Fingerprint identification: How far have we come

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 356-367

  Lennard, Chris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANBERRA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bayesian interpretation; DNA profiling; evidence presentation; fingerprint identification; likelihood ratios; mathematical models

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ALGORITHM; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; AUSTRALIA; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DNA FINGERPRINTING; DOCUMENTATION; EXPERT WITNESS; FINGER DERMATOGLYPHICS; FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION; GOLD STANDARD; INDIVIDUALIZATION; LEGAL EVIDENCE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROBABILITY; QUALITY CONTROL; REFERENCE DATABASE; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84888344116     PISSN: 00450618     EISSN: 1834562X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00450618.2012.752037     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community, National Research Council. Strengthening forensic science in the United States: a path forward. Washington (DC): The National Academies Press; 2009. Available from: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228091.pdf (accessed 24 October 2012).
2. http://onin.com/fp/problemidents.html (accessed 24 October 2012).
3. ScientificWorking Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study and Technology (SWGFAST). Standards for examining friction ridge impressions and resulting conclusions [Internet]. SWGFAST; 2011. Available from: http://www.swgfast.org/ documents/examinationsconclusions/110913-Examinations-Conclusions-1.0.pdf (accessed 24 October 2012).
4. Champod C. Edmond Locard-Numerical standards and 'probable' identifications. J Forensic Ident. 1995;45(2):136-155.
5. Langenburg G. A critical analysis and study of the ACE-V process [PhD thesis]. [Lausanne (Switzerland)]: University of Lausanne; 2012.
6. Langenburg C, Champod C, Genessay T. Informing the judgments of fingerprint analysts using quality metric and statistical assessment tools. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;219(1-3):183-198.
7. Comber B. Numerical analysis and comparison of distorted fingermarks from the same source [Masters thesis]. [Canberra (Australia)]: University of Canberra; 2012.
8. Comber B. A metric for the objective assessment of fingerprint expert opinion on identification. Paper presented at: 21st International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences of the Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society (ANZFSS); 2012 Sep 23-27; Hobart, Australia.
9. Anonymous. Resolution VII. Identification News. 1979;29(12):2.
10. Anonymous. Resolution VII Amended. Identification News. 1980;30(8):3.
11. Anonymous. IAI Resolution 2010-18 [Internet]. International Association for Identification (IAI); 2010. Available from: http://www.swgfast.org/ Resources/100716-IAI-Resolution-2010-18.pdf (accessed 24 October 2012).
12. Neumann C, Evett IW, Skerrett J. Quantifying the weight of evidence from a forensic fingerprint comparison: a new paradigm. J Roy Stat Soc A. 2012;175(2):371-415.
13. Walsh S. To infinity and beyond: a critical look at DNA as the 'gold standard' of forensic evidence interpretation. Paper presented at: 21st International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences of the Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society (ANZFSS); 2012 Sep 23-27; Hobart, Australia.
14. Martire K. Do jurors understand forensic science evidence when presented in a Bayesian framework Paper presented at: 21st International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences of the Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society (ANZFSS); 2012 Sep 23-27; Hobart, Australia.
15. Federal Judicial Center, National Research Council. Reference manual on scientific evidence. 3rd ed. Washington (DC): The National Academies Press;2011. Available from: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fjc/manual-sci-evidence.pdf (accessed 24 October 2012).