The Forensic Analysis, Comparison and Evaluation of Friction Ridge Skin Impressions

ISBN-13: 9781119230892 / Angielski / Twarda / 2022 / 356 str.

Dan G. Perkins

Spis treści

Acknowledgements xiIntroduction 1References 2Part I Analysis Stage 51 Does the Mark Have Evidential Value? 71.1 Continuity and Integrity 71.2 The Most Evidentially Valuable Mark 11References 122 Does the Mark Require Enhancement? 133 What Details Does the Mark Reveal? 153.1 Persistence and Uniqueness 153.2 Documentation 163.3 Complex Marks 173.4 First-Level Detail 213.5 Second-Level Detail 343.6 Third-Level Detail 443.7 Creases, Subsidiary Ridges and Scars 503.8 Abnormalities 60References 614 Are the Details in the Mark Likely to Appear Similarly in a Print Made by the Same Area of Skin? 674.1 Downward Pressure 684.2 Movement 714.3 Superimposition 764.4 Colour Reversal 794.5 Direction Reversal 834.6 The Surface the Mark Was On 874.7 The Material the Mark Was Made In 914.8 The Media Used to Develop the Mark 924.9 Changes to the Skin 93References 955 Is the Mark Suitable? 99References 1056 What Is the Most Likely Orientation of the Mark? 1076.1 Shape and Ridge Flow 1076.2 Pattern Family 1086.3 Distal Flexion Crease 1086.4 Other Marks 1096.5 The Surface the Mark Was Found on 1096.6 Summary 109Reference 1107 Which Area of Skin Is Most Likely to Have Made the Mark? 1117.1 The Surface the Mark Was Found On 1117.2 Other Marks 1127.3 Lone Marks 1197.4 The Part of the Digit That Made the Mark 1227.5 The Pattern 1247.6 Summary of Digit Determination 1337.7 Palm Marks 1347.8 Medial and Proximal Phalange Marks 1507.9 Plantar Marks 1527.10 Toe Marks 158References 1608 What Details Does the Print Reveal, and Are They Likely to Be a Reliable Record of the Details on the Skin of the Donor? 1638.1 Sets of Fingerprints 1638.2 The Details in the Print 1668.3 The Reliability of the Details 168References 171Part II Comparison 1739 Are the Details in the Mark in Agreement or Disagreement with Those in the Print? 1759.1 First-Level Detail 1769.2 Second-Level Detail 1779.3 Third-Level Detail 1809.4 Creases, Subsidiary Ridges and Scars 181References 183Part III Evaluation 18510 Which Conclusion Is Supported by the Observations in the Analysis and Comparison? 18710.1 Exclusion 19010.2 Identification 19610.3 Inconclusive 207References 210Appendices 215Appendix 1 Fabrication, Transplantation and Forgery 215A.1 Fabrication 215A.2 Transplantation 219A.3 Forgery 222References 227Appendix 2 Verification 229A2.1 Open Verification 229A2.2 Blind Verification 231A2.3 The Use of Verification 232A2.4 Technical Review 232References 233Appendix 3 Bias 235A3.1 Contextual Information 235A3.2 Experience 237A3.3 Motivation 237A3.4 How Bias Can Affect Decision Making 238A3.5 Minimising the Effects of Bias 239References 240Appendix 4 Activity Level Propositions 243A4.1 How Long Has the Mark Been on the Surface? 244A4.2 What Were the Circumstances at the Time the Mark Was Made? 260A4.3 Blood Marks 264References 267Appendix 5 Errors 273A5.1 Clerical Errors 273A5.2 Technical Errors 273A5.3 Error Rates 284References 300Index 303

O autorze

Dan Perkins is a Senior Reporting Fingerprint Examiner and has been involved in fingerprint identification for over 20 years. Dan has held various other roles including Deputy Head of the Forensic Faculty and Fingerprint Training & Development Manager. He holds a Diploma in Forensic Human Identification (DipFHID) from the Royal College of Physicians.