1
00:00:02,560 --> 00:00:05,280
Speaker 1: Hey, folks, Kate Judson here. I'm a lawyer and the

2
00:00:05,320 --> 00:00:09,320
Speaker 1: executive director of the Center for Integrity and Forensic Sciences.

3
00:00:10,960 --> 00:00:14,120
Speaker 1: We're back with another episode of Junk Science, a series

4
00:00:14,160 --> 00:00:17,560
Speaker 1: we first released in twenty twenty, but these stories are

5
00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:20,919
Speaker 1: just as relevant as ever. The episode you're about to

6
00:00:20,960 --> 00:00:24,040
Speaker 1: hear is about fingerprint evidence, a type of evidence we've

7
00:00:24,040 --> 00:00:27,000
Speaker 1: been taught to believe is super reliable through things like

8
00:00:27,080 --> 00:00:30,400
Speaker 1: TV crime dramas. But like all the forensics we explore

9
00:00:30,440 --> 00:00:33,159
Speaker 1: in this series, the truth is more complicated than that.

10
00:00:34,920 --> 00:00:38,560
Speaker 1: One of the biggest issues is that of close non matches, which,

11
00:00:38,960 --> 00:00:42,199
Speaker 1: as it sounds, is when two prints are very similar

12
00:00:42,240 --> 00:00:44,839
Speaker 1: to each other but in fact did not come from

13
00:00:44,880 --> 00:00:50,360
Speaker 1: the same person. A twenty twenty article by J. Kohler

14
00:00:50,360 --> 00:00:53,519
Speaker 1: of Northwestern University reported that there was up to a

15
00:00:53,560 --> 00:00:56,720
Speaker 1: twenty eight percent air rate of false positives for close

16
00:00:56,760 --> 00:01:00,120
Speaker 1: non matches, not exactly a foolproof way to pre of

17
00:01:00,160 --> 00:01:08,120
Speaker 1: guilt or innocence, and definitely not beyond a reasonable doubt.

18
00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:13,560
Speaker 2: It's Friday night. You hop in the shower, then put

19
00:01:13,560 --> 00:01:16,959
Speaker 2: on your favorite blue button down shirt. You look at

20
00:01:17,000 --> 00:01:19,759
Speaker 2: yourself in the mirror and hype yourself up a bit.

21
00:01:20,680 --> 00:01:23,480
Speaker 2: You're forty years old, but you've taken good care of

22
00:01:23,520 --> 00:01:26,640
Speaker 2: yourself over the years and still look pretty damn good.

23
00:01:28,319 --> 00:01:30,440
Speaker 2: You head out, and when you get to the club,

24
00:01:30,480 --> 00:01:33,319
Speaker 2: you see your friend Alvin standing outside on the corner

25
00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:37,120
Speaker 2: waiting for you. You smile because Alvin's always a good time.

26
00:01:37,640 --> 00:01:39,720
Speaker 2: He might be the only person who can keep up

27
00:01:39,720 --> 00:01:43,280
Speaker 2: with you when you dance all night. You both head

28
00:01:43,319 --> 00:01:46,200
Speaker 2: inside and grab a drink, catch up a little bit,

29
00:01:46,360 --> 00:01:49,920
Speaker 2: and then hit the dance floor. The place is all

30
00:01:50,000 --> 00:01:53,920
Speaker 2: bass and flashing lights. Neither one of you stops moving

31
00:01:54,000 --> 00:01:56,880
Speaker 2: until they turn off the music, and the DJ tells

32
00:01:56,920 --> 00:02:01,360
Speaker 2: everyone it's closing time. Time to get at it. When

33
00:02:01,360 --> 00:02:03,520
Speaker 2: you get outside the club, you say goodbye to Alvin

34
00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:05,480
Speaker 2: because you have to get up early in the morning.

35
00:02:05,760 --> 00:02:07,640
Speaker 2: You're not going to go back to his place tonight.

