|
The Detail Archives Discuss This Issue Subscribe to The Detail |
|
|
G o o d
M o r n i n g ! |
The purpose of the Detail is to help keep you informed of the current state of affairs in the latent print community, to provide an avenue to circulate original fingerprint-related articles, and to announce important events as they happen in our field. |
| Breaking NEWz you can UzE... | ||
|
compiled by Jon Stimac |
||
|
Last week
Dennis Degler prompted a discussion on the CLPEX message forum regarding John
Doe warrants.
This week
the IAI is in full swing in St. Louis, MO. and an excellent program is ahead of
those in attendance.
___________________________________
This week, we review an article on:
Process errors leading to
missed Identifications
Recognizing the
potential for error is the first step in eliminating it. The possible causes of
missed-ID's has been studied. A comprehensive list of mistakes should be
compiled that includes oversights, errors, omissions etc that could lead to a
suspect not being identified in a case where a detectable latent print capable
of individualization was present.
Below is a list of all the ones I could think of, grouped by which stage of the
process at which they occur.
I'd like people to comment on whether they think the errors are caused by lack
of proficiency on the part of the operator, by unsound judgment by the
decision-maker or are unavoidable in some or all circumstances. Also, can you
think of any errors I have missed?
Evidence recovery
The scene is not
examined by a CSI
A surface that bears a detectable latent print is not examined
The surface is not examined using the appropriate method for development of the latent
The latent is not optimally developed
The developed latent is not noticed by the CSI
The developed latent print is not recognized as a friction ridge print
The developed latent print is not recorded or recovered
Analysis
The latent is incorrectly assessed as containing insufficient detail for individualization
Features of the latent are incorrectly classified as friction ridge features or as distortion artifacts
The latent is orientated incorrectly
The digit/palmar determination and search allowances do not include the correct location for the friction ridge skin
Comparison
The corresponding exemplar is not compared with the latent
The selected target(s) from the latent is (are) not present in the exemplar
The target group is not recognized when seen in the exemplar
Incomplete comparison of all the features available
Evaluation
Under-evaluation of similarities
Over-evaluation of
dissimilarities
_______________________________________________________
To discuss this Detail, the
message board is always open: (http://www.clpex.com/phpBB/viewforum.php?f=2)
More formal latent print discussions are available at
onin.com: (http://www.onin.com)
_______________________________________________________
FUNNY FINGERPRINT FIND
The Detail was sent out this week during
discussions regarding all sorts of interesting fingerprint-related topics by 5
crazy examiners part 2.
_______________________________________________________
UPDATES ON CLPEX.com
Updated the Newzroom
_______________________________________________________
Feel free to pass The Detail along to other
examiners. This is a free newsletter FOR latent print examiners, BY latent
print examiners. There are no copyrights on The Detail, and the website is open
for all to visit.
If you have not yet signed up to receive the Weekly Detail in YOUR e-mail inbox,
go ahead and join the list now
so you don't miss out! (To join this free e-mail newsletter, send a blank
e-mail to:
theweeklydetail-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com) Members may
unsubscribe at any time. If you have difficulties with the sign-up process
or have been inadvertently removed from the list, e-mail me personally at
kaseywertheim@aol.com and I will try
to work things out.
Until next Monday morning, don't work too hard or too little.
Have a GREAT week!