The fingerprint discipline in a criminal justice system has two main uses: (1) fingerprints, palm prints, toe prints and sole prints of the human body.
257 pages
62 KB – 257 Pages
PAGE – 1 ============
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: The Report of the International Association for Identification, Standardization II Committee Author: Joseph Polski, Ron Smith, Robert Garrett, et al. Document No.: 233980 Date Received: March 2011 Award Number: 2006-DN-BX-K249 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
PAGE – 3 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY COMMITTEE CHARGE In the fall of 2006, the President of the International Association for Identification, Diana Castro, formed what has become known as the Sta ndardization II Committee. This committee was charged with the responsibility of re-exami ning the findings of the IAI Standardization Committee (1970-73) which concluded fi–no valid basis exists at this time for requiring that a pre-determined minimum number of friction ridge characteristics must be present in two impressions in order to est ablish positive identification.fl This original charge was clarified and expanded by IAI President Ken Martin in 2007, to include the following: Determine if, after review of the 1973 pos ition statement and the research conducted since that time, the IAI should maintain the pos ition that no valid (scientific) basis exists for requiring a pre-determined minimum number of fricti on ridge characteristics be present in two impressions to establish an identification (ind ividualization), and If the Standardization II Committee concludes that the position of the IAI should change, what would be the recommended change and what is the basis for that conclusion. If no change is warranted, what is the basis for maintaining the 1973 position, and Upon conclusion of the Committee™s review of past and present data, what recommendations, if any, would the Committee ma ke in regards to research which would further the science. A detailed international literature review project was initiated along with surveys, resulting in an abundance of information and data which required compilation and review. At its first formal meeting in Panama City, Fl orida, USA, during October of 2008, IAI President Robert Garrett determined that the research mate rial collected thus far would lend itself well to the examination of additional issues. He theref ore directed the Committee to review the IAI™s Resolution VII of 1979 and Resolution V of 1980 which dealt with the reporting and testifying to fingerprint comparison conclusions utilizing the positions of possible, probable or likely as qualified statements. MEMBERSHIP PROFILE The original configuration of the Committee was anticipated to be a traditionally organized structure with a static membership. However, the evolution of the Committee™s charge supported the inclusion of new members to assist with unanticipated or specia lized areas of concern. The IAI recognized that the credibility of the Committee and its work was paramount if its findings and recommendations were to be supported by the forensic science community. For that purpose, committee membership was extended to subject matter experts outside the realm of traditional fingerprint examination, including representatives from academia, the legal profession, mathematicians, statis ticians, standards setting bodies and fingerprint experts from
PAGE – 4 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 3 North America and Europe. The fingerprint experts represented national, state, county, municipal and private forensic service providers. RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee offers the following recommendati ons based on its research, deliberations and findings: 1. The Committee recommends that the IAI replace the 1973 Position Statement changing the official position of the Association related to Friction Ridge Examinations. The successor resolution should state: fiThere currently exists no scientific ba sis for requiring a minimum amount of corresponding friction ridge detail informatio n between two impressions to arrive at an opinion of single source attribution.fl Note: This recommendation was presented at the 94 th Annual Educational Conference of the IAI in Tampa, Florida and passed as Resolution 2009-18 on August 21, 2009. 2. The Committee recommends that IAI Resolution VII of 1979 and IAI Resolution V of 1980 be rescinded in their entirety. 3. The Committee recommends that the IAI propose a new resolution which reflects the following position: Any member or certified la tent print examiner may offer oral or written reports of testimony of probable or likely conclusions concerning source attribution of two friction ridge impressions being from the sa me source, if such member has been trained to interpret the results of a probability model which has been accepted and acknowledged by the IAI as a reliable model to support such conclusions. 1 4. The committee recommends that the IAI seek funding for the establishment and maintenance of a web-based clearinghouse for pa st, present and future literature related to friction ridge science. 5. The Committee recommends that the IA I pursue the development of a standing committee to develop a strategic plan for research, review ongoing research, and to partner with academic and rese arch entities to further the advancement of friction ridge science. 6. The Committee recommends that the IAI create a Standing Committee on probability theory and statistics as it relates to the fore nsic disciplines represented by the IAI. Their charge would be to assist the Science and Practice Committee in the acceptance and 1 The Committee acknowledges that this is a multi-step process. The initial step is to show a commitment to exploring the use of probability models. The committee found ample references to show that this approach has value. (refer to findings references).
