Introduction

Principles of Fingerprint Analysis

We touch things every day: a coffee cup, a car door, a computer keyboard. Each
time we do, it is likely that we leave behind our unique signature—in our fingerprints. No
two people have exactly the same fingerprints. Even identical twins, with identical DNA,
have different fingerprints. This uniqueness allows fingerprints to be used in all sorts of
ways, including for background checks, biometric security, mass disaster identification,
and of course, in criminal situations.

Fingerprints are unique patterns, made by friction ridges (raised) and furrows
(recessed), which appear on the pads of fingers and thumbs. Prints from palms, toes
and feet are also unique; however, these are used less often for identification, so this
guide focuses on prints from the fingers and thumbs. The fingerprint pattern, such as
the print left when an inked finger is pressed onto paper, is that of the friction ridges on
that particular finger. Friction ridge patterns are grouped into three distinct types—loops,
whorls, and arches—each with unique variations, depending on the shape and
relationship of the ridges:

Fingerprint analysis has been used to identify suspects and solve crimes for
more than 100 years, and it remains an extremely valuable tool for law enforcement.
One of the most important uses for fingerprints is to help investigators link one crime
scene to another involving the same person. Fingerprint identification also helps
investigators to track a criminal’s record, their previous arrests and convictions, to aid in
sentencing, probation, parole and pardoning decisions

Analysts use the general pattern type (loop, whorl or arch) to make initial
comparisons and include or exclude a known fingerprint from further analysis. To match
a print, the analyst uses the minutiae, or ridge characteristics, to identify specific points
on a suspect fingerprint with the same information in a known fingerprint. For example,
an analyst comparing a crime scene print to a print on file would first gather known
prints with the same general pattern type, then using a loupe, compare the prints side-
by-side to identify specific information within the minutiae that match. If enough details
correlate, the fingerprints are determined to be from the same person.

Where Fingerprints May be Found

Fingerprints can be found on practically any solid surface, including the human
body. Analysts classify fingerprints into three categories according to the type of surface
on which they are found and whether they are visible or not: Fingerprints on soft
surfaces (such as soap, wax, wet paint, fresh caulk, etc.) are likely to be three-
dimensional plastic prints; those on hard surfaces are either patent (visible) or latent
(invisible) prints. Visible prints are formed when blood, dirt, ink, paint, etc., is transferred
from a finger or thumb to a surface. Patent prints can be found on a wide variety of
surfaces: smooth or rough, porous (such as paper, cloth or wood) or nonporous (such
as metal, glass or plastic).

How Fingerprints are Collected?

Collecting Patent Prints

Patent prints are collected using a fairlystraightforward method: photography.
These prints are photographed in high resolution with a forensic measurement scale in
the image for reference. Investigators can improve the quality of the images by using
low-angle or alternate light sources and/or certain chemicals or dyes during
photography, but this is usually not necessary.

Collecting Latent Prints

One of the most common methods for discovering and collecting latent
fingerprints is by dusting a smooth or nonporous surface with fingerprint powder (black
granular, aluminum flake, black magnetic, etc.). If any prints appear, they are
photographed as mentioned above and then lifted from the surface with clear adhesive
tape. The lifting tape is then placed on a latent lift card to preserve the print.
 However, fingerprint powders can contaminate the evidence and ruin the
opportunity to perform other techniques that could turn up a hidden print or additional
information. Therefore, investigators may examine the area with an alternate light
source or apply cyanoacrylate (super glue) before using powders.

Alternate Light Source (ALS): It is becoming more commonplace for

investigators to examine any likely surfaces (doors, doorknobs, windows, railings, etc.)
with an alternate light source. These are laser or LED devices that emit a particular
wavelength, or spectrum, of light. Some devices have different filters to provide a variety
of spectra that can be photographed or further processed with powders or dye stains.
For example, investigators may use a blue light with an orange filter to find latent prints
on desks, chairs, computer equipment or other objects at the scene of a break-in.

