# data[].attributes.body
Sample Fingerprint Card GClark

# data[].attributes.body
The use of materials to expose fingerprints for evidence
- Aking Grayer

# data[].attributes.body
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/fingerprints-overview Z.Duncan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods. The fingerprint images can then be photographed, marked up for distinguishing features by latent fingerprint examiners, and used to search an automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS).[1] An AFIS is a computer system that stores fingerprint images in an organized, searchable data structure that is widely used by criminal justice agencies to maintain databases of the fingerprints of individuals who are arrested or incarcerated.

Fingerprint databases typically contain rolled fingerprints from each finger ("tenprints") and fingerprints from the whole hand with all the fingers extended in parallel ("slaps"). If an individual whose fingerprints are in an AFIS encounters the criminal justice system again, a criminal investigator can search the AFIS to establish identity and link the individual with a particular criminal record. If a criminal investigator matches a latent print to a fingerprint in the AFIS, that individual may be linked to the crime under investigation.

An AFIS can also house repositories of latent fingerprints that remain unidentified, typically referred to as an unsolved latent file (ULF). As new fingerprints are added to the AFIS, criminal investigators can search them against the ULF collection in the hope of making a match. Matches happen regularly within one jurisdiction over time, but how are unsolved latent fingerprints collected in one jurisdiction matched against a tenprint record stored in the AFIS of another jurisdiction? Interoperability between two jurisdictions will determine whether Jurisdiction A can search the database in Jurisdiction B to find a match. Maximizing AFIS interoperability can help maximize the value of latent fingerprint evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods.

# data[].attributes.body
https://castleviewuk.com/ch1-packaging.html Z.Duncan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Forensic Supplies | Staff Development and Training | A Forensic Approach to Building Teams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Part 7) Packaging and Labelling the Evidence:
Once an item of physical evidence has been removed from the location at which it was found, it must be packaged in such a way that it cannot become contaminated or damaged. It is equally important that the item is unable to escape from its packaging for two reasons. First, to preserve the item from contamination in an unprotected environment. Secondly, to prevent the item contaminating other packaged evidence. For example, imagine the consequences of a suspected drug in the form of a powder escaping from its package. This could end up (and no doubt will end up) on the outside of another package so that when this is handled, that drug becomes transfered to the person who opens the package and then on to other items for examination!

So, the CSI needs to have a wide range of different types of packaging material and know exactly which is best for the items of evidence being collected. Each package must be sealed to prevent anything getting into the package, and anything getting out of it. And each package must be labelled with information that 1) uniquely identifies it,
2) says exactly where it was recovered, 3) says exactly when it was recovered, 4) shows the name and job (e.g., CSI) of the person who recovered it, and 5) provides details of exactly who has handled the item after it has been recovered and packaged. This (5th) part is very important because it gives details of the chain of custody, otherwise called the continuity in the "life" of the item from the moment it was recovered and thereafter. The labels (in the UK) used to record details of the packaged evidence are often called CJA (Criminal Justice Act) labels.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Investigating a Crime Scene - 7 - Packaging and Labelling the Evidence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Part 7) Packaging and Labelling the Evidence: Once an item of physical evidence has been removed from the location at which it was found, it must be packaged in such a way that it cannot become contaminated or damaged. It is equally important that the item is unable to escape from its packaging for two reasons.

# data[].attributes.body
https://ncforensics.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/techniques-for-collecting-and-analyzing-fingerprints/ Z.Duncan

# data[].attributes.body
This pdf shows a number of ways to package evidence, including fingerprints
- Aking Grayer

# data[].attributes.body
https://atg.sd.gov/docs/Properly%20Packaging.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
https://jcheminf.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13321-017-0195-1#:~:text=Database%20fingerprint%20%28DFP%29%3A%20an%20approach%20to%20represent%20molecular,10%20Rights%20and%20permissions.%20...%20More%20items...%20 Z.Duncan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This section is organized in two major parts. First, the concept of DFP is discussed using MACCS keys for compound data sets up to 1500 compounds. The second part shows an application of DFP with PubChem fingerprints for larger data sets.

Distribution of binary fingerprint: SE as metric of database diversity

Figure 3 shows the probability distributions of MACCS keys (166-bits) for three representative data sets (drugs, benzimidazoles, and Epigenetic-focused) plus the randomly generated binary fingerprints as a reference. The probability distributions of the other compound data sets are shown in Additional file 1: Fig. S1. The corresponding SE values for each probability distribution is shown in each group and are further reported in Table 1 for all data sets. In addition, Table 1 summarizes the mean similarity value using the MACCS keys fingerprints and Tanimoto index (MACCS keys/Tanimoto similarity) of all ten data sets. Table 1 and Fig. 3; Additional file 1: Fig. S1 show that each data set had different values of SE that was associated with the mean MACCS keys/Tanimoto similarity.

Probability distributions of MACCS keys (166-bits) of representative data sets studied in this work. The number of compounds, mean MACCS keys/Tanimto similarity, and Shannon entropy (SE) are shown

Figure 4 shows the relationship between SE and mean MACCS keys/Tanimoto similarity. The plot shows that high SE is associated with high intra-set diversity i.e., low similarity. Likewise, lower SE is associated with high similarity. Of note, SE is not a magnitude that can be expressed in terms of an absolute scale because no upper limit boundaries are known. A general observation is that high SE is an indicative that it is less likely that two compounds in the data set have similar fingerprint representation. If this observation is repeated for many pairs of compounds in the data set, then the overall similarity of the compound data set is low and the mean similarity of the data set is expected to be low. In contrast, if the overall SE of the data set is (relatively) low, it is likely that two molecules in the data set have similar fingerprint representation. Therefore, it is expected that the overall diversity of the data set is (relatively) low e.g., the overall similarity of the compound data set is high. This general trend was observed for nine out of ten data sets.

Relationship Shannon Entropy and MACCS keys/Tanimoto similarity for the ten compound data sets in Table 1. A drugs, I general screening, C clinical, G GDB13, D DNMT1, E epigenetic focused, M semi-synthetic, N natural products, B benzimidazole, GR GRAS, R random

A notable exception was the GRAS set: SE of the MACCS keys has a relative low value (30) but the data set has high diversity (as measured with MACCS keys/Tanimoto <0.40). In other words, despite the fact that there is a relative low entropy in the fingerprint representation of GRAS, it happens that the likelihood that two compounds share similar fingerprint representation is low. It is worth noting that MACCS keys/Tanimoto captures pair-wise relationships that are not directly captured by the SE of the entire fingerprint. A second notable exception was the random set that had, as expected, the highest SE value (above 80) but MACCS keys/Tanimoto similarity of 0.33. The distinct feature of GRAS (as compared to the other data sets considered in this work) can be related to the particular structural features of molecules in this data set. It has been shown that GRAS molecules have a high content of aliphatic chain and has a low diversity of molecular scaffolds [ 20]. It should also be considered that MACCS keys is unable to capture the particular features of GRAS compounds.

The plot in Fig. 4 shows two main clusters that group together the different data sets. These databases can be related through the nature of the compounds in each cluster. In the larger cluster (upper left), all the data sets, with exception of GDB13, are related to synthetic bioactive molecules. While the small cluster contains data sets that include natural products, semi-synthetic natural products and benzimidazole derivatives, all present in living organisms.

Based on the above results, it can be suggested that SE of the probability distributions of MACCS keys (166-bits) can be used as an additional criterion to rapidly assess the fingerprint-based diversity of compound data sets. Of course, additional metrics and criteria e.g., scaffold diversity, should be considered for a comprehensive assessment of the structural diversity of data sets [ 21]. It is worth noting that the concept of SE was initially used to measure the content of information in particular messages [ 3]. Nowadays, along with similarity and molecular scaffolds, SE has been implemented to measure scaffold diversity [ 10, 22]. In chemoinformatics, SE is also related to the generation of many kinds of molecular representations based on graph theory and virtual similarity searches, among others [ 23, 24]. In particular, SE has been used previously to determine the similarity between a given molecule and a focused library [ 24]. In that approach, Wang et al. calculated the variation of SE of a focused library with and without a given compound to determine their similarity with the redundant futures present in the database.