36
00:02:09,160 --> 00:02:11,920
Speaker 2: You give Alvin a call the next weekend, but there's

37
00:02:11,960 --> 00:02:16,040
Speaker 2: no answer. You don't think much of it because Alvin

38
00:02:16,120 --> 00:02:19,320
Speaker 2: sometimes just doesn't answer his phone. He's the kind of

39
00:02:19,320 --> 00:02:23,320
Speaker 2: guy that does his own thing. But then a few

40
00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:27,240
Speaker 2: days later you get a call from another friend. He

41
00:02:27,280 --> 00:02:30,639
Speaker 2: tells you he passed by Alvin's house and there were

42
00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:35,840
Speaker 2: police officers surrounding it. They said that Alvin had been murdered.

43
00:02:37,200 --> 00:02:40,200
Speaker 2: You hang up and immediately head to the police station.

44
00:02:40,880 --> 00:02:44,040
Speaker 2: You want to help figure out who did this. You

45
00:02:44,120 --> 00:02:47,200
Speaker 2: meet with detectives and you find out that Alvin was

46
00:02:47,320 --> 00:02:50,600
Speaker 2: murdered on the night you went dancing with him, but

47
00:02:50,680 --> 00:02:55,440
Speaker 2: he wasn't discovered until nine days later. His landlord found

48
00:02:55,520 --> 00:02:58,000
Speaker 2: him on the floor of his apartment. And you hear

49
00:02:58,120 --> 00:03:02,160
Speaker 2: all this, and you're just immediately as if you had

50
00:03:02,200 --> 00:03:04,880
Speaker 2: stayed at his house that night, maybe you could have

51
00:03:04,960 --> 00:03:08,920
Speaker 2: protected him. You tell the police everything you can remember

52
00:03:08,960 --> 00:03:12,480
Speaker 2: about that night. You want to do anything you can

53
00:03:12,880 --> 00:03:15,320
Speaker 2: to help them find out who did this to your friend.

54
00:03:18,560 --> 00:03:21,160
Speaker 2: The police call you in four times over the next

55
00:03:21,160 --> 00:03:25,240
Speaker 2: two weeks as they investigate Alvin's murder. One day, they

56
00:03:25,280 --> 00:03:28,480
Speaker 2: tell you they're taking fingerprints of everyone who had been

57
00:03:28,520 --> 00:03:32,280
Speaker 2: around Alvin in the days preceding his death. They tell

58
00:03:32,320 --> 00:03:34,960
Speaker 2: you that by allowing them to take your prints, it'll

59
00:03:34,960 --> 00:03:37,880
Speaker 2: help them figure out who committed the murder. Part of

60
00:03:37,920 --> 00:03:40,840
Speaker 2: you feels like you're in an episode of some detective show.

61
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:43,560
Speaker 2: When they press the tips of your fingers and the

62
00:03:43,600 --> 00:03:47,120
Speaker 2: palms of your hands on a cold inkpad, then roll

63
00:03:47,160 --> 00:03:49,520
Speaker 2: the tips of your fingers one by one on a

64
00:03:49,520 --> 00:03:52,840
Speaker 2: piece of paper. You've seen this process what seems like

65
00:03:52,960 --> 00:03:55,840
Speaker 2: hundreds of times before on TV and in the movies,

66
00:03:56,320 --> 00:03:59,640
Speaker 2: but you've never actually done it yourself. You have no record.

67
00:04:00,000 --> 00:04:04,080
Speaker 2: I've never been fingerprinted before. Not long after that, the

68
00:04:04,120 --> 00:04:06,800
Speaker 2: police call you into the station one more time, but

69
00:04:07,560 --> 00:04:13,720
Speaker 2: something has shifted. They bring you into an interrogation room.

70
00:04:14,480 --> 00:04:17,880
Speaker 2: The first thing they do is show you a polaroid

71
00:04:18,160 --> 00:04:22,800
Speaker 2: of Alvin's body. You immediately feel fluid bubble into your

72
00:04:23,000 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 2: esophagus and you quickly scan the room for a garbage can.

73
00:04:27,240 --> 00:04:30,839
Speaker 2: Your mind quickly computes shit. If ipwke in front of

74
00:04:30,880 --> 00:04:34,839
Speaker 2: these cops, they'll think I did this. You manage to

75
00:04:34,960 --> 00:04:38,440
Speaker 2: swallow the vomit and there's a sharp burn in your throat.

