Fingermark submission decision-making within a UK fingerprint laboratory: Do experts get the marks that they need?

Within UK policing it is routinely the responsibility of fingerprint laboratory practitioners to chemically develop areas of latent fingerprint ridge detail on evidential items and to determine which areas of ridge detail are of sufficient quality to be submitted to fingerprint experts for search or comparison against persons of interest. This study assessed the effectiveness of the fingermark submission process within the Evidence Recovery Unit Fingerprint Laboratory of the Metropolitan Police Service. Laboratory practitioners were presented with known source fingermark images previously deemed identifiable or insufficient by fingerprint experts, and were asked to state which of the marks they would forward to the Fingerprint Bureau. The results indicated that practitioners forwarded a higher percentage of insufficient fingermarks than is acceptable according to current laboratory guidelines, and discarded a number of marks that were of sufficient quality for analysis. Practitioners forwarded more insufficient fingermarks when considering fingermarks thought to be related to a murder and discarded more sufficient fingermarks when considering those thought to be related to a crime of 'theft from vehicle'. The results highlight the need for fingerprint laboratories to work alongside fingerprint experts to ensure that a consistent approach to decision-making is, as far as possible, achieved, and that appropriate thresholds are adopted so as to prevent the loss of valuable evidence and improve the efficiency of the fingerprint filtering process.

[1]  M. F. Luce,et al.  Constructive Consumer Choice Processes , 1998 .

[2]  Cedric Neumann,et al.  Operational benefits and challenges of the use of fingerprint statistical models: a field study. , 2011, Forensic science international.

[3]  I. Dror,et al.  When emotions get the better of us: the effect of contextual top‐down processing on matching fingerprints , 2005 .

[4]  Law. Policy.  Executive Summary of the National Academies of Science Reports, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward , 2009 .

[5]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Expert and exceptional performance: evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[6]  I. Dror,et al.  Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making erroneous identifications. , 2006, Forensic science international.

[7]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Motivated closing of the mind: "seizing" and "freezing". , 1996, Psychological review.

[8]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory , 1996 .

[9]  Standards to avoid bias in fingerprint examination? Are such standards doomed to be based on fiscal expediency? , 2013 .

[10]  Itiel E Dror,et al.  Emotional Experiences and Motivating Factors Associated with Fingerprint Analysis , 2010, Journal of forensic sciences.

[11]  Itiel E. Dror,et al.  The Paradoxical Brain: The paradox of human expertise: why experts get it wrong , 2011 .

[12]  I. Dror,et al.  Cognitive and contextual influences in determination of latent fingerprint suitability for identification judgments. , 2013, Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society.

[13]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  The Paradoxical Brain: Index , 2011 .

[14]  Philip A. Gable,et al.  The Blues Broaden, but the Nasty Narrows , 2010, Psychological science.

[15]  C. Champod,et al.  The potential (negative) influence of observational biases at the analysis stage of fingermark individualisation. , 2007, Forensic science international.

[16]  Itiel E. Dror.  Expectations, contextual information, and other cognitive influences in forensic laboratories , 2012 .

[17]  Lisa J Hall,et al.  Will the introduction of an emotional context affect fingerprint analysis and decision-making? , 2008, Forensic science international.

[18]  F Taroni,et al.  Decision theoretic properties of forensic identification: underlying logic and argumentative implications. , 2008, Forensic science international.

[19]  Philip A. Gable,et al.  Approach-Motivated Positive Affect Reduces Breadth of Attention , 2008, Psychological science.

[20]  S. C. Day.  EXPECTATIONS , 1983, The Lancet.