DFP

As described above, 166-bit long DFP were generated for all ten compound data sets in Table 1. Representative DFP of selected data sets are shown in Additional file 1: Table S1. Two different thresholds were used to determine the limit redundancy value, the mean probability of a random distribution and the inter-mean plus one database standard deviation (vide supra). As described below, to select the most representative threshold value, a comparison with city block distance was performed. Using this criteria one DFP per database was calculated with the different thresholds, resulting in the selection of the mean probability of a random distribution as a final threshold.

DFP and inter-set relationships

Table 3 shows the city block distance [ 1] between the data sets considering the newly developed DFP. A 2D visualization of the distance matrix is presented in the Additional file 1: Fig. S2.

As expected, the randomly generated set was the most distant i.e., most dissimilar, to the other ten data sets with real molecules. In agreement with previous publications [ 13, 14] there was a small distance between compounds in the clinic ('Clinical') and general screening and approved drugs. Similarly, there was a small distance between the commercial molecules focused on epigenetic targets ('Epigenetic focused') and compounds for general screening and molecules in the 'Clinic'. Indeed, it can be expected a large overlap between the chemical spaces of all these data sets using MACCS keys from which the DFP was designed. In contrast, after random, GRAS compounds were the second most distant to all other data sets considered in this study. This is consistent with previous results that support that GRAS molecules are dissimilar to other databases commonly used in drug discovery using MACCS keys [ 25].

Taken together the results in Table 3, further visualized in Additional file 1: Fig. S2, can be concluded that the newly DFP is a reasonable approximation of the fingerprint-based representation of a molecular database. Similar trends between the inter-set relationships were obtained with the DFP and the Tanimoto coefficient (Additional file 1: Table S2 and Fig. S3), and the inter-set relationships calculated with MACCS keys and the Tanimoto coefficient (Additional file 1: Fig. S4).

DFP and intra-set relationship

Table 4 shows the relationship between the intra-set mean similarities computed with two strategies, namely; a classical approach calculated the pair-wise mean similarity with MACCS keys/Tanimoto coefficient. The second approach was an approximation of the intra-set similarity using the newly proposed DFP: for each data set, the similarity based on the DFP was calculated as the mean similarity between the MACCS keys representation of each compound and the DFP of the data set. Results summarized in Table 4 (and plotted in Additional file 1: Fig. S5) show a direct relationship between these two values supporting the hypothesis that DFP was able to retain the general information contained in a given compound data set. Even if DFP underestimated the similarity values (Table 4), it was a reasonable tool to estimate the intra-set molecular diversity, since these comparison studies are relative to the databases.

DFP application with PubChem fingerprint and larger data sets

For three different thresholds (0.5, 0.6 and 0.7) the informational significant bit positions of PubChem, 198, 180, and 159 respectively, were selected using Differential Shannon Entropy implemented in IMMAN package software. Figure 5 shows the classical Shannon entropy average versus the average DFP/Tanimoto Similarity based in the 198 information significant bit positions obtained with a 0.5 threshold with IMMAN software. Figure 5 also displays the databases cluster membership on five clusters obtained with k-mean Euclidean distances implemented in WEKA software [ 26].

Relationship Shannon entropy and DFP/Tanimoto similarity and k-mean Euclidean clustering for the ten compound data sets in Table 2 at threshold of 0.5 threshold value

Similar to Figs. 4, 5 shows two main clusters that group together different data sets that contain chemically related compounds. For instance, in the larger cluster colored blue, all the data sets, with exception of PS15, are related to synthetic bioactive molecules. While the small two-member clusters, in red color, group FDA and Approved datasets. The one-member clusters correlates with the previously reported distinct nature of GRAS, MEGx, and Benzi compounds.

This general grouping of compound data sets in Fig. 5 is consistent with the probability distribution of the 198 significant bit positions recovered from the original databases represented by PubChem fingerprints. In Fig. 6 the datasets probability distributions can by grouped in a similar way to the cluster membership illustrated in Fig. 5.

Probability distribution of the 198 significant bit positions recovered from the original databases represented by PubChem fingerprint at threshold of 0.5

The same analysis was applied for 0.6 and 0.7 DFP thresholds. The implementation of this cutoff criteria led to a significant decrease in the resolution of the DFP to distinguish differences between the databases studied. The respective probability distributions and classical Shannon entropy average versus the average DFP/Tanimoto Similarity plots, with k-mean clustering, can be found in the Additional file 1: Figs. S6-S9.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Database fingerprint (DFP): an approach to represent molecular databases - Journal of Cheminformatics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Molecular fingerprints are widely used in several areas of chemoinformatics including diversity analysis and similarity searching. The fingerprint-based analysis of chemical libraries, in particular of large collections, usually requires the molecular representation of each compound in the library that may lead to issues of storage space and redundant calculations.

# data[].attributes.body
Some ones thumb print
D.Williams

# data[].attributes.body
There are a great amount of ways you could gather fingerprint evidence and most of them are listed in this website
-Aking Grayer

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.oldpolicecellsmuseum.org.uk/content/learning/educational-programmes-and-tours/first-convictions-uk-based-fingerprint-evidence#:~:text=1%20The%20first%20conviction%20in%20the%20UK%20based,Forensic%20Human%20Identification%3A%20An%20Introduction.%20Florida%3A%20CRC%20Press. Z.Duncan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The first conviction in the UK based on fingerprint evidence

A little History

Fingerprints were used as signatures in ancient Babylon in the second millennium BC. King Hammurabi (1955-1913 BC) used finger seals on contracts, and law officers of the day were authorized to secure the fingerprints of arrested persons.

In AD 1100, Chinese novelist Shi-Naingan wrote in his book, The Story of the River Bank, "He compelled them to ink their fingers to record their fingerprints."

The English first began using fingerprints on July 28, 1858, when on a whim Sir William Herschel, Chief Magistrate of the Hooghly district in Jungipoor, India, had Rajyadhar Konai, a local businessman, impress his hand print on a contract. Herschel made a habit of requiring prints on every contract made with the locals. He later established a fingerprint register.

Harry Jackson
The case of Harry Jackson is renowned as being the first criminal trial in the United Kingdom in which an individual was convicted based on fingerprint evidence. On 27th June 1902, a number of billiard balls were stolen from a house in Denmark Hill, South London during a burglary. During the investigation of the scene, a police officer discovered fingerprints on a recently-painted windowsill. With suspicions that the burglar had entered the premises through this window, the Fingerprint Branch of Scotland Yard was contacted. Detective Sergeant Collins attended the scene and photographed the fingerprints, particularly a clear left thumbprint. After ensuring the prints had not been left by anyone in the household nor any member of law enforcement who had visited the scene, he returned to Scotland Yard to identify the owner of the print. The laborious task of sifting through the fingerprints of known criminals was conducted until a similar print was found. The scene prints were compared and it was concluded that they were a match. The fingerprint belonged to 41-year-old Harry Jackson. Jackson, who worked as a labourer, had previously served time in prison for burglary, further supporting the case against him. Jackson was arrested and, at that time, was in possession of stolen goods from a different burglary. The Assistant Crime Commissioner at the time was Edward Henry, the man who had produced the Henry System of Fingerprint Classification and founded the Fingerprint Bureau. Unfortunately fingerprinting in forensic science was a relatively new concept and had never been successfully used as evidence in courts. Prosecutor Richard Muir was brought in to help. DS Collins acted as an expert witness, providing information on fingerprinting and presenting the court with enlarged images of the crime scene thumbprint and the suspect's thumb print, detailing the similarities between the two. After much deliberation the prosecution managed to successfully convince the jury of the reliability of fingerprint evidence. In September 1902, Harry Jackson was found guilty and sentenced in the Central Criminal Court to seven years imprisonment. Black, S. Thompson, T. 2007. Forensic Human Identification: An Introduction. Florida: CRC Press.
Despite the advances in forensic technology, fingerprints have remained the bread and butter of crime fighting for more than 100 years.

