CLPEX Chat Board

A few emails have been going around about the Code of Ethics (see below) that was recently approved by the membership in Spokane. The discussion at that general meeting became rather heated on the subject and the members were divided over the issue, but when it came to a vote the majority elected to leave in the phrase ‘Divine guidance’.

In the U.S., citizens are free to practice whatever religion they choose, but church and state must be kept separate. In the past few years Christians feel that only references to their particular religion are being removed or prohibited. Lawsuits over manger scenes on public property are filed, plaques of the Ten Commandments that have been in place for decades are suddenly considered offensive, Christmas trees are referred to as ‘giving trees’, etc. Public figures are pushing an agenda of political correctness that is sometimes nonsensical.

Because of this phenomenon many Christians become defensive whenever there is discussion about removing a reference to God in any venue, but they are thinking with their heart rather than their head in this case. Religious statements have no place in a governing document for a scientific organization like the IAI. In my opinion it is unprofessional and I hope that at the conference next year cooler heads will prevail on this issue.


Code of Ethics
As Amended Through July 16, 2010
As a member or certificant of the International Association for Identification, and being actively engaged in the profession of forensic identification, analysis, and investigation, I dedicate myself to the efficient and scientific administration thereof in the interest of truth, justice and the betterment of the profession.

I will cooperate with others of the profession, promote improvement through research, and disseminate such advancement in my effort to make more effective the analysis of the expert.

I will employ my technical knowledge factually, with zeal and determination using accepted practices, to protect the ethical standards of the profession, and I acknowledge my responsibility to the public trust.

I humbly accept my responsibility to public trust and seek Divine guidance that I may keep inviolate the profession of forensic identification, analysis and investigation.



The previous Code of Ethics said:
CODE OF ETHICS
• As a member of the International Association for Identification, and being actively engaged in the profession of Scientific Identification and Investigation, I dedicate myself to the efficient and scientific administration thereof in the interest of Justice and the betterment of Law Enforcement.
• To cooperate with others of the profession, promote improvement through research, and disseminate such advancement in my effort to make more effective the analysis of the expert.
• To employ my technical knowledge factually, with zeal and determination, to protect the ethical standards of the profession of Scientific Identification and Investigation.
• I humbly accept my responsibility to Public Trust and seek Divine guidance that I may keep inviolate the Profession of Law Enforcement.

I agree and am surprised (was unable to make the meeting this year). I think the wording and implied meaning is exclusionary and not appropriate in this context. Religious beliefs are personal and not a reflection of a persons moral / ethical compass.

Regardless of intent, the wording is awkward and confusing. If I do NOT seek Divine guidance (whatever the interpretation), am I therefore unethical? Do we need thought police to ensure all members seek Divine Guidance? For that matter, what if my acceptance of public trust is not humble?

This section is a matter of personal choice. It has no business being in a code of ethics.

I agree, and will relate something that happened to a good friend.

My friend was due for Crime Scene Recertification. Part of that included signing the Code of Ethics. He couldn't, in good conscience, sign something that required him to state that he would seek Divine guidance when he would not be seeking such guidance. He completed all the paperwork, except for that signature and submitted it with a cover letter explaining why he didn't sign it and asking for an alternative. No one ever contacted him to offer any alternative (actually no one ever contacted him to even confirm receipt of his paperwork), so he lost his certification over this issue. Since then, I have brought it up to members of the Board of Directors with no resolution - still, no one has contacted this person.

If I were joining the IAI today, I would not be able to do so for the same reason that my friend lost his certification. I could not sign that document today.

For those of us who take ethics very seriously, but who don't seek Divine guidance, this excludes us from joining or recertifying. Something is wrong with that picture - and it doesn't take an imaging analyst to figure that out.

George

I think having a code of ethics is a requirement for ASCLD or ISO is it not?? And I think it is important to have it as a means of revoking certification or membership from people who choose to engage in less than honorable actions like cheating on a test, falsifying records, or covering up facts in an investigation. Just like testifying on the stand you have to appeal to some higher power as part of the oath - the language isn't as important as the intent I think....

Kevin,

From where I am from, I don't have to appeal to a higher power as part of an oath. I also don't believe in Ghost, Goblins, Zombies, Santa Clause, Fairies, God, god's, demigods, demons, Infinate Spirits, Makers, or Deities of any kind, so I won't be seeking any Divine Guidence. The language is very important. I do enjoy mrdeity.com though. Very funny.

A code of ethics is something that can be enforced. Much of the IAI code of ethics is not enforceable nor is it in alignment with this country's Bill of Rights, so what is the point? By the way, just by signing the membership application you are mandated to follow the code of ethics. I have asked the IAI, specifically, if a member will be charged with ethics violations by refusing to seek divine guidance - I have not been given a clear answer and am hoping for further clarification. It may be that the only way to resolve the situation is for those members who do not seek divine guidance to turn themselves in on ethics violations and see how the IAI responds.

If you check out the AAFS Code of Ethics and Conduct there is no mention of religion, there are clearly enforceable rules, and there are consequences for not following them. A model to follow?

Missed everyone at the conference this year; George - I owe you a cigar!

I was wondering, purely out of curiosity, how the IAI have implemented their so called Code of Ethics with regards to two of their members, namely Peter Swann and Martin Leadbetter who are guilty of two of the most serious misidentifications in the history of Fingerprinting?

