|Posted on Tuesday, September 16, 2003 - 06:20 am: ||
This question is answered in various pages on this website, including a posting to this forum here stating:
Regarding identification (versus development/detection), the primary advances in the past 70 years have involved the realization that there was no scientific foundation for a "minimum number" of matching "Level 2" points... and that instead the quantity and quality are used in the ACE-V process to effect reliable identifications. In the US, published scientific literature abandoned point counting in the 1940's.
In the UK, it was the late 1990's before they completely abandoned their obsolete internal rules. Contrary to popular belief and published literature, it was not a rule of law in the UK for 16 points, but a police administrative policy. They had exceptions and would make identifications on fewer points for many prints (eight, for example when there where multiple impressions) before they embraced the North American non-numerical standard.
|Posted on Monday, September 15, 2003 - 12:33 pm: ||
I had thought that England had dropped their minimum point standard, even though individual departments may still use one to help insure more accurate results. Here's a link that explains the US requirements: www.latent-prints.com/iai_standardization_committee.htm
|Posted on Monday, September 15, 2003 - 11:08 am: ||
How many "points" are necssary to confirm a match between two sets of prints? England and Scotland rerquire 14-16. HOw many in the majority of jurisdictions in the US?