76
00:04:39,600 --> 00:04:42,640
Speaker 2: Then they show you another picture and Alvin is flat

77
00:04:42,680 --> 00:04:47,560
Speaker 2: on his back. There's blood everywhere, on his clothes, the

78
00:04:47,640 --> 00:04:50,159
Speaker 2: carpet next to him. You can't even see his face.

79
00:04:50,160 --> 00:04:53,760
Speaker 2: Whoever did this put Alvin's big white box fan over

80
00:04:53,800 --> 00:04:56,440
Speaker 2: his head and shoulders so you can't see the top

81
00:04:56,480 --> 00:04:59,120
Speaker 2: portion of his body. You used to make fun of

82
00:04:59,120 --> 00:05:01,800
Speaker 2: Alvin for that fan, and you were always telling him

83
00:05:01,800 --> 00:05:05,120
Speaker 2: just to invest in a damn ac unit already the

84
00:05:05,160 --> 00:05:09,640
Speaker 2: whole thing seems so surreal. And now the officers are

85
00:05:09,720 --> 00:05:12,200
Speaker 2: pointing at the fan in the picture and they say,

86
00:05:12,640 --> 00:05:15,880
Speaker 2: you see those bloody smudges on the fan. Those are

87
00:05:15,960 --> 00:05:19,320
Speaker 2: fingerprints and the prince we took from you the other day.

88
00:05:19,960 --> 00:05:23,320
Speaker 2: We've collected over a dozen fingerprints of people who were

89
00:05:23,400 --> 00:05:27,760
Speaker 2: in Alvin's apartment before he was murdered, and only yours

90
00:05:27,800 --> 00:05:30,599
Speaker 2: matched the prints on that fan. There were no signs

91
00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:33,320
Speaker 2: of break in at his apartment, but you didn't have

92
00:05:33,400 --> 00:05:36,520
Speaker 2: to break in, did you. Alvin let you in after

93
00:05:36,600 --> 00:05:39,720
Speaker 2: your night out together. Then you got in an argument

94
00:05:39,800 --> 00:05:42,359
Speaker 2: with him, You got jealous that he was dancing with

95
00:05:42,440 --> 00:05:46,360
Speaker 2: other men, and you stabbed him to death, didn't you.

96
00:05:46,360 --> 00:05:48,240
Speaker 2: You stare at the officer and disbelieve.

97
00:05:48,440 --> 00:05:48,520
Speaker 3: No.

98
00:05:48,680 --> 00:05:51,520
Speaker 2: You say, what are you talking about? Why would I

99
00:05:51,600 --> 00:05:54,240
Speaker 2: come here willingly to help you guys out if I

100
00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:58,200
Speaker 2: had anything to do with this. They don't listen to

101
00:05:58,240 --> 00:06:01,800
Speaker 2: a word you say. They put handcuffs on you and

102
00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:09,960
Speaker 2: put you in custody. At your trial, the prosecution calls

103
00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:14,360
Speaker 2: a fingerprint expert to the stand. He says, before we're

104
00:06:14,360 --> 00:06:18,520
Speaker 2: even born as fetuses in the womb, human beings develop

105
00:06:18,720 --> 00:06:22,920
Speaker 2: ridges on their fingers and hands. In addition to those ridges,

106
00:06:22,960 --> 00:06:26,120
Speaker 2: we have glands that secrete oils, so that when we

107
00:06:26,200 --> 00:06:30,279
Speaker 2: touch objects the worlds loops and swirl pattern of those

108
00:06:30,400 --> 00:06:35,000
Speaker 2: ridges are left behind. Fingerprint analysis has been around for

109
00:06:35,080 --> 00:06:38,200
Speaker 2: over one hundred years, and we know that each of

110
00:06:38,240 --> 00:06:42,359
Speaker 2: our fingerprints are unique. The fingerprints were covered from this

111
00:06:42,600 --> 00:06:46,040
Speaker 2: crime scene were visible to the naked eye because they

112
00:06:46,040 --> 00:06:50,280
Speaker 2: were left as impressions in the victim's blood. I analyze

113
00:06:50,279 --> 00:06:54,240
Speaker 2: these prints and compare them to defining characteristics of the

114
00:06:54,279 --> 00:06:58,719
Speaker 2: defendants prints. The bloody prints found near the victim's body

115
00:06:59,000 --> 00:07:02,599
Speaker 2: clearly belong to the defendant. I am one hundred percent

116
00:07:02,800 --> 00:07:07,560
Speaker 2: certain about this. The prosecution calls two more fingerprint experts

117
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:12,160
Speaker 2: to the stand and they all agree these are your prints.

