Fingerprint evidence under scrutiny: Issues raised by six international forensic reports (Part 2)

• Author: Meintjes-van der Walt, L.
• Date: 06 July 2020
• Citation: (2020) 33 SACJ 168
• Pages: 168-191
• Published date: 06 July 2020

Fingerprint evidence under

scrutiny: Issues raised by six

international forensic reports

(part 2)

LIRIEKA MEINTJES-VAN DER WALT*

AND MERCY CHIWARA**

ABSTRACT

Part 1 of this ar ticle, separately published in 2019 (32(2)) SACJ 155, scrutinises

the Mayeld Report and t he NAS Report with rega rd to ngerprint

evidence. This sect ion, Part 2 of the art icle, specically inter rogates

the 2011 Scottish Fingerprint I nquiry Repor t (SFI Report) (consisting of

750 pages); the 2012 National Institute of Science and Technology Repor t

(NIST Report) (consisting of 249 pages), the 2016 Forensic Science in

Criminal C ourts: Ensuring Sc ientic Validity of Feature- Comparison Methods

Report by the President’s Council of Adv isors on Science and Technology

(PCAST Report) (consisting of 174 pages) and the 2017 Forensic Science

Assessments: AQ uality and Gap A nalysis: Latent Fingerpri nt Examination

of the American A ssociation for the Advancement of Science (AAAS Repor t)

(consisting of 166 pages). In this article, the summ aries of these exten sive

and incisive reports and t he recommendations conta ined therein, clearly

reect a start ling similar ity in the ndi ngs of the different repor ts. It is

pointed out that all the rep orts register per tinent challenges faced by

ngerprint evidence wit h regard to validity and r eliability. The article

concludes by asserting that S outh Africa m ight well heed the challenges

and shortcomings regist ered by these reports when de ciding on the relative

weight that should be attached to nger print evidence.

* BJuris LLB (UPE); LL M (Rhodes); LLD (Rijksunversiteit Leide n), Adjunct Professor of

Law, Leader of the Law, Science and Justice Rese arch Niche Area, University of Fort

Hare.

** LLB; LL M (University of Fort Ha re).

ARTICLES

168168

(2020) 33 SACJ 168

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

1 The Scottish Fingerprint Inquiry Report 2011

The third repor t that is examined below is the so -called Fingerprint

Inquiry repor t conducted in Scotland (hereafter SF I Report).1 In 2011,

this report, compiled by Judge Campbell, af ter Shirley McKie was

considered connected to a murder case by one ngerprint on ly, echoed

the challenges against ngerpr int evidence raised in the Mayeld

Report and the NAS Report.

1.1 The factual background of HM Advocate v McKie (1999)

In 1997, Ms Marion Margaret Campbell Ross was murdered and found

dead in her house in Kilma rnock, Scotland. Four hundred and t wenty-eight

ngerprints were found at the crime scene and were sent to the Fingerpr int

Bureau of the Scottish Crim inal Record Ofce (hereaf ter the SCRO).2

The SCRO identied a latent print marked Y7 as M s McKie’s ngerprint.3

Ms McKie was part of the team wh ich investigated the death of Ms Ross.

Another ngerprint li fted from a gif t tag in the house marked XF was

identied as Mr David Asbur y’s. The trial proceeded and Mr A sbury was

convicted of the murder of Ms Ross. During the tr ial, issues arose against

the provenance of some ngerprints and suggestions of planti ng were

made. However, no issue arose with any of the identications made by

SCRO.4 Ms McK ie was one of the witnesses and she gave evidence about

her involvement in the murder investigation. In her evidence she denied

that the ngerprint att ributed to her was hers, she denied being in the

house of the deceased beyond the porch.5 Subsequently, Shirley McKie

was charged with perjur y and the grounds that justi ed her conviction

were that she had testied falsely under oath.6

Mr Pat Wertheim and Mr David Grieve, two American  ngerprint

experts, in 1999 raised questions w ith regard to the identication of

Y7 in the McKie case a nd as a consequence of this Ms McKie was

unanimously acquitted by the jur y.7 After the acquitt al, her father, Mr Iain

McKie, questioned certai n aspects of the prosecution of Ms McKie

and expressed concerns regarding the conduct and the tr aining of

1 A Campbell The Fingerpr int Inquiry Report (2011) (S FI Repor t).

2 SFI Report op cit (n1) 31.

3 SFI Report op cit (n1) 31.

4 SFI Report op cit (n1) 31.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

Fingerprint evidence under scrutiny: Issues raised

by six international forensic reports (part 2) 169

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd