1
00:00:00,960 --> 00:00:04,520
Speaker 1: It's Friday night. You hop in the shower, then put

2
00:00:04,519 --> 00:00:07,960
Speaker 1: on your favorite blue button down shirt. You look at

3
00:00:07,960 --> 00:00:10,719
Speaker 1: yourself in the mirror and hype yourself up a bit.

4
00:00:11,640 --> 00:00:14,440
Speaker 1: You're forty years old, but you've taken good care of

5
00:00:14,480 --> 00:00:17,599
Speaker 1: yourself over the years and still look pretty damn good.

6
00:00:19,280 --> 00:00:21,400
Speaker 1: You head out, and when you get to the club,

7
00:00:21,440 --> 00:00:24,280
Speaker 1: you see your friend Alvin standing outside on the corner

8
00:00:24,360 --> 00:00:28,080
Speaker 1: waiting for you. You smile because Alvin's always a good time.

9
00:00:28,600 --> 00:00:30,680
Speaker 1: He might be the only person who can keep up

10
00:00:30,680 --> 00:00:34,199
Speaker 1: with you when you dance all night. You both head

11
00:00:34,280 --> 00:00:37,159
Speaker 1: inside and grab a drink, catch up a little bit,

12
00:00:37,320 --> 00:00:40,880
Speaker 1: and then hit the dance floor. The place is all

13
00:00:40,960 --> 00:00:44,880
Speaker 1: bass and flashing lights. Neither one of you stops moving

14
00:00:44,960 --> 00:00:47,840
Speaker 1: until they turn off the music and the DJ tells

15
00:00:47,880 --> 00:00:51,240
Speaker 1: everyone it's closing time. Time to get out of here.

16
00:00:52,159 --> 00:00:53,960
Speaker 1: When you get outside the club, you say goodbye to

17
00:00:54,040 --> 00:00:56,440
Speaker 1: Alvin because you have to get up early in the morning.

18
00:00:56,720 --> 00:00:58,600
Speaker 1: You're not going to go back to his place tonight.

19
00:01:00,120 --> 00:01:02,880
Speaker 1: You give Alvin a call the next weekend, but there's

20
00:01:02,880 --> 00:01:07,000
Speaker 1: no answer. You don't think much of it because Alvin

21
00:01:07,080 --> 00:01:10,280
Speaker 1: sometimes just doesn't answer his phone. He's the kind of

22
00:01:10,280 --> 00:01:14,280
Speaker 1: guy that does his own thing. But then a few

23
00:01:14,360 --> 00:01:18,200
Speaker 1: days later, you get a call from another friend. He

24
00:01:18,240 --> 00:01:21,600
Speaker 1: tells you he passed by Alvin's house and there were

25
00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:26,800
Speaker 1: police officers surrounding it. They said that Alvin had been murdered.

26
00:01:28,160 --> 00:01:31,160
Speaker 1: You hang up and immediately head to the police station.

27
00:01:31,840 --> 00:01:35,000
Speaker 1: You want to help figure out who did this. You

28
00:01:35,080 --> 00:01:38,160
Speaker 1: meet with detectives and you find out that Alvin was

29
00:01:38,240 --> 00:01:41,560
Speaker 1: murdered on the night you went dancing with him, but

30
00:01:41,640 --> 00:01:46,400
Speaker 1: he wasn't discovered until nine days later. His landlord found

31
00:01:46,480 --> 00:01:48,960
Speaker 1: him on the floor of his apartment, and you hear

32
00:01:49,080 --> 00:01:53,080
Speaker 1: all this, and you're just immediately nauseous. If you had

33
00:01:53,160 --> 00:01:55,840
Speaker 1: stayed at his house that night, maybe you could have

34
00:01:55,920 --> 00:01:59,760
Speaker 1: protected him. You tell the police everything you can remember

35
00:02:00,240 --> 00:02:03,920
Speaker 1: that night. You want to do anything you can to

36
00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:06,279
Speaker 1: help them find out who did this to your friend.

37
00:02:09,520 --> 00:02:12,120
Speaker 1: The police call you in four times over the next

38
00:02:12,120 --> 00:02:16,200
Speaker 1: two weeks as they investigate Alvin's murder. One day, they

39
00:02:16,240 --> 00:02:19,440
Speaker 1: tell you they're taking fingerprints of everyone who had been

40
00:02:19,480 --> 00:02:23,239
Speaker 1: around Alvin in the days preceding his death. They tell

41
00:02:23,280 --> 00:02:25,920
Speaker 1: you that by allowing them to take your prints, it'll

42
00:02:25,919 --> 00:02:28,840
Speaker 1: help them figure out who committed the murder. Part of

43
00:02:28,880 --> 00:02:31,480
Speaker 1: you feels like you're in an episode of some detective

44
00:02:31,520 --> 00:02:34,320
Speaker 1: show when they press the tips of your fingers and

45
00:02:34,400 --> 00:02:37,679
Speaker 1: the palms of your hands on a cold inkpad, then

46
00:02:37,840 --> 00:02:40,360
Speaker 1: roll the tips of your fingers one by one on

47
00:02:40,400 --> 00:02:43,680
Speaker 1: a piece of paper. You've seen this process what seems

48
00:02:43,720 --> 00:02:46,800
Speaker 1: like hundreds of times before on TV and in the movies,

49
00:02:47,280 --> 00:02:50,640
Speaker 1: but you've never actually done it yourself. You have no record.

50
00:02:50,840 --> 00:02:55,040
Speaker 1: You've never been fingerprinted before. Not long after that, the

51
00:02:55,080 --> 00:02:57,760
Speaker 1: police call you into the station one more time, but

52
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:04,919
Speaker 1: something has shifted. They bring you into an interrogation room.

53
00:03:05,440 --> 00:03:08,840
Speaker 1: The first thing they do is show you a polaroid

54
00:03:09,120 --> 00:03:13,760
Speaker 1: of Alvin's body. You immediately feel fluid bubble into your

55
00:03:13,960 --> 00:03:17,919
Speaker 1: esophagus and you quickly scan the room for a garbage can.

56
00:03:18,200 --> 00:03:21,800
Speaker 1: Your mind quickly computes shit if IPU in front of

57
00:03:21,800 --> 00:03:25,800
Speaker 1: these cops, they'll think I did this. You manage to

58
00:03:25,919 --> 00:03:29,400
Speaker 1: swallow the vomit and there's a sharp burn in your throat.

59
00:03:30,560 --> 00:03:33,600
Speaker 1: Then they show you another picture and Alvin is flat

60
00:03:33,639 --> 00:03:38,520
Speaker 1: on his back. There's blood everywhere, on his clothes, the

61
00:03:38,600 --> 00:03:41,120
Speaker 1: carpet next to him. You can't even see his face.

62
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:44,720
Speaker 1: Whoever did this? Put Alvin's big white box fan over

63
00:03:44,760 --> 00:03:47,400
Speaker 1: his head and shoulders, so you can't see the top

64
00:03:47,440 --> 00:03:50,080
Speaker 1: portion of his body. You used to make fun of

65
00:03:50,080 --> 00:03:52,800
Speaker 1: Alvin for that fan. You were always telling him just

66
00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:56,440
Speaker 1: to invest in a damn ac unit. Already the whole

67
00:03:56,440 --> 00:04:01,040
Speaker 1: thing seems so surreal. And now the office are pointing

68
00:04:01,080 --> 00:04:03,720
Speaker 1: at the fan in the picture and they say, you

69
00:04:03,760 --> 00:04:07,640
Speaker 1: see those bloody smudges on the fan, Those are fingerprints

70
00:04:08,200 --> 00:04:10,280
Speaker 1: and the prince we took from you the other day.