I did hear some time ago they were issued with letters of ‘censure’ by the IAI, whatever that means, but since that letter of censure, Peter Swann has in fact accused the IAI of criminal acts during the Fingerprint Inquiry. An incredibly serious accusation without any foundation.

Can anyone conform what of any action has been taken by the IAI against these two named individuals?

Are they both still members of the IAI despite their totally and absolutely ‘unethical’ behaviour?

If they are then any Code of Ethics presented by the IAI is totally meaningless.

...and with the adoption of 2010-18 and the rescinding of 1979-7 and 1980-5 one could presumably use "divine guidence" to arrive at a "possible,probable, or likely" conclusion as 2010-18 does not require any specific type of model and the code requires "divine guidence."

While we're at it since we pretend to be internation, why at the opening ceremonies are only christian prayers, the pledge of allegiance to the US flag, and the US national anthem ...should be for all or nothing.

It seems like there are a number of members who agree that this section of the Code of Ethics should be eliminated. It's also in the Recertification documents, and in some Certification docs (some disciplines don't have it, others do). What is the process to get this removed from all of these places?

Tomorrow morning I will turn my self in and admit to the IAI that I have violated the Code of Ethics by not seeking Divine Guidence. I will keep you posted.

Be sure to review the following IAI documents on their website (in the member's area - the password and log-on are in the back of any JFI):

Professional Misconduct document (link under General Policy and Reference)

From the Constitution: Article IX Code of Ethics, Standards of Professional Conduct and Members' Bill of Rights

From the By-Laws: Section 7.07, all of Article XVI, and Appendix A (Flowchart of Complaint Process)

Several other members are considering the same action.

The problem is, and has been for some time, that the business meeting is poorly attended and represents, at best, less than 10% of the membership. Suggestions have been made to make decisions such as a revised code of ethics more inclusive, but none of these has been enacted. If you cannot make the annual conference, or, the harsh reality of life, if you do and fail to attend the business meeting, you cannot participate. Over a thousand people may attend the conference; often less than 300 show up for the business meeting. I remember past president Doug Monsoor saying to me during one business meeting that if we did not devise a way for greater membership participation, the IAI would suffer. He was right and this is just one example.

Historically, there have been few viable options. One suggestion was to allow voting by mail. Every proposal quickly became a nightmare when it came to execution. But is that true today? We have password protection for the monthly report of the Chief Operations Officer, and that could easily work for voting. Topics from the business meeting could be streamed real time to members who logged on. I listen to radio programs that allow listener voting. How difficult would it be to allow membership voting via the Internet?

Harry Caldwell, who was instrumental in founding the IAI, was always concerned about the organization being run by elitists. Harry envisioned a professional organization that promoted membership involvement. A. J. Renoe distrusted the membership, and believed the organization could only be run by a select few. That differing philosophy has been battlled for nearly 90 years without adequate resolution. Whatever the intent of the current code of ethics, the result is aberrant, a series of statements as Alice noted, without clear direction, measurable objectives and enforceable consequences. Printlady noted there was considerable discussion but, in the end, meaningless garbage prevailed.

I think we need to pursue options. I am fearful of an elitist organization in a position to set policy, establish standards and influence the future of forensic science. I can't imagine any government functioning with only one place to vote, Surely, we can do better.

Throughout history claims of ‘Divine Guidance’ have been made to explain understanding and action and many wars have been fought on this basis with both sides claiming such intervention.

Divine guidance is said to be transmitted in many ways.

‘The many forms of divination through which divine guidance and prophecy was sought included the interpretation of natural and human signs and omens. These signs and omens were seen through the interpretation of patterns in the sky, lightning, the flight of birds, tea leaves, animal entrails, sneezing, chance remarks, and dreams. Systems of divination were developed that included the casting of lots or stones; gazing into water or a crystal ball; astrology; reading tarot cards; communication with the dead; and geomancy, a form of divination that uses signs and patterns of the earth. Many of these divination methods evolved into and/or included the guidance of an inner voice or voices.’
http://www.divineguidanceproject.org/li ... istory.htm

As a non expert I feel this approach opens the way for a much more pragmatic approach to the comparison and identification of fingerprints.

No more debating the efficacy of mathematically based models or of probability theory.

PICTURE THE SCENE.

Experts sit in a circle at the feet of the resident fingerprint guru. As the hour of meditation comes to an end he leads his colleagues through the evidence.

“Well what do we have?
We know that the suspect's horoscope for this week points to some troubled times ahead.
When we contacted our angel tarot cards they pointed to the suspect’s guilt.
We know that this is the year of the tiger and that today Mars and Venus are in opposition.
My inner voice clearly points to the accused’s guilt and this conclusion is confirmed in my reading of the runes."

At this point a young expert (washing his Guru’s feet) intervenes,

“But guru I have examined the prints and there are many discrepancies.”

The Guru laughs and pats the expert on the head.

“You will know in time my son. It has taken me many years to achieve this state of grace
We are agreed then it is an identification.”

I feel this whole idea opens up a rich vein of challenge to ridgeology, ACE-V , and all the other modern approaches to fingerprint comparison and identification. It is a fresh and innovative way to avoid the drudgery of the scientific approach and allows for a little inventiveness and intuition in the expert’s approach.