118
00:07:13,440 --> 00:07:17,080
Speaker 2: But your attorney calls two witnesses to the stan fingerprint

119
00:07:17,120 --> 00:07:20,679
Speaker 2: experts that claim it isn't even close. There's no way

120
00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:24,520
Speaker 2: these prints belong to you. The jury isn't phased by

121
00:07:24,520 --> 00:07:28,640
Speaker 2: the conflicting opinions of the expert witnesses. They are convinced

122
00:07:28,760 --> 00:07:32,720
Speaker 2: by the impassioned story that the prosecutor laid out. They

123
00:07:32,760 --> 00:07:36,440
Speaker 2: convict you of first degree murder and abuse of a corpse.

124
00:07:37,320 --> 00:07:41,960
Speaker 2: Your sentenced to life without parole. There are shouting in

125
00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:44,880
Speaker 2: the courtroom as you're escorted out by cops with your

126
00:07:44,920 --> 00:07:49,200
Speaker 2: hands cuffed tightly behind your back. You can't understand why

127
00:07:49,240 --> 00:07:52,880
Speaker 2: this is happening, What is going on? Those are not

128
00:07:53,120 --> 00:07:59,920
Speaker 2: your fingerprints. You feel totally and completely helpless. But lucky

129
00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:04,680
Speaker 2: for you, this isn't the end. The fingerprint experts that

130
00:08:04,800 --> 00:08:08,880
Speaker 2: testified in your defense call this conviction a gross miscarriage

131
00:08:08,880 --> 00:08:13,720
Speaker 2: of justice. They demand that the evidence be reevaluated. A

132
00:08:13,760 --> 00:08:17,200
Speaker 2: panel of experts do just that and find that the

133
00:08:17,240 --> 00:08:21,800
Speaker 2: prosecution's evaluation was clearly wrong. The prints at the crime

134
00:08:21,880 --> 00:08:26,240
Speaker 2: scene clearly do not match your fingerprints. One of the

135
00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:30,320
Speaker 2: experts for the prosecution admits he made a mistake. You're

136
00:08:30,360 --> 00:08:33,800
Speaker 2: afforded a new trial and you are found not guilty.

137
00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:39,679
Speaker 2: But this process takes two agonizing years, and after serving

138
00:08:39,760 --> 00:08:42,320
Speaker 2: that amount of time in prison for a crime you

139
00:08:42,400 --> 00:08:49,920
Speaker 2: never committed, the murder of your friend, you're released. The

140
00:08:50,000 --> 00:08:52,720
Speaker 2: story you just heard is based on the true story

141
00:08:52,760 --> 00:08:56,240
Speaker 2: of Richard Jackson, who was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to

142
00:08:56,360 --> 00:08:59,440
Speaker 2: life without parole for the murderer of his friend Alvin

143
00:08:59,520 --> 00:09:04,160
Speaker 2: Davis nineteen ninety eight. While fingerprint analysis has been proven

144
00:09:04,200 --> 00:09:08,440
Speaker 2: to be purely subjective, it still holds a firm place

145
00:09:08,480 --> 00:09:13,520
Speaker 2: in the public imagination and therefore enjures minds as reliable science.

146
00:09:16,040 --> 00:09:19,920
Speaker 2: I'm Josh Dubin, civil rights and criminal defense attorney, an

147
00:09:19,920 --> 00:09:23,959
Speaker 2: Innocent ambassador to the Innocence Project in New York. Today,

148
00:09:24,280 --> 00:09:30,320
Speaker 2: on Wrongful Conviction Junk Science, we examined fingerprint evidence contrary

149
00:09:30,320 --> 00:09:33,640
Speaker 2: to what pop culture has ingrained in the American conscience.