The first British murderers to be convicted using fingerprint evidence

Fingerprints were used to help convict brothers Alfred and Albert Stratton of bludgeoning Thomas Farrow, 71, to death during a break-in at his paint suppliers in Deptford, South East London, in February 1905.

Thomas and Ann Farrow, shopkeepers in South London, were discovered by there neighbours bludgeoned to death in their home. Ann was actually still breathing but sadly died four days later without ever having regained consciousness.

A cash box with receipts was found empty, leading the police to believe that the motive was robbery. There was one print on the box which the police could find no match for. Fortunately, a local milkman reported seeing two young men in the vicinity of the Farrow house on the day of the murders, who were quickly identified as, petty criminals, Alfred and Albert Stratton. The police quickly began interviewing the brothers friends and associates.

Alfred's girlfriend told police that he had given away his coat on the day of the murders and changed the colour of his shoes the following week and authorities caught up with the brothers and fingerprinted them.

The Fingerprint on a cash box matched that of Albert, being held at Scotland Yard's developing new bureau in the capital.

Although the fingerprint, or more correctly thumbprint was the only solid evidence the prosecution had to offer, it was enough to have the brothers convicted and hanged on May 23, 1905.

Sources

Black, S. Thompson, T. 2007. Forensic Human Identification: An Introduction. Florida: CRC Press.

history.com

wiki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
First convictions in the UK based on fingerprint evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fingerprints were used as signatures in ancient Babylon in the second millennium BC. King Hammurabi (1955-1913 BC) used finger seals on contracts, and law officers of the day were authorized to secure the fingerprints of arrested persons.

# data[].attributes.body
https://atg.sd.gov/docs/Properly%20Packaging.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
The recording of fingerprints
D.Willliams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The FBI's Next Generation Identification system is the largest biometric database of criminals in the world, and clear, legible fingerprints form the foundation of its master fingerprint file. Agencies submitting fingerprints to the FBI should be aware of the proper procedures for recording fingerprints. The following information will assist in obtaining fingerprints that meet Bureau standards.

Fingerprint Impression Types

Type 4
Rolled impressions are the ten individually-taken fingerprint images rolled from nail to nail. The plain impressions are used to verify the sequence and accuracy of the rolled impressions.

Type 14
Identification flat impressions are taken simultaneously without rolling. These are referred to as plain, slap, or flat impressions. The individual's right and left four fingers should be captured first, followed by the two thumbs (4-4-2 method). Instituting this finger capture method ensures the highest level of fingerprint sequence accuracy.

Basic Fingerprint Equipment
Fingerprints can be recorded utilizing the following methods:

Standard Fingerprint Card (e.g., FD-249 and FD-258)-Use ink to record fingerprint images on standard fingerprint cards.

Live Scan-Fingerprint images can be submitted electronically using a live scan device. Electronic fingerprinting equipment should be properly maintained at all times. For a list of certified devices, please refer to the FBI Certified Products List at www.fbibiospecs.cjis.gov.

Fingerprinting Process

The recommended height for recording legible fingerprints is approximately 39 inches from the floor. This allows the forearm of an average adult to be parallel with the floor. This is the recommended position to record fingerprints.

Soap and water are preferred; however, rubbing alcohol may be substituted.

If hands are moist, wipe each finger with rubbing alcohol. If hands are dry or flaky use a small amount of hand lotion and wipe off any residue.

If capturing fingerprints electronically, ensure the live scan fingerprint device is properly calibrated and the platen is free of dust, dirt, and any residual fingerprint images.

The individual's hands should be cleaned prior to printing:

Instruct the individual to look away from the fingerprint device, not to assist in the fingerprint process, and to relax. Grasp the individual's right hand at the base of the thumb with your right hand. Cup your hand over the individual's fingers, tucking under those fingers not being printed. Guide the finger being printed with your left hand.

If using the ink and paper method, roll the finger on the inking plate or pad so the entire fingerprint pattern area is evenly covered with ink. The ink should cover from one edge of the nail to the other and from the crease of the first joint to the tip of the finger. Using the correct amount of ink is vital.

When taking the rolled impression, the side of the finger bulb is placed upon the card or platen. The finger is then rolled to the other side until it faces the opposite direction. Care should be exercised so the bulb of each finger, from tip to below the first joint, is rolled evenly. Generally, the weight of the finger is the maximum pressure needed to clearly record a fingerprint. In order to take advantage of the natural movement of the forearm, the hand should be rotated from the more difficult position to the easiest position. This requires the thumbs be rolled toward and the fingers away from the center of the individual's body. Roll each finger from nail to nail in the appropriate space, taking care to lift each finger up after rolling to avoid smudging.

When using the ink and paper method and a rolled impression is not acceptable, you may use an adhesive retab to cover the fingerprint in its space. (Only two retabs can be applied to each fingerprint block.) For live scan, the image should be deleted and retaken.

For a Type-4, plain impressions are typically printed last. The technician simultaneously presses the individual's four fingers (of the right hand), keeping the fingers together on the surface of the card or live scan device (at a 45-degree angle) to capture all four fingers in the allotted space. Repeat this process for the left hand and then print both thumbs. Type-14 capture protocol requires the technician to simultaneously press the individual's four fingers on the surface of the live scan device at a 90-degree vertical angle. Care should be taken to capture all fingers in the allotted space. Repeat this process for the left hand and then print both thumbs simultaneously (4-4-2 method). Capturing all fingers and thumbs in a vertical position improves finger segmentation software accuracy.

Complete all required textual information. It is important to enter the appropriate data in all fields when known.

Special Circumstances

Deformed or missing fingers:
If the finger is deformed, every attempt should be made to record the fingerprint in both the rolled and plain impression blocks. A postmortem kit, which is more commonly known as a spoon, can be utilized to assist in recording these images. If unable to record the image, simply place a notation in the fingerprint block (e.g., deformed, webbed) or electronically apply the Unable to Print (UP) code in data field 2.084.

Missing fingers are fingers physically present but cannot be recorded at the time of capture due to injury. Each missing finger should be designated via a notation in the fingerprint block (e.g., bandaged, injured, crippled, paralyzed) or electronically apply the UP code in data field 2.084.
Fully amputated fingers:
An amputated finger occurs when the finger's first joint is no longer physically present. Amputated fingers should be designated via a notation in the fingerprint block (e.g., amp, missing at birth, severed) or electronically apply the Amputated (XX) code in data field 2.084.
Tip-amputated fingers:
If a portion of the first joint is present, record the available fingerprint pattern area in both the rolled and plain impression blocks.
Extra fingers:
When fingerprinting an individual with an extra finger, record only the thumb and the next four fingers. Do not record the extra finger as either a rolled or plain impression.
Scarred fingers:
Record scarred fingers in both the rolled and plain impressions without a notation.
Worn fingerprints:
An individual, by the nature of their work or age, may have very thin or worn ridges in the pattern area. Apply light pressure and use very little ink to record these types of fingerprint impressions. A technique known as "milking the finger" can be used to raise the fingerprint ridges prior to printing. This technique involves applying pressure or rubbing the fingers in a downward motion from palm to fingertip.

For more information about recording legible fingerprints or to request training, visit our website or contact the Customer Service Group at (304) 625-5590 or via e-mail at identity@ic.fbi.gov.

Capturing Legible Fingerprints

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recording Legible Fingerprints | Federal Bureau of Investigation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The FBI's Next Generation Identification system is the largest biometric database of criminals in the world, and clear, legible fingerprints form the foundation of its master fingerprint file. Agencies submitting fingerprints to the FBI should be aware of the proper procedures for recording fingerprints. The following information will assist in obtaining fingerprints that meet Bureau standards.

