Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Forgeries of Fingerprints in Forensic Science

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Biometric Anti-Spoofing

Part of the book series: Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition ((ACVPR))

Abstract

The objective of this chapter is to provide an account of the considerations made in forensic science regarding issues associated with potential forgeries of fingerprints. We will start with a clarification of terms and define the production of forgeries and the fabrication of evidence based on fingerprints. A short historical account will be given to highlight that the raised issues coincide with the early days of fingerprinting. Various methods of production of forged fingers as published in the forensic literature will then be exposed, distinguishing the techniques requiring the cooperation of the donor and the techniques without the cooperation of the donor. Examples of the various types of forgeries with associated images will be shown. The ability of forensic experts to distinguish between genuine marks and fakes will then be discussed. Although manual inspection techniques, they may also provide a reference to biometrics practitioners in their development of computerised techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “The Mark of a Master”, David Grann, The New Yorker, July 12, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/12/100712fa_fact_grann.

References

  1. Bonebreak GC (1976) Fabricating fingerprint evidence. Identification News, 3–13 Oct 1976

    Google Scholar 

  2. Midkiff C (1994) Forged and fabricated prints: their past and the future? Fingerprint Whorld 19:5–7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wertheim PA (1994) Detection of forged and fabricated latent prints. J Forensic Ident 44(6):652–681

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Wertheim PA (1998) Integrity assurance: policies and procedures to prevent fabrication of latent print evidence. J Forensic Ident 48(4):431–441

    Google Scholar 

  5. Geller B, Almog J, Margot P, Springer E (1999) A chronological review of fingerprint forgery. J Forensic Sci 44(5):963–968

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wertheim PA (2008) Latent fingerprint evidence: fabrication, not error. The Champion 16–23 Nov/Dec 2008

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wertheim PA (2000) The murder of Sir Harry Oakes. Fingerprint Whorld 26(99):9–28

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sherrer H (2011) William DePalma was framed for bank robbery by a policeman faking his fingerprint. http://justicedenied.org/wordpress/archives/1117

  9. Altbecker A (2010) Fruit of a poisoned tree: a true story of murder and the miscarriage of justice. Jonathan Ball Publishers, Jeppestown

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sherrer H (2003) Defending Mohammad: justice on trial. In: Precht RE (ed) Justice Denied Mag 25:11

    Google Scholar 

  11. Johansen GL (2001) Detection of fraudulent fingerprints. Silent Witness 35(1):8–9

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. van der Meulen LJ (1955) False fingerprints: a new aspect. J Crim Law Criminol Police Sci 46(1):122–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wertheim PA (2008) Case study: fingerprint forgery. Chesapeake Examiner 46(2):12–22

    Google Scholar 

  14. Srp LL (1949) Finger print forgeries. Finger Print Ident Mag 30(12):3–4

    Google Scholar 

  15. Berry JE (1983) A false impression. Fingerprint Whorld 8(32):107

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lovell A (1985) The Mickelberg stitch. Creative Research, Perth

    Google Scholar 

  17. Samischenko SS (1995) Forged latent prints. In: International symposium on fingerprint detection and identification, Israel National Police, pp 381–383

    Google Scholar 

  18. Groenendal H (1995) Forged latent prints. In: International symposium on fingerprint detection and identification, Israel National Police, pp 373–379

    Google Scholar 

  19. De Rechter G (1912) Des fauses empreintes digitales. Archives internationales médecine légale 3(1):215–219

    Google Scholar 

  20. Goddefroy E (1913) Peut-on produire de fausses empreintes digitales ? Archives d’anthropologie criminelle de médecine légale et de psychologie normale et pathologique 28(231):207–211

    Google Scholar 

  21. Carlson M (1920) Finger-prints can be forged. Va Law Reg 5(10):765–768

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wehde A, Beffel JN (1924) Finger-prints can be forged. The Tremonia Publishing Company, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chapel CE (1941) Fingerprinting: a manual of identification. Coward McCann, New York

