Fingerprint Analysis Questioned

N E W  Y O R K, April 15 -- Detectives from Sherlock Holmes to Andy Sipowitz have used them to nab criminals.

DNA Tests? Not quite. Rather, fingerprints have been used for decades with nearly unassailable authority by our courts and our culture.

Almost everyone agrees that no two fingerprints are the same. However, the prints that investigators find at a crime scene are usually just partial prints that are smudged. And critics say there's never been a scientific test to prove that you can reliably make a match with these partial prints.

"Fingerprint analysis is a 19th century law enforcement technique that has never been subjected to 20th century scientific standards," said Rob Epstein, Philadelphia public defender.

Fingerprint Analysis Questioned

Experts believe this method of crime analysis has not been properly scrutinized that scientists are starting to question law enforcement's methods.

"We do know that errors are being made of a grotesque nature," said James E. Starrs, a professor at George Washington University.

One case that is making experts ask questions is that of Riky Jackson, who was convicted of murder in Pennsylvania in 1998 based solely on fingerprint evidence. He was released when the Federal Bureau of Investigation figured out the prints were not his.

"The average Joe in America knows absolutely nothing about fingerprints," said Jackson. "All I knew is that the fingerprints in question were not mine."

Good Matches Hard to Find

Critics say there are no set standards among fingerprint examiners as to what qualifies as a match. They also point out that the qualifications required to become a fingerprint examiner vary widely at different law enforcement agencies.

Defenders say fingerprint evidence has been used with a high level of success for nearly a century. But according to a 1995 proficiency exam given to fingerprint examiners, 20 percent of them made mistakes.

But no matter how careful investigators may be, mistakes still happen. In the future, some say, DNA evidence may take over— making fingerprints look as old-fashioned as Sherlock Holmes and Watson.