In looking at the "Executive Summary Strengthening Forensic Science in the United
States: A Path Forward" I felt there was a glaring omission. While the report dealt with the inter-operability of the automated fingerprint identifications it did not address the database issues that should be a major concern with all local and state automated fingerprint identification systems. The poor quality fingerprint arrest card images in the search database, are a significant problem that can lead to missed and bad fingerprint identifications. A missed fingerprint identification allowing a criminal to avoid incarceration is a public safety issue. In the past this has resulted in additional criminal offenses to include homicide.
The reason that poor quality arrest card fingerprints are such a significant problem is because the number of missed and bad fingerprint identifications are significantly greater than the bad latent identifications and often directly impact regular citizens.
While the focus of this report was on the latent fingerprints, the number of useful latent fingerprints at a crime scene pales in comparison to the number of fingerprint cards processed in the course of a year. The FBI recently concluded that even when functioning well the IAFIS fingerprint system is 95% to 98% accurate. I would suggest, a realistic accuracy rate for state and local fingerprint systems would probably be closer to 90%. When this accuracy is combined with the large number of arrest and applicant fingerprint cards, you can see we are dealing with a large number of errors. Poor quality hardcopy fingerprint cards (criminal/non-criminal) increase the potential of error for the journeyman latent fingerprint examiners. A latent print is very often a poor quality image, when compared to a poor quality fingerprint card it increases the possibility of the latent fingerprint examiner making an incorrect conclusion. Since there is no minimum standard for declaring a latent fingerprint identification, examiners often declare an identification with less than 10 points of identification. 10 points, is the number of level II points of identification agreed to by all the examiners in the Mayfield bad identification. Again as noted in an earlier Blog all the latent fingerprint examiners in the Mayfield case, had significant training and experience.
The summary does have some good and important suggestions, which once implemented will improve the reliability of latent fingerprint identifications. The automated fingerprint database acceptance of poor quality fingerprint card images, will continue to produce both missed and bad identification arrest cards.
Bob McAuley
Dir. Operations/Training
Forensic Biometric Identification Solutions LLC.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I disagree with the weight you put on poor quality tenprint images resulting in more erroneous latent print identifications. To call out this specific potential cause from dozens of additional organizational, management, hidden or examiner causes for erroneous identifications doesn't do the topic of erroneous identifications any justice at all. In fact, poor tenprint quality alone would not cause an erroneous identification. It would have to be combined with other faulty conditions for it to even be a factor. I believe the concept of erroneous identifications should be removed from the discussion and the focus should rightfully remain on missed identifications being the result of poor tenprint quality.
2) make recommendations for maximizing the use of forensic technologies and
techniques to solve crimes, investigate deaths, and protect the public;
Kasey: I do appreciate your taking a few minutes to comment on my Blog. When I looked at the request the Board received from Congress, the poor quality images in the database jumps out at me as a significant problem. The big reason is of course a public safety issue, allowing individuals back on the streets that should be incarcerated, witch has led to tragic results in a number of cases. On the latent end the poor quality images cause missed identifications, the FBI rejects a large number of prints daily due to quality. In a significant number of these cases a reprint is not available, so the print is not in the FBI IAFIS and the poor quality image is in the state database lessens the chance for a hit.
Your point about poor quality alone not causing the bad ID is correct, an examiner has to not follow established procedure (ACE-V) to have a bad ID. I will suggest that many bad ID's are the result of an individual working on a marginal quality latent image, yes they should not identify it but it does happen.
Post a Comment