71
00:04:10,920 --> 00:04:14,280
Speaker 1: We've collected over a dozen fingerprints of people who were

72
00:04:14,360 --> 00:04:18,719
Speaker 1: in Alvin's apartment before he was murdered, and only yours

73
00:04:18,760 --> 00:04:21,560
Speaker 1: matched the prints on that fan. There were no signs

74
00:04:21,560 --> 00:04:24,280
Speaker 1: of break in at his apartment, but you didn't have

75
00:04:24,360 --> 00:04:27,440
Speaker 1: to break in, did you. Alvin let you in after

76
00:04:27,560 --> 00:04:30,680
Speaker 1: your night out together. Then you got in an argument

77
00:04:30,760 --> 00:04:33,320
Speaker 1: with him. You got jealous that he was dancing with

78
00:04:33,400 --> 00:04:37,320
Speaker 1: other men, and you stabbed him to death, didn't you.

79
00:04:37,320 --> 00:04:40,119
Speaker 1: You stare at the officer and disbelieve no. You say,

80
00:04:40,160 --> 00:04:43,119
Speaker 1: what are you talking about? Why would I come here

81
00:04:43,160 --> 00:04:45,919
Speaker 1: willingly to help you guys out if I had anything

82
00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:49,599
Speaker 1: to do with this. They don't listen to a word

83
00:04:49,680 --> 00:04:53,160
Speaker 1: you say. They put handcuffs on you and put you

84
00:04:53,240 --> 00:05:02,120
Speaker 1: in custody at your trial. Prosecution calls a fingerprint expert

85
00:05:02,200 --> 00:05:06,480
Speaker 1: to the stan. He says, before we're even born as

86
00:05:06,560 --> 00:05:10,360
Speaker 1: fetuses in the womb, human beings develop ridges on their

87
00:05:10,400 --> 00:05:14,159
Speaker 1: fingers and hands. In addition to those ridges, we have

88
00:05:14,320 --> 00:05:18,200
Speaker 1: glands that secrete oils, so that when we touch objects,

89
00:05:18,440 --> 00:05:21,880
Speaker 1: the whorls, loops, and swirl pattern of those ridges are

90
00:05:21,960 --> 00:05:26,400
Speaker 1: left behind. Fingerprint analysis has been around for over one

91
00:05:26,520 --> 00:05:30,200
Speaker 1: hundred years, and we know that each of our fingerprints

92
00:05:30,279 --> 00:05:34,240
Speaker 1: are unique. The fingerprints were covered from this crime scene

93
00:05:34,400 --> 00:05:37,479
Speaker 1: were visible to the naked eye because they were left

94
00:05:37,520 --> 00:05:41,960
Speaker 1: as impressions in the victim's blood. I analyze these prints

95
00:05:42,279 --> 00:05:46,320
Speaker 1: and compare them to defining characteristics of the defendants prints.

96
00:05:47,120 --> 00:05:50,919
Speaker 1: The bloody prints found near the victim's body clearly belonged

97
00:05:51,000 --> 00:05:54,560
Speaker 1: to the defendant. I am one hundred percent certain about this.

98
00:05:55,680 --> 00:05:59,120
Speaker 1: The prosecution calls two more fingerprint experts to the stand,

99
00:06:00,000 --> 00:06:04,839
Speaker 1: and they all agree these are your prints. But your

100
00:06:04,880 --> 00:06:08,640
Speaker 1: attorney calls two witnesses to the stand, fingerprint experts that

101
00:06:08,720 --> 00:06:12,360
Speaker 1: claim it isn't even close. There's no way these prints

102
00:06:12,360 --> 00:06:16,160
Speaker 1: belong to you. The jury isn't phased by the conflicting

103
00:06:16,160 --> 00:06:19,960
Speaker 1: opinions of the expert witnesses. They are convinced by the

104
00:06:20,000 --> 00:06:24,280
Speaker 1: impassioned story that the prosecutor laid out. They convict you

105
00:06:24,320 --> 00:06:28,479
Speaker 1: of first degree murder and abuse of a corpse. Your

106
00:06:28,600 --> 00:06:33,039
Speaker 1: sentenced to life without parole. There is shouting in the

107
00:06:33,040 --> 00:06:36,200
Speaker 1: courtroom as you're escorted out by cops with your hands

108
00:06:36,240 --> 00:06:40,400
Speaker 1: cuffed tightly behind your back. You can't understand why this

109
00:06:40,480 --> 00:06:45,200
Speaker 1: is happening. What is going on? Those are not your fingerprints.

110
00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:51,400
Speaker 1: You feel totally and completely helpless, But lucky for you,

111
00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:56,479
Speaker 1: this isn't the end. The fingerprint experts that testified in

112
00:06:56,520 --> 00:07:00,440
Speaker 1: your defense call this conviction a gross miscarriage of justice.

113
00:07:00,960 --> 00:07:05,200
Speaker 1: They demand that the evidence be reevaluated. A panel of

114
00:07:05,240 --> 00:07:09,840
Speaker 1: experts do just that and find that the prosecution's evaluation

115
00:07:10,120 --> 00:07:13,760
Speaker 1: was clearly wrong. The prints at the crime scene clearly

116
00:07:13,800 --> 00:07:17,800
Speaker 1: do not match your fingerprints. One of the experts for

117
00:07:17,840 --> 00:07:21,960
Speaker 1: the prosecution admits he made a mistake. You're afforded a

118
00:07:22,000 --> 00:07:26,160
Speaker 1: new trial and you are found not guilty. But this

119
00:07:26,240 --> 00:07:31,240
Speaker 1: process takes two agonizing years, and after serving that amount

120
00:07:31,240 --> 00:07:34,120
Speaker 1: of time in prison for a crime you never committed,

121
00:07:34,320 --> 00:07:41,480
Speaker 1: the murder of your friend, you're released. The story you

122
00:07:41,640 --> 00:07:44,760
Speaker 1: just heard is based on the true story of Richard Jackson,

123
00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:48,320
Speaker 1: who was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to life without parole

124
00:07:48,720 --> 00:07:51,360
Speaker 1: for the murder of his friend Alvin Davis in nineteen

125
00:07:51,440 --> 00:07:55,440
Speaker 1: ninety eight. While fingerprint analysis has been proven to be

126
00:07:55,480 --> 00:07:59,600
Speaker 1: purely subjective, it still holds a firm place in the

127
00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:07,160
Speaker 1: public imagination and therefore enjures minds as reliable science. I'm

128
00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:11,280
Speaker 1: Josh Dubin civil rights and criminal defense attorney, an innocent

129
00:08:11,400 --> 00:08:15,320
Speaker 1: ambassador to the Innocence Project in New York. Today, on

130
00:08:15,440 --> 00:08:21,400
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction Junk Science, we examined fingerprint evidence. Contrary to

131
00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:25,440
Speaker 1: what pop culture has ingrained in the American conscience. Matching

132
00:08:25,600 --> 00:08:28,800
Speaker 1: known prints of a suspect the prince left at the

133
00:08:28,840 --> 00:08:32,560
Speaker 1: scene of a crime is not an exact science. It

134
00:08:32,640 --> 00:08:36,520
Speaker 1: is entirely subjective, up to the eye of the examiner.

