Skip to main content
 
 
 

Fingerprint Experts’ errors are in ‘No Doubt’

Fingerprint Experts’ errors are in ‘No Doubt’

Simon Bunter, one of our Fingerprint Experts, has had some interesting times challenging the certainty of fingerprint identifications in casework.  The day-to-day working practices of many Police Fingerprint Experts have changed very little in recent years, despite criticisms and recommendations from both the R-v-Smith Court of Appeal judgement and The Fingerprint Inquiry Scotland report, which means the strength of fingerprint evidence continues to be overstated in many cases.  Below are several examples where we have tested the ‘certainty’ of the Crown’s fingerprint identification and found it wanting.

 

R-v-Eastel

In this case Mr Bunter questioned the Crown Fingerprint Expert’s ‘conclusive’ identification result.  His report highlighted how the Fingerprint Expert had contradicted himself when trying to indicate the position of supposedly ‘clear’ matching detail in the prints, and also how the same expert had originally failed to identify one of the prints, before changing his mind and being in “no doubt” as to its identification.  Upon scrutiny of the Fingerprint Bureau documentation, Mr Bunter noted that there had been an apparent attempt to erase the notes recording the expert’s original opinion.

After several Crown attempts at producing and presenting this key fingerprint evidence to the court, the Judge dismissed the case remarking that, in his opinion, the fingerprint evidence was weak.

 

R-v-Whitworth

A Police Fingerprint Expert provided written evidence that 16 ridge characteristics in a scene print matched the defendant’s partially taken thumb impression, obtained from him when he was charged with the offence.  The expert was in “no doubt” regarding this identification and it had been checked and confirmed by another three Police Fingerprint Experts from the same Bureau.

Mr Bunter was not happy with the partial reference prints the police had used and carried out his comparison against a set of the defendant’s complete fingerprints.  This comparison showed that there were several differences between the top of the mark and the tip of the defendant’s thumb.  These differences were only visible on the reference set of complete fingerprints that had not been used by the Police Expert in her evidence.

At court the Police Fingerprint Expert refused to accept that there were differences between the prints and would not re-examine her findings using the complete reference set.  Due to the difference of opinion, senior personnel from the Fingerprint Bureau decided to canvas opinion from two other Police Fingerprint Bureaux.  The results varied from ‘Inconclusive’ to ‘Identification’.  Due to the disparity of conclusions between the experts the CPS decided not to proceed with the case.

 

R-v-Smith

In this widely reported case, a poor quality fingerprint in blood was found on a door handle at a murder scene.  The Police Fingerprint Expert analysed this print and initially deemed that it contained ...insufficient detail for any worthwhile comparison to be made.”  He went on to explain that the mark was of such poor quality that it was not possible to eliminate millions of other people as having made the print.  After a suspect was charged, however, the Police Expert re-examined the mark and amended his opinion to being in “no doubt” that the mark had been made by the defendant’s left forefinger.

At the trial, the Police Fingerprint Expert plus two of his expert colleagues from the same bureau gave evidence that they were in “no doubt” that the mark was made by the defendant.  We disagreed and Mr Bunter explained to the court why the print could not be safely attributed to Mr Smith.  Mr Bunter went on to explain that he had never seen a Fingerprint Expert identify a print of such poor quality.  Despite the issues with the fingerprint evidence, the defendant was found guilty.

During the subsequent appeal, a further two independent Fingerprint Experts gave evidence disagreeing with the Crown Experts’ identification and the appeal was allowed.  In the appeal judgement, the Judges criticised the lack of notes, working practices, reports and presentation of the Police Fingerprint Experts, commenting that “No competent forensic scientist in other areas of forensic science these days would conduct an examination without keeping detailed notes of his examination and the reasons for his conclusions.”

After this judgement, the questioned prints were forwarded to a panel of Fingerprint Experts from another police force.  This panel also concluded that the prints did not match.  

 

If you have any questions regarding fingerprint evidece, please contact Mr Simon Bunter BSc(Hons), FFS at our Durham office on 0191 332 4999.

Tweets by @KBCforensics 

Subscribe To Mailing List

To unsubscribe click here

What our customers say...

  • Really happy with all aspects of this case and would definitely recommend this company. Thank you.

    Private instruction, September 2020
  • Clear advice given at start and very prompt response.

    Private Client, March 2021
  • We have used KBC on many occasions in the past and have always had a reliable service.

    Solicitor, April 2020
  • Mr Brown was an impressive witness. As far as I am concerned, you can give him full marks all round.