 Using a fluorescent dye stain and an orange alternate light source helps this
latent print appear clearly so that it can be documented. (Courtesy of Scott Campbell,
Ron Smith & Associates)

 Use of various alternate light sources may help enhance the appearance of a
fingerprint. (Courtesy of Scott Campbell, Ron Smith & Associates)

Cyanoacrylate: Investigators often perform cyanoacrylate (superglue)

processing, or fuming, of a surface before applying powders or dye stains. This process,
typically performed on non-porous surfaces, involves exposing the object to
cyanoacrylate vapors. The vapors (fumes) will adhere to any prints present on the
object allowing them to be viewed with oblique ambient light or a white light source.

Chemical Developers: Porous surfaces such as paper are typically processed

with chemicals, including ninhydrin and physical developer, to reveal latent fingerprints.
These chemicals react with specific components of latent print residue, such as amino
acids and inorganic salts. Ninhydrin causes prints to turn a purple color, which makes
them easily photographed. DFO (1,2-diazafluoren-9-one) is another chemical used to
locate latent fingerprints on porous surfaces; it causes fingerprints to fluoresce, or glow,
when they are illuminated by blue-green light.

Other Collection Methods: In addition to the methods identified above, there

are special techniques for capturing prints from skin, clothing and other difficult
surfaces. Amido Black, a non-specific protein stain that reacts with any protein present,
is typically used for developing or enhancing bloody impressions on human skin. To
reveal prints on clothing, high-tech methods such as vacuum metal deposition using
gold and zinc are showing promise for the investigator. AccuTrans®, a liquid casting
compound, can be used to lift powdered latent prints from rough, textured or curved
surfaces. AccuTrans® is basically a very thick liquid that fills in the nooks and crannies
of rough or textured areas where conventional print lifting tape encounters difficulty.

When is fingerprint analysis used?

Fingerprints can be used in all sorts of ways:
 Providing biometric security (for example, to control access to secure areas or
systems)
 Identifying amnesia victims and unknown deceased (such as victims of major
disasters, if their fingerprints are on file)
 Conducting background checks (including applications for government
employment, defense security clearance, concealed weapon permits, etc.)

In the absence of DNA, fingerprints are used by the criminal justice system to
verify a convicted offender’s identity and track their previous arrests and convictions,
criminal tendencies, known associates and other useful information. Officers of the court
can also use these records to help make decisions regarding a criminal’s sentence,
probation, parole or pardon.

Who Conducts the Analysis?

In criminal justice cases, computerized systems are used to search various local,
state and national fingerprint databases for potential matches. Many of these systems
provide a value indicating how close the match is, based on the algorithm used to
perform the search. Fingerprint examiners then review the potential matches and make
a final determination.

How and Where the Analysis is Performed?

Fingerprint analysis is usually performed by law enforcement agencies or crime
laboratories; however, casework may be sent to private companies if there is a need,
such as to reduce backlogs, verify results, or handle high-profile cases.

Fingerprint examination involves looking at the quality and quantity of information

in order to find agreement or disagreement between the unknown print (from the crime
scene) and known prints on file. To conduct the examination, fingerprint examiners use
a small magnifier called a loupe to view minute details (minutiae) of a print. A pointer
called a ridge counter is used to count the friction ridges.

The Fingerprint Analysis Process

Fingerprint examiners use the ACE-V (analysis, comparison, evaluation and
verification) method to reach a determination on each print.

Analysis involves assessing a print to determine if it can be used for a

comparison. If the print is not suitable for comparison because of inadequate quality or
quantity of features, the examination ends and the print is reported as not suitable. If the
print is suitable, the analysis indicates the features to be used in the comparison and
their tolerances (the amount of variation that will be accepted). The analysis may also
uncover physical features such as recurves, deltas, creases and scars that help indicate
where to begin the comparison.

Comparisons are performed by an analyst who views the known and suspect
prints side-by-side. The analyst compares minutiae characteristics and locations to
determine if they match. Known prints are often collected from persons of interest,
victims, others present at the scene or through a search of one or more fingerprint
databases such as the FBI’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System
(IAFIS). IAFIS is the largest fingerprint database in the world and, as of June 2012, held
more than 72 million print records from criminals, military personnel, government
employees and other civilian employees.

