Experiment 2 : A lab on fingerprints

OBJECTIVES
Students should be able:
1. Become familiar with the main features of human fingerprints.
2. Develop skills in dusting and lifting latent fingerprints.
3. Compare fingerprints of suspects to fingerprints lifted from a
simulated crime scene.

PROCEDURE
Part A: Taking your own fingerprints
Our own fingerprint was transferred to a fingerprint card and the
type of fingerprint was identified.

The fingerprint was slightly rolled across the fingerprint pad that
has been provided.

The procedure was repeated for each of the fingers.

The procedure was repeated by using magnetic powder and

charcoal powder.

Part B: Lifting a latent print

- A clean, flat lightly colored surface was chosen to apply the
fingerprint.
- The surface was wiped clean by using ethanol before apply the
The print was applied with firm pressure to the surface

The powder brush was gently dip into the fingerprint powder and
the surface of the object printed with fingerprint was lightly
brushed.
The print was lifted and transferred to a white cue card as evidence

RESULT
QUESTION
1. Using the fingerprints below, identify each of the following
features; a lake, bifurcation, island and ridge ending. Circle
the feature and label it. You only need to identify each
feature once, and you may not need to use all of the prints
for this exercise. In addition, identify the fingerprint pattern
(arch, loop etc) for each print.

For the first print is radial loop. Second print is double loop whorls.
Third print is central pocket loop whorl. Fourth print is plain whorl.
Fifth print is plain arches while the last print is tented arches.
There were four features that exist at the second print which is
double loop whorls.

Ridge ending

lake

island ridge

bifurcation

2. Case Study 1: You are a forensic scientist investigating a

homicide. You are given an aluminum baseball bat used in
the beating death of a gang member. You manage to lift a
partial latent print from the bat. Your job is to compare the
partial print to the fingerprints of 3 rival gang members
suspected in the beating death. Below is the partial print as
well as the prints of the suspects. Write a report
summarizing the results of your investigation. In it, you
should include information on the latent print (basic
fingerprint type and any distinguishing characteristics) as
well as the fingerprint of the suspect you believe matches it
(if any). You should describe the process by which you found
your match for example, you may rule out some suspect
prints because they are not the same basic pattern as your
latent print. You may cut and paste the prints into your
report if you wish and use them to indicate what features
you have identified. To get better resolution, you can view
the prints in Word and view them at 150%. You should also
indicate how confident you are in your results. Recall that
most courts require 12 points to match for it to be
considered a match.

The basic fingerprint type from the suspect and partial print from the
crime scene was a radial loop pattern. It is because it was opens

towards the thumb. The comparison between partial print from the
crime scene with fingerprint of three rival gang members suspected
in a beating death showed that the partial print matched with
fingerprint from suspect B.

10
11

12
10

11

12

7
4

3
2

7
4

1
5

2
5

1. Core of the radial

loop
4. Hook
7. Bifurcation
10.
Short bridge

2. Ridge ending

3. Bifurcation

5. Island
8. Bifurcation
11.
Bifurcatio
n

6. Ridge ending
9. Ridge ending
12.
Hook

3. Case Study 2: On the class website, there are prints from 4

suspects and a latent print from a crime scene. As you did
with question 2, try to establish a link between the latent
print and suspect prints. Use visuals to show the matching

minutiae, and write a brief report explaining how you made

the match, and how confident you are in your findings.

4. As stated earlier in the lab handout, there is some

controversy over the veracity of fingerprint evidence,

particularly in light of the Daubert standards. Imagine you
are a trial judge faced with defense attorneys arguing that
fingerprint evidence should not be introduced in a trial
because no systematic study or studies have been conducted
to determine the accuracy with which a partial print can be
matched to a fingerprint, and that no uniform standards for
determining whether a match exist. Briefly explain your
position on the admissibility of fingerprint evidence and
explain whether you feel the field of fingerprint analysis is a
reliable science under the Daubert guidelines.