    Counsel, March 2020
  • Just a very high quality, professional service.

    Solicitor, December 2019
  • Value for money.

    Solicitor, May 2020
  • Good service, prompt, efficient, have used many times in the past.

    Solicitor, April 2020
  • Provided helpful information above and beyond what was expected.

    Solicitor, February 2021
  • We were kept updated throughout the process and the report was provided promptly.

    Solicitor, January 2020
  • Very quick turnaround, with attention to detail and helpful comments.

    Solicitor, January 2020
  • I was delighted by Mrs Tweedy's professional and thorough approach.

    Mr Saltrese - September 2019
  • Always try to instruct, if possible, due to excellent service provided.

    Solicitor, September 2019
  • I was able to have a meaningful conversation with a specialist when obtaining a quote for the work.

    Solicitor, June 2020
  • I will definitely use Dr Schudel in the future and will be recommending him to my colleagues.

    Counsel, March 2020
  • Complete satisfaction with services.

    Solicitor, September 2019
  • We have always received professional and high standards of services. Reports are produced promptly and communications responded to without delay.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • Karl Ebejer was always prompt with responses and was very helpful.

    Solicitor, August 2020
  • We have used your company numerous times and have always received very well written and easy to understand reports.

    Solicitor, March 2021
  • I have instructed you for many years and always find yourselves to be helpful, efficient and reports are prepared in an easy to digest format.

    Solicitor, October 2019
  • I have been instructing KBC for over 15 years and have always been happy with the service, contact from experts and quality of the reports.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Excellent client care and service.

    Solicitor, August 2020
  • Mr Dampier made an incredibly complicated matter easy to understand.

    Barrister, February 2020
  • Experts are always happy to discuss matters prior to providing report.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Mr Ebejer was always very professional and friendly.

    Solicitor, August 2020
  • Always a pleasure working with you guys; our first choice for instruction.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • Mr Beatson was very helpful and professional, clearly with a wide range of knowledge and understanding.

    Solicitor, March 2020
  • Mrs Allan was most informative and provided explanations where required. A very professional attitude.

    Private Client, March 2021
  • Mr Dunnill’s report was helpful and our conference at Court informative; I would certainly be happy to use him in a case again.

    Barrister, December 2020
  • I have worked with Mr Donnelly in many cases over the years and his expertise, presentation of written work and ability in the witness box is second to none.

    Counsel, November 2020
  • Excellent reports within Legal Aid rates.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • I don’t think the service could be improved upon or bettered in any way.

    Private Instruction, November 2020
  • Courteous and informative.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • I was told you were the best at what you did. I honestly believe I got what was required.

    Private client, July 2020
  • Quick and efficient; and well laid out report.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • Very fast, professional, easy to instruct.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • Report well presented. Concise and precise.

    Solicitor, February 2021
  • Quick, professional, friendly, comprehensive.

    Prison Governor, June 2020
  • I found the service to be very professional throughout.

    Solicitor, October 2019
  • There is no question that your input was instrumental in persuading the Defendants to alter their stance.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • Provided quotes quickly and complied with court timescales.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Fast response and work turnover time; great customer service.

    Solicitor, November 2020
  • Knowledgeable, helpful and polite.

    Solicitor, June 2020
  • Easy access to experts; excellent communication and advice, as required.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • Very approachable.

    Solicitor, November 2020
  • Jenny Gray was excellent and very helpful throughout.

    Barrister, November 2019
  • Brilliant communication, my emails were promptly answered.

    Private instruction, September 2020
  • We have used your services for some time and are very satisfied.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • Would definitely use you again; very impressed.

    Solicitor, November 2020
  • Easy to contact, quick responses (particularly in the current circumstances), very helpful staff.

    Solicitor, April 2020
  • Prompt attention to dealing with queries and providing information and reports.

    Solicitor, March 2020
  • Website was very informative.  First contact was knowledgeable and efficient. The report was delivered in record time - very impressed!

    Solicitor, January 2021
  • Excellent, as usual.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • Andrew Dampier provided first class service in the form of reports and maps. He was able to explain the report in good layman’s terms and was also available to take calls and provide further information to counsel.

    Barrister, January 2021
  • I am extremely grateful to you for all your work on this case, in particular your prompt and helpful responses to my repeated requests.

    Barrister, February 2021
  • Swift service.

    Solicitor, March 2020
  • Quick, expert and accurate.

    Solicitor, July 2020
  • Thank you very much once again for your excellent service.

