3 ms·
My understanding from skimming the article is, they only identified the suspect from fingerprints. After identification they did surveillance and gathered addit
by zapdrive 6y ago
My understanding from skimming the article is, they only identified the suspect from fingerprints. After identification they did surveillance and gathered additional evidence.
- mschwaig 6y ago> The FDL [HSI Forensic Document Laboratory] returned the request after conducting a comparative analysis of the friction ridge detail of the fingerprints from the Imgur album and the fingerprint samples taken after police had arrested Porras for a different crime. The fingerprints in the Imgur album matched the prints they already had on file for Porras. It doesn't sound like that to me, but maybe I am misunderstanding what a comparative analysis would entail.
- zapdrive 6y agoIt doesn't say they arrested him immediately after the match. If you read the article they say they placed multiple orders and would surveill him after every order. That's how they gathered evidence.
- mschwaig 6y agoI did read the article. I am interested in how forensic evicende like that is gathered in general and how reliable it is in general. It's debatable what role that fingerprint played in that investigation, but I did not want to call into question that particular outcome. For example my impression is that DNA evidence is very reliable while for example optically matching hairs or matching bite marks, which I think was done in the past in a similar 'does A match B setup' is fairly unreliable. It's interesting to me both from both the 'what bar does evidence have to meet to make sure there are no false convictions' side as well as the 'what are the privacy implications of posting pictures with fingerprints in them' side.