Document Type
Article
Publication Version
Published Version
Publication Date
Fall 2018
Journal or Book Title
Daedalus
Volume
147
Issue
4
First Page
119
Last Page
134
DOI
10.1162/daed_a_00524
Abstract
Everyone knows that fingerprint evidence can be extremely incriminating. What is less clear is whether the way that a fingerprint examiner describes that evidence influences the weight lay jurors assign to it. This essay describes an experiment testing how lay people respond to different presentations of fingerprint evidence in a hypothetical criminal case. We find that people attach more weight to the evidence when the fingerprint examiner indicates that he believes or knows that the defendant is the source of the print. When the examiner offers a weaker, but more scientifically justifiable, conclusion, the evidence is given less weight. However, people do not value the evidence any more or less when the examiner uses very strong language to indicate that the defendant is the source of the print versus weaker source identification language. We also find that cross-examination designed to highlight weaknesses in the fingerprint evidence has no impact regardless of which type of conclusion the examiner offers. We conclude by considering implications for ongoing reform efforts.
Copyright Owner
The Authors
Copyright Date
2018
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Recommended Citation
Kadane, Joseph B. and Koehler, Jonathan J., "Certainty & Uncertainty in Reporting Fingerprint Evidence" (2018). CSAFE Publications. 12.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/csafe_pubs/12
Comments
This article is published as Kadane, Joseph B., and Jonathan J. Koehler. "Certainty & Uncertainty in Reporting Fingerprint Evidence." Daedalus 147, no. 4 (2018): 119-134.