Individualization is dead, long live individualization! Reforms of reporting practices for fingerprint analysis in the United States
- 21 January 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Law, Probability and Risk
- Vol. 13 (2), 117-150
- https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgt014
Abstract
Individualization, the claim to be able to reduce the potential donor pool of a forensic trace to a single source, has long been criticized. This criticism was echoed by a 2009 U.S. National Research Council report, which called such claims unsupportable for any discipline save nuclear DNA profiling. This statement demanded a response from those disciplines, such as fingerprint analysis, that have historically designated ‘individualization’ one of their approved testimonial conclusions. This article analyses three serial responses to this challenge by the U.S fingerprint profession. These responses posited new terms for testimonial reports or modified the definition of individualization. The article argues that these reforms have yet to ‘fix’ individualization and that all three reforms suffered semantic and conceptual difficulties. The article concludes by suggesting that these difficulties may be traced to the insistence on retaining, and somehow justifying, the term and concept ‘individualization’, instead of developing new terms and concepts from a defensible reasoning process.Keywords
This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Analysis of experiments in forensic firearms/toolmarks practice offered as support for low rates of practice error and claims of inferential certaintyLaw, Probability and Risk, 2012
- Addressing the National Academy of Sciences’ Challenge: A Method for Statistical Pattern Comparison of Striated Tool MarksJournal of Forensic Sciences, 2012
- The limits of social framework evidenceLaw, Probability and Risk, 2009
- Forensics without uniqueness, conclusions without individualization: the new epistemology of forensic identificationLaw, Probability and Risk, 2009
- Identification, individualization and uniqueness: What's the difference?Law, Probability and Risk, 2009
- A Calculation of the Theoretical Significance of Matched BulletsJournal of Forensic Sciences, 2008
- Authors’ ResponseJournal of Forensic Sciences, 2007
- Fingerprint examination: towards more transparencyLaw, Probability and Risk, 2007
- Two theories of the civil burden of persuasionLaw, Probability and Risk, 2003
- A hierarchy of propositions: deciding which level to address in caseworkScience & Justice, 1998