PAGE – 5 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 4 implementation of probability modeling and to liaise with various entities such as the FBI™s Biometric Center of Excellence, National Institute of Science and Technology, National Institute of Justice, National Academy of Sciences and the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes. 7. The Committee recommends that th e IAI support the pursuit of a single internationally accepted examination met hodology and standard for conclusions. 8. The Committee recommends that the IAI suppor t the pursuit of research in an attempt to establish a measurable threshold requirement for identification of latent prints, with the intent of achieving a standard. The Committee recognizes the difficulty or potential impossibility of this endeavor. Therefore, research initially focusing on Level I and Level II friction ridge skin detail is recommended, followed by additional research utilizing Level III information if warranted.
PAGE – 6 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 5 I. Background The purpose of this section is to provide background information related to the principles of friction ridge identification and the formation of the IAI Standardization Committee, as well as to provide historical context for the IAI Resolutions and their im pact on the friction ridge science community worldwide. A. Principles of Friction Ridge Identification The fingerprint discipline in a criminal justice system has two main uses: (1) supporting criminal/civil histor y records in a Tenprint operation; (2) comparing crime scene latent prints to known exemplars to ai d a criminal investigation. While these are different objectives, the Committee fully recogni zes the fundamental si milarities in the comparison of latent prints and Tenprints. In operations where Tenprint examiners are performing work that is more akin to latent print examinations (e.g. single finger pawn slip/check identifications, degraded Tenprint images, identification of human remains), the findings and recommendations in this repor t apply. The charge of this Committee has not been to address the use of fingerprints in routine criminal/civil history functions and is beyond the scope of this report. The primary role of the friction ridge exam iner is to provide conclusions of source attribution through the analysis and comparison of friction ridge impressions. This process may result in the examiner identifing or excluding an individual as the source of an impression. The presence of friction ridge details in the same relative position in both impressions remains the principle mean s of establishing an identification.
PAGE – 8 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 7 fiThe Committee likewise agreed that the study would require a substantial amount of time, and warranted a careful and deliberate approach rather than one of expediency in order to meet a predetermined deadline.fl 5 The Committee embarked on a three year mission to answer the questions presented to them. Through literature research, worldwide personal contacts and written international survey documents, they began to compile data. Interim reports were presented at the 56th Annual IAI Educational Conference in Louisville, KY in 1971 and the 57th Annual IAI Educational Conference in Milwaukee, WI in 1972. Based upon the Committee’s research, on August 1, 1973, the Inte rnational Association for Identification adopted the following Resolution which becam e its™ official position on this issue: “The International Association for Identification assembled in its 58 th Annual Conference at Jackson, Wyoming, this first Day of August, 1973, based upon a three-year study by its Standardization Committee, hereby states that no valid basis exists at this time for requiring that a pre-determined minimum number of friction ridge characteristics must be present in two impressions in order to establish positive identification. The foregoing reference to friction ridge characteristics applies equally to fingerprints, palm prints, toe prints and sole prints of the human body.fl Based upon the available data at the time , the Standardization Committee came to the conclusion that there was no scientific basis to establish that any set minimum number of matching friction ridge characteristics be present for an identification to be effected. Although this might have been inte rpreted as a negative position and certainly a position contradictory to the policies of many agencies at the time, the value of the statement rests in the fact that the IAI had finally taken a position on the issue. This position statement became available for latent print examiners to use on the witness stand when questioned on this topic. Through this Position Statement, the IAI fundamentally 5 Identification News , International Association for Identification, August 1973.
