Forensic Fingerprints by Houck Max M.;

Author:Houck, Max M.;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Elsevier Science
Published: 2016-02-05T02:39:44+00:00

History of Criminal Identification

An individual's criminal history record associates personal identifiers to arrest and disposition data. Until the mid-1850s, this information was haphazardly recorded as notes and associated with a name, of which could easily have been an alias. As populations and the criminal element grew, it became increasingly difficult to accurately document a person's criminal record and associate descriptive data with a record in order to accurately identify recidivists. The advent of photography was a pivotal moment in the criminal justice community. Officials could now attach a photograph (the mug shot) to a criminal history record. While the use of photographs greatly advanced the criminal justice system, it was not the be-all and end-all of criminal identification because of the fact that a criminal could easily change his/her appearance. In addition, many police departments did not institute standard operating procedures for mug shots. Historic mug shots often contained people wearing hats, women with veils, and heads tilted.

The next milestone in criminal identification was initially viewed as the first truly scientific method of criminal identification. In 1882, Alphonse Bertillon, a police clerk in Paris, France, developed a system of body measurements to be used for identification. Known as anthropometry, the system involved distinct measurements of the human body. These measurements, a total of 11, were recorded with descriptive data such as height and eye color, body deformities or marks such as scars, mug shots, and the 11 measurements. In 1894, Galton's fingerprint classification was added to the Bertillonage record of criminal identification. Not long after Bertillonage was instituted as a means of identification, the problem with anthropometry was becoming apparent in three ways. First, different officers could record different measurements of the same body parts. The difference was enough that false identifications could be made or recidivists could be missed. Second, the system did not account for growth or aging of the body. Measurements taken from an individual throughout growth and the aging processing could be different enough to preclude an identification. Third, the system was proving unable to handle large amounts of data. As files grew, the time it took for the officers to search and locate a file became debilitating. As the problems with anthropometry intensified the use of a fingerprint classification system to accurately identify individuals emerged as the premier method of identification.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.