PROJECT ON

FINGERPRINTING

Name:Abhishek chatterjee
Reg No:11A006
Batch :2011-16

Submitted To:
Mr Jagdeesh Chandra

0 | Page

INDEX
Introduction:What
Pg 2

is

Fingerprinting

History
Pg 3
Adoption
Pg 5
John
Pg 6

of

Fingerprinting
Edgar

Aadhar
Pg 9

and

studies

identify

Hoovers
Its

Criticism
Pg9
Case
Pg 10

To

of

Contribution

potential

of
fingerprint

Criminals

Impact
fingerprinting

misidentification

Conclusion
Pg 12
References
Pg 14

1 | Page

Introduction: What Is Fingerprinting

A fingerprint in its narrow sense is an impression left by the
friction ridges of a human finger. In a wider use of the term,
fingerprints are the traces of an impression from the friction
ridges of any part of a human or other primate hand. A print
from the foot can also leave an impression of friction ridges. A
friction ridge is a raised portion of the epidermis on the digits
(fingers and toes), the palm of the hand or the sole of the foot,
consisting of one or more connected ridge units of friction ridge
skin.
Impressions of fingerprints may be left behind on a surface by
the natural secretions of sweat from the eccrine glands that are
present in friction ridge skin, or they may be made by ink or
other substances transferred from the peaks of friction ridges
on the skin to a relatively smooth surface such as a fingerprint
card. Fingerprint records normally contain impressions from the
pad on the last joint of fingers and thumbs, although fingerprint
cards also typically record portions of lower joint areas of the
fingers.
Fingerprint identification, known as dactyloscopy, or hand
print identification, is the process of comparing two instances of
friction ridge skin impressions, from human fingers or toes, or
even the palm of the hand or sole of the foot, to determine
whether these impressions could have come from the same
individual. The flexibility of friction ridge skin means that no two
finger or palm prints are ever exactly alike in every detail; even
two impressions recorded immediately after each other from the
same hand may be slightly different.

HISTORY

2 | Page

The earliest dated prints of the ridges of the skin on human

hands and feet were made about 4,000 years ago during the
pyramid building era in Egypt. In addition, one small portion of
palm print, not known to be human, has been found impressed
in hardened mud at a 10,000-years old site in Egypt.
It was common practice for the Chinese to use inked
fingerprints on official documents, land sales, contracts, loans
and acknowledgments of debts. The oldest existing documents
so endorsed date from the 3rd century BC, and it was still an
effective practice until recent times. Even though it is recorded
that the Chinese used their fingerprints to establish identity in
courts in litigation over disputed business dealings
Researchers fail to agree as to whether the Chinese were fully
aware of the uniqueness of a fingerprint or whether the physical
contact with documents had some spiritual significance.
The first documented interest in the skin's ridges in the western
world, a paper written in 1684 by an Englishman, Dr. Nehemiah
Grew, was mainly of an anatomical nature. A small number of
other academics from various European countries also made
anatomical studies of the skin.
Professor Marcello Malpighi, a plant morphologist at the
University of Bologna, performed research similar to Grew's and
published similar findings in his 1686 publication De Extemo
Tactus Organo. This anatomical treatise, though less detailed
about the surface of the hand than that of Dr Crew, delves
further beneath the surface. Malpighi's anatomical work was so
outstanding that one of the layers of the skin was named
:stratum Malpighi" after him.
It was not until 1798, however, that J C Mayer of Germany
theorized that the arrangements of friction ridges were unique.
In 1823, Professor Johannes Evangelist Purkinje published the
most detailed description of fingerprints to have appeared
anywhere up to that time. Professor Purkinje's thesis entitled A
Commentary on the Physiological Examination of the Organs of
Vision and the Cutaneous System describes, with illustrations,
nine fingerprint patterns classified in Latin.
3 | Page