135
00:08:37,640 --> 00:08:41,240
Speaker 1: So how did fingerprints become so widely accepted and thought

136
00:08:41,280 --> 00:08:45,520
Speaker 1: of as the gold standard as full proof evidence. It

137
00:08:45,600 --> 00:08:48,800
Speaker 1: turns out that the first time fingerprints were admitted into

138
00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:52,400
Speaker 1: evidence was almost one hundred and ten years ago, and

139
00:08:52,440 --> 00:08:56,240
Speaker 1: the methods used to match prints to individuals hasn't changed

140
00:08:56,320 --> 00:08:56,880
Speaker 1: much since.

141
00:09:01,920 --> 00:09:04,960
Speaker 2: The Pacers Foundation is a proud supporter of this episode

142
00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:08,400
Speaker 2: and of the Last Mile organization, which provides business and

143
00:09:08,520 --> 00:09:13,319
Speaker 2: tech training to help incarcerated individuals successfully and permanently re

144
00:09:13,520 --> 00:09:17,200
Speaker 2: enter the workforce. The Pacers Foundation is committed to improving

145
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:22,000
Speaker 2: the lives of Hoosiers across Indiana, supporting organizations dedicated primarily

146
00:09:22,040 --> 00:09:25,560
Speaker 2: to helping young people and students. For more information on

147
00:09:25,640 --> 00:09:28,600
Speaker 2: the work of the Pacers Foundation or the Last Mile Program,

148
00:09:28,760 --> 00:09:32,800
Speaker 2: visit Pacersfoundation dot org or the Lastmile dot org.

149
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:42,880
Speaker 1: As Clarence Hiller painted the railing outside his home in

150
00:09:42,880 --> 00:09:46,840
Speaker 1: the early evening of September eighteenth, nineteen ten, he couldn't

151
00:09:46,880 --> 00:09:50,079
Speaker 1: stop looking over his shoulder. It seemed like the entire

152
00:09:50,200 --> 00:09:53,040
Speaker 1: South Side of Chicago was on edge. There had been

153
00:09:53,080 --> 00:09:56,040
Speaker 1: a number of robberies in the area, and everyone was

154
00:09:56,080 --> 00:09:59,480
Speaker 1: worried that they could be the next victim, And so

155
00:09:59,720 --> 00:10:02,120
Speaker 1: in the the middle of that night, when Clarence heard

156
00:10:02,120 --> 00:10:05,040
Speaker 1: the screams of his wife and daughter, he was prepared

157
00:10:05,080 --> 00:10:08,840
Speaker 1: to launch into action. He confronted the stranger in his house,

158
00:10:09,040 --> 00:10:11,600
Speaker 1: and as Clarence tried to force the man out, both

159
00:10:11,679 --> 00:10:15,840
Speaker 1: the robber and Clarence fell down the stairs. Three shots

160
00:10:15,840 --> 00:10:19,520
Speaker 1: were fired, the intruder fled, and his neighbors came outside

161
00:10:19,520 --> 00:10:22,040
Speaker 1: and their slippers and robes to see what had happened.

162
00:10:22,520 --> 00:10:25,920
Speaker 1: They found Clarence bleeding just outside his front door with

163
00:10:26,000 --> 00:10:29,560
Speaker 1: his daughter standing over him. The police were called and

164
00:10:29,760 --> 00:10:33,200
Speaker 1: a suspect, Thomas Jennings, was found just eight blocks away.

165
00:10:33,880 --> 00:10:36,720
Speaker 1: His coat was torn and bloody, and he was carrying

166
00:10:36,760 --> 00:10:41,120
Speaker 1: a revolver. Thomas Jennings was ultimately convicted, but this wasn't

167
00:10:41,120 --> 00:10:45,160
Speaker 1: the only evidence used in his prosecution. When Thomas Jennings

168
00:10:45,160 --> 00:10:48,200
Speaker 1: climbed into the Hiller's home that night, he grabbed onto

169
00:10:48,240 --> 00:10:51,360
Speaker 1: the railing that Clarence was painting the night before, leaving

170
00:10:51,440 --> 00:10:54,280
Speaker 1: a fingerprint behind in a semi wet coat of paint.

171
00:10:55,240 --> 00:10:57,560
Speaker 1: The prosecution cut off the piece of the rail with

172
00:10:57,600 --> 00:11:01,520
Speaker 1: the fingerprint that Jennings left behind. At his murder trial,

173
00:11:01,880 --> 00:11:05,120
Speaker 1: jennings defense attorney argued that this new forensic method of

174
00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:08,800
Speaker 1: lifting and comparing fingerprints couldn't be trusted. There were no

175
00:11:08,920 --> 00:11:12,240
Speaker 1: tests that could prove that it was reliable. But then

176
00:11:12,440 --> 00:11:15,360
Speaker 1: the prosecutor got in front of the jury and pressed

177
00:11:15,360 --> 00:11:18,599
Speaker 1: his finger onto a piece of paper. He then demonstrated

178
00:11:18,640 --> 00:11:20,760
Speaker 1: how he was able to lift his own print off

179
00:11:20,800 --> 00:11:23,600
Speaker 1: of it. By proving that he could collect the evidence

180
00:11:24,000 --> 00:11:26,120
Speaker 1: he was able to convince the jury that it was

181
00:11:26,240 --> 00:11:30,960
Speaker 1: also possible to accurately analyze and match it to a suspect.

182
00:11:31,760 --> 00:11:35,720
Speaker 1: The judge ruled that fingerprint testimony was admissible and Jennings

183
00:11:35,760 --> 00:11:40,120
Speaker 1: was convicted. The precedent of admitting fingerprints has been upheld

184
00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:43,360
Speaker 1: again and again, despite the fact that numerous men and

185
00:11:43,400 --> 00:11:48,360
Speaker 1: women have been falsely identified through fingerprint evidence. For example,

186
00:11:48,400 --> 00:11:50,880
Speaker 1: on March eleventh, two thousand and four, there were a

187
00:11:50,880 --> 00:11:54,720
Speaker 1: series of explosions in Madrid during rush hour. Ten bombs

188
00:11:54,760 --> 00:11:57,600
Speaker 1: went off, all within two minutes of each other. One

189
00:11:57,679 --> 00:12:00,760
Speaker 1: hundred and ninety three people died in almost two thousand

190
00:12:00,760 --> 00:12:05,720
Speaker 1: were injured. Upon investigation, Spanish authorities found a fingerprint on

191
00:12:05,720 --> 00:12:09,160
Speaker 1: one of the plastic bags that contained a detonator. They

192
00:12:09,240 --> 00:12:12,440
Speaker 1: photographed it, then reached out to countries around the world

193
00:12:12,440 --> 00:12:15,480
Speaker 1: to help find the culprits of the attack. The US

194
00:12:15,520 --> 00:12:19,160
Speaker 1: authorities ran the print through a database of fingerprints. Twenty

195
00:12:19,240 --> 00:12:23,520
Speaker 1: possible matches appeared. One of them was Brandon Mayfield, but

196
00:12:23,600 --> 00:12:26,960
Speaker 1: Brandon Mayfield hadn't left the country in ten years. He

197
00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:30,640
Speaker 1: didn't even have a valid passport. FBI analysts had no

198
00:12:30,760 --> 00:12:32,920
Speaker 1: idea how Mayfield would have been able to fly to

199
00:12:32,960 --> 00:12:36,839
Speaker 1: Spain and back completely undetected, and yet they pursued him

200
00:12:36,840 --> 00:12:40,360
Speaker 1: as a suspect. It turns out that Brandon had converted

201
00:12:40,400 --> 00:12:44,319
Speaker 1: to Islam after marrying his Egyptian wife, and so American

202
00:12:44,360 --> 00:12:47,640
Speaker 1: authorities must have seen him as a convenient suspect just

203
00:12:47,720 --> 00:12:51,439
Speaker 1: a few years after nine to eleven. In fact, despite

204
00:12:51,480 --> 00:12:54,800
Speaker 1: evidence that showed that it was extremely unlikely that Brandon

205
00:12:54,800 --> 00:12:57,760
Speaker 1: had left the Prince on that back, three different FBI

206
00:12:57,800 --> 00:13:01,679
Speaker 1: agents testified that the prince found in Spain matched Mayfields.

