CLPEX Chat Board

Rare Twin Murder Case Echoes Bizarre Fingerprint Origins
Fingerprints From 1903 to 2010: Identical Twins May Share DNA, but Not Prints

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/atlanta-tw ... id=9909586

"In a justice system that often relies heavily on high-tech DNA testing, it was fingerprinting, a practice more than a century old, that succeeded where DNA failed."

I have no idea why the prints weren't identified prior to or in conjunction with the DNA "hit". Does anyone know anything about this case??

Gold Standard ... yeah right!

Quite possibly, it went something like this. Fingerprints, for what ever reason, failed AFIS. Donald had DNA in the system, and it hit him months into the investigation, and they then acted quickly on the DNA ID. And of course he fit the description and was "on the streets" and had opportunity. Some of the accounts seem to indicate that, shortly after he was arrested, he was shown the video and identified his brother. That prompted making the fingerprints a priority, and Ronald was confirmed. It appears this all happened shortly after Donald's arrest, even before the comparison of Donald's prints was performed. The two brothers are quite similar in appearance. It may well be that an in-custody fingerprint case there is a lower priority and didn't become urgent until Ronald became a suspect.

We in Auckland have had this same situation occure on occassions where the twin gives his brothers name, unfortunately we were unable to convince those in power that when ever DNA is taken the at least one fingerprint must be taken at the same time as the DNA. It is the way the law is written so we must suffer these issues until it goes through the courts and every one jumps up and down, tears their hair out, stamp their feet etc then some one will have the bright idea, 'oh we could take their fingerprints at the same time as the DNA' and the media will say why didn't someone think of that before!
yea right.

In the state of Arizona, USA, we actually had an opportunity for input when the DNA database was first started (a priority was prison inmates and registered offenders convicted of sex crimes, if my recollection is correct). As a result, an index card was devised, containing demographic info, a signature & 4 pat fingerprints obtained at the same time DNA exemplars were obtained. The idea was to prevent a substitute person/exemplar being used. Don't know the protocol now, but before I retired in 2004, all DNA IDs were confirmed with fingerprint IDs to insure the subject ID'd was the correct person.
Regards, RLT

With the implementation of Prop 69 in early 2009, the California Department of Justice has worked with a diverse committee and law enforcement agencies in a great effort to create a new, shared DNA/Fingerprint database. One in which the main purpose is to maintain the quality of the identification data associated with the biological (DNA) samples submitted to this database. This is being implemented now by the concurrent collection of a buccal sample and fingerprint capture during the time of the booking. A separate system has been devised to enter the demographic info associated with the buccal samples (via barcode), and for capture of a single set of prints to verify the biological sample at the time of the live scan record entry. Essentially, there are two side-by-side computers to process each step (once to add the record to the state database, and again in this system to verify the collected sample to add to the new database). To date, this project includes eleven counties within California. It launched well over a year ago, but has been slow, due to its complexity, and the need for training to educate most live scan operators of the importance of proper buccal swab/fingerprint capture (and the need to use both systems). There tends to be little concern for (and a lot of loathing) to "having to collect the prints twice" now for the overworked/short-staffed personnel responsible for the collection of such data. I would love to see this materialize to a day where such a database exists universally and can eventually merge into a one-stop booking shop at some point in the future without proprietary systems getting in the way.