# data[].attributes.body
Data on fingerprints and how they are utilized
- Aking Grayer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The FBI provides a variety of services, information, and training involving biometrics-the measurable biological (anatomical and physiological) or behavioral characteristics used for identification of an individual. Fingerprints are a common biometric modality, but others include things like DNA, irises, voice patterns, palmprints, and facial patterns. In an effort to harness new technologies and improve identifications, the Bureau developed its Next Generation Identification (NGI) system, which provides the criminal justice community with the world's largest and most efficient electronic repository of biometric and criminal history information.

Over the years, the FBI and its partners in the law enforcement and intelligence communities have used biometrics not only to authenticate an individual's identity (you are who are say you are), but more importantly, to figure out who someone is (by a fingerprint left on a murder weapon or a bomb, for example), typically by scanning a database of records for a match.

The FBI has long been a leader in biometrics. It has used various forms of biometric identification since our earliest days, including assuming responsibility for managing the national fingerprint collection in 1924. More recently, the Bureau's Science and Technology Branch created the Biometric Center of Excellence (BCOE) to strengthen our ability to combat crime and terrorism with state-of-the-art biometrics technology. In addition to the BCOE, our Criminal Justice Services Division-with its vast repositories of fingerprints and biographical data-is the FBI's natural focus for identity management activities. However, important additional biometrics-related work is being undertaken by the FBI Laboratory, such as DNA activities, while voice and face recognition initiatives are being pursued in our Operational Technology Division.

Biometric Initiatives

We continue to look to new scientific advances to increase the range and quality of our biometric identification capabilities, including these three initiatives:

Global Collections Program

Through the Global Collections Program, we foster national and international relationships related to biometrics in support of counterterrorism and other law enforcement efforts. Our initiatives include:

The Foreign Biometric Exchange (FBE) Program: This program's primary mission is to collect high value biometrics obtained from foreign law enforcement partners. The biometric records pertain to individuals of interest to partner countries, the United States, or the international law enforcement community, and include individuals associated with or appropriately suspected of terrorist activity, egregious crimes, or transnational criminal activity.

Quick Capture Platform: This is a rapid deployment team whose members are prepared to deploy within four hours to support national and international special security events, critical incidents, and other emergency operations with rapid identification services. Flyaway teams use electronic fingerprint capture devices and query FBI, Department of Defense, and DHS criminal fingerprint databases.

Flyaway Program: This fingerprint capture tool is an advancement of the highly successful QCP kits, which were initially developed for combat theater operations and enabled frontline investigators to collect, store, and match fingerprint data. The MBA, which can be used with an FBI-issued smart phone or tablet, is new technology and quickly became a game-changer when deployed in 2016. The MBA and fingerprint scanner will allow FBI agents and task force officers to quickly determine positive identification of suspected persons, internationally and domestically, making it more conducive to conduct expeditious field operations.

Preventing and Combating Serious Crime (PCSC) Initiative: As part of the Visa Waiver Program, partner nations are required to enter into a PCSC agreement to share criminal and terrorist biometrics with the U.S. The Criminal Justice information Services Division acts as the technical implementer for the Department of Justice to provide connectivity between U.S. and partner nation biometric systems.

All About Fingerprints

Fingerprints vary from person to person (even identical twins have different prints) and don't change over time. As a result, they are an effective way of identifying fugitives and helping to prove both guilt and innocence. Learn more:

Checks on Employees of Banks and Related Entities

Criminal History Record Information (CHRI) Checks on Employees of Banking-Related Institutions or Entities

Public Law 92‑544 (found in the notes to 28 United States Code § 534) authorizes the FBI to exchange records "with officials of federally chartered or insured banking institutions to promote or maintain the security of those institutions." The same broad language is used in the regulation governing such checks at 28 CFR § 50.12(a).

Pursuant to this authority, the banking industry for many years has conducted criminal history record information (CHRI) checks on employees of federally chartered or insured banking institutions. Due to evolving business practices and methods of operation in the banking industry, the FBI has received requests from the industry for clarification of the authority to conduct CHRI checks on employees of other entities, such as bank subsidiaries, holding companies, and contractors, that have a direct relationship with a banking institution, affecting the security of the institution, and the authority to provide the results of the CHRI checks to officials of bank holding companies involved in the human resource decisions of banking institutions held by such companies. The FBI takes this opportunity to clarify that: (1) employees of bank subsidiaries, holding companies and contractors who are intimately involved in the management or operations of a banking institution or who otherwise have access to a bank's restricted areas, infrastructure, or assets, may be subject to CHRI checks, and (2) officials to whom criminal history record checks results may be returned include officials of bank holding companies who are involved in the human resource decisions of banking institutions held by such companies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fingerprints and Other Biometrics | Federal Bureau of Investigation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The FBI provides a variety of services, information, and training involving biometrics-the measurable biological (anatomical and physiological) or behavioral characteristics used for identification of an individual. Fingerprints are a common biometric modality, but others include things like DNA, irises, voice patterns, palmprints, and facial patterns.

# data[].attributes.body
https://fingerprintinggsc.weebly.com/famous-crimes-solved-by-fingerprinting.html#:~:text=Famous%20Crimes%20Solved%20by%20Fingerprinting%20-%20Fingerprints%21%20Fingerprints,Hiller%20lived%20with%20his%20wife%20and%20four%20children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children. On the morning of September 19, 1910, Mr. Hiller woke up to find that a gaslight near her daughter's bedroom was not burning. On the landing, he found a stranger and engaged in combat. Both men tumbled down the staircase. Seconds later, two shots were sound, as well as, Mr. Hiller's soft cry for help. At the door, Mrs. Hiller found her husband dead. Investigators found some particles of sand and gravel at the foot of the daughter's bed. Yet what convicted the killer, Thomas Jennings, were his fingerprints. Next to the rear kitchen window, through which the killer had entered the home of the Hillers, were railings. By chance, Mr. Hiller had painted these very railings just hours before his death. Into the paint four fingerprints of someone's left hand was etched. American law enforcement has already adopted the principle of fingerprinting. Therefore, the presence of these fingerprints was admissible in the court of law. At the trial, fingerprint expert William M. Evans of the PDBI agreed that Jennings hand, and his alone, had left the prints on the railings. The appeal court affirmed the verdict of the jury, guilty, and upheld Jenning's death sentence. He was later hanged.

Fingerprints were also the reasons behind the solving of another famous case: the case of the Stratton Brothers. Thomas Farrow, and his wife, Ann, managed a paint shop in South London. On March 27, 1905, Mr. Farrow had been found dead on the floor of his paint shop. Upstairs, where the couple kept a small room for themselves, his wife lay, covered in blood, and barely alive. Just a few days later, Ann died. The discovery of two masks at the scene of the crime suggested the presence of more than one intruder. They found a clear print on a tray that did not match either victim. With the description given by milkman Henry Jennings, two brothers known for burglary, Albert and Alfred Stratton were held custody. Both were taken to the Tower Bridge police station, where Detective Inspector Charles Collins, a founding member of Scotland Yard's Fingerprint Branch in 1901, rolled their fingers on the inkpad. The fingerprint on the tray matched Albert's right thumb to perfection. Thus, both brothers were charged with murder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children.

# data[].attributes.body
Data on fingerprints
D.Williams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The ability of fingerprint databases in different jurisdictions to share data with each other - interoperability of the databases - can be influenced by both technology and policy. Through secure network connections, the automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS) in Jurisdiction A can be networked to the AFIS in Jurisdiction B so that either jurisdiction can search the fingerprints in the other. The two jurisdictions typically must have an AFIS manufactured by the same vendor or have a way for two different systems to communicate. The two agencies typically also must have some official agreement, such as a memorandum of understanding that defines the terms of the information sharing; otherwise the searching will be done on an ad hoc basis.