207
00:13:02,120 --> 00:13:05,400
Speaker 1: They said that it matched with one hundred percent certainty.

208
00:13:05,920 --> 00:13:09,040
Speaker 1: They arrested Mayfield, and while he sat in jail, the

209
00:13:09,120 --> 00:13:12,680
Speaker 1: FBI tried to convince the Spanish authorities that these prints

210
00:13:12,679 --> 00:13:15,840
Speaker 1: were Mayfields, but the Spanish police didn't see what the

211
00:13:15,880 --> 00:13:18,880
Speaker 1: FBI saw. The prince didn't seem to match it all,

212
00:13:18,920 --> 00:13:22,080
Speaker 1: from their perspective, a far cry from a match with

213
00:13:22,080 --> 00:13:25,319
Speaker 1: one hundred percent certainty. They said that when they compared

214
00:13:25,360 --> 00:13:27,960
Speaker 1: Mayfield's prince to the ones on the bag, it was

215
00:13:28,160 --> 00:13:33,880
Speaker 1: quote conclusively negative. They eventually did find a match for

216
00:13:33,920 --> 00:13:37,160
Speaker 1: the fingerprints and apprehended the man who left them behind

217
00:13:37,240 --> 00:13:40,320
Speaker 1: during the attack. The FBI admitted that they made a

218
00:13:40,360 --> 00:13:45,000
Speaker 1: mistake in pursuing Mayfield and let him walk free. Mayfield

219
00:13:45,040 --> 00:13:48,439
Speaker 1: is now probably the best known case of mistaken fingerprints,

220
00:13:49,040 --> 00:13:57,760
Speaker 1: but he certainly isn't the only one.

221
00:13:54,280 --> 00:13:57,360
Speaker 3: And we probably can guess if the Spanish police hadn't

222
00:13:57,400 --> 00:14:00,520
Speaker 3: been involved, or if they didn't have DNA, imagine this

223
00:14:00,520 --> 00:14:03,480
Speaker 3: case in the United States. Mister Mayfield would have been convicted.

224
00:14:04,320 --> 00:14:09,680
Speaker 3: How would his defense lawyer have attacked three FBI agents

225
00:14:09,720 --> 00:14:12,160
Speaker 3: with all of this experience, who claimed with one hundred

226
00:14:12,160 --> 00:14:15,880
Speaker 3: percent certainty that this print belonged to mister Mayfield. But

227
00:14:16,200 --> 00:14:21,440
Speaker 3: here's the point here. You could assume that three fingerprint

228
00:14:21,480 --> 00:14:25,840
Speaker 3: examiners with decades of experience who were certified, followed the

229
00:14:25,880 --> 00:14:28,400
Speaker 3: process and they were all wrong.

230
00:14:30,240 --> 00:14:34,640
Speaker 1: Joining us today is Mary Moriarty, the chief public Defender

231
00:14:34,720 --> 00:14:38,080
Speaker 1: of Hennepin County in Minnesota, and I'm really excited to

232
00:14:38,080 --> 00:14:41,960
Speaker 1: have her as a guest. She is a staunch defender

233
00:14:42,000 --> 00:14:45,080
Speaker 1: of the rights of the accused, an outspoken one of that,

234
00:14:45,200 --> 00:14:49,120
Speaker 1: and we need more public defenders like that in our country.

235
00:14:49,280 --> 00:14:53,080
Speaker 1: She has worked to challenge the admission of fingerprints. So, Mary,

236
00:14:53,160 --> 00:14:55,440
Speaker 1: tell us a little bit about how you first became

237
00:14:55,520 --> 00:14:56,760
Speaker 1: interested in fingerprints.

238
00:14:57,600 --> 00:15:01,280
Speaker 3: So it goes back to when I as a child. Actually,

239
00:15:01,320 --> 00:15:03,880
Speaker 3: if you notice, my last name is Moriarty, and I

240
00:15:03,920 --> 00:15:08,440
Speaker 3: had a particular interest in Sherlock Holmes, and I got

241
00:15:08,720 --> 00:15:13,600
Speaker 3: for Christmas one year the Hardy Boys book that talked

242
00:15:13,640 --> 00:15:17,040
Speaker 3: about how to collect evidence, and one of the things

243
00:15:17,080 --> 00:15:20,960
Speaker 3: I had in there was a recipe for fingerprint powder,

244
00:15:21,440 --> 00:15:25,760
Speaker 3: and so I would go take my parents' glasses, wineglasses,

245
00:15:25,800 --> 00:15:28,080
Speaker 3: that kind of thing, and I would dust them for prints.

246
00:15:28,080 --> 00:15:30,200
Speaker 3: I would put tape over it and I would lift

247
00:15:30,200 --> 00:15:33,000
Speaker 3: the print. But I never really thought, well, what do

248
00:15:33,040 --> 00:15:36,239
Speaker 3: you do after that? It was just an interesting exercise

249
00:15:36,440 --> 00:15:40,080
Speaker 3: in taking items that I knew my parents had touched

250
00:15:40,160 --> 00:15:43,200
Speaker 3: and actually trying to lift the prints from them.

251
00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:46,320
Speaker 1: Well, I think I was like screwing around with a

252
00:15:46,400 --> 00:15:48,840
Speaker 1: Rubik's cube and playing with Gi Joe figures. So this

253
00:15:48,960 --> 00:15:52,320
Speaker 1: makes me feel a little bit insecure about what I

254
00:15:52,400 --> 00:15:55,200
Speaker 1: was doing as a kid. But it certainly sounds like

255
00:15:55,600 --> 00:15:59,320
Speaker 1: you were headed towards a career involving forensics in the law.

256
00:15:59,400 --> 00:15:59,960
Speaker 1: For a while.

257
00:16:00,680 --> 00:16:04,200
Speaker 3: My father was actually a public defender, and some of

258
00:16:04,200 --> 00:16:08,320
Speaker 3: my dad's clients were actually my classmates, and I got

259
00:16:08,320 --> 00:16:13,160
Speaker 3: to know them as individuals. There's an attempt to otherwise

260
00:16:13,480 --> 00:16:17,440
Speaker 3: people who become public defender clients. And you know, the

261
00:16:17,480 --> 00:16:20,280
Speaker 3: age old question that public defenders get asked is how

262
00:16:20,280 --> 00:16:23,480
Speaker 3: can you represent those people? And it's very easy because

263
00:16:23,520 --> 00:16:28,600
Speaker 3: those people are our brothers, our dads, our sisters, our cousins.

264
00:16:29,040 --> 00:16:31,600
Speaker 3: And you look at what those clients have been through,

265
00:16:32,040 --> 00:16:34,760
Speaker 3: and so many of them have a history of trauma,

266
00:16:35,280 --> 00:16:40,000
Speaker 3: you can understand why they find themselves in these particular situations.

267
00:16:40,520 --> 00:16:43,560
Speaker 3: And I think growing up my parents fostered a really

268
00:16:43,640 --> 00:16:47,600
Speaker 3: strong sense of justice in my life. In every situation,

269
00:16:47,720 --> 00:16:50,080
Speaker 3: they would sit me down and say, you know, what

270
00:16:50,520 --> 00:16:53,920
Speaker 3: is the right thing to do here? So fast forward

271
00:16:54,200 --> 00:16:57,240
Speaker 3: when I went to law school. Once I finally made

272
00:16:57,240 --> 00:16:59,400
Speaker 3: that decision, I knew that there was only one thing

273
00:16:59,440 --> 00:17:02,080
Speaker 3: that I wanted to be and that was a public defender.

