CLPEX Chat Board

One of the listeners to the Double Loop Podcast wrote in to say that she had never seen the symbol Φ used to represent an ID. So we'd like to take an informal survey of latent print examiners to see what symbol or abbreviation they commonly use to indicate an identification. Also, if you know why Φ is used to indicate an ID, please let us know. You can take the survey here:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/7ZJPZ7V

As an aside, some of you may be wondering what a podcast is. It's basically a radio show that is available on the internet. You can listen to this radio show about latent prints in a few different ways.
First, you can go to http://soundcloud.com/double-loop-podcast
Here you can listen to the broadcast from your computer browser.
If you have a smart phone, you can download the SoundCloud app and listen to the show from your phone.
If you have iTunes on your computer, your phone, or music player, you can subscribe to the show by searching for 'Double Loop Podcast'.

Look for new episodes every Tuesday morning, and thank you to everyone who's been listening and to everyone that's written in with comments or feedback about the show. Btw, Episode 5 is now available.

I exchanged information on this subject in early 2012 concerning the use of the phi symbol to denote an identification and this was my response at the time:

I do not think it has anything to do with "phi". I have an idea that it is a mark of convenience that takes on a variance of the "phi" symbol. In the evaluation stage of latent prints, an examiner makes an mark near an area of latent they consider of value for identification, probably on a photograph, and that mark would be an "O". When the latent areas are later compared and an identification effected, the "O" would receive a diagonal slash (not the vertical mark normally associated with the "phi" symbol ) to designate an identification, thereby indicating the area was no longer to be considered for future comparisons. This is a convenient and simple way of modifying an existing symbol by adding a simple mark that would cancel out a previous marking/determination.

Another individual confirmed that in their early years in FBI files (by candlelight) the "O" was made on a card when there was a negative search of FBI Records and a postive search would receive the "O" with a slash.

It takes just as much ink and wrist and finger movement to write 'ID' as it does to write Φ. I actually use a '0' with a slash through it (to differentiate a 0 [zero] from an O [oh]) to represent 'zero IDs'. Have I been doing it wrong all along? If I have an ID, I'll write 'ID'.

Ernie and I apparently have very similar stories from former FBI examiners who worked the tech section. My instructor assured us back in 1965 that the FBI had modernized to the extent that electric lights were available but gave the same explanation for the symbols. A circle (or O or zero) meant no prior arrest, a circle with a slash meant a prior record. The ID was signified by adding the FBI number to the searched card.

Dave

Dave,

YOU were the source of my information on the FBI experience. I just do not list names unless they chime in on their own. My notes also have indicate that you believe this practice originated in Britain because of markings you found on VERY early FP cards while at another agency that predated the FBI files.

Ernie

No wonder it was familiar, Ernie. I do know I had to update the fingerprint files in Portland when NCIC came into existence. People did not waste time doing a full classification on odd-ball prints. The oldest card I found was from 1923 and had a circle in the upper left hand corner to signify no prior arrest. Later, in Washington, I purged the old state files. Each card had either a circle or circle with a slash. Perhaps a British examiner could enlighten us as to use in the UK.

Dave

I asked a similar question quite a while back so thanks to everyone for the info and the clarification on the history behind the symbol....

However, has anyone else been 'encouraged' not to use the circle with a slash because it resembles the DNA section equivalent/abbreviation for no value?