From his illustrations, it can be seen that the Latin

classifications refer to what Henry would later name arches,
tented arches, loops, whorls and twinned loops. Purkinje's
research was purely anatomical, and he made no mention of
individuals being identified by the patterns that he described.
However, he recommended further research, and others soon
took up his challenge.
However, it was not until 1858 that the first practical
application of the science was made, when an English
administrator in India, Sir William Herschel, commenced
placing the inked palm impressions and, later, thumb
impressions of some members of the local population on
contracts.
These prints were used as a form of signature on the documents
because of the high level of illiteracy in India and frequent
attempts at forgery. Herschel also began fingerprinting all
prisoners in jail.
Herschel's main role as a fingerprint pioneer lies in the area of
the immutability of ridged skin also mentioned by Faulds.
Throughout his life, Herschel took his own fingerprints and
noted that no change had occurred in them in over 50 years. He
also had a small collection of about 20 sets of fingerprints and
used his technique of hand printing to detect forgeries of legal
documents.
Herschel did not make his feelings known and did not suggest
that he had developed a method of registering and identifying
criminals, nor did he foresee any crime scene application as
Faulds had done.
The greatest advances in fingerprint science in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries were probably made by Dr Henry Faulds,
a Scottish missionary doctor of the United Presbyterian Church.
Faulds first became interested in fingerprints after 1874 while
working at the hospital he established in Tsukiji, Tokyo, Japan.
After careful experiment and observation, he became convinced
that fingerprint patterns did not change, that the fingerprint
patterns on the fingers where highly variable and that
superficial injury did not alter them, they returned to their
former design as the injury healed.
4 | Page

In a letter written to Nature in October 1880, Faulds relates

how he took many sets of fingerprints and palm prints and
studied them. He further described the pattern formations on
the fingers, referred to "loops" and "whorls" and stating how
good sets of fingerprints may be obtained by the use of "a
common slate or smooth board of any kind, or a sheet of tin,
spread over very thinly with printer's ink. This technique, still in
use today, appears to be a botanical technique called natureprinting.
Fauld's most important conclusion was that fingerprints do not
change and that finger marks (that is, latent prints) left on
objects by bloody or greasy fingers "may lead to the scientific
identification of criminals".
In 1892, a noted English scientist of the time, Sir Francis
Galton, published an accurate and in-depth study of the
fingerprinting science that included an attempt at a system of
fingerprint classification to facilitate the handling of large
collections of fingerprints. Although Galton's work proved to be
sound and became the foundation of modern fingerprint science
and technology, his approach to classification was inadequate,
and it was to be others who were to successfully apply his work.
Juan Vucetich, an Argentinian police officer, research the
science of fingerprints, corresponded with Galton, then devised
his own system of fingerprint classification, which he called
"icnofalagometrico". This system was put into practice in
September 1891, and in March 1892, Vucetich opened the first
fingerprint bureau at San Nicholas, Buenos Aires. Within a short
time of the bureau being set up, the first conviction by means of
fingerprint evidence in a murder trial was obtained.
In June 1892 at Necochea, Francisca Rojas claimed that she
had been brutally attacked and her two children murdered by a
neighboring ranch worker named Velasquez. Velasquez was
arrested but refused to confess to the murder of the two
children. Nine days after the crime, a search of the crime scene
was carried out and a number of fingerprints in blood were
found on a door post of the woman's hut.

5 | Page

The post was taken to the fingerprint bureau for comparison with
the inked fingerprint impressions of Velasquez. They were not
identical, but the blood impressions were found to be identical
with those of Rojas. When confronted with this evidence, Rojas
confessed to the murder of her children, and in July 1892 she was
found guilty of their murder and sentenced to life
imprisonment ..
By the end of that year, the Fingerprint Office at New Scotland
Yard was fully functional, the first British court conviction by
fingerprints being obtained in 1902. Approximately 10 years after
the publication of Henry's book, his classification system was
being used by police forces and prison authorities throughout the
English-speaking world.
Friction Ridge Skin
Only the hairless parts of the body ---- the inner surfaces of the
hands and the soles of the feet ---- are covered with patterns
formed by raised ridges of skin known as friction or papillary
ridges. The study of fingerprints, or dactyloscopy, is the more
widely used section in practice even though prints from the
soles of the feet are as characteristic as fingerprints, they are
less often used for identification purposes due to their low rate
of occurrence.
The patterns formed by the papillary ridges are important since
they are already formed in the fetus by the fourth month of
pregnancy and they do not change until death. These patterns
cannot be altered, except by accident, mutilation, or very
serious skin disease, as they are formed in deep layers of the
dermis.