274
00:17:02,120 --> 00:17:05,400
Speaker 3: I wanted to be in a courtroom representing the same

275
00:17:05,440 --> 00:17:18,080
Speaker 3: people that I got to know through my father's practice.

276
00:17:19,240 --> 00:17:22,240
Speaker 1: All Right, so you became an attorney and got a

277
00:17:22,320 --> 00:17:24,280
Speaker 1: chance to right some of the wrongs that you saw

278
00:17:24,520 --> 00:17:28,320
Speaker 1: the system. But what were your thoughts about fingerprints when

279
00:17:28,320 --> 00:17:29,480
Speaker 1: you first started out?

280
00:17:30,400 --> 00:17:32,919
Speaker 3: I have to acknowledge. So I've been a public defender

281
00:17:32,960 --> 00:17:36,359
Speaker 3: for thirty years and I certainly had fingerprint cases, and

282
00:17:36,520 --> 00:17:40,679
Speaker 3: I also accepted without questioning that they were based on

283
00:17:40,760 --> 00:17:45,520
Speaker 3: science and that an expert could actually testify that a

284
00:17:45,840 --> 00:17:50,560
Speaker 3: single finger made this print from the crime scene. And

285
00:17:50,800 --> 00:17:55,120
Speaker 3: fingerprints have been accepted as evidence in courts for over

286
00:17:55,200 --> 00:17:59,400
Speaker 3: one hundred years, and people assume that it's reliable.

287
00:18:00,240 --> 00:18:02,720
Speaker 1: So this is something that always fascinated me. I don't

288
00:18:02,720 --> 00:18:05,239
Speaker 1: even know when it was that I began to believe this,

289
00:18:05,320 --> 00:18:09,640
Speaker 1: but even I had come to the belief that fingerprints

290
00:18:09,640 --> 00:18:11,919
Speaker 1: were sort of the gold standard, and that seems to

291
00:18:11,920 --> 00:18:15,639
Speaker 1: be sort of a consistent, you know, collective thought in

292
00:18:15,680 --> 00:18:19,840
Speaker 1: the American psyche that fingerprints are regarded as being just

293
00:18:19,960 --> 00:18:21,760
Speaker 1: really reliable. Why do you think that is?

294
00:18:22,520 --> 00:18:26,520
Speaker 3: They're in popular culture. We've all grown up being given

295
00:18:26,640 --> 00:18:29,840
Speaker 3: a certain perspective on what fingerprints are. When I started

296
00:18:29,840 --> 00:18:32,840
Speaker 3: getting an interest in fingerprints, I would say to people

297
00:18:32,960 --> 00:18:35,600
Speaker 3: outside the legal system, my friends, I would say, you know,

298
00:18:36,080 --> 00:18:39,840
Speaker 3: when you think about how a fingerprint from a crime

299
00:18:39,920 --> 00:18:43,600
Speaker 3: scene is compared to the known print of somebody, what

300
00:18:43,640 --> 00:18:45,840
Speaker 3: does that look like in your mind? And they will

301
00:18:45,880 --> 00:18:50,439
Speaker 3: always say, well, I envision the crime scene print on

302
00:18:50,520 --> 00:18:54,360
Speaker 3: a screen right next to the known fingerprint, and then

303
00:18:54,400 --> 00:18:58,120
Speaker 3: I see a computer merging them and bells going off, going.

304
00:18:58,000 --> 00:18:58,600
Speaker 2: Ding ding ding.

305
00:18:58,640 --> 00:19:02,119
Speaker 3: It matches, and that makes sense. It makes sense that

306
00:19:02,160 --> 00:19:04,880
Speaker 3: people would think that. When I tell people that that's

307
00:19:04,960 --> 00:19:08,919
Speaker 3: not at all what happens, they are shocked. Lay people

308
00:19:09,040 --> 00:19:11,520
Speaker 3: hear that there are these databases and they tend to

309
00:19:11,560 --> 00:19:14,439
Speaker 3: think that everybody's fingerprints are in it. And so I

310
00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:19,239
Speaker 3: think what people believe is that, Okay, you get a

311
00:19:19,480 --> 00:19:22,159
Speaker 3: fingerprint off a gun and you put it in a

312
00:19:22,280 --> 00:19:25,440
Speaker 3: database and the computer comes up with the match and

313
00:19:25,520 --> 00:19:29,119
Speaker 3: that's it. So that's not true at all. So of

314
00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:33,040
Speaker 3: course we're all entrenched in popular culture. We've been told

315
00:19:33,200 --> 00:19:37,280
Speaker 3: for many, many years fingerprints are fantastic, and you know,

316
00:19:37,320 --> 00:19:41,399
Speaker 3: why would anybody take the time to actually look to

317
00:19:41,520 --> 00:19:42,640
Speaker 3: see what they do?

318
00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:46,800
Speaker 1: So tell us a little bit about what they actually do.

319
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:50,359
Speaker 1: Practically speaking, how does it actually work? What if fingerprint

320
00:19:50,600 --> 00:19:52,600
Speaker 1: examiners look at.

321
00:19:52,640 --> 00:19:57,000
Speaker 3: The way fingerprint examiners actually look at fingerprints is through

322
00:19:57,040 --> 00:20:01,760
Speaker 3: what they call a methodology called ACE. So it's a

323
00:20:01,800 --> 00:20:09,680
Speaker 3: C E slash V, which is analysis, comparison, evaluation and verification.

324
00:20:10,520 --> 00:20:13,560
Speaker 3: So here's a description of what they actually do. Let's

325
00:20:13,600 --> 00:20:19,120
Speaker 3: say a person is shot with a gun. They will lift,

326
00:20:19,359 --> 00:20:22,400
Speaker 3: and by lift, I mean they'll look for a fingerprint

327
00:20:22,520 --> 00:20:26,400
Speaker 3: on that gun and then they will try to remove

328
00:20:26,440 --> 00:20:29,680
Speaker 3: that fingerprint so that they can compare it. So the

329
00:20:29,720 --> 00:20:34,200
Speaker 3: a part is analysis. They are supposed to look at

330
00:20:34,240 --> 00:20:38,880
Speaker 3: that fingerprint to see whether there is enough detail in

331
00:20:38,920 --> 00:20:42,880
Speaker 3: it to go any further. People have seen these pictures

332
00:20:42,960 --> 00:20:46,760
Speaker 3: of somebody rolling their finger over a pad of ink,

333
00:20:47,119 --> 00:20:50,160
Speaker 3: and that's how you get the print. That's not what happens.

334
00:20:50,520 --> 00:20:54,560
Speaker 3: When people touch objects. You get a fragment, and sometimes

335
00:20:54,600 --> 00:20:58,480
Speaker 3: it's smeared, and sometimes there's dust on it, sometimes there's oil.

336
00:20:58,560 --> 00:21:01,399
Speaker 3: There are a lot of different facts. And so here's

337
00:21:01,480 --> 00:21:04,879
Speaker 3: the deal. It's not that you're comparing a fully rolled

338
00:21:04,920 --> 00:21:08,479
Speaker 3: fingerprint to a fully rolled fingerprint. You are first looking

339
00:21:08,600 --> 00:21:12,200
Speaker 3: at a fragment of the print, and it is totally

340
00:21:12,280 --> 00:21:17,480
Speaker 3: within the subjectivity, the subjective discretion of a fingerprint analysis

341
00:21:17,560 --> 00:21:21,880
Speaker 3: or examiner to decide whether there is enough information on

342
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:25,520
Speaker 3: that print to even go ahead and compare it. So

343
00:21:25,680 --> 00:21:26,680
Speaker 3: just think about.

