I've heard rumblings over the past decade or so that fingerprint analysis isn't as reliable as is commonly thought, but I haven't paid much attention. I just took a look at the
Wikipedia article on fingerprints and found this quote from an editor of a fingerprint periodical:
Sandy L. Zabell writes:
In 1995, the Collaborative Testing Service (CTS) administered a proficiency test that, for the first time, was designed, assembled, and reviewed by the International Association for Identification (IAI).The results were disappointing. Four suspect cards with prints of all ten fingers were provided together with seven latents. Of 156 people taking the test, only 68 (44%) correctly classified all seven latents. Overall, the tests contained a total of 48 incorrect identifications.
This doesn't seem surprising where people are involved. Latent prints and especially partials probably leave a lot of room for human interpretation.
--Percy
™ Version 4.2