ADOPTION OF FINGERPRINTING TO IDENTIFY

CRIMINALS
In 1880, Dr. Henry Faulds, a Scottish surgeon in a Tokyo
hospital, published his first paper on the subject in the scientific
journal Nature, discussing the usefulness of fingerprints for
identification and proposing a method to record them with
printing ink. He also established their first classification and
6 | Page

was also the first to identify fingerprints left on a vial. Returning

to the UK in 1886, he offered the concept to the Metropolitan
Police in London but it was dismissed at that time. Faulds wrote
to Charles Darwin with a description of his method but, too old
and ill to work on it, Darwin gave the information to his
cousin, Francis Galton, who was interested in anthropology.
Having been thus inspired to study fingerprints for ten years,
Galton published a detailed statistical model of fingerprint
analysis and identification and encouraged its use in forensic
science in his book Finger Prints. He had calculated that the
chance of a "false positive" (two different individuals having the
same fingerprints) was about 1 in 64 billion.
Juan Vucetich, an Argentine chief police officer, created the first
method of recording the fingerprints of individuals on file,
associating these fingerprints to the anthropometric system
of Alphonse Bertillon, who had created, in 1879, a system to
identify individuals by anthropometric photographs and
associated quantitative descriptions. In 1892, after studying
Galton's pattern types, Vucetich set up the world's first
fingerprint bureau. In that same year, Francisca Rojas
of Necochea, was found in a house with neck injuries, whilst her
two sons were found dead with their throats cut. Rojas accused
a neighbour, but despite brutal interrogation, this neighbour
would not confess to the crimes. Inspector Alvarez, a colleague
of Vucetich, went to the scene and found a bloody thumb mark
on a door. When it was compared with Rojas' prints, it was
found to be identical with her right thumb. She then confessed
to the murder of her sons.
A Fingerprint Bureau was established in Calcutta (Kolkata),
India, in 1897, after the Council of the Governor General
approved a committee report that fingerprints should be used
for the classification of criminal records. Working in the
Calcutta Anthropometric Bureau, before it became the
Fingerprint Bureau, were Azizul Haque and Hem Chandra Bose.
Haque and Bose were Indian fingerprint experts who have been
credited with the primary development of a fingerprint
classification system eventually named after their supervisor, Sir
Edward Richard Henry. The Henry Classification System, codevised by Haque and Bose, was accepted in England and Wales
when the first United Kingdom Fingerprint Bureau was founded
inScotland Yard, the Metropolitan Police headquarters, London,
in 1901. Sir Edward Richard Henry subsequently achieved
improvements in dactyloscopy.
7 | Page

In the United States, Dr. Henry P. DeForrest used fingerprinting

in the New York Civil Service in 1902, and by 1906, New York
City Police DepartmentDeputy Commissioner Joseph A. Faurot,
an expert in the Bertillon system and a finger print advocate at
Police Headquarters, introduced the fingerprinting of criminals
to the United States.
The Scheffer case of 1902 is the first case of the identification,
arrest and conviction of a murderer based upon fingerprint
evidence. Alphonse Bertillonidentified the thief and murderer
Scheffer, who had previously been arrested and his fingerprints
filed some months before, from the fingerprints found on a
fractured glass showcase, after a theft in a dentist's apartment
where the dentist's employee was found dead. It was able to be
proved in court that the fingerprints had been made after the
showcase was broken. A year later, Alphonse Bertillon created a
method of getting fingerprints off smooth surfaces and took a
further step in the advance of dactyloscopy.
Since the advent of fingerprint detection, many criminals have
resorted to the wearing of gloves in order to avoid leaving
fingerprints, which thus makes the crime investigation more
difficult. However, the gloves themselves can leave prints that
are just as unique as human fingerprints. After collecting glove
prints, law enforcement can then match them to gloves that they
have collected as evidence. In many jurisdictions the act of
wearing gloves itself while committing a crime can be
prosecuted as an inchoate offense.
As many offenses are crimes of opportunity, many assailants are
not in the possession of gloves when they commit their illegal
activities. Thus, assailants have been viewed using pulled-down
sleeves and other pieces of clothing and fabric to handle objects
and touch surfaces during the commission of their crimes.

