Posted by Susan Crandell on October 26, 1999 at 11:28:37:
In Reply to: HMA vs. Shirley McKie posted by David Grieve on October 01, 1999 at 21:57:48:
After examining the latent print and the inked print it's hard to imagine that one examiner would have made the identification, unbelievable that two others could have verified same. The latent print is certainly of value for comparison purposes by our standards, from the SCRO Copy Production No.189 I cannot locate 16 points in sequential order. Provided that their working lifts, photographs were not greatly superior to this image (or even the photograph Pat Wertheim recorded), according to their requirements, the issue should have been sufficient points for an identification to be effected, not a resulting erroneous identification / verification.
Were Dave Grieve and/or Pat Wertheim offered the opportunity to compare and possibly eliminate the victim's fingerprints with the erroneously identified latent print?
Susan Crandell CLPE 20 yrs local, state, & federal govt exp