150
00:09:34,040 --> 00:09:37,720
Speaker 2: Matching known prints of a suspect the prince left at

151
00:09:37,760 --> 00:09:40,880
Speaker 2: the scene of a crime is not an exact science.

152
00:09:41,520 --> 00:09:45,559
Speaker 2: It is entirely subjective up to the eye of the examiner.

153
00:09:46,679 --> 00:09:50,280
Speaker 2: So how did fingerprints become so widely accepted and thought

154
00:09:50,320 --> 00:09:54,560
Speaker 2: of as the gold standard as full proof evidence. It

155
00:09:54,640 --> 00:09:57,840
Speaker 2: turns out that the first time fingerprints were admitted into

156
00:09:57,840 --> 00:10:01,440
Speaker 2: evidence was almost one hundred and ten years ago, and

157
00:10:01,480 --> 00:10:05,280
Speaker 2: the methods used to match prints to individuals hasn't changed

158
00:10:05,360 --> 00:10:05,920
Speaker 2: much since.

159
00:10:11,800 --> 00:10:14,760
Speaker 3: The Pacers Foundation is a proud supporter of this episode

160
00:10:14,760 --> 00:10:17,520
Speaker 3: of wrongful conviction, with Jason Flahm and of the Last

161
00:10:17,559 --> 00:10:21,360
Speaker 3: Mile organization, which provides business and tech training to help

162
00:10:21,400 --> 00:10:26,640
Speaker 3: incarcerated individuals successfully and permanently re enter the workforce. The

163
00:10:26,679 --> 00:10:29,960
Speaker 3: Pacers Foundation is committed to improving the lives of Hoosiers

164
00:10:30,000 --> 00:10:34,920
Speaker 3: across Indiana, supporting organizations dedicated primarily to helping young people

165
00:10:35,040 --> 00:10:38,000
Speaker 3: and students. For more information on the work of the

166
00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:42,240
Speaker 3: Pacers Foundation or the Last Mile Program, visit Pacersfoundation dot

167
00:10:42,360 --> 00:10:44,640
Speaker 3: org or the Lastmile dot org.

168
00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:57,200
Speaker 2: As Clarence Hiller painted the railing outside his home in

169
00:10:57,240 --> 00:11:01,480
Speaker 2: the early evening of September eighteenth, nineteen, he couldn't stop

170
00:11:01,520 --> 00:11:04,800
Speaker 2: looking over his shoulder. It seemed like the entire South

171
00:11:04,840 --> 00:11:07,439
Speaker 2: side of Chicago was on edge. There had been a

172
00:11:07,520 --> 00:11:10,760
Speaker 2: number of robberies in the area, and everyone was worried

173
00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:14,160
Speaker 2: that they could be the next victim, and so in

174
00:11:14,200 --> 00:11:17,120
Speaker 2: the middle of that night, when Clarence heard the screams

175
00:11:17,160 --> 00:11:19,960
Speaker 2: of his wife and daughter, he was prepared to launch

176
00:11:20,000 --> 00:11:23,480
Speaker 2: into action. He confronted the stranger in his house, and

177
00:11:23,520 --> 00:11:26,080
Speaker 2: as Clarence tried to force the man out, both the

178
00:11:26,200 --> 00:11:30,760
Speaker 2: robber and Clarence fell down the stairs. Three shots were fired,

179
00:11:31,200 --> 00:11:34,160
Speaker 2: The intruder fled, and his neighbors came outside and their

180
00:11:34,200 --> 00:11:37,360
Speaker 2: slippers and robes to see what had happened. They found

181
00:11:37,400 --> 00:11:40,839
Speaker 2: Clarence bleeding just outside his front door with his daughter

182
00:11:40,920 --> 00:11:44,800
Speaker 2: standing over him. The police were called and a suspect,

183
00:11:44,880 --> 00:11:48,760
Speaker 2: Thomas Jennings, was found just eight blocks away. His coat

184
00:11:48,880 --> 00:11:51,640
Speaker 2: was torn and bloody, and he was carrying a revolver.