John Edgar Hoovers contribution

Americans have had an eight-year fascination, love affair is with
fingerprints. During the 1920's and 30's, law enforcement
leaders like Police Chief August Vollmer of Berkeley, California
and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover believed that the widespread
use of fingerprinting and the other crime-fighting sciences of
firearms identification, questioned documents, and forensics
chemistry, would someday bring America's massive crime
problem to its knees. Although incredibly nave, most police
8 | Page

thinkers of that era believed this, and the American public

bought it too. It's therefore not surprising that during this era,
men such as Vollmer and Hoover began to think seriously about
fingerprinting everyone a concept called universal
fingerprinting.
Most citizens never get arrested, therefore the fingerprints of a
vast majority of the population are not taken and filed away for
further use. However, by fingerprinting everyone housewives,
babies, factory workers, and school children America's
fingerprint collection would be complete. It is this idea that
appeals to advocates of universal fingerprinting.
Although today, the police and the public have a more realistic
view of crime and criminals, the criminalistic science of
fingerprints is still a symbol of police professionalism and
successful crime fighting. In the mid-1980's, at the height of the
missing children scare, programs promoting the voluntary
fingerprinting of school children and babies sprang up all over
the country.
The idea of fingerprinting everyone either voluntarily or by
law, has been around as long as fingerprinting itself. In 1930,
August Vollmer began talking and writing about the advantages
of universal fingerprinting. He figured that everybody would
benefit from such a program. For example, the police would get
an effective crime-fighting tool that would help catch criminals
and eventually prevent crime. If job applicants were
fingerprinted, employers would know who they were hiring and
could turn away those candidates with criminal records.
Moreover, victims of fires, plane crashes, and other disasters
could be identified, and so could missing children and people
found dead on the street, in the woods, or in the water. There
were less obvious advantages as well the government could
deal more effectively with illegal aliens, merchants could protect
themselves against bad checks, hotel beats, and other kinds of
fraud, the IRS could catch tax cheats, and the census bureau
could do a better job.1

9 | Page

Vollmer's advocacy of universal fingerprinting contradicted, to a

certain degree, his leanings as a civil libertarian. This is
probably what kept him from pushing for laws to make the
fingerprinting of noncriminals mandatory. Vollmer wanted to
educate people teach them the advantages of fingerprinting so
they would ask to be officially printed. He hoped to do this by
getting service clubs, lodges, magazines, and newspapers
interested in his idea. These groups would in turn sponsor
programs to educate and indoctrinate the public.2
August Vollmer wasn't the first to think about or to propose
universal fingerprinting. In 1916, Juan Vucetich, Argentina's
great criminalist and fingerprint pioneer, was the driving force
behind a law passed in his country that required the entire
population, including foreign residents and visitors, to be
fingerprinted. Following the passage of this statute, the reaction
against it was so strong, the law was quickly repealed. Vucetich
died in 1925 and the idea of fingerprinting everyone has not
been brought up again in Argentina.
The movement to fingerprint noncriminals really got underway
in America in the mid-1930's at the height of the great crime
wave. During this period J Edgar Hoover used the media and
exploited public fear of crime to make his case. He even got
people like John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Walt Disney, and President
Roosevelt to have themselves printed.3
By 1934, police departments all over America routinely
fingerprinted everyone they arrested. The fingerprint card of
each arrestee was sent to the FBI's National Fingerprint Bureau
in Washington, D.C.4 That year, Hoover informed the House
Appropriations Committee that his fingerprint bureau housed
five million sets of prints, the largest collection of its kind in the
world. It was also in 1934 that he added what he called the
civilian fingerprints to the national bureau. This collection was
made up of the noncriminal fingerprints of federal employees
and those who had volunteered to be printed. (In 15 years this
file would hold 20 million fingerprint sets.)5 Hoover also advised
the House Appropriations Committee that it was his dream to
add to this file the fingerprints of every American citizen.6
10 | P a g e

By 1936 August Vollmer had retired from the Berkeley Police

Department and was teaching police administration at the
University of California. That year he arranged a special town
election to ask voters if they objected to a campaign to get
people to volunteer their prints. Vollmer was well known and
popular in Berkeley, and the people there voted three to one in
favor of his program. During the next two years, sixteen
thousand citizens, about half the town's population, were
fingerprinted.7 (Eventually, the Berkeley Police Department
would send fifty-two thousand prints to the FBI.)
Vollmer had launched his fingerprinting campaign by taking the
prints of Dr. Robert G. Sproul, the president of the University of
California. Dr. Sproul was fingerprinted at a booth set up for
that purpose on the Berkeley campus. But even in Berkeley
there was some resistance to universal fingerprinting. Many
factory workers who had been asked to submit by their
employers were suspicious that it was a management scheme to
gain control over labor. Others feared the program would
someday become involuntary.