The total national infrastructure of AFIS maintained by federal, state, local and tribal agencies can be thought of as the national criminal justice AFIS enterprise, and how the systems communicate with each other will depend on the network architecture and access controls.

Fingerprint searches can be done in either a vertical (e.g., local to state, state to federal) or a horizontal (e.g., local to local, state to state) manner. As a result, interoperability can be considered at different levels of geographic or jurisdictional granularity: local, regional intrastate, state, regional interstate and national. The extent to which an authorized AFIS user such as a criminal investigator can launch a latent fingerprint search from his or her computer in the national criminal justice AFIS enterprise and search for a fingerprint match in databases maintained in other jurisdictions can be thought of as the level of interoperability.
Read more about the Latent Fingerprint Interoperability Survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ability of fingerprint databases in different jurisdictions to share data with each other - interoperability of the databases - can be influenced by both technology and policy. Through secure network connections, the automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS) in Jurisdiction A can be networked to the AFIS in Jurisdiction B so that either jurisdiction can search the fingerprints in the other.

# data[].attributes.body
Finger prints

# data[].attributes.body
Methods on collecting fingerprints
D.Williams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By : Jelie Osorio
Submitted 2012-03-22 04:04:19

CSI fan or not, collecting fingerprints is still an important part of forensic science. As a matter of fact, it is a great help to almost all CSI or Crime Scene Investigators throughout the world.

Crime scene investigators are trained with different ways to collect fingerprints. Aside from latent prints, they are also trained to take known prints. Latent prints are fingerprints left behind by people in crime scenes and other environments. They are left accidentally. Known prints, on the other hand, are submitted willingly. They are taken through the use of black ink. The process would be to put the person's thumb in the ink and then press it on a white card. Most of us are familiar with this because this is usually done whenever traveling documents and the like are processed.

How to Lift Latent Prints

Method 1: Dusting

This is the most common technique in collecting fingerprints. This is done with the use of a brush and a special type of black powder. Once the crime scene investigator arrives in the crime scene, the one in charge of latent prints or the latent print technician will start looking for fingerprints. He or she will use the brush and powder. These work because it can stick to the oil in the fingerprint. Afterwards, he will use sticky tape to lift the prints. It works because it can lift both the dust and the oil. Then the prints will be stored in an evidence card.

Once the prints reach the crime lab, the latent print examiner will analyze it. They will try to match it with another print stored in IAFIS or Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System of the FBI.

Though dusting may not be very effective in most instances, especially if the material is "compromised" or it has been touched already which can lead to "inconclusive" results, crime scene investigators can try other methods of collecting fingerprints.

Method 2: Electric Pen

This is another way of collecting fingerprints. With this method, a metal filing brush and electric pen is used. The "brush" is an electromagnet that can take iron filings. Similar to ordinary brushes, it does not affect the prints. The print just sticks to the oil. You can then lift the print using sticky tape or other types of adhesives.

Method 3: Special Chemical Bonding Agents

When using special chemical bonding agents, crime scene investigators will set the object in a specially heated area. They will make use of superglue fumes to warm up the environment. Through this process, a white substance will appear on the print. This is actually the method used for colleting prints for years now.

Method 4: Gray Scale, Livescan and Biometric Gadgets

This method of collecting fingerprints is used by police operatives. 256 shades or gray are used by the gray scale in taking prints. Though this method features different varieties, the most common is "livescan".

With "livescan", different types of laser technology are used in assessing fingerprints. To get clear prints, a glass pad is often used. Then the results are sent to a database to find a match. Police officers now also make use of fingerprint cards and images which can verify matches. They also use cameras for collecting prints.

Another gadget you can use for taking prints is called the "biometric handheld gadget". Aside from taking prints right on the spot, it can link to the main database system directly. After taking the prints, they can be matched and searched for using a database so you don't even need to take your suspect to the police station.

There are different other ways to collect fingerprints. With these advances in technology, security and even justice for the victim can be achieved right away.

Author Resource:

Through different ways to collect fingerprints , crime scene investigators and police operatives can bring the victim justice. There are also other fingerprint identification methods used for different instances.hostgator promo codes hostgator promo code

Related Articles

HTML Ready Article. Click on the "Copy" button to copy into your clipboard.

Firefox users please select/copy/paste as usual

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Popular Methods of Collecting Fingerprints

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By : Jelie Osorio Submitted 2012-03-22 04:04:19 CSI fan or not, collecting fingerprints is still an important part of forensic science. As a matter of fact, it is a great help to almost all CSI or Crime Scene Investigators throughout the world. Crime scene investigators are trained with different ways to collect fingerprints.

# data[].attributes.body
Fingerprints played a key role
D.Williams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fingerprint Technology Played Key Role

A latent thumbprint from the crime scene (inset) was matched to this IAFIS record.

A cold case is just that-an investigation of a crime, usually a violent one, where all leads have been exhausted and the trail has gone cold. But in recent years, the use of various technologies has begun heating up many of these cold cases, uncovering new leads for investigators and providing justice for victims.

One immediate technology example that comes to mind is automated fingerprint searching-more precisely, searches of latent prints of violent unknown perpetrators left at crime scenes. The FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), which houses known records for approximately 73 million criminal subjects, is used daily by local, state, tribal, and international law enforcement for current cases, but increasingly for help in solving cold cases as well. And once a year, the Bureau's Criminal Justice Information Services Division recognizes an outstanding major case solved with help from IAFIS.

The Latest on Latents
Latent prints are impressions-usually invisible to the naked eye-often left at crime scenes that are produced by the ridged skin on human fingers, palms, or soles of the feet. The FBI's IAFIS receives an average of 700 latent search requests per day from authorized law enforcement agencies...with an average response time of one hour.

Our Next Generation Identification system, an incremental replacement of today's IAFIS, will specifically focus on the latent user community next March when a National Palmprint System (NPPS) is scheduled to be established. The NPPS will create a centralized repository of known palmprints within the FBI's database, allowing searches of unknown palmprints against the repository...as well as searches of known palmprints against the Unsolved Latent File. Both types of searches will enhance law enforcement's ability to identify criminal and terrorist suspects.

The 2012 Latent Hit of the Year Award was presented last month to two employees of the Omaha Police Department-Detective Douglas Herout and Senior Crime Laboratory Technician Laura Casey-for their efforts to identify the man responsible for a brutal murder more than 30 years ago.

The crime: In 1978, 61-year-old Carroll Bonnet was stabbed to death in his apartment. Police collected evidence, including latent fingerprints and palmprints from the victim's bathroom (officers believed the killer was trying to wash off blood and other evidence before leaving the apartment). The victim's car was then stolen.

The investigation: The car was found in Illinois, but after collecting additional latent prints, investigators couldn't develop any new leads. The crime scene evidence was processed, and latent prints recovered from the scene and the car were searched against local and state fingerprint files. Investigators also sent fingerprint requests to agencies outside Nebraska, but no matches were returned and the case soon went cold.

The re-investigation: In late 2008, the Omaha Police Department received an inquiry on the case, prompting technician Laura Casey to search the prints against IAFIS (which didn't exist in 1978). In less than five hours, IAFIS returned possible candidates for comparison purposes. Casey spent days carefully examining the prints and came up with a positive identification-Jerry Watson, who was serving time in an Illinois prison on burglary charges.

The case was officially re-opened and assigned to the cold case squad's Doug Herout. Working with laboratory technicians and analysts, Herout reviewed the original evidence from the case, including a classified advertisement flyer with "Jerry W." scribbled on one of the pages. Herout also discovered that Jerry Watson had lived only a few blocks from where the victim's car was recovered.

And the discovery was made just in time-Watson was just days away from being released from prison.

Herout traveled to Illinois to question Watson and presented him with an order to obtain a DNA sample. Subsequent testing determined that Watson's DNA matched DNA recovered at the crime scene, a finding that-combined with Watson's identified prints-resulted in murder charges and a conviction. On October 17, 2011-33 years to the day that Bonnet's body was discovered-his killer was sentenced to life in prison.