344
00:21:26,400 --> 00:21:30,359
Speaker 1: That, right, That's kind of scary because it's up to

345
00:21:30,800 --> 00:21:34,920
Speaker 1: the judgment call of one analyst on that particular day,

346
00:21:35,400 --> 00:21:38,919
Speaker 1: and I'm quite sure that another analyst looking at the

347
00:21:38,960 --> 00:21:42,040
Speaker 1: same portion of a print might come up with the

348
00:21:42,080 --> 00:21:47,160
Speaker 1: opposite conclusion. So it turns out that the A in ACV,

349
00:21:47,359 --> 00:21:51,800
Speaker 1: the very first step is problematic and pretty flawed. So

350
00:21:51,960 --> 00:21:54,760
Speaker 1: the next letter is the C for comparison. Where you're

351
00:21:54,800 --> 00:21:57,959
Speaker 1: taking a print left at a crime scene and comparing

352
00:21:58,000 --> 00:22:00,879
Speaker 1: it to a suspects print. Tell us a little bit

353
00:22:00,880 --> 00:22:02,680
Speaker 1: about what that process entails.

354
00:22:02,760 --> 00:22:07,480
Speaker 3: Mary, So once you make the decision to go forward,

355
00:22:07,720 --> 00:22:12,280
Speaker 3: then you are onto the sea or comparison, and you're

356
00:22:12,359 --> 00:22:16,600
Speaker 3: comparing the fully rolled print to the fragment of a print.

357
00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:20,440
Speaker 3: So Josh, you might look and compare those two fingerprints

358
00:22:20,440 --> 00:22:23,800
Speaker 3: and say, you know, I see enough here. I see

359
00:22:23,880 --> 00:22:27,760
Speaker 3: twelve points of comparison. That's enough for me to say

360
00:22:27,800 --> 00:22:32,040
Speaker 3: that this is the same person. I might look at

361
00:22:32,040 --> 00:22:36,520
Speaker 3: it and say, oh, I see five points of comparison.

362
00:22:36,640 --> 00:22:39,399
Speaker 3: I think that's enough to declare that it's a match.

363
00:22:39,920 --> 00:22:43,920
Speaker 3: So once again, it is completely subjective.

364
00:22:44,280 --> 00:22:48,680
Speaker 1: Right and saying, well, sometimes we think ten points that

365
00:22:48,720 --> 00:22:52,480
Speaker 1: look the same between a rolled print and a fragment

366
00:22:52,520 --> 00:22:55,720
Speaker 1: of a print are enough similarities to declare a match,

367
00:22:55,760 --> 00:22:58,119
Speaker 1: and sometimes we think five is enough. And that just

368
00:22:58,520 --> 00:23:02,639
Speaker 1: doesn't seem scientific and seemed very reliable, and so Mary,

369
00:23:03,119 --> 00:23:06,600
Speaker 1: something we've been addressing a lot on this podcast is

370
00:23:06,760 --> 00:23:10,280
Speaker 1: the two thousand and nine NAS Report. Tell us a

371
00:23:10,320 --> 00:23:14,680
Speaker 1: little bit about what the NAS report said about fingerprints.

372
00:23:15,560 --> 00:23:19,520
Speaker 3: The National Academy of Science is the most prestigious scientific

373
00:23:19,560 --> 00:23:24,879
Speaker 3: body in the United States and they advise Congress on

374
00:23:25,160 --> 00:23:29,080
Speaker 3: issues of science, medicine, pretty much anything you can think

375
00:23:29,119 --> 00:23:33,240
Speaker 3: of when it comes to sciences, and the National Academy

376
00:23:33,240 --> 00:23:38,600
Speaker 3: of Science was asked to examine the comparative forensic sciences.

377
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:43,560
Speaker 3: It was a groundbreaking report and it was very in depth.

378
00:23:43,720 --> 00:23:49,000
Speaker 3: They took testimony, they solicited research, and it rocked the

379
00:23:49,040 --> 00:23:52,840
Speaker 3: forensic science community. One of the things that you realize

380
00:23:52,880 --> 00:23:55,480
Speaker 3: when you look at the report, if you are a scientist,

381
00:23:55,560 --> 00:23:58,280
Speaker 3: you know that there are certain tenets of science, like

382
00:23:58,320 --> 00:24:01,680
Speaker 3: you have to be able to replicate the process. When

383
00:24:01,720 --> 00:24:06,600
Speaker 3: a scientist does an experiment, they document what they do.

384
00:24:07,200 --> 00:24:10,040
Speaker 3: And the National Academy of Science was very clear that

385
00:24:10,160 --> 00:24:14,080
Speaker 3: fingerprint examiners, as well as any other comparative forensic examiners,

386
00:24:14,200 --> 00:24:17,840
Speaker 3: do not provide documentation. And I found this to be true.

387
00:24:17,920 --> 00:24:21,919
Speaker 3: You would order, you would ask for a fingerprint examiner's file,

388
00:24:22,520 --> 00:24:26,119
Speaker 3: and you wouldn't really see many notes. You wouldn't know

389
00:24:26,200 --> 00:24:28,719
Speaker 3: what they were actually looking at. You might have a

390
00:24:28,760 --> 00:24:31,439
Speaker 3: picture of a fingerprint with some circles on it, but

391
00:24:31,880 --> 00:24:34,040
Speaker 3: you wouldn't know what they were looking at. So there

392
00:24:34,119 --> 00:24:38,040
Speaker 3: was no way to replicate the process that they actually used.

393
00:24:38,600 --> 00:24:41,800
Speaker 3: There was no basis for saying that it came from

394
00:24:41,880 --> 00:24:45,359
Speaker 3: the same source. And most of the people who did fingerprints,

395
00:24:45,800 --> 00:24:48,760
Speaker 3: and probably still do in some places, are not scientists.

396
00:24:49,000 --> 00:24:51,840
Speaker 3: They are not recruited because of their scientific background. They

397
00:24:51,840 --> 00:24:56,240
Speaker 3: are often police officers who were apprenticed into this position

398
00:24:56,400 --> 00:24:59,120
Speaker 3: because the police officer who examined the print was going

399
00:24:59,160 --> 00:25:04,200
Speaker 3: to retire. And then there's the evaluation where you're actually

400
00:25:04,280 --> 00:25:07,879
Speaker 3: making the decision about whether this comes from the same source,

401
00:25:08,359 --> 00:25:12,160
Speaker 3: and there's a lot of controversy there. Fingerprint examiners used

402
00:25:12,160 --> 00:25:15,159
Speaker 3: to come in and say that they had one hundred

403
00:25:15,200 --> 00:25:18,520
Speaker 3: percent certainty, they were one hundred percent certain that this

404
00:25:19,119 --> 00:25:23,400
Speaker 3: print from the crime scene came from this particular client,

405
00:25:24,160 --> 00:25:26,320
Speaker 3: and there was no basis for that. In fact, that's

406
00:25:26,359 --> 00:25:29,640
Speaker 3: not even allowed anymore. And why is there no basis

407
00:25:29,680 --> 00:25:33,960
Speaker 3: for it? You would have to have population statistics, right,

408
00:25:34,040 --> 00:25:36,880
Speaker 3: I mean, that's what DNA has, That's why they come

409
00:25:36,960 --> 00:25:39,320
Speaker 3: up with these numbers. It's one in a million that

410
00:25:39,359 --> 00:25:43,359
Speaker 3: it came from this person. There are no population statistics

411
00:25:43,400 --> 00:25:44,760
Speaker 3: regarding fingerprints.