Aadhar And Its Potential Impact

As of March 2013, the Unique Identification Authority of
India operates the world's largest fingerprint (multi-modal
biometric) system, with over 200 million fingerprint, face and
iris biometric records. UIAI plans to collect as many as 600
million multi-modal record by the end of 2014. India's Unique
Identification project is also known as Aadhaar, a word meaning
"the foundation" in several Indian languages. Aadhaar is a
voluntary program, with the ambitious goal of eventually
providing reliable national ID documents for most of India's 1.2
billion residents.
With a database many times larger than any other in the world,
Aadhaar's ability to leverage automated fingerprint and iris
modalities (and potentially automated face recognition) enables
rapid and reliable automated searching and identification
11 | P a g e

impossible to accomplish with fingerprint technology alone,

especially when searching children and elderly residents'
fingerprints.
It would also help in maintain an accurate data base of criminals
and help identify and catch potential criminals who could leave
their fingerprints in crime scence,this will kick start a new era
of forensics and will make police work more effective and
advanced. Lesser criminals will be able to evade the law.

CRITICISM OF FINGERPRINTING
The human element eliminates the infallibility of the
fingerprint methodology as a personal identification
mechanism. Mistakes can be made by the administrator in the
process of printing, or by the expert who is responsible for
making the final determination upon review of the possible
matches.
There is no data available that could quantify the percentage
of errors made in personal identification through the
utilization of fingerprints.There are also errors that can occur
in the process of taking inked fingerprints. The fingerprints
can be rendered illegible in the inking process if:

The finger has not been rolled fully from side to side.
The entire finger from its joint to its top has not been
inked.
The finger is not held securely in place. If the technician
holds the fingers too loosely (or too securely), there
could be a smudging or blurring of the prints, thus
rendering a false pattern of prints.
The usage of an inappropriate texture of ink can result
in running of the ink and pattern distortion. Black
printer's ink of a heavy texture is the advisable texture
to use.
The usage of too much ink can distort the patterns.
The usage of too little ink will render the ridge patterns
indistinguishable.
12 | P a g e

Temporary disabilities to the fingerprint subject, such

as cuts and blisters, can distort the pattern of the
ridges.
Excessive perspiration on the fingers of the subject may
inhibit the ink from adhering to the fingers which would
result in a blurred and inaccurate outcome.
Errors made on the information card that accompanies
the fingerprints, such as name, date of birth, sex and
age can lead to complications as to the authenticity of
the prints

Case
Studies
Misidentification

Of

Fingerprint

A. Commonwealth v. Cowans

On May 30, 1997, an African-American male shot and

wounded Officer Gregory Gallagher of the Boston Police
Department while that officer was on duty.The assailants
baseball hat fell off during the initial struggle between the
two men.Shortly after the shooting, an African-American male
holding a gun gained entry into the nearby residence of Ms.
Bonnie Lacy.The individual removed his sweatshirt, wiped his
gun off, asked for and received a glass of water, and then
left.Officer Gallagher later identified Mr. Stephan Cowans as
his assailant in a photographic lineup that included the
pictures of eight individuals.The officer also subsequently
identified Cowans in a standard lineup that included the
suspect.A witness who saw the presumed assailant shortly
after the shooting confirmed the identification, although Ms.
Lacy did not.14 In addition to the eyewitness evidence,
investigators located a fingerprint on the glass used by the
individual who had gained entry to Ms. Lacys house.15 The
print was matched to that of Mr. Cowans by two fingerprint
examiners working for the Boston Police Department.16 A
fingerprint examiner retained by the defense later confirmed
the fingerprint match. On the basis of this evidence, Mr.
Cowans was convicted of shooting a police officer and
sentenced to thirty to forty-five years in state prison.In the
pre-DNA world, Mr. Cowans would no doubt have spent much
of his adult life behind bars. However, in May 2003 (six years
after Cowanss conviction), at the defendants request, Orchid
Cellmark Laboratories performed DNA testing on both the
glass and the baseball hat found at the crime scene. The DNA
profile found on the glass did not match that of Mr. Cowans,
but it did match that of the primary contributor to the DNA on
13 | P a g e

the baseball cap.In January 2004, at the request of the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, further testing was
performed on the sweatshirt. The resulting DNA profile
matched the common profile found on the glass and the
baseball hat.21 Initially, Suffolk Assistant District Attorney
David E. Meier stated that, given the compelling evidence
of the fingerprint on the glass, his office would retry Cowans
if the conviction were overturned. Two days later, after the
fingerprint had been re-examined, however, Meier changed
his mind.In addressing Superior Court Judge Peter Lauriat,
Meier explained that the fingerprint evidence presented at
trial did not match that of Cowans: I can conclusively and
unequivocally state, your honor, that that purported match
was a mistake. Mr. Cowans was then released, having spent
six years in jail for a crime he did not commit.