It's yet another example of the vital role that technology plays in getting dangerous criminals off our streets.

Resources:
- Previous Latent Hit of the Year Awards

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
criminal justice information services stories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
30-Year-Old Murder Solved | Federal Bureau of Investigation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A cold case is just that-an investigation of a crime, usually a violent one, where all leads have been exhausted and the trail has gone cold.

# data[].attributes.body
The night stalker was a sly and sneaky serial killer but was caught by just a fingerprint
- Aking Grayer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Twenty-six years ago today, fingerprint technology captured stalker Richard Ramirez, aka the Night Stalker. It wasn't the police that found and caught him-it was a group of civilians who recognized him while he tried to steal a car. When he tried pulling a woman out of her car, her neighbors stepped in. One of them recognized him from his picture in the papers and alerted the others-this was the serial killer that had California afraid to go to sleep at night.

While the capture of the Night Stalker was a credit to law enforcement's use of the media, his identification as Ramirez was the result of another modern technique. The Night Stalker case was among the first major cases to use automated fingerprinting technology.

Today, television detectives run fingerprints from a crime scene through an automated database and get results in seconds-somewhat inaccurately. In reality, the database kicks back "likely" matches and a trained fingerprint examiner must compare them to find an actual match. Still, the technology we use today allows quick searches of a vast number of fingerprints, and if a criminal leaves a fingerprint behind we can see if he's ever been booked and fingerprinted, or if we have the same print on file from another scene.

In 1985, this use of computers was brand new. Before automated systems, examiners would have to look through fingerprints on file by hand, using ten-print cards (on which a booked criminal has rolled all ten fingerprints in ink). It meant a great deal of time and effort, and was rarely useful without a suspect in mind. Some even admitted that the collection of fingerprints at the scene was frequently done for public relations purposes only-to appear to be doing something to solve the crime.

When computers were first applied to the task, the systems were extremely expensive, making it difficult to sell to agencies with low budgets. That's why when the California Department of Justice used their brand new automated fingerprint indexing system to immediately identify Richard Ramirez as the Night Stalker, it put these systems on the map-it proved they worked, and that the cost was justified.

For a contemporary article on the use of automated fingerprint technology, go here. For more on the Night Stalker's crimes, go here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Use of Fingerprint Technology: anniversary of capture of Night Stalker - Crime and Forensic Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Twenty-six years ago today, fingerprint technology captured stalker Richard Ramirez, aka the Night Stalker. It wasn't the police that found and caught him-it was a group of civilians who recognized him while he tried to steal a car. When he...

# data[].attributes.body
Fringer prints

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha. C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods. The fingerprint images can then be photographed, marked up for distinguishing features by latent fingerprint examiners, and used to search an automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS).[1] An AFIS is a computer system that stores fingerprint images in an organized, searchable data structure that is widely used by criminal justice agencies to maintain databases of the fingerprints of individuals who are arrested or incarcerated.

Fingerprint databases typically contain rolled fingerprints from each finger ("tenprints") and fingerprints from the whole hand with all the fingers extended in parallel ("slaps"). If an individual whose fingerprints are in an AFIS encounters the criminal justice system again, a criminal investigator can search the AFIS to establish identity and link the individual with a particular criminal record. If a criminal investigator matches a latent print to a fingerprint in the AFIS, that individual may be linked to the crime under investigation.

An AFIS can also house repositories of latent fingerprints that remain unidentified, typically referred to as an unsolved latent file (ULF). As new fingerprints are added to the AFIS, criminal investigators can search them against the ULF collection in the hope of making a match. Matches happen regularly within one jurisdiction over time, but how are unsolved latent fingerprints collected in one jurisdiction matched against a tenprint record stored in the AFIS of another jurisdiction? Interoperability between two jurisdictions will determine whether Jurisdiction A can search the database in Jurisdiction B to find a match. Maximizing AFIS interoperability can help maximize the value of latent fingerprint evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods.

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha.C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When the criminal investigation team gather evidence at the crime scene, there are procedures for the collection and preservation of this evidence. This would be how the investigation team physically collect the evidence and what they use to do this, and also what they use to preserve the evidence for example; the right packaging and tagging of that evidence.

It is important that the investigation team use the right equipment when collecting evidence. This is so they do not damage the evidence or get the best sample of that evidence that they possibly can. An example of this could be using a swab to collect a sample of blood; the investigation team wouldn't use tweezers to collect this because they wouldn't get the best sample from using that piece of equipment. Different pieces of equipment are used to collect the different types of evidence and different packaging will be used for the different types of evidence. The coroner for a deceased would be a way of evidence is collected. The coroner is called out when an individual has died, if this individual is involved in a homicide, this body will be examined.

Packaging of this evidence is important in order to prevent damaging that evidence. This would be the material of the packaging and the size of the packaging. The material pf the packaging plays an important role because if a piece of evidence is not put into the right packaging it could damage or ruin that evidence. An example of this would be if a weapon that had blood on it was put into a plastic container. The box could build up with residue which could ruin the evidence. It's also important that the evidence is put in a package size suitable for that evidence. For example putting a blood swab in a container and in a sealed plastic bag would be more suitable than putting that evidence in a plastic box.

After the evidence has been packaged correctly, it is a procedure to tag or label that evidence. This label or tag includes important information like the case reference that the evidence belongs to, the date, and identification number, the names of the individuals who have handled that piece of evidence and details of that evidence. This is an important procedure because if this evidence was lost or misplaced, the information on the label should tell that individual enough information to return that evidence to its correct case. Also if the evidence has been tampered with, the names of the individuals who have handled that piece of evidence is on the tag.

Once the evidence has been correctly collected, packaged and tagged, it is then analysed using suitable techniques. Different types of evidence will be analysed using techniques. A presumptive technique most commonly used to analyse blood sample to see whether they are blood would be the Kastle Meyer test. This technique includes adding 3 liquid components; ethanol, Kastle meyer and hydrogen peroxide, onto the sample. A colour change to pink will indicate to the team that the sample is positive for blood. This sample would then be taken back to the labs for examination and further analysis.

Chemical evidence would be analysed using a different technique to biological evidence because they are different types of evidence. A commonly used technique used to analyse drugs which is chemical evidence would be identifying what drug is at the crime scene. Marquis Reagent is a liquid component added to the sample which performs a colour change test which then allows us to identify what drug it is due to that colour change. This technique is only a presumptive test and would be sent back to the labs where further analysis could be performed such as spectroscopy and chromatography.

Other pieces of evidence that may not have been specifically collected from the crime scene but still have involvement in the case would also be analysed. This could be witness statements or surveillance videos. These would be types of evidence that are produced by technical aids such as CCTV or listening devices. These would be used to identify individuals, look at locations and also the time when those pieces of evidence were produced. Witness statements are important pieces of evidence in investigations because they might be able to identify things that the investigation team may not know because they did not see the crime take place. These would be analysed as to whether they are valuable evidence in the investigation because they can supply detailed information but also may be biased and opinionated statements.

The biological evidence of this case being the fingerprints would have been collected using specific techniques and equipment. The technique to collect these were dusting which involves dusting fine powders to objects or areas intending for the particles of the powder to adhere to residues left by the hands and fingers of individuals. This evidence would then be analysed by forensics in order to try and match that fingerprint to a possible suspect. These fingerprints were preserved in sealed envelopes which were then given to the forensic team.