412
00:25:56,080 --> 00:25:57,639
Speaker 1: Okay, so we're seeing that there are a lot of

413
00:25:57,640 --> 00:26:01,600
Speaker 1: flaws with both analyzing and comparing prints, the A and

414
00:26:01,640 --> 00:26:04,560
Speaker 1: the C and as that neither of these steps are

415
00:26:04,600 --> 00:26:09,520
Speaker 1: actually rooted in the scientific methods. And now we're onto E, right, ACE.

416
00:26:10,640 --> 00:26:13,959
Speaker 1: So the E is evaluation where they decide if it's

417
00:26:14,000 --> 00:26:16,240
Speaker 1: a match or not. And so it seems that if

418
00:26:16,320 --> 00:26:20,320
Speaker 1: analyzing and comparing the prints aren't scientifically proven to work,

419
00:26:20,800 --> 00:26:24,000
Speaker 1: the evaluation of those prints and deciding whether or not

420
00:26:24,040 --> 00:26:26,159
Speaker 1: it's a match can't be done to any degree of

421
00:26:26,320 --> 00:26:30,320
Speaker 1: certainty either. That just seems like common sense. So this

422
00:26:30,680 --> 00:26:35,120
Speaker 1: is purely subjective. But there's one last letter in these

423
00:26:35,160 --> 00:26:39,640
Speaker 1: steps that examiners follow, and that's the V for verification. Right,

424
00:26:39,680 --> 00:26:44,000
Speaker 1: it's ace V. And I'm already skeptical because the first

425
00:26:44,040 --> 00:26:46,400
Speaker 1: three steps of the process are flawed, So how could

426
00:26:46,440 --> 00:26:48,000
Speaker 1: the results be verified?

427
00:26:48,920 --> 00:26:53,920
Speaker 3: Imagine this, A fingerprint examiner would decide that this fragment

428
00:26:53,960 --> 00:26:56,960
Speaker 3: of a print came from this particular person, and then

429
00:26:57,000 --> 00:27:01,160
Speaker 3: they would hand it off to another fingerprint examiner for verification.

430
00:27:01,960 --> 00:27:05,399
Speaker 3: But the issue was it was never blind. So, Josh,

431
00:27:05,480 --> 00:27:07,840
Speaker 3: let's say you and I were fingerprint examiners in the

432
00:27:07,840 --> 00:27:11,240
Speaker 3: same office, and I would make a decision about a print,

433
00:27:11,400 --> 00:27:14,199
Speaker 3: and then I would ask you to verify what I

434
00:27:14,320 --> 00:27:17,440
Speaker 3: had done. And the problem with that is you already

435
00:27:17,520 --> 00:27:21,360
Speaker 3: knew what I had done. It wasn't blind. In science,

436
00:27:21,480 --> 00:27:25,040
Speaker 3: they do blind verification, so that the person who's actually

437
00:27:25,119 --> 00:27:29,520
Speaker 3: attempting to verify or replicate what the first person did

438
00:27:29,720 --> 00:27:33,240
Speaker 3: it doesn't know what the result was actually, So the

439
00:27:33,359 --> 00:27:38,000
Speaker 3: fact that the verification wasn't blind led to what people

440
00:27:38,040 --> 00:27:41,040
Speaker 3: call confirmation bias, which is a huge problem.

441
00:27:41,359 --> 00:27:44,879
Speaker 1: All right. So, once the NAS basically said that the

442
00:27:45,080 --> 00:27:49,399
Speaker 1: ACEV process is really a recipe for wrongful convictions, this

443
00:27:49,480 --> 00:27:53,120
Speaker 1: should have been an explosion in the criminal justice system

444
00:27:53,240 --> 00:27:55,640
Speaker 1: in the courts, and it just wasn't. And that's I guess,

445
00:27:55,640 --> 00:27:59,479
Speaker 1: a different issue altogether. We have to keep pushing in

446
00:27:59,520 --> 00:28:02,920
Speaker 1: that regard. But you are still trying to push and

447
00:28:03,080 --> 00:28:07,000
Speaker 1: challenge the admissibility of fingerprints in the criminal justice system,

448
00:28:07,359 --> 00:28:09,520
Speaker 1: and I have to tell you, it just seems like

449
00:28:09,800 --> 00:28:13,880
Speaker 1: it must be so difficult, Mary, because this is not

450
00:28:14,040 --> 00:28:18,679
Speaker 1: like any kind of scientific analysis. But it just feels

451
00:28:18,760 --> 00:28:24,159
Speaker 1: to me that everyone believes fingerprint evidence works. It's so

452
00:28:24,640 --> 00:28:29,200
Speaker 1: ingrained in pop culture, and just like the intrinsic belief

453
00:28:29,240 --> 00:28:32,720
Speaker 1: that people have that we've grown up with. So tell me,

454
00:28:33,000 --> 00:28:36,359
Speaker 1: what are some of the problems you've run into when

455
00:28:36,440 --> 00:28:40,080
Speaker 1: trying to call and question this so called science.

456
00:28:40,800 --> 00:28:44,360
Speaker 3: When you're in court litigating this. You're absolutely right, that

457
00:28:44,600 --> 00:28:46,880
Speaker 3: is one of the things you hear from prosecutors and

458
00:28:46,920 --> 00:28:50,040
Speaker 3: you hear from judges. Of course, this is reliable. It's

459
00:28:50,080 --> 00:28:52,960
Speaker 3: been coming into court for decades and decades, and nobody

460
00:28:53,000 --> 00:28:56,240
Speaker 3: has ever challenged it before. So that is a big

461
00:28:56,320 --> 00:29:00,680
Speaker 3: hurdle to get over, much more so than other things

462
00:29:00,760 --> 00:29:03,200
Speaker 3: like bite marks, blood spatter and that sort of thing.

463
00:29:03,640 --> 00:29:08,120
Speaker 3: The court system always lags behind science, and it was

464
00:29:08,200 --> 00:29:13,560
Speaker 3: an uphill climb to convince judges and prosecutors that there

465
00:29:13,560 --> 00:29:16,920
Speaker 3: were problems with fingerprints, or if you could convince them

466
00:29:17,360 --> 00:29:20,040
Speaker 3: that there were problems, you certainly couldn't convince them that

467
00:29:20,080 --> 00:29:23,880
Speaker 3: they should exclude that evidence. In fact, judges and I

468
00:29:23,920 --> 00:29:25,720
Speaker 3: heard this quite a bit. It's like, well, you know,

469
00:29:25,800 --> 00:29:28,440
Speaker 3: let's just let the jury decide. But then you get

470
00:29:28,480 --> 00:29:32,360
Speaker 3: back to the problem of jurors thinking that fingerprints are

471
00:29:33,040 --> 00:29:35,040
Speaker 3: you know, they've been with us forever. They're embedded in

472
00:29:35,080 --> 00:29:38,320
Speaker 3: popular culture, and you have to get over all of

473
00:29:38,360 --> 00:29:42,880
Speaker 3: that history to convince durors that there are indeed issues. Essentially,

474
00:29:43,320 --> 00:29:48,040
Speaker 3: the presumption is that prints are infallible. In a case

475
00:29:48,120 --> 00:29:51,000
Speaker 3: where your client is supposed to be presumed innocent and

476
00:29:51,120 --> 00:29:53,960
Speaker 3: the prosecution or the government has to prove their case

477
00:29:54,000 --> 00:29:57,600
Speaker 3: beyond a reasonable doubt, a significant piece of evidence is

478
00:29:57,640 --> 00:30:01,360
Speaker 3: presumed to be infallible. You have a lot of work

479
00:30:01,400 --> 00:30:04,000
Speaker 3: to do to try to educate them that that's not

480
00:30:04,080 --> 00:30:04,800
Speaker 3: the case.

