A Harder Day in Court for Fingerprint, Writing Experts ; US Judge Limits Testimony of Forensic Analysts, in a Ruling That Might Alter How Evidence Is Presented at Trial

By Seth Stern writer of The Christian Science Monitor | The Christian Science Monitor, January 16, 2002 | Go to article overview

A Harder Day in Court for Fingerprint, Writing Experts ; US Judge Limits Testimony of Forensic Analysts, in a Ruling That Might Alter How Evidence Is Presented at Trial


Seth Stern writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor


For decades, fingerprinting and handwriting analysis have enjoyed sure acceptance in American courts.

But now, in an age of scientifically grounded DNA analysis, judges are looking with increased skepticism at forensic techniques that rely solely on the subjective experience of experts.

Last week, Philadelphia federal judge Louis Pollak ruled a fingerprint expert could not testify that a suspect's prints definitively matched those found at a crime scene. Other courts have also recently knocked out testimony from handwriting and knife-mark experts.

Legal observers view the decision by Judge Pollak as a breakthrough that could lead to major changes in the way everything from firearms to bite marks are investigated and presented in court.

"Courts are forcing forensic science to become a science - to actually test its claims, determine its error rates, and not overstate conclusions," says Michael Saks, a law professor at Arizona State University in Tempe.

Both fingerprinting and handwriting analysis were developed by police in the early 1900s, based on the premise that each person's unique prints or penmanship assures that the right suspects are tied to their crimes.

But fingerprint experts and their critics have disagreed over how well a partial print lifted from a crime scene can be matched with certainty to a full print culled from a database.

Still, until a decade ago, federal judges were limited in their discretion to bar an expert's testimony. To make such a determination, the judges could only ask whether the testimony was accepted within the community of experts in that field.

But then, in 1993, the Supreme Court gave federal judges the power to decide for themselves whether an expert's testimony was sufficiently grounded in science to be admitted. In effect, this made federal judges the gatekeepers over all scientific and forensic evidence.

In recent years, defense attorneys have launched at least a dozen challenges to fingerprinting analysis. Before last week, though, none had succeeded.

In his decision, however, Judge Pollak found that although fingerprint science had been accepted in court for 90 years, it hadn't been proved scientifically. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Harder Day in Court for Fingerprint, Writing Experts ; US Judge Limits Testimony of Forensic Analysts, in a Ruling That Might Alter How Evidence Is Presented at Trial
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.