Faulty fingerprints debunk forensic science ‘zero error’ claim

[question everything]

Faulty fingerprints debunk forensic science ‘zero error’ claim

Researcher says set of known errors is merely tip of the iceberg.
IRVINE WORLD NEWS

While forensic scientists have long claimed fingerprint evidence is infallible, the widely publicized error that landed an innocent American behind bars as a suspect in the Madrid train bombing alerted the nation to the potential flaws in the system.

Now, UC Irvine criminologist Simon Cole has shown that not only do errors occur, but as many as a thousand incorrect fingerprint “matches” could be made each year in the U.S. This is in spite of safeguards intended to prevent errors.

Cole’s study is the first to analyze all publicly known mistaken fingerprint matches. In analyzing these cases of faulty matches dating from 1920, Cole suggests that the 22 exposed incidents, including eight since 1999, are merely the tip of the iceberg. Despite the publicly acknowledged cases of error, fingerprint examiners have long held that fingerprint identification is “infallible,” and testified in court that their error rate for matching fingerprints is zero.

(snip)

Story was taken from a UC Irvine press release

A UC IRVINE STUDY suggests that there could be as many as 1,900 mistaken fingerprint matches each year by U.S. crime laboratories.

http://epaper.ocregister.com/Default/Client.asp?enter=true&skin=OCW&Daily=OCWIrvineWorldNews&GZ=T&AW=1134663133406 (stragne URL, and move to page 14)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. "Myth of Fingerprints"

There was a Law & Order episode about this, titled as I have indicated above. They made the point that a fingerprint "match" depends on the analyst-some require 6 matches of certain points on the fingerprint, others need more, others less. For a drama, this episode gave a lot of information about fingerprints that I found very informative.

[Dogmudgeon]

2. Dactylography

As it's called, technically ...

The claims of fingerprint analysis have never been adequately evaluated. People have gone to their deaths over what amounts to a "pseudoscience" in the philosophical and CSICOPian senses of the word.

Recently I've been seeing some scientific work being done on fingerprint analysis, but this has only been in the last five or six years. I'd have to guess that there was a case that was successfully argued in the late 1990s that got the fingerprint evidence thrown out.

It's not an infallible method. Neither is DNA analysis. There is no infallible method.

--p!

[ProfessorGAC]

3. Well, Of Course

Any interpretive skill has to have some measure of error. Any "expert" who says the error rate is zero is lying.
The Professor

[SmokingJacket]

4. Infallibility does not exist.

Another good reason to get rid of the death penalty.

[darkmaestro019]

5. also, there are various means of altering your fingerprints.

Or so I've read in my research for a novel that will sit on my hard drive. : )

[liveoaktx]

6. I read an article that other day that Play-Doh can be used to foil scanner