481
00:30:05,320 --> 00:30:07,640
Speaker 1: Right, because it turns out that judges are really no

482
00:30:07,760 --> 00:30:12,440
Speaker 1: different than jurors. I mean, in some instances they're more sophisticated,

483
00:30:12,600 --> 00:30:17,720
Speaker 1: not always. They certainly have less time and frankly sometimes

484
00:30:17,800 --> 00:30:22,320
Speaker 1: less patience, but they're sort of not immune to the

485
00:30:22,360 --> 00:30:25,920
Speaker 1: impact of pop culture and precedent. But look, some people

486
00:30:25,960 --> 00:30:28,640
Speaker 1: may be listening to this and thinking, I don't have

487
00:30:28,680 --> 00:30:30,520
Speaker 1: a law degree, but I want to help. I want

488
00:30:30,560 --> 00:30:33,320
Speaker 1: to do something about this. So do you have any

489
00:30:33,360 --> 00:30:37,640
Speaker 1: ideas for what our listeners can do to help I do?

490
00:30:37,880 --> 00:30:39,560
Speaker 3: And I wanted to go back, just for a moment

491
00:30:40,240 --> 00:30:43,720
Speaker 3: to talk about precedent because where I went in my

492
00:30:43,920 --> 00:30:48,720
Speaker 3: mind are courts saying that actual innocence of a client

493
00:30:48,800 --> 00:30:53,000
Speaker 3: on death row doesn't matter because procedure was followed. So

494
00:30:53,480 --> 00:30:59,280
Speaker 3: that should alert your listeners how much courts adhere to

495
00:30:59,680 --> 00:31:04,760
Speaker 3: press and are deferential to previous findings to the point

496
00:31:05,080 --> 00:31:09,000
Speaker 3: where they would authorize that somebody received the death penalty

497
00:31:09,240 --> 00:31:13,320
Speaker 3: because the process was followed. Anyone in the public wants

498
00:31:13,720 --> 00:31:18,080
Speaker 3: the law enforcement, the system to get things right. And

499
00:31:18,120 --> 00:31:20,880
Speaker 3: the only way we can get things right is if

500
00:31:20,920 --> 00:31:25,920
Speaker 3: we understand the limitations of these forensic sciences, so people

501
00:31:25,920 --> 00:31:30,960
Speaker 3: can be writing letters, calling their prosecutors, their policymakers, county commissioners,

502
00:31:31,200 --> 00:31:35,200
Speaker 3: city council members. What are you doing to make sure

503
00:31:35,640 --> 00:31:41,240
Speaker 3: that police officers, that crime lab examiners understand this information?

504
00:31:41,720 --> 00:31:44,640
Speaker 3: And that would be really helpful because people really do

505
00:31:44,800 --> 00:31:49,240
Speaker 3: listen more to constituents and people in the public than

506
00:31:49,280 --> 00:31:51,520
Speaker 3: they do potentially defense lawyers.

507
00:31:53,560 --> 00:31:56,440
Speaker 1: You know, I've said this before, and I really do

508
00:31:56,560 --> 00:32:01,080
Speaker 1: think it bears repeating. Pressure breaks pipes. What you all

509
00:32:01,200 --> 00:32:05,160
Speaker 1: can do as listeners of this podcast is take action.

510
00:32:06,080 --> 00:32:08,800
Speaker 1: You're on here because you want to learn something, but

511
00:32:08,920 --> 00:32:11,920
Speaker 1: you also want to do something about it. The way

512
00:32:12,000 --> 00:32:14,960
Speaker 1: that we stop this junk signs from making it into

513
00:32:15,040 --> 00:32:17,720
Speaker 1: our courts is to shine a bright light on it.

514
00:32:18,640 --> 00:32:22,320
Speaker 1: Google the NAS Report that we've continually talked about during

515
00:32:22,360 --> 00:32:26,720
Speaker 1: this season. That report details how so many of these

516
00:32:26,760 --> 00:32:32,440
Speaker 1: disciplines of forensic science, including fingerprints, are really problematic. The

517
00:32:32,600 --> 00:32:36,840
Speaker 1: problem is judges don't know about it. Find out who

518
00:32:36,880 --> 00:32:40,240
Speaker 1: your local criminal court judges are and send them the

519
00:32:40,360 --> 00:32:44,480
Speaker 1: NAS Report. Highlight this section on fingerprint analysis and send

520
00:32:44,640 --> 00:32:48,640
Speaker 1: to your local criminal court judges. It's only by educating

521
00:32:48,680 --> 00:32:51,800
Speaker 1: our judges and speaking truth to power that we can

522
00:32:51,960 --> 00:32:55,280
Speaker 1: really make change happen. And if you don't think that

523
00:32:55,360 --> 00:32:58,160
Speaker 1: your voice matters, just take a look around the country

524
00:32:58,240 --> 00:33:01,560
Speaker 1: right now. It's the collection the voice that is causing

525
00:33:01,760 --> 00:33:04,560
Speaker 1: change to happen, and we can do it one step

526
00:33:04,560 --> 00:33:15,640
Speaker 1: at a time in our criminal justice system. Thank you

527
00:33:15,680 --> 00:33:18,560
Speaker 1: for listening to Wrongful Conviction Junk Science. We're going to

528
00:33:18,560 --> 00:33:21,720
Speaker 1: be taking a little break, but our next episode will

529
00:33:21,720 --> 00:33:25,400
Speaker 1: be out on October seventh. In the meantime, we will

530
00:33:25,440 --> 00:33:28,480
Speaker 1: be keeping a critical and close eye on our criminal

531
00:33:28,600 --> 00:33:32,080
Speaker 1: justice system. We would love to hear how you're doing

532
00:33:32,120 --> 00:33:34,520
Speaker 1: that along with us, so please leave us a comment

533
00:33:34,600 --> 00:33:36,440
Speaker 1: and let us know what you've been up to, and

534
00:33:36,560 --> 00:33:40,400
Speaker 1: stay on the Wrongful Conviction podcast feed as Jason Flamm

535
00:33:40,400 --> 00:33:45,080
Speaker 1: will continue to release episodes between now and October seventh.

536
00:33:47,440 --> 00:33:50,440
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction Junk Science is a production of Lava for

537
00:33:50,480 --> 00:33:54,680
Speaker 1: Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number One. Thanks

538
00:33:54,720 --> 00:33:57,479
Speaker 1: to our executive producer Jason Flamm and the team at

539
00:33:57,520 --> 00:34:02,360
Speaker 1: Signal Company Number One, ducer Kevin Wardis and senior producers

540
00:34:02,440 --> 00:34:06,400
Speaker 1: Kara Kornhaber and Britz Spangler. Our music was composed by

541
00:34:06,480 --> 00:34:10,520
Speaker 1: Jay Ralph. You can follow me on Instagram at dubin Josh.

542
00:34:11,040 --> 00:34:14,960
Speaker 1: Follow the Wrongful Conviction podcast on Facebook and on Instagram

543
00:34:15,000 --> 00:34:18,360
Speaker 1: at Wrongful Conviction and on Twitter at wrong Conviction