CLPEX Chat Board

Ms. Rennie,

Do you remember the name of the show on which Dr. Lee made this startling remark. Perhaps then, we could go to that show's webpage and find a page for it.

Bonnevie(1924) and Karl (1934) deny that pattern type or direction is inherited even in twins

The Genetics of Dermal Ridges by Sara Holt states that identical twins have a .95 +/- .01 correlation when it come to what she calls Total Friction Ridge count or TFC. This is the count between the delta and the core for each finger added up.

Siblings only showed a correlation of .50 +/- .04.
Non identical twins .49 +/- .08

This is strong evidence that pattern size is stronly determined by genetics

For example if a set of twins both had the most common pattern types loops and the sizes are the same due to genetics one might assume that the pattern types were also due to genetics but that is probably not the case.

In Cummins and Midlo there is the statement the "If a pair has no more than 30% homolateral difference in the hands, the probability is 84% that they are monozygotic; if they have more the 30% homolateral difference the probability is 90% that they are dizygotic."

I have not found that twins that the same pattern type on the same finger 80 % of the time.

Cummins site Geipel (1941) saying that identical twins should have at least 3 paired pattern types. His claim was that if there were more than seven different pairs meant that the twins were dizygotic. Still not the 80% number that is claimed.


"A recent WSJ article speculates that identical twin !ngerprints
are 95% similar.; D. Costello, Families: the perfect deception: identical twins, Wall Street J. Feb. 12th 1999"

Wow 95% similar, hard fingerprint science in the WSJ.

Does anyone have the twin study data with pattern types on each of the fingers? That is one source that could be mined for data to support or dispute that claim.

Journal of Forensic Sciences Vol 27 Number 2 April 1982
Fingerprint comparison. I Similarity of Fingerprints

87.5% of fingerprint pairs matched in pattern type when looking at MZ twins
60% of fingerprint pairs matched when looking at DZ same sex twins
50% for Sibling and unrelated individuals

Only 15% of the pairs had the same pattern had the same ridge count as well.

So only 141 out of 1075 pairs had the same pattern and ridge count (13%)

This may be where the 80% stat comes from

lpexaminer wrote:I have that episode on my tivo and i have given several copies on dvd to people. If anyone wants to have a copy, send me a dvd with your return address and i will copy it for you.

Kimberly Lankford
Fort Worth Police Dept.
Crime Lab
350 W. Belknap 4th floor
Fort Worth, Tx 76102

Does this offer stand for international orders?

Pretty please?

A recently published writing done in this area was "Discriminabiliity of Fingerprints of Twins" published in the Journal of Forensic Identification, Vol. 58, No. 1, January/February 2008. It put the likelihood of same level 1 pattern detail between identical twins at 55% for the population that was studied. The authors use the phrase "higher degree of similarity"and not the word "identical". The authors did a great job in remaining objective based on the information they collected.

Where did Henry Lee get his information of 80%?

Hey, here's a crazy idea....why doesn't someone F___kin' ask him?

I just e-mailed Dr. Lee asking him if he had made that statement concerning twins. I wil let everyone know if he responds.

Danny:

You can get a copy of the show from Kim:

If anyone wants to have a copy, send me a dvd with your return address and i will copy it for you.

Kimberly Lankford
Fort Worth Police Dept.
Crime Lab
350 W. Belknap 4th floor
Fort Worth, Tx 76102

Cindy,
Thank you for the information. Oh, and for the rest; you have digressed from the original statement from Dr. Lee. I have seen a pair of identical twin's fingerprints that were plain arches. And yes, even plain arches have level one differences. Regardless, when the comparison was finished using level II detail; they were found not to be a match. That is the important thing. I have also seen identical twins that even the pattern types differ. And as for the palmprints, there were notable differences in the Level I detail. In the end it can only be said: that no two fingerprints are the same. Not completely, that is.

Any reply from Dr. Lee yet?

I have not gotten a response back from him.

Dr. Lee is supposed to be a Key Note Speaker at the Ohio Identification Seminar in September, being held in Toledo, Ohio. I do plan to bring this information to his attention and to ask a few questions about his findings and how he made his statement. I have the DVD being sent to me from Forth Worth Texas, and plan to view it in its entirety and then write down a few questions. I'm not too sure how long he's been in the fingerprint field, but I started in 1969 and this is all new to me. Any suggestions, let me know.

Paul R Bivens

I interviewed Dr. Henry Lee at the (OIO) Ohio Identification Officers 2008 Seminar this past week, and asked him about his statement concerning twins having the same fingerprints 80% of the time. I must admit, he's quite the politician. When he said he had no idea of what I was talking about and didn't remember saying anything like that in the first place, I held up the DVD which I received from Kimberly Lankford of Forth Worth, Texas and indicated that I could show it to the group with him and we could then discuss it. He "remembered" and began describing to me when fingerprints are developed within the womb and how they are evolved making the different designs. I interrupted and advised him that I already understood the fingerprint part of the development, but wanted to know what he meant about the 80% of twins having the same fingerrpints.
He then began telling me about studies he had been doing since 1972 dealing with prints - and I had to interrupt him again by advising him that I had been involved with fingerprints since 1969 and before that date and up to the present date I have found that NO two fingerprints have EVER been found to be the same, thus, making me question his 80% statement. I then asked if he had knowledge of the IAI study on twins from Twinsburg, Ohio and he said "...oh of course".
When I asked him again concerning the 80% of twins having the same fingerprints, I gave him an "out" by saying, "You weren't talking about minutiae, were you? You were talking about patterns, right?" He reverted back to his belief that fingerprint "patterns" are the fingerprints and that 80% of twins did have the same prints. After my fourth attempt, he agreed that twins did NOT have the same minutiae, but stuck with his original prediction of 80% of twins having the same "pattern type".
We in the fingerprint field must be on our toes and pssess the knowledge and know-how to be a rebuttal on any testimony of this type.

Paul,
Thank you for the update, & especially for following up in pursuit of accurate communication.
Regards, RLT