Evaluation is where the examiner ultimately decides if the prints are from the
same source (identification or individualization), different sources (exclusion) or is
inconclusive. Inconclusive results may be due to poor quality samples, lack of
comparable areas, or insufficient number of corresponding or dissimilar features to be
certain.

Verification is when another examiner independently analyzes, compares and

evaluates the prints to either support or refute the conclusions of the original examiner.
The examiner may also verify the suitability of determinations made in the analysis
phase.

Studies related to Fingerprint Analysis

The study by Bradford T. Ulery et al. (2011) Examined the Accuracy and Reliability
of Forensic Latent Fingerprint Decisions Made by Experts in the Field.

• The study found that fingerprint examiners were highly accurate in their
decisions, with an overall error rate of only 0.1%.
• However, the study also found that the examiners had a higher error rate when
working with difficult latent prints, such as those with poor quality or low contrast.
Additionally, the study found that examiners were more likely to make errors
when under time pressure.
• To improve the reliability of fingerprint examiners, the study recommended the
use of a standardized methodology, as well as the development of training
programs that focus on identifying and correcting common errors made by
examiners.
 • Overall, the study suggests that fingerprint examiners are highly accurate in their
decisions, but that the reliability of their judgments can be improved by using a
standardized methodology and providing additional training to examiners.

Case of Error in Fingerprint Analysis

One example of an error in fingerprint analysis occurred in the case of Brandon
Mayfield, a US citizen and Muslim convert who was falsely accused by the FBI of
involvement in the 2004 Madrid train bombings based on a fingerprint misidentification.
In 2004, the FBI matched a fingerprint found on a bag of detonators recovered at
the Madrid bombing site to Mayfield's fingerprint on file, leading to his arrest and
detention for two weeks as a material witness.
However, further analysis revealed that the fingerprint belonged to an Algerian
man who was later arrested in connection with the bombings.

Research study on identifying forged fingerprints

The research paper "Novel C stain-based chemical method for differentiating real
and forged fingerprints" was published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in 2020. The
researchers aimed to address the problem of detecting forged fingerprints, which can be
a major challenge in forensic investigations. They noted that current methods for
detecting forged fingerprints, such as UV fluorescence and chemical treatments, are not
always effective, and there is a need for a more reliable and accurate method.

The research team proposed a new chemical method based on the use of a stain
called Novel C. The stain was found to react differently to real and forged fingerprints,
allowing for differentiation between the two. The researchers tested the method on a
variety of surfaces, including glass, plastic, and metal, and found that it was effective in
differentiating real and forged fingerprints in all cases.

Overall, the research on the Novel C stain-based chemical method for

differentiating real and forged fingerprints is a significant contribution to the field of
forensic science. It has the potential to improve the accuracy and reliability of fingerprint
analysis, which can have important implications for criminal investigations and the
administration of justice.

Even if a print is deposited, it may not become a useful piece of evidence. Here
are some reasons why:
• It may not be discovered.
• It may not survive, due to environmental factors. For example, prints deposited
outdoors in arid climates may not survive long because latent print residue is
approximately 98% water.
• If a particular surface or item is collected/packaged improperly, any latent prints
may be destroyed.
• The print may be found but not contain a sufficient amount of information to be
useful. For example, it could be a partial print, a smeared print, or from a part of
the hand for which a known print is not available.
Recommendations:

 Continued Training and Education: Encourage ongoing training and professional

development for fingerprint analysts to keep them updated with the latest
techniques, technologies, and ethical considerations. This can help minimize
errors and enhance the overall quality of analysis.
 Promote research and development in fingerprint analysis techniques, including
emerging technologies such as advanced imaging, enhancement algorithms, and
automated identification systems. This can lead to improved accuracy, efficiency,
and reliability of fingerprint analysis.
 Encourage collaboration between fingerprint analysts, forensic scientists, legal
professionals, and other relevant stakeholders to promote a holistic approach to
evidence evaluation. This can lead to a better understanding of the limitations
and potential biases associated with fingerprint analysis.