B. The Mayfield Affair

On March 11, 2004, a terrorist bomb attack on a Madrid train
station resulted in 191 deaths and some 2,000 people injured.
The Spanish authorities found a bag of detonators near the
site of the explosion with a fingerprint on it that did not
match any in their databank. The authorities forwarded the
print to several investigative organizations, including the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). After searching its
fingerprint database, the FBI located a possible match in the
prints of Mr. Brandon Mayfield, an attorney in Portland,
Oregon.From the start, there were troubling aspects about
the match. Mr. Mayfield had ties to Muslim individuals and
organizations thought to make him suspect, but there was no
evidence that he had been out of the country for many years.
Nevertheless, the FBI examiners concluded that the print was
a 100 percent positive identification, and so informed the
Spanish authorities on April 2, 2004.The Spanish disagreed.
On April 13, 2004, the Spanish authorities reported in a
memorandum to the FBI that the match was conclusively
negative. Where the FBI found fifteen points of agreement
for
the
fingerprint,
the
Spanish
found
only
seven.Nevertheless, the FBI continued to maintain that the
latent print on the bag matched that of Mr. Mayfield and
arranged a meeting with Spanish officials in Madrid on April
21, 2004 to present their analysis. The meeting did nothing to
change the opinion of the FBI and, subsequently, Mr. Mayfield
was arrested on May 6, 2004 on a material witness warrant.
14 | P a g e

Fortunately for Mr. Mayfield, the Spanish authorities

persisted with their investigation and, shortly after Mayfields
arrest, announced that they had matched the latent print to
an Algerian named Ouhnane Daoud. The final blow came
when the Spanish authorities found traces of Daouds DNA
in a rural cottage outside Madrid where investigators believe
the terrorist cell held planning sessions and assembled the
backpack bombs used in the attack. Mr. Mayfield was finally
released after spending two weeks in jail. What went wrong?
FBI officials initially gave conflicting accounts. In June 2004,
The New York Times reported on the agencys changing
positions: F.B.I. officials told Congress members in the
briefings last week that they had come up with the match
after working off a second-generation digital printmeaning
a copy of a copy. But they gave a somewhat different
explanation in interviews this week, saying they were now
uncertain what generation the digital print represented. But
the F.B.I. official who spoke to The New York Times on
condition of anonymity added that the real issue was the
quality of the latent print that the Spaniards originally took
from the blue bag.The determination by an F.B.I. examiner
that the print was useable was hasty and erroneous, F.B.I.
officials said, and et the agency off in the wrong direction and
corrupted the rest of the process.

CONCLUSION
Regardless of these criticisms Fingerprints are the ultimate
source in the establishment of both the verification and
recognition of a person's identity. This statement is based on
three factors: fingerprints are distinct and unique to each
individual, and no two people have identical prints;
fingerprints are unchangeable over the course of a lifetime of
a person; and fingerprints can be extracted from any surface
they
come
into
contact
with.
They
are
inexpensive,reliable,gurantee quick results,have multiple uses
apart from incriminating criminals and acting as deterrent to
stop crime.
15 | P a g e

It is also permanent, it identifies who a person is, as opposed

to what a person has, such as a password, or other
identification of that nature. It establishes identification
through the identification of unchangeable personal
characteristics. A person may change hair color, but cannot
alter fingerprints. One cannot guess, fake or forget
fingerprints as can occur in non-biometric identification
methodologies. The individual who is fingerprinted must be
physically present in order to be processed.

Refferences
1.
2.

http://wwy.brooklaw.edu/students/journals/bjlp/jlp13i_zabell.pdf
http://www.clpex.com/Information/Pioneers/henryclassification.pdf
3. http://www.onin.com/fp/fphistory.html
4. http://galton.org/fingerprints/books/herschel/herschel-1916origins-1up.pdf
16 | P a g e