Skip Navigation


Law, Probability and Risk Advance Access originally published online on August 19, 2007
Law, Probability and Risk 2008 7(2):87-109; doi:10.1093/lpr/mgm020
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
7/2/87    most recent
mgm020v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haber, L.
Right arrow Articles by Haber, R. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2007]. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Scientific validation of fingerprint evidence under Daubert

Lyn Haber{dagger} and Ralph Norman Haber

Human Factors Consultants, 313 Ridge View Drive, Swall Meadows, CA 93514, USA

{dagger} Email lhaber{at}humanfactorsconsultants.com

Received on 14 September 2006. Revised on 24 October 2006. Accepted on 24 October 2006.


  Abstract

When a scientific method is used by an expert to reach a conclusion offered in court, the Frye ruling in 1923 and particularly the Daubert ruling in 1993 requires that the method itself has been shown to be valid. When applied to fingerprint methods, valid means accurately distinguishing between pairs of prints made by one and by two donors. Courts have ruled uniformly in more than 40 Daubert hearings since 1999 that fingerprint evidence rests on a valid method, referred to as the Analysis-Comparison-Evaluation-Verification (ACE-V) method. In this article, we discuss the scientific evidence needed to document the validity of ACE-V. We describe examples of experiments that would provide this evidence, and review the available published research. We briefly describe the testimony presented by fingerprint examiners in these hearings, intended to show that ACE-V meets the Daubert criteria for validity. We analyze evidence for the validity of the standards underlying the conclusions made by fingerprint examiners. We conclude that the kinds of experiments that would establish the validity of ACE-V and the standards on which conclusions are based have not been performed. These experiments require a number of prerequisites, which also have yet to be met, so that the ACE-V method currently is both untested and untestable.

Keywords: Frye; Daubert; Fingerprints; validity; reliability; ACE-V method; standards for conclusion; ground truth; individuation; exclusion; inconclusive; error rate; verification; one unexplained discrepancy


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.