A comment on experimental results of fingerprint comparison validity and reliability: A review and critical analysis

Glenn Langenburg; Cedric Neumann; Christophe Champod

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2014.06.012

A comment on experimental results of fingerprint comparison validity and reliability: A review and critical analysis

Sci Justice. 2014 Sep;54(5):393-5. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2014.06.012.

Authors

Glenn Langenburg¹, Cedric Neumann², Christophe Champod³

Affiliations

¹ Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, 1430 Maryland Avenue East, Saint Paul, MN 55106, United States. Electronic address: glenn.langenburg@state.mn.us.
² South Dakota State University, Math & Statistics-Box 2220, Brookings, SD 57007, United States. Electronic address: cedric.neumann@sdstate.edu.
³ Ecole des Sciences Criminelles, Institut de police scientifique, Batochime, University of Lausanne (UNIL), CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: cchampod@unil.ch.

PMID: 25278205
DOI: 10.1016/j.scijus.2014.06.012

Abstract

We respond to the article "Experimental results of fingerprint comparison validity and reliability: A review and critical analysis" by Ralph and Lyn Haber which offers (a) a one-sided criticism of the state of affairs in latent print examination, (b) lack of original data supporting that their suggested approach, and (c) a host of incorrect statements, inaccuracies, or obscure interpretations of the existing data.

Keywords: Critical analysis; Error rates; Fingerprints; Latent prints.

Publication types

Letter