A different perspective on the forensic science crisis.

Recurrent mentions of a forensic science crisis are reported in the literature. Some 15 years ago, the discussion was focused on the backlog problem. Other issues have been regularly debated since then, including the risk of error, need for independence, importance and risk of contextualisation, increasing fragmentation into separate processes and specialisations. Proposed solutions to solve one problem often led to other issues in other parts of the process. This paper attempts to address the apparent crisis using a different perspective, through a comparison with established disciplines, namely material science, medicine and historical science. The comparison with material science shows that, despite the varied organisational and legal models and the interdisciplinary nature of the field, a common element to all forensic science endeavours exists: the trace. A greater focus on the trace might thus help the development of a holistic approach in forensic science. The comparison with medicine demonstrates that, through the overall process, the main risk shifts from the risk to overlook important hypotheses or traces at the beginning of the process (e.g. problems in the detection of traces/symptoms and formulation of hypotheses) to the risk of supporting the wrong hypothesis at the end of the process (e.g. erroneous test of the hypotheses/diagnostic). Further, in medicine, symptoms are rarely evaluated in isolation, while traces are often evaluated separately. By analogy, epidemiology illustrates forensic science's critical role in preventing crime through forensic intelligence, supporting a more extensive and more collaborative application of forensic science in security issues. The comparison with historical science also indicates that a single trace (i.e. the observed effect) is rarely sufficient to reason on its cause. Retrodiction (abduction) is proposed as an alternative reasoning approach to reconstruct events from the past based on signs uncovered in the present. Finally, the impact of science in investigating crimes is presented as an evolving process. A new trace or information can bring an entirely different light on the reconstruction of past events or prevention of future issues. Thus, issues or challenges in the first stages of the process (i.e., crime scene investigation) should be addressed in priority for subsequent stages to function correctly.

Understanding Physical Developer (PD): Part II--Is PD targeting eccrine constituents?

Physical developer (PD) is a fingermark development technique that deposits silver onto fingermark ridges. It is the only technique currently in routine operational use that gives results on porous substrates that have been wet. There is a reasonable understanding of the working solution chemistry, but the chemical constituent(s) contained in fingermark residue that are specifically targeted by PD are largely unknown. A better understanding of the PD technique will permit a more informed selection of alternative or complementary detection methods, and greater usage in operational laboratories. Recent research by our group has shown that PD does not selectively target the lipids present in the residue. This research investigated the hypothesis that PD targets the eccrine constituents in fingermark residue. This was tested by comparison of PD and indanedione-zinc (Ind-Zn) treated natural fingermarks that had been deposited successively, and marks that had been deposited with a ten second interval in between depositions. Such an interval allows for the regeneration of secretions from the pores located on the ridges of the fingers. On fingermark depletions with no time interval between depositions, PD and Ind-Zn treated depletions successively (and comparatively) decreased in development intensity as the amount of residue diminished. Short time intervals in between successive depletions resulted in additional secretions from the pores intermittently occurring, the increased development of which was visualised by treatment with both PD and Ind-Zn. The changes in development intensity were seen with both techniques on the same split depletions in a series, comparably and proportionately. These results indicate that the components targeted by PD are contained in the material excreted by the friction ridge pores through its mirrored development with Ind-Zn. Repetition of the experiments on marks that only contained eccrine material showed good Ind-Zn development but poor results with PD. This indicates that there are other constituents contained in "natural" fingermarks that are required to be present for PD to be able to target constituents in the eccrine sweat. It may be that the required constituents in the natural residues are non-water soluble, and that these protect the eccrine constituents from solubilisation in the aqueous washes employed in the PD method. Further research is being undertaken to determine whether PD is targeting specific compounds in the pore secretions, or a mixture of compounds consisting of the eccrine material, epidermal lipids and sebaceous lipids typically present in latent fingermark residues.

Styryl dye coated metal oxide powders for the detection of latent fingermarks on non-porous surfaces.

Conventional fingermark powders rely on contrast induced by absorption/reflection (e.g. black powder) or luminescence in the visible region (e.g. Blitz Green(®)). In most cases, these powders provide sufficient contrast; however, in some circumstances surface characteristics can interfere with the visualisation of powdered fingermarks. Visualisation in the near infra-red (NIR) region, however, has been shown to eliminate interferences commonly encountered in the visible region. In this study, a mixture of rhodamine 6G and the NIR laser dye styryl 11 (STaR 11) was coated onto an aluminium oxide nanopowder and then mixed with silver magnetic powder to develop and visualise fingermarks in the NIR. When compared to Blitz Green(®), it was determined that the STaR 11 magnetic powder was better suited for marks deposited on textured surfaces and for older marks, whereas Blitz Green(®) performed better on smooth glossy surfaces. The ability of the STaR 11 mixed dye formulation to be visualised in both the visible and NIR regions also provides a significant advantage over conventional luminescent fingermark powders.