    Solicitor, March 2021
  • Your (cell site) reports and maps were extremely helpful.

    Barrister, February 2021 ​​​​​​
  • Always provide detailed quotes to assist with applying for authority from LAA. Quick response and good communication.

    Solicitor, March 2021
  • Thank you for your hard work in this case and for the prompt responses. 

    Barrister, March 2020
  • Telephone communications were very helpful when we were not able to contact the expert directly. The call takers were knowledgeable as to the case and what was required and answered any queries we had.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • I used Andrew Dampier for a cell site case and he was exceptional.

    Barrister, November 2020
  • Easy to use BAC calculation form, fast turn around.

    Solicitor, September 2019
  • Thank you very much, I am grateful and impressed with your service.

    Solicitor, January 2021
  • Simon Bunter is extraordinarily knowledgeable, remarkably efficient and a wonderful communicator. I cannot recommend him highly enough.

    Barrister, December 2019
  • Very quick response to queries raised following receipt of report. Very helpful.

    Solicitor, January 2021
  • Extremely helpful, efficient and above all thoroughly professional.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Prompt provision of report and prompt reply to queries.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • Mr Armstrong impressed throughout the trial as a real expert in his field. It was apparent too that Mr Armstrong was entirely impartial.

    Counsel, March 2020
  • Quick, efficient service and a well-prepared report.

    Solicitor, July 2020
  • Exceptionally efficient service.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Mr Prime reported to us with great efficiency and presented his evidence to the Jury in an extremely persuasive manner.

    Counsel, March 2020
  • Speedy responses to our instructions and questions asked. Helpful estimated timeframe for the service of reports.

    Solicitor, January 2021
  • Service was excellent throughout.

    Solicitor, August 2020
  • There are times when DNA evidence can be a little dry, but Mike Appleby's presentation and delivery to the jury was pitch perfect.

    Barrister, December 2019
  • I am very impressed by your service.

    Solicitor, February 2020
  • I find KBC invariably helpful and reliable.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • Simon Bunter is as good an expert as I have ever worked with.

    Barrister, December 2019
  • Overall helpful and efficient service.

    Solicitor, September 2019
  • Mr Frost has been a great help in this case and we really appreciate his assistance.

    Solicitor, February 2021
  • Jenny Gray acted with the utmost integrity throughout. This was noted in open court by the judge hearing the case.

    Solicitor, October 2019
  • I can say that I am very satisfied with the service I have received from KBC, starting with my initial phone call and interaction your colleague when I made my initial enquiry, right up to the report being received. I would certainly use KBC again and would recommend you to my colleagues.

    Solicitor, January 2020
  • Fast service; timely response to communication.

    Solicitor, January 2020
  • Prompt and Professional and produces excellent reports.

    Solicitor, September 2020
  • Mike Appleby's exceptional quality was noted by all of the Counsel involved in the case. It is always a pleasure to watch someone, who is good at something, doing it and doing it well.

    Barrister, December 2019
  • A thorough analysis, with well set out conclusions.

    Solicitor, July 2020
  • Regular contact, advice on hand via phone if necessary, prompt and efficient.

    Solicitor, August 2020
  • Found the service to be extremely helpful, given the timeframe in which the report was required.

    Solicitor, January 2020
  • My impression of your service was excellent.

    Private Instruction, November 2020
  • Extremely good customer service and continuous contact/support.

    Solicitor, November 2019
  • I chose this company, as the first point of contact was extremely helpful.

    Private instruction, September 2020
  • Speedy and detailed quotes which do not delay funding from LAA.

    Solicitor, December 2020
  • No question was too silly and everything was explained so clearly and easily; great customer service.

    Private instruction, September 2020
  • Communication and speed of delivery of information was, as always, excellent.

    Solicitor, April 2020
  • We have used your services on many previous occasions. You always provide the cheapest estimate and respond quicker than any other service provider we have contacted for the purposes of Legal Aid.

    Solicitor, January 2021
  • Mr Appleby was truly excellent. While giving evidence it was plain that he has achieved the perfect blend of clarity and authoritative charisma.

    Barrister, December 2019
  • I have had the pleasure of the assistance of Mike Appleby on a number of occasions now and he is an excellent man to have around. 

    Counsel, March 2020

Keith Borer Consultants is a division of Orchid Cellmark Ltd, a company registered in England at 16 Blacklands Way, Abingdon, OX14 1DY.

Registered No. 4045527; VAT registration No. GB 750 0292 64

Website developed by Problue Solutions