The first successful conviction using fingerprints was in a burglary case in 1902 and the burglar, Harry Jackson was jailed.
2006-08-01 14:34:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Fingerprint evidence is very rare for the most part. I actually have the only two convictions in my area based solely on fingerprints found at a scene. The first case was a residence burglary that the 16 year old perpetrator decide to take time out and drink a coke. Found a beautiful and flawless thumb print on the can. Since I already knew who the suspect was it was a matter of proving the print was his.
The second case with a different department involved a car burglary. The car owner happened to have washed the car the day before. I found a full set of finger prints on the glass. The first submission didn't come back with any hits. A year later, the department got a new AFIS machine which is state of the art technology. The evidence commander resubmited my print and found a match. Both perpetrators were convicted!!!!
That is only 2 cases in a 20 year career. Unlike CSI it is very rare but very exciting. You just never know what you are going to come up with but most victims think fingerprints mean we can go out and arrest someone. It just doesn't happen in real life.
2006-08-01 15:43:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sam B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The first answer here is wrong, since that was the first conviction to take place in Britian not the US.
There is no clear date as to when fingerprinting was first used. However, significant modern dates documenting the use of fingerprints for positive identification does exist.
Although widely accepted among lay people and jurors, objective scientific validation of forensic latent print identification is rare or nonexistent. Fingerprint identification was the first forensic discipline (in 1977) to formally institute a professional certification program for individual experts, including a procedure for decertifying those making errors. However, the educational qualifications are low, and the ease of entry cast doubt on the legitimacy of many in the profession.
Fingerprint evidence got a big boost when two convicts with the same name and same anthropometry measurements were found in Fort Leavenworth prison in Kansas in 1903. Since their fingerprints clearly distinguished them, this case brought fingerprinting into its own as the leading tool for identification. By 1910, based on a print left in wet paint in a murder case, an appeals court declared that fingerprint technology had a scientific basis.
2006-08-01 15:09:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Agent Starling 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rojas- 1892
2006-08-02 03:08:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by mike g 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
1892 - for conviction of Rojas who murdered her two sons.
2006-08-01 14:39:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