185
00:11:52,440 --> 00:11:55,880
Speaker 2: Thomas Jennings was ultimately convicted, but this wasn't the only

186
00:11:55,960 --> 00:11:59,839
Speaker 2: evidence used in his prosecution. When Thomas Jennings climbed it

187
00:11:59,880 --> 00:12:02,640
Speaker 2: to the Hiller's home that night, he grabbed onto the

188
00:12:02,760 --> 00:12:05,880
Speaker 2: railing that Clearance was painting the night before, leaving a

189
00:12:05,920 --> 00:12:09,679
Speaker 2: fingerprint behind in a semi wet coat of paint. The

190
00:12:09,720 --> 00:12:12,000
Speaker 2: prosecution cut off the piece of the rail with the

191
00:12:12,040 --> 00:12:16,640
Speaker 2: fingerprint that Jennings left behind. At his murder trial, jennings

192
00:12:16,640 --> 00:12:19,960
Speaker 2: defense attorney argued that this new forensic method of lifting

193
00:12:20,040 --> 00:12:23,600
Speaker 2: and comparing fingerprints couldn't be trusted. There were no tests

194
00:12:23,600 --> 00:12:26,920
Speaker 2: that could prove that it was reliable. But then the

195
00:12:26,960 --> 00:12:29,880
Speaker 2: prosecutor got in front of the jury and pressed his

196
00:12:29,880 --> 00:12:33,120
Speaker 2: finger onto a piece of paper. He then demonstrated how

197
00:12:33,160 --> 00:12:35,360
Speaker 2: he was able to lift his own print off of it.

198
00:12:35,760 --> 00:12:38,600
Speaker 2: By proving that he could collect the evidence, he was

199
00:12:38,600 --> 00:12:41,559
Speaker 2: able to convince the jury that it was also possible

200
00:12:41,920 --> 00:12:46,160
Speaker 2: to accurately analyze and match it to a suspect. The

201
00:12:46,280 --> 00:12:50,720
Speaker 2: judge ruled that fingerprint testimony was admissible, and Jennings was convicted.

202
00:12:51,640 --> 00:12:55,560
Speaker 2: The precedent of admitting fingerprints has been upheld again and again,

203
00:12:55,800 --> 00:12:58,719
Speaker 2: despite the fact that numerous men and women have been

204
00:12:58,880 --> 00:13:03,600
Speaker 2: falsely identified through fingerprint evidence. For example, on March eleventh,

205
00:13:03,600 --> 00:13:06,359
Speaker 2: two thousand and four, there were a series of explosions

206
00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:09,839
Speaker 2: in Madrid during rush hour. Ten bombs went off, all

207
00:13:09,880 --> 00:13:12,840
Speaker 2: within two minutes of each other. One hundred and ninety

208
00:13:12,840 --> 00:13:17,520
Speaker 2: three people died and almost two thousand were injured. Upon investigation,

209
00:13:17,760 --> 00:13:20,920
Speaker 2: Spanish authorities found a fingerprint on one of the plastic

210
00:13:20,960 --> 00:13:25,160
Speaker 2: bags that contained a detonator. They photographed it, then reached

211
00:13:25,200 --> 00:13:27,520
Speaker 2: out to countries around the world to help find the

212
00:13:27,559 --> 00:13:31,040
Speaker 2: culprits of the attack. The US authorities ran the print

213
00:13:31,040 --> 00:13:35,719
Speaker 2: through a database of fingerprints, Twenty possible matches appeared. One

214
00:13:35,760 --> 00:13:39,320
Speaker 2: of them was Brandon Mayfield. But Brandon Mayfield hadn't left

215
00:13:39,320 --> 00:13:41,959
Speaker 2: the country in ten years. He didn't even have a

216
00:13:42,040 --> 00:13:46,320
Speaker 2: valid passport. FBI analysts had no idea how Mayfield would

217
00:13:46,360 --> 00:13:49,480
Speaker 2: have been able to fly to Spain and back completely undetected,

218
00:13:49,960 --> 00:13:53,360
Speaker 2: and yet they pursued him as a suspect. It turns

219
00:13:53,400 --> 00:13:56,160
Speaker 2: out that Brandon had converted to Islam after marrying his