Witness statements were valuable pieces of evidence in this investigation. This is because of the lack of physical pieces of evidence that these witness statements could give the investigation team any information and details. These witness statements included reported viewings of an individual carrying a young child who matched Madeleine's description. This witness statement revealed the 'Tanner sighting'. Witness statements also given by residents of the holiday destination came forward with information which then made the investigation team question another resident of that area on Madeleine disappearance. This shows that an analysis of the witness statements were carried out which lead to further lines of enquires. Although there were many witness statements given, there were none that saw Madeleine wondering off by herself or a kidnapper abducting Madeleine from the apartment. There were no surveillance videos that gave the investigation team any evidence or leads in the case. If surveillance videos gave evidence, this could have been used to identify any individuals present in the videos and also the location.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collecting the evidence - Packaging & Tagging

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When the criminal investigation team gather evidence at the crime scene, there are procedures for the collection and preservation of this evidence. This would be how the investigation team physically collect the evidence and what they use to do this, and also what they use to preserve the evidence for example; the right packaging and tagging of that evidence.

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha.C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods. The fingerprint images can then be photographed, marked up for distinguishing features by latent fingerprint examiners, and used to search an automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS).[1] An AFIS is a computer system that stores fingerprint images in an organized, searchable data structure that is widely used by criminal justice agencies to maintain databases of the fingerprints of individuals who are arrested or incarcerated.

Fingerprint databases typically contain rolled fingerprints from each finger ("tenprints") and fingerprints from the whole hand with all the fingers extended in parallel ("slaps"). If an individual whose fingerprints are in an AFIS encounters the criminal justice system again, a criminal investigator can search the AFIS to establish identity and link the individual with a particular criminal record. If a criminal investigator matches a latent print to a fingerprint in the AFIS, that individual may be linked to the crime under investigation.

An AFIS can also house repositories of latent fingerprints that remain unidentified, typically referred to as an unsolved latent file (ULF). As new fingerprints are added to the AFIS, criminal investigators can search them against the ULF collection in the hope of making a match. Matches happen regularly within one jurisdiction over time, but how are unsolved latent fingerprints collected in one jurisdiction matched against a tenprint record stored in the AFIS of another jurisdiction? Interoperability between two jurisdictions will determine whether Jurisdiction A can search the database in Jurisdiction B to find a match. Maximizing AFIS interoperability can help maximize the value of latent fingerprint evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latent fingerprints used in criminal investigations are often crucial pieces of evidence that can link a suspect to a crime. Latent prints are typically collected from a crime scene by specialists trained in forensic science techniques to reveal or extract fingerprints from surfaces and objects using chemical or physical methods.

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha.C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children. On the morning of September 19, 1910, Mr. Hiller woke up to find that a gaslight near her daughter's bedroom was not burning. On the landing, he found a stranger and engaged in combat. Both men tumbled down the staircase. Seconds later, two shots were sound, as well as, Mr. Hiller's soft cry for help. At the door, Mrs. Hiller found her husband dead. Investigators found some particles of sand and gravel at the foot of the daughter's bed. Yet what convicted the killer, Thomas Jennings, were his fingerprints. Next to the rear kitchen window, through which the killer had entered the home of the Hillers, were railings. By chance, Mr. Hiller had painted these very railings just hours before his death. Into the paint four fingerprints of someone's left hand was etched. American law enforcement has already adopted the principle of fingerprinting. Therefore, the presence of these fingerprints was admissible in the court of law. At the trial, fingerprint expert William M. Evans of the PDBI agreed that Jennings hand, and his alone, had left the prints on the railings. The appeal court affirmed the verdict of the jury, guilty, and upheld Jenning's death sentence. He was later hanged.

Fingerprints were also the reasons behind the solving of another famous case: the case of the Stratton Brothers. Thomas Farrow, and his wife, Ann, managed a paint shop in South London. On March 27, 1905, Mr. Farrow had been found dead on the floor of his paint shop. Upstairs, where the couple kept a small room for themselves, his wife lay, covered in blood, and barely alive. Just a few days later, Ann died. The discovery of two masks at the scene of the crime suggested the presence of more than one intruder. They found a clear print on a tray that did not match either victim. With the description given by milkman Henry Jennings, two brothers known for burglary, Albert and Alfred Stratton were held custody. Both were taken to the Tower Bridge police station, where Detective Inspector Charles Collins, a founding member of Scotland Yard's Fingerprint Branch in 1901, rolled their fingers on the inkpad. The fingerprint on the tray matched Albert's right thumb to perfection. Thus, both brothers were charged with murder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children.

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha.C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children. On the morning of September 19, 1910, Mr. Hiller woke up to find that a gaslight near her daughter's bedroom was not burning. On the landing, he found a stranger and engaged in combat. Both men tumbled down the staircase. Seconds later, two shots were sound, as well as, Mr. Hiller's soft cry for help. At the door, Mrs. Hiller found her husband dead. Investigators found some particles of sand and gravel at the foot of the daughter's bed. Yet what convicted the killer, Thomas Jennings, were his fingerprints. Next to the rear kitchen window, through which the killer had entered the home of the Hillers, were railings. By chance, Mr. Hiller had painted these very railings just hours before his death. Into the paint four fingerprints of someone's left hand was etched. American law enforcement has already adopted the principle of fingerprinting. Therefore, the presence of these fingerprints was admissible in the court of law. At the trial, fingerprint expert William M. Evans of the PDBI agreed that Jennings hand, and his alone, had left the prints on the railings. The appeal court affirmed the verdict of the jury, guilty, and upheld Jenning's death sentence. He was later hanged.

Fingerprints were also the reasons behind the solving of another famous case: the case of the Stratton Brothers. Thomas Farrow, and his wife, Ann, managed a paint shop in South London. On March 27, 1905, Mr. Farrow had been found dead on the floor of his paint shop. Upstairs, where the couple kept a small room for themselves, his wife lay, covered in blood, and barely alive. Just a few days later, Ann died. The discovery of two masks at the scene of the crime suggested the presence of more than one intruder. They found a clear print on a tray that did not match either victim. With the description given by milkman Henry Jennings, two brothers known for burglary, Albert and Alfred Stratton were held custody. Both were taken to the Tower Bridge police station, where Detective Inspector Charles Collins, a founding member of Scotland Yard's Fingerprint Branch in 1901, rolled their fingers on the inkpad. The fingerprint on the tray matched Albert's right thumb to perfection. Thus, both brothers were charged with murder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fingerprints have been the reason for the solving of a vast amount of cases. The case of Thomas Jennings in 1910 was the case, which resulted in the first American murder trial to admit fingerprint testimony. Clarence Hiller lived with his wife and four children.

# data[].attributes.body
Philneisha.C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Just after 2 a.m. on the night of September 19, 1910, Clarence Hiller woke to the screams of his wife and daughter in their home at 1837 West 104th Street in Chicago. After a spate of robberies, residents of this South Side neighborhood were already on edge. Hiller, a railroad clerk, raced to confront the intruder. In the ensuing scuffle, the two men fell down the staircase. His daughter, Clarice, later recalled hearing three shots, followed by her mother screaming upstairs. Neighbors came running but the man had fled the home, leaving a dying Hiller by his front door.

The unknown assailant didn't make it far. Thomas Jennings - an African-American man who had been paroled six weeks earlier - was stopped a half-mile away wearing a torn and bloodied coat and carrying a revolver. But it was what he left behind that would be the focal point of his trial-a fingerprint from a freshly painted railing that he used to hoist himself through a window at the Hiller house. Police photographed and cut off the railing itself, claiming it would prove the identity of the burglar. In the eyes of the court, they were right; Hiller's murder would lead to the first conviction using fingerprint evidence in a criminal trial in the United States. At times controversial, this method of solving cases endures more than a century later.

Not only has fingerprinting had staying power in the legal system, the underlying method is fundamentally the same as when it was first introduced to American police departments. Prints are still evaluated based on the same descriptions of arches, loops and whorls written by Sir Francis Galton in the late 19th century. Further, the basic technique of collecting and comparing remains remarkably similar to what was applied to that rudimentary set of prints discovered at the Hiller home.

