Fingerprints and DNA have a unique ability in forensic science in as they do not only provide evidence, but they can also tell the police the name of the suspect.
The fingertip search at a crime scene can reveal evidence such as cigarette butts, a tissue or paper fallen from a pocket, which may then provide fingerprints or DNA of the suspect.
CCTV can pinpoint a suspect close to the crime scene and the forensic evidence can start from that point of contact.
Exceptions to watch out for that alter fingerprints are: People, who work with chemicals, which can burn away the skin; manual workers like a farrier.
Also, people, who had underarm sweat glands removed due to excessive perspiration, as this reduces the body fluid needed to use a livescan effectively.
Bite marks evidence can become biased and less trustworthy, as they are often judged upon qualities, not measurements.
Ten points are required as a minimum for an impression, when sent to AFIS.
DNA is usually only 96% accurate but in the first case used by Prof. Alec Jeffrey from Leicester University in 1984 it was more than 99.99%.
The History of Fingerprinting
In the 1850s, William Herschel, in British India, began privately experimentating with fingerprints, that he later used as signatures on land titles and his jailers warrants. He did not yet use the fingerprints not to identify offenders, but using them instead of a written signature.
In 1880, Henry Faulds, a Scottish missionary, became the first person to publicly suggest that fingerprints could be used as a method of criminal identification in NATURE magazine.
In 1892, Francis Galton, published a study of fingerprinting that included a basic system of fingerprint classification.
In the same year, the fingerprint identification from a crime scene took place and the first fingerprint bureau
was set up in Argentina.
First Case of Fingerprint evidence leading to conviction:
Francesca Rojas’ two young children are killed in their home in the small town of Necochea, Argentina. According to Rojas, a man named Velasquez had threatened her when she rejected his sexual advances earlier in the day. Upon returning home
later, Rojas claimed to have seen Velasquez escaping out her open door. Once inside, she found both her six-year-old boy and
four-year-old girlstabbed to death.
Juan Vucetich, in charge of criminal identification at the regional headquarters, had been intrigued by the new theories of fingerprint identification and sent an investigator to see if the methods could help crack the case. Until then, the only other method of identification was the Bertillonage, named after its inventor, Alphonse Bertillon, who worked for the Paris police,which involved the body measurements in 11 places.
Vucetich found a bloody fingerprint of the mother and was able to prove her guilt. She had killed her children because her boyfriend did not like children and she did not want to lose him. She allowed another man at first to be falsely accused and interrogated even with the suspect stripped to the children’s corpses for a night.She was sentenced to life.
In the late 1890s, some assistants working for Edward Henry, who was the Chief of Police in Bengal, developed a comprehensive system for identifying fingerprints.
A few years later, in 1901, the UK adopted the Henry classification system. It is known under his name but not under the actual assistants, who developed it. It is only recently, due to much work of the UK Fingerprint Society that the assistants have been recognised for their work!
In 1902, Henry Jackson was found guilty of burglary on this basis. In 1905, the first UK conviction took place for murder, based on fingerprint evidence.
From my human rights research I just remembered that fingerprints were also used in Bavaria from 1911 by a special police directorate that dealt with only ‘policing’ the Roma and Sinti, discriminating against them by forcing them to register, wherever they went, also with their fingerprints, and with as many additional individual characteristics as possible. The ‘Gypsy Register’ (Zigeuner Buch) was compiled by Alfred Dillmann already in 1905, and from 14th April 1911 fingerprints had to also taken from Sinti and Roma countrywide. This reference book about 3350 people was held in a print of 7000 by local government and police, and the fingerprints had to be sent to the headquarters in Munich. In 1925 this book was used in a trial against doctors in Nuremberg.
Listen to this fascinating discussion between Professor Sir Alec Jefferys and Dr John Bond OBE about the discovery and first applications of DNA fingerprinting, as it became known in 1984. A year of many coincidences, too…
@DrJohnBond – 1984 – the year of the discovery of DNA fingerprinting by Professor Sir Alec Jefferys: interview.. minutes agoDetails
The Legacy of Leicester: DNA Fingerprinting by University of Leicester on #SoundCloud
The Legacy of Leicester: DNA Fingerprinting by University of Leicester
The Legacy of Leicester: DNA Fingerprinting by University of Leicester
Pitchfork was able to evade his identification by bribing a friend to hand in his sample in his place. Only, when Ian Kelly boasted about this Pitchfork could be arrested. Where there is such high level of criminal energy involved and a suspect has access to bribery, or in cases of organised criminality or secret societies even to blackmail and cover ups or to offer incentives to another criminal to take the blame for a high-profile murderer to stay out of the frame it is very difficult for the police to get their hands on the real culprit’s DNA. But sooner or later, and with good undercover work, f.ex. in local pubs or circles a victim moved in, the real murderer will boast or somebody else sees a chance for a climb on a organised criminal career ladder and does tip off the authorities or openly a suspect ‘toast’…
Pitchfork’s release date was given for 2016. I sincerely hope he is not repeating his evil!
The discovery of DNA fingerprinting in 1984 must have also sent ripples through the scientific and storm waves through the organised crime world that is involved in human trafficking, human egg theft and illegal IVF trade, and in organ harvesting…
And also, the criminally minded amongst the scientific community, who hide behind a facade of respectability or who abuse their own faculty for illegal experiments and who also abuse confidentiality and clearance related issues to not let their fellow scientists into their true research, must have been on high alert, and I can imagine that Prof Jeffreys’ discovery was not welcomed by all of his worldwide colleagues…
It is very interesting to also look at other scientific developments or organised crime in 1984 and onwards, as I was able to fit so many pieces into a greater picture for my own social sciences research about organised criminality under abuse of immunity and also about the hidden structures and intertwined reality of organised crime syndicates and secret societies like freemasonry, Templars and many others, whose tentacles reach also into infiltrating and sabotaging research facilities and laboratories, often under abuse of immunity or the high clearance status for a cover project…
It has emerged through whistleblowers that illegal cloning and IVF treatments from stolen human eggs and forbidden species crossing has also been committed under abuse of privilege. The perpetrators were sheltered by immunity and via their secret societies.
Not everybody, I can imagine, was too happy about Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys’ discovery in the shady but high-financed world of crimes against humanity and organised science criminality, usually by individuals with greed and envy as their creed!
Sigrid Countess von Galen
NEC LAUDIBUS NEC TIMORE
http://sigridvongalen.tumblr.com (James John Westcott House)
@instcrimjust @CTraumastudies @sigridvongalen