Post Number: 39
|Posted on Saturday, December 24, 2011 - 05:33 pm: ||
The difficulty in developing identifiable latent finger or palm prints on firearms and related materials such as magazines and cartridge casings (from fired or unexpended ammunition) has been documented in several studies.
In one study1 by ATF scientists, 1,000 firearms were examined, resulting in a total of 114 identifiable latent prints developed on 93 weapons. Factors negatively impacting the recovery of identifiable latent prints in that study include "how it (the print) was deposited, atmospheric and environmental conditions, perspiration variation, the nature of the firearmís (and magazines, ammo, etc.) surface and finish, how the firearm was handled, and packaging."
1 Barnum, Clive A. and Klasey, Darrell R.; "Factors Affecting the Recovery of Latent Prints on Firearms"; Journal of Forensic Identification, Vol 47 (2), 1997, pages 141-149.
C.M. Adams (Challenger)
Post Number: 1
|Posted on Thursday, December 22, 2011 - 02:18 am: ||
I am a digital forensics investigator out of my league and expertise investigating a death that wasbruled a suicide by the local LEOs. My wife's family asked me because I am the only investigator they know. In addition to a $1,000,000 USD inheritance that is not even mentioned in the agency report, we now know that no latent prints were developed on the gun, the magazine, the 3 remaining live rounds in the mag., the one live round in the chamber, and the expended shell casing. One of our family members is a Federal LEO in Arizona and he tells us that sometimes prints don't show on the gun, but to not find any on the magazine, and the rounds, and the casing, all from a gun made in 1971, is without precedent to the best of his knowledge. At least for a suicide.
What do you folks think?