Jennings' defense attorneys raised questions about this new-and little understood-technique, as well as whether such evidence could even be legally introduced in court (the first time it was used in Britain, they claimed, a special law was needed to make such evidence legal). The defense team even solicited prints from the public in an effort to find a match and disprove the theory that fingerprints were never repeated. A courtroom demonstration, however, backfired badly: Defense attorney W.G Anderson's print was clearly visible after he challenged experts to lift the impression from a piece of paper that he had touched.

This made a distinct impression on the jury as well; they voted unanimously to convict Jennings, who was sentenced to hang. The Decatur Herald called it "the first conviction on finger-printing evidence in the history of this country," adding with dramatic flourish that "the murderer of Hiller wrote his signature when he rested his hand upon the freshly painted railing at the Hiller home."

It's unclear the degree to which Jennings's race played a part in his trial. News reports at the time didn't sensationalize race in their coverage, or even mention Hiller's race. Yet it's not hard to envision that a jury, presented with an unfamiliar technique, would have been more skeptical with a white defendant.

The concept of identifying people by unique fingerprints, first laid out 18 years earlier in Europe, even had its origin in pseudoscientific racial beliefs. It was thoroughly studied and chronicled in Galton's 1892 epic tome Finger Prints (A cousin of Darwin, Galton had long focused on a series of experiments hoping to tie myriad personal and intellectual characteristics to physical traits and heredity). Galton, who had also studied anthropometry in an effort to deduce the meaning behind physical measurements, did not find any major difference between races in his exhaustive collection of prints for research-but not for lack of effort. He wrote in Finger Prints that "it seemed reasonable to expect to find racial differences in finger marks, the inquiries were continued in varied ways until hard fact had made hope no longer justifiable."

As journalist Ava Kofman recently outlined in the Public Domain Review, Galton's pursuit of fingerprint science meshed well with colonialist ideology of the time. "Fingerprints were originally introduced for Europeans to distinguish between the otherwise indistinguishable mass of extra-European peoples, who themselves produced "indecipherable" fingerprints," she wrote. Later in his career, according to Kofman, Galton would later engage in quantifying racial differences, inventing "scientific," numerical measurements to categorize humans by race.

Nonetheless the system Galton outlined was to identify unique characteristics proved effective and caught on quickly. Police in the United States were just beginning to emulate their European colleagues and started to gather prints for the purpose of identification in the early 20th century. During the 1904 World's Fair in St. Louis, Scotland Yard sent representatives to host an exhibit to demonstrate the technique, which was growing in popularity in British courts. Even Mark Twain was caught up in the speculation of how they could be used to apprehend criminals, placing "the assassin's natal autograph" - which is to say the "blood-stained finger-prints" found on a knife- at the center of the dramatic courtroom finale in his novel Puddn'head Wilson, published years before the Jennings case.

After Jennings' conviction, however, lawyers mounted a challenge to the notion that such a newfangled and little-understood technique could be admitted in court. After more than a year in the appeals process, on December 21, 1911, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld the conviction in the People v. Jennings, affirming his sentence would be carried out soon after. They cited prior cases in Britain and published studies on the subject to lend credibility to fingerprinting. Several witnesses in the Jennings trial, it pointed out, had been trained by the venerable Scotland Yard. "This method of identification is in such general and common use that the courts cannot refuse to take judicial cognizance of it," the ruling stated.

Fingerprinting had thereby been "proclaimed by the Supreme Court of Illinois to be sufficient basis for a verdict of death by hanging," the Chicago Tribune reported, and it was the beginning of a shift toward the largely unquestioned use of fingerprint evidence in courtrooms across the United States. "The Jennings case really is the earliest case - earliest published case - in which you'll find any discussion of fingerprint evidence," says Simon A. Cole, author of Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification and professor of criminology, law and society at the University of California, Irvine School of Social Ecology. "So, in that sense it really is a precedent for the whole country."

People v. Jennings further specified that fingerprint evidence was something that the average juror would have to rely on interpretation to understand. "Expert testimony is admissible when the subject matter of the inquiry is of such a character that only persons of skill and experience are capable of forming a correct judgment as to any facts connected therewith." The inclusion of this statement was crucial in legal terms: some level of human judgment and interpretation was a given, built into the courtroom process when fingerprint evidence was presented to a jury. The degree of subjectivity that represents and what potential room for error - however small - is acceptable is still actively debated more than a century later.

Beginning with the Jennings trial, two fundamental questions have formed the basis of any challenge to its admissibility in court. Is the technique itself sound (the primary issue when it was first introduced)? And how accurate the evidence is when interpreted and applied to any specific case? "The uniqueness of fingerprints is really kind of beside the point of the accuracy of the identification," says Cole. "The best way to understand that is to think about eyewitness identification - nobody disputes that all human faces are in some sense unique, even those of identical twins, but nobody reasons from that that eyewitness identification must be 100 percent accurate." Juries like the one that convicted Jennings were initially focused on whether prints were repeated, "whereas really what we need to know is can people match them accurately."

It is this gray area that defense attorneys seize on in thorny legal cases. Following a 1993 Supreme Court ruling in Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., judges were required to apply what is known as the Daubert standard to determine if a witness' testimony can be considered scientific. This is based on a list of factors, including how the technique itself has been tested, error rates and what regulations govern its usage. These standards were more stringent than what had previously been required, putting the onus on judges to determine what could be considered by a jury as scientific evidence.

Fingerprinting techniques came under marked public scrutiny in 2004 when an Oregon lawyer named Brandon Mayfield was arrested in connection with a terrorist attack on a commuter train in Madrid based on a mistaken match of a partial print gathered at the scene . The FBI later publicly apologized to Mayfield, but such high-profile incidents inevitably introduce questions about if other mistakes have gone unnoticed and fuel skeptics and lawyers who contest the often presumed infallibility of such evidence.

As part of a broader re-examination of forensics that had come to be widely accepted over the years, the National Academy of Sciences released a report in 2009 that addressed some of these shortcomings, acknowledging that "not all fingerprint evidence is equally good, because the true value of the evidence is determined by the quality of the latent fingerprint image. These disparities between and within the forensic science disciplines highlight a major problem in the forensic science community: The simple reality is that the interpretation of forensic evidence is not always based on scientific studies to determine its validity."

Fingerprint examiners rely on years of experience, testing and verification by a second examiner to bolster the reliability of their determination. Echoing the reasoning in the People v. Jennings ruling, fingerprint examiner William Leo writes that "the purpose of the expert witness in the legal system is to interpret information and form a conclusion that a jury of lay persons would be incapable of doing...A fingerprint examiner's conclusion is not based upon a personal opinion, but rather on an evaluation of the detail present using the knowledge and skills acquired through training, education and expertise."

"You'll probably find for the most part that most people are in agreement that most of the time if you have a decent print of some size that is of decent quality, you can make an identification in some reasonable percentage of cases," says David A. Harris, professor of law at the University of Pittsburgh and author of Failed Evidence: Why Law Enforcement Resists Science. "Where things have begun to come into question in the last 20 years is the way that those identifications have been done, the certainty with which they have been presented, the terminology around that and just a general harder look at all the forensic sciences."

When it comes to fingerprint evidence, uncertainty has not been eliminated, but is now more likely to be acknowledged and addressed. And despite greater skepticism in recent decades and the more stringent caveats introduced by Daubert, courts have not significantly curtailed the use of fingerprint evidence, nor the reliance on examiners to interpret this evidence for the jury.

"A hundred years is kind of an impressive run," says Cole. "There are some reasons for that - I think the fingerprint patterns are very information rich, you can see that there's a lot of information packed into a small area." When Thomas Jennings placed his hand on a porch railing in the middle of the night, he unwittingly introduced that valuable information into American courtrooms, influencing the outcome of innumerable cases for more than a century and counting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The First Criminal Trial That Used Fingerprints as Evidence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Just after 2 a.m. on the night of September 19, 1910, Clarence Hiller woke to the screams of his wife and daughter in their home at 1837 West 104th Street in Chicago. After a spate of robberies, residents of this South Side neighborhood were already on edge.