A simple guide to leading fingerprint evidence in Court.

1. Evidence-in-chief
and
Cross-examination

2. Plan your evidence
The Witnesses
The Exhibits

3. •Developing fingerprint impression at crime scene
•Performing Research
•Making Comparison
•Arriving at Conclusion
Expert
•Contact print
•Enlargements of Fingerprint Slip impression & Contact print
•Photograph of Mounted Card
Photographer
•Procedure adopted on recording fingerprint impression of accused
on fingerprint slip
•Signature of accused on fingerprint slip
Person recording
impression of
accused

4. Object upon which impression developed -
‘A’
Contact print of impression on object – ‘B’
Fingerprint Slip with impressions of accused
– ‘C’
Original Mounted Card – ‘D’
Photograph of Mounted Card – ‘E’

5. Analysis & Conclusion
Mounted Card
Contact Print –v- Fingerprint Slip
Fingerprint Slip
Preparation of Contact Print
Discovery of latent fingerprint at scene
Fingerprint Expert

6. Qualifications
•Certificates, diplomas, fellowships, etc.
•Experience as Fingerprint Expert
•Amount of sets of fingerprints examined
Principles of
fingerprint
identification
•Fingerprints are impressions made by the end joints of the fingers and, therefore, are reversed
reproductions of the skin surface details
•Positive identification, or elimination, of fingerprints is dependent upon the individual ridge
characteristics in a fingerprint, their relative position to each other, and whether or not there are
any dissimilar characteristics that cannot be explained.
•Ridge characteristics – types (bifurcation, endings, dots, cross-overs, etc.)
•Technique - application of brush and powder to develop latent fingerprint impression
•Uniqueness – Each of the 10 fingers on every person’s hands bears its own individual and
distinctive trademark in its ridge pattern and characteristics. No two fingers have ever been found
identical in their ridge patterns and characteristics
•Permanence – fingerprints formed as foetus and, except for size, remains unchanged throughout
life and even after death, until decomposition.

7. Discovery of latent
fingerprint
impression
• Expert visited and processed the crime scene
• Found object
• Applied brush and powder
• Developed latent fingerprint impression
The Object
• Expert took possession of object
• Markings placed thereon
• Protection of latent fingerprint impression by covering
• Admit into evidence – “A”

8. Expert passes object to photographer for latent
fingerprint to be photographed
Photographer Evidence -
•Identifies Object passed by Expert – (‘A’)
•Contact print developed (markings, etc.)
•Admitted into evidence – (‘B’)
•Explain contact print
•Object (‘A’) and Contact print (‘B’) returned to Expert

9. Expert:
•Identifies contact print (‘B’)
•Verifies that contact print and latent impression on object
identical
Expert performs research and comes to an
opinion
Expert gives blank fingerprint form to Officer
(generally Complainant) to take impressions
from accused

10. Officer taking impressions from accused
Received
blank
fingerprint
slip from
fingerprint
expert
Informs
accused of
intention to
take
fingerprints
Any
objections
or
complaints
Each finger
placed in
Ink Slab
Rolled onto
fingerprint
slip
Signature of
accused at
foot of
fingerprint
slip
Admit
signed
fingerprint
slip into
evidence –
(‘C’)
Return of
completed
fingerprint
slip to
fingerprint
expert

11. Expert
•Receives fingerprint slip
•Compares impressions on fingerprint slip with Contact Print
•Identifies matching impression and places mark above relevant digit on fingerprint slip
and on contact print
•Identifies fingerprint slip – (‘C’)
•Contact print (‘B’) and fingerprint slip (‘C’) returned to photographer
Photographer
•Receives marked contact print and fingerprint slip
•Places marking on fingerprint slip
•Identifies fingerprint slip (‘C’) with marking
•Makes enlargements of contact print and impression designated on fingerprint slip
(markings of photographer)
•Submits enlargements, together with contact print (‘B’) and fingerprint slip (‘C’) to Expert

12. Expert
•Verification of enlargements as that of contact print (‘B’) and fingerprint slip (‘C’)
•Places enlargements side by side on mounted card
•Prepares a features table
•Signs at back of Mounted Card
•Admit original mounted card into evidence – ‘D’
•Transmit original mounted card to photographer for photograph to be taken
Photographer
•Receives from Expert original Mounted Card – ‘D’
•Identifies original mounted card – ‘D’
•Takes photograph of original mounted card – (markings, etc.)
•Admit into evidence photograph of original mounted card – ‘E’
•Returns original mounted card and photograph (‘E’) to Expert
•Produce copies of photograph of original mounted card for Magistrate and Defence Counsel

13. Expert receives original mounted card (‘D’) and
photograph thereof (‘E’)
Identifies photograph of original mounted card
(‘E’)
Verification that photograph of original mounted
card is identical to original mounted card
Copies of photograph of original mounted card
passed to Magistrate and Defence Counsel
Expert then explains the content of the original
mounted card (‘D’)

14. Magnifying glasses to be made available
Treat with each ridge characteristic individually
from the features table
Conclusion -
•Based on the number of corresponding ridge characteristics
both in continuous sequence and agreement
•Opinion – the source of the latent print is the accused

15. •Subjective exercise
•Number of ridge characteristics required in order for positive identification
•Mistakes made in the past
Erroneous
Identification
•Impossible to determine time of placementAge of latent print
•Utilizing an adhesive tape to remove an impression and replace it on another object
Planted or forged
prints
•Pre-emptive evidence to defence claims
Legitimate (innocent)
access
•ProcedureOn Academic Material

16. Statutory powers
Right of accused
person to object

17. Statute
•Police Service
Act, (repealed)
Ch. 15:01 – s. 37
•Police Service
Act , 2006 (as
amended) – s.50
Commonlaw
•Buckley 163 J.P.
561
•Culpepper, 58
WIR 420
•Hallam, Court of
Appeal N.S.W.
10/09/90
•Tyres –v- Barr,
45 WIR 7
•Small, 27 WIR 64
•Tottenham
Justices, 82
Cr.App.R. 277
•Chappel, 89
Cr.App.R. 82
Texts
•Scott’s
Fingerprint
Mechanics, 1978
(Olsen)
•Modern Scientific
Evidence, Vol. 4
(Faigman)
Precedents
•Sean
Subransingh et al
(Bobart
Kidnapping)
•Sidiqque Martin
and anor
•Kevin Culpepper
•Pitman & Agard
(Cascade Murder)
•Junior Colin
Nicome
•Timothy Wise
•Marlon Mackain
•Shawn Parris

18.  N.B. the Prosecutor must take great care in
leading fingerprint evidence not to
inadvertently disclose the previous bad
character of the accused.