PAGE – 9 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 8 adopted the position that each comparison and corresponding identification represented a unique set of circumstances, and the amount of fricti on ridge detail needed to effect an identification was dependent on these unique circumstances. This resulted in the rejection of the position that a pre-determined number of friction ridg e characteristics is necessary to effect an identification. The 1970-1973 Standardization Committee consistently noted that additional research needed to be conducted and proposed that funding be sought to conduct research into the area of friction ridge identification practices. C. Resolution VII (1979) During the mid to late 1970s, discussion ar ose within the forensic identification community regarding expert witness testimony on the giving of opinions when insufficient friction ridge detail existed to conclusively offer an opinion of identification. Although the debate was not over the original position statement itself, it concerned the related topic of sufficiency. This remained a contentious issue with the membership and after debate, the following Resolution was passed in 1979: fiWHEREAS the delegates of the Internat ional Association fo r Identification, assembled in their 64th annual conference in Phoenix, Arizona, August 2, 1979 state unanimously that friction ri dge identifications are positive, and officially oppose any testimony or repo rting of possible, probable or likely friction ridge identification. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that any member, officer or certified latent print examiner who provides or al or written reports, or gives testimony of possible, probable or likely friction ridge identification shall be deemed to be engaged in conduct unbecoming such member, officer or certified latent print examiner as describe d in Article XVII, Section 5, of the constitution of the International Asso ciation for Identification and charges may be brought under such conditions set forth in Article XVII, Section 5, of the constitution. If such member be a certified latent print examiner, his conduct and status will be reconsidered by the Latent Print Certification Board, and
PAGE – 10 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 9 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the S ecretary shall send a copy of this resolution to the Office of the Attorney General of the United States and to the Attorneys General of each of the stat es as notification of the position of the International Association for Identification.fl D. Resolution V (1980) Ame nding Resolution VII of 1979 During the months following the publishing of Resolution VII in the August 1979 issue of the Identification News, the forensic identification community became concerned with the strict wording of Resolution VII as passed in 1979. Although there were many collateral issues with the wording of the Resolution, the primary argument was that it might be violated. This fiunder oathfl statem ent could potentially be used against the member as ficonduct unbecomingfl or be used to revoke their Latent Print Examiner Certification. The issue was debated prior to, and during, the 65th Annual Educational Conference of 1980 held in Ottawa, Canada resulting in the following amendment to the original Resolution VII: fiWHEREAS Resolution VII of 1979 has, by its wording, created great controversy among members of the IAI, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution VII be amended to read: fiWHEREAS the delegates of the Internat ional Association fo r Identification, assembled in their 64th annual conference in Phoenix, Arizona, August 2, 1979 state unanimously that friction ri dge identifications are positive, and officially oppose any testimony or repo rting of possible, probable or likely friction ridge identification found on the hand and feet, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that any member, officer or certified latent print examiner who init iates or volunteers oral or written reports, or testimony of possible, pr obable or likely friction ridge identification, or who, when required in a judicial proceeding to provide such
PAGE – 11 ============
Report of the IAI Standardization II Committee – 10 reports or testimony, does not qualify it with a statement that the print in question could be that of someone else, shall be deemed to be engaged in conduct unbecoming such member, officer or certified latent print examiner as described in Article XVII, Section 5, of the constitution of the International Association for Identification and charges may be brought under such conditions set forth in Article XVII, Section 5, of the constitution. If such member be a certified latent print examiner, his conduct and status will be reconsidered by the Latent Print Certification Board, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the S ecretary shall send a copy of this resolution to the Office of the Attorney General of the United States and to the Attorneys General of each of the stat es as notification of the position of the International Association for Identificationfl. E. Impact of the 1973 IAI Position Stat ement on the Forensic Identification Community The 1973 IAI Position Statement became the basis of expert witness testimony on this subject. It was considered to be a foundation upon which the latent print examiner could formulate opinions regarding sufficiency of friction ridge characteristics necessary to identify a latent print. The passage of Resolution VII of 1979 and Resolution V of 1980 became the impetus for additional research. Members of the latent print examiner community attempted to further define the processes by which latent prints are analyzed, compared and identified. This research resulted in the concept of fiRidgeologyfl6 and spurred on a significant increase in training. The 1973 Position Statement was not intended to, nor did it, eliminate the use of numeric standards across the world. Current ly, many agencies worldwide continue in their use of a numeric standard which require s a specific number of Level II details prior 6 Ashbaugh, D. (1999) Quantitative-Qualitative Friction Ridge Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Ridgeology : Ridgeology Consulting Services.
62 KB – 257 Pages