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lee CD (1934) Finger-prints can be forged. J Crim Law Criminol 25(4):671–674

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cummins H (1934) Counterfeit finger-prints. J Crim Law Criminol 25(4):665–671

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Morisod P (1992) Détection des fausses empreintes digitales. Séminaire de 4ème année, Université de Lausanne/Institut de Police Scientifique et de Criminologie

    Google Scholar 

  27. Espinoza M, Champod C, Margot P (2011) Vulnerabilities of fingerprint reader to fake fingerprints attacks. Forensic Sci Int 204(1–3):41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mazzi P (2007) Optimisation de la conservation de faux doigts par modification de leur composition. Séminaire de bachelor, Université de Lausanne/Ecole des sciences criminelles/Institut de police scientifique

    Google Scholar 

  29. Giroud N (2006) Etude des risques liés à la fabrication de fausses empreintes digitales en gélatine. Séminaire de bachelor, Université de Lausanne/Ecole des sciences criminelles/Institut de police scientifique

    Google Scholar 

  30. Harper WW (1937) Fingerprint “forgery” transferred latent fingerprints. J Crim Law Criminol 28(4):573–580

    Google Scholar 

  31. Senay P (1990) Empreintes digitales falsifiées [counterfeit fingerprints]. La Gazette de la Gendarmerie Royale du Canada [Royal Canadian Mounted Police Gazette] 52(9):6–7

    Google Scholar 

  32. Scott S (2012) Fingerprint forgery and fraud—does fact mirror fiction?/the possibilities of latent print transference abridged version (part 1). Fingerprint Whorld 38(146):4–11

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kiltz S, Hildebrandt M, Dittmann J, Vielhauer C, Kraetzer C (2011) Printed fingerprints: a framework and first results towards detection of artificially printed latent fingerprints for forensics. In: Farnand SP, Gaykema F (eds) Image quality and system performance VIII, Proceedings of SPIE-IS&T electronic imaging, SPIE, vol 7867, p 78670U

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schwarz L (2009) An amino acid model for latent fingerprints on porous surfaces. J Forensic Sci 54(6):1323–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hildebrandt M, Kiltz S, Dittmann J, Vilhauer C (2011) Malicious fingerprint traces: a proposal for an automated analysis of printed amino acid dots using houghcircles. In: Thirteenth ACM multimedia workshop on multimedia and security, pp 33–39

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hildebrandt M, Kiltz S, Sturm J, Dittmann J, Vielhauer C (2012) High-resolution printed amino acid traces: a first-feature extraction approach for fingerprint forgery detection. In: Media watermarking, security and forensics, Proceedings SPIE, vol 8303, p 83030J

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bourquin AC (2011) Etude des stigmates caractéristiques des fausses traces digitales. Projet de master, Université de Lausanne/Ecole des sciences criminelles/Institut de police scientifique

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lee CD (1933) Further discussion of the evidentiary value of fingerprints. Univ PA Law Rev Am Law Reg 8(3):320–323

    Google Scholar 

  39. Geller B, Almog J, Margot P (2001) Fingerprint forgery—a survey. J Forensic Sci 46(3):731–733

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law and Criminal Justice, School of Criminal Justice, Institute of Forensic Science, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Christophe Champod & Marcela Espinoza

Authors
  1. Christophe Champod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcela Espinoza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe Champod .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Idiap Research Institute, Martigny, Switzerland

    Sébastien Marcel

  2. University of Southampton, United Kingdom

    Mark S. Nixon

  3. Institute of Automation Center for Biometrics and Security Resea, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Stan Z. Li

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Champod, C., Espinoza, M. (2014). Forgeries of Fingerprints in Forensic Science. In: Marcel, S., Nixon, M., Li, S. (eds) Handbook of Biometric Anti-Spoofing. Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6524-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6524-8_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6523-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6524-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation