• Forensic Sci. Int. · Apr 2011

    Quantitative assessment of evidential weight for a fingerprint comparison I. Generalisation to the comparison of a mark with set of ten prints from a suspect.

    • Cedric Neumann, Ian W Evett, James E Skerrett, and Ismael Mateos-Garcia.
    • Forensic Science Service, 2920 Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, Birmingham B37 7YN, United Kingdom. Cedric.Neumann@me.com
    • Forensic Sci. Int. 2011 Apr 15; 207 (1-3): 101-5.

    AbstractThe authors have published elsewhere a quantitative method for assessing weight of evidence in the case where a finger mark from a crime scene is compared with a control print taken from a single finger of a suspect. The approach is based on the notion of calculating a likelihood ratio (LR) that addresses a pair of propositions relating to the single finger that was the origin of the crime mark. In practice, things are rather different because the crime mark will not just be compared with a single finger from a suspect but with a set of prints from all of his/her fingers; likewise, when the mark is compared with a database, this will consist of ten print records from random individuals. It is clear that "finger propositions" are not realistic in this situation and we show how our approach may be generalised to address a pair of propositions that relate to the person that made the crime mark. It often is the case that information is present at the crime scene that enables some inference to be drawn relating to which of the offender's ten fingers left a particular mark of interest. This kind of inference may profitably be drawn into the formal analysis. We illustrate our approach with an example.Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…