 |
| (Image courtesy cnycentral.com) MY OBSERVATIONS/THOUGHTS OF DIGITAL FINGERPRINTING AT ITHACA POLICE DEPT. |
I was wrapping up a case and my client was required to get "processed" by Ithaca City police before he could be sentenced by the Judge. What does that mean?
To be processed by the police involves a few things:
-you give all of your personal information (name, age, address, height, weight, tattoos etc)
-you get your photo taken by the police for their computer
-and you get your FINGERPRINTS taken and uploaded into their computer
(and probably sent to BOTH state-wide and national databases --I asked two officers where they went, and they honestly were not sure what databases they got sent to...I can only assume that NSA, CIA, FBI, etc has access)
So, back to the story, my client and I went to IPD main building and waited to be processed. In a few minutes, an officer came out and allowed us both to come back to the area in the station where people are processed. I watched.
This officer was a veteran of IPD and has been processing people for many, many years. He was extremely polite and professional. My client gave his info and had his picture taken without any kind of problem.
Then, the officer started taking the fingerprints.
I'll stop the story to explain that IPD uses a digital fingerprint scanner that is part of a computer --so the prints are uploaded to databases almost instantly--once they've been taken.
Here is a picture of the closest thing I could find online that looked like the machine they have:
 |
| (not IPD's scanner, just something that looked similar, image courtesy of ydr.com) |
OK--so here is where the story gets interesting. This very experienced officer began fingerprinting my client (who was very good-natured and patient) ... and the machine just wouldn't cooperate.
I watched this officer unsuccessfully try to digitally fingerprint my client for almost AN HOUR. They kept getting stopped on a particular finger (I think it was the right ring finger). Apparently, your fingers have to be cool and not sweaty or the machine doesn't like to read the print.
I thought that was less than ideal--since most people I encounter are nervous when they're dealing with the police and sweaty hands are a pretty common side-effect of being nervous.
They kept wiping my client's hands with baby wipes and running them under cool water to reduce their temperature.
After about a half hour of trying, a SECOND OFFICER came in to try to get the prints. The first officer (who seemed to really know what he was doing), just said "I give up."
It took the SECOND OFFICER about 20 minutes to finally get the computer to accept the prints. This involved several cooling attempts under water because my client apparently had "a hot finger!"
I just silently watched this epic ordeal. There was nothing I could do to protest or help, so I sat their thinking about this process and the machine being used.
MY THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS PROBLEM:
More and more, the scientific reliability of using fingerprints as evidence of a crime has been questioned. As a defense attorney, the most important thing in a criminal case is making sure that the methods used by police and police forensic labs are true and accurate (and based on good science).
In the past several years, many police forensic techniques have been DEBUNKED --by other scientists--to prove that the police methods were faulty or HAD NO BASIS IN REAL SCIENCE.
I'm talking about the FBI Hair matching scandal. ARTICLE HERE
Or BITE-MARK analysis (that's not a scientific thing either ) ARTICLE HERE
I'm a lawyer that believes that it is part of my job to constantly be learning about the science behind police techniques. I attended a seminar last summer where a forensic presenter talked about FINGERPRINTS.
It has been established that Fingerprint evidence is NOT considered full proof. Scientists have determined that 2 different people could have the SAME print. However, it is a small margin (but it is possible). That's when analyzing full and COMPLETE fingerprints.
In truth, in most criminal cases, police investigators are only able to get PARTIAL fingerprints from a crime scene. This is where I get scared as a defense attorney.
PARTIAL FINGERPRINTS --are WHOLLY UNRELIABLE as evidence. If a prosecutor tried to use them in court I would be objecting enthusiastically. Here's why:
I've seen images of what appear to be the same partial print side-by-side. They look identical.... then when the full image of the prints are revealed...they are CLEARLY different prints. It's jarring. However, if a jury sees the identical partial prints, how could they NOT convict the Defendant?
This brings it back to IPD's digital fingerprinting... and the problems I saw this week with the machine.
I'm a skeptic about most things -- but seeing the problems these two experienced officers had with the digital machine, my confidence in that machine's ability to take proper prints from ANYBODY is now in question.
What if the machine takes a bad print from you? Then it goes into a state and national database.
What if somebody commits a crime someplace with a similar print to you and you get charged? What if you can't account for your whereabouts that day? What if you're convicted of something you didn't do because of faulty or unreliable technology (and so-called Fingerprint science)?
These are big questions --but I think most people would agree that it shouldn't take an hour to get somebody's fingerprints. Maybe IPD and the City of Ithaca should help finance a new fingerprint scanner. I think that fingerprints are too important (based on the how they're relied upon by police) for a machine to get them wrong...
Just one lawyer's opinion.
BY ATTORNEY MIKE CYR
Phone: 607-229-5184
www.ithacadwi.com
www.facebook.com/ithacadwi
Twitter: @ithacadwi
It has been established that Fingerprint evidence is NOT considered full proof. Scientists have determined that 2 different people could have the SAME print. However, it is a small margin (but it is possible). That's when analyzing full and COMPLETE fingerprints.
In truth, in most criminal cases, police investigators are only able to get PARTIAL fingerprints from a crime scene. This is where I get scared as a defense attorney.
PARTIAL FINGERPRINTS --are WHOLLY UNRELIABLE as evidence. If a prosecutor tried to use them in court I would be objecting enthusiastically. Here's why:
I've seen images of what appear to be the same partial print side-by-side. They look identical.... then when the full image of the prints are revealed...they are CLEARLY different prints. It's jarring. However, if a jury sees the identical partial prints, how could they NOT convict the Defendant?
This brings it back to IPD's digital fingerprinting... and the problems I saw this week with the machine.
I'm a skeptic about most things -- but seeing the problems these two experienced officers had with the digital machine, my confidence in that machine's ability to take proper prints from ANYBODY is now in question.
What if the machine takes a bad print from you? Then it goes into a state and national database.
What if somebody commits a crime someplace with a similar print to you and you get charged? What if you can't account for your whereabouts that day? What if you're convicted of something you didn't do because of faulty or unreliable technology (and so-called Fingerprint science)?
These are big questions --but I think most people would agree that it shouldn't take an hour to get somebody's fingerprints. Maybe IPD and the City of Ithaca should help finance a new fingerprint scanner. I think that fingerprints are too important (based on the how they're relied upon by police) for a machine to get them wrong...
Just one lawyer's opinion.
BY ATTORNEY MIKE CYR
Phone: 607-229-5184
www.ithacadwi.com
www.facebook.com/ithacadwi
Twitter: @ithacadwi