220
00:13:56,240 --> 00:13:59,960
Speaker 2: Egyptian wife, and so American authorities must have seen him

221
00:14:00,040 --> 00:14:03,200
Speaker 2: as a convenient suspect just a few years after nine

222
00:14:03,240 --> 00:14:07,000
Speaker 2: to eleven. In fact, despite evidence that showed that it

223
00:14:07,040 --> 00:14:10,600
Speaker 2: was extremely unlikely that Brandon left the prince on that bag,

224
00:14:11,000 --> 00:14:14,280
Speaker 2: three different FBI agents testified that the prince found in

225
00:14:14,400 --> 00:14:18,080
Speaker 2: Spain matched Mayfields. They said that it matched with one

226
00:14:18,240 --> 00:14:22,400
Speaker 2: hundred percent certainty. They arrested Mayfield, and while he sat

227
00:14:22,480 --> 00:14:26,120
Speaker 2: in jail, the FBI tried to convince the Spanish authorities

228
00:14:26,160 --> 00:14:29,720
Speaker 2: that these prints were Mayfields, but the Spanish police didn't

229
00:14:29,720 --> 00:14:32,600
Speaker 2: see what the FBI saw. The prince didn't seem to

230
00:14:32,640 --> 00:14:35,920
Speaker 2: match it all, from their perspective, a far cry from

231
00:14:35,960 --> 00:14:38,880
Speaker 2: a match with one hundred percent certainty. They said that

232
00:14:38,920 --> 00:14:41,760
Speaker 2: when they compared Mayfield's prince to the ones on the bag,

233
00:14:42,000 --> 00:14:47,840
Speaker 2: it was quote conclusively negative. They eventually did find a

234
00:14:47,840 --> 00:14:51,040
Speaker 2: match for the fingerprints and apprehended the man who left

235
00:14:51,040 --> 00:14:54,320
Speaker 2: them behind during the attack. The FBI admitted that they

236
00:14:54,360 --> 00:14:58,640
Speaker 2: made a mistake in pursuing Mayfield and let him walk free.

237
00:14:58,800 --> 00:15:02,800
Speaker 2: Mayfield is now probably the best known case of mistaken fingerprints,

238
00:15:03,360 --> 00:15:06,680
Speaker 2: but he certainly isn't the only one.

239
00:15:08,600 --> 00:15:11,680
Speaker 4: And we probably can guess if the Spanish police hadn't

240
00:15:11,720 --> 00:15:14,120
Speaker 4: been involved, or if they didn't have DNA. If you

241
00:15:14,120 --> 00:15:16,800
Speaker 4: can imagine this case in the United States, mister Mayfield

242
00:15:16,840 --> 00:15:20,640
Speaker 4: would have been convicted. How would his defense lawyer have

243
00:15:21,120 --> 00:15:25,520
Speaker 4: attacked three FBI agents with all of this experience, who

244
00:15:25,560 --> 00:15:28,480
Speaker 4: claimed with one hundred percent certainty that this print belonged

245
00:15:28,480 --> 00:15:33,120
Speaker 4: to mister Mayfield. But here's the point here. You could

246
00:15:33,160 --> 00:15:38,360
Speaker 4: assume that three fingerprint examiners with decades of experience who

247
00:15:38,360 --> 00:15:42,760
Speaker 4: were certified, followed the process and they were all wrong.

248
00:15:44,560 --> 00:15:49,000
Speaker 2: Joining us today is Mary Moriarty, the chief public Defender

249
00:15:49,040 --> 00:15:52,400
Speaker 2: of Hennepin County in Minnesota, and I'm really excited to

250
00:15:52,400 --> 00:15:56,280
Speaker 2: have her as a guest. She is a staunch defender

251
00:15:56,320 --> 00:15:59,200
Speaker 2: of the rights of the accused, and an outspoken one

252
00:15:59,200 --> 00:16:02,120
Speaker 2: at that, and we need more public defenders like that

253
00:16:02,200 --> 00:16:05,480
Speaker 2: in our country. She has worked to challenge the admission

254
00:16:05,480 --> 00:16:08,680
Speaker 2: of fingerprints. So, Mary, tell us a little bit about

255
00:16:08,760 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 2: how you first became interested in fingerprints.

256
00:16:11,920 --> 00:16:15,600
Speaker 4: So it goes back to when I was a child. Actually,

257
00:16:15,640 --> 00:16:18,200
Speaker 4: if you notice, my last name is Moriarty and I

258
00:16:18,240 --> 00:16:22,760
Speaker 4: had a particular interest in Sherlock Holmes, and I got

259
00:16:23,080 --> 00:16:27,920
Speaker 4: for Christmas one year the Hardy Boys book that talked

260
00:16:27,960 --> 00:16:31,400
Speaker 4: about how to collect evidence, and one of the things

261
00:16:31,400 --> 00:16:35,320
Speaker 4: I had in there was a recipe for fingerprint powder,

262
00:16:35,760 --> 00:16:40,120
Speaker 4: and so I would go take my parents' glasses, wineglasses,

263
00:16:40,120 --> 00:16:42,400
Speaker 4: that kind of thing, and I would dust them for prints.

264
00:16:42,440 --> 00:16:44,520
Speaker 4: I would put tape over it, and I would lift

265
00:16:44,560 --> 00:16:47,320
Speaker 4: the print. But I never really thought, well, what do

266
00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:50,560
Speaker 4: you do after that? It was just an interesting exercise

267
00:16:50,760 --> 00:16:54,400
Speaker 4: in taking items that I knew my parents had touched

268
00:16:54,480 --> 00:16:57,520
Speaker 4: and actually trying to lift the prints from them.

269
00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:00,600
Speaker 2: Well, I think I was like screw and around with

270
00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:03,040
Speaker 2: a Rubik's cube and playing with Gi Joe figures. So

271
00:17:03,080 --> 00:17:06,399
Speaker 2: this makes me feel a little bit insecure about what

272
00:17:06,560 --> 00:17:09,400
Speaker 2: I was doing as a kid. But it certainly sounds

273
00:17:09,480 --> 00:17:13,240
Speaker 2: like you were headed towards a career involving forensics in

274
00:17:13,280 --> 00:17:13,640
Speaker 2: the law.

275
00:17:13,720 --> 00:17:17,040
Speaker 4: For a while, my father was actually a public defender,

276
00:17:17,600 --> 00:17:20,760
Speaker 4: and some of my dad's clients were actually my classmates,

277
00:17:21,160 --> 00:17:26,000
Speaker 4: and I got to know them as individuals. There's an

278
00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:30,840
Speaker 4: attempt to otherwise people who become public defender clients, and

279
00:17:31,680 --> 00:17:34,440
Speaker 4: the age old question that public defenders get asked, is

280
00:17:34,480 --> 00:17:37,400
Speaker 4: how can you represent those people? And it's very easy

281
00:17:37,520 --> 00:17:42,200
Speaker 4: because those people are our brothers, our dads, our sisters,

282
00:17:42,240 --> 00:17:45,359
Speaker 4: our cousins. And you look at what those clients have

283
00:17:45,440 --> 00:17:48,479
Speaker 4: been through, and so many of them have a history

284
00:17:48,480 --> 00:17:52,840
Speaker 4: of trauma, you can understand why they find themselves in

285
00:17:52,880 --> 00:17:56,640
Speaker 4: these particular situations. And I think growing up my parents

286
00:17:56,680 --> 00:18:00,440
Speaker 4: fostered a really strong sense of justice in my life.

287
00:18:00,920 --> 00:18:03,560
Speaker 4: In every situation, they would sit me down and say,

288
00:18:04,040 --> 00:18:06,440
Speaker 4: you know, what is the right thing to do here?

289
00:18:06,960 --> 00:18:10,720
Speaker 4: So fast forward when I went to law school. Once

290
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:13,080
Speaker 4: I finally made that decision, I knew that there was

291
00:18:13,119 --> 00:18:15,240
Speaker 4: only one thing that I wanted to be, and that

292
00:18:15,400 --> 00:18:17,480
Speaker 4: was a public defender. I wanted to be in a

293
00:18:17,520 --> 00:18:21,199
Speaker 4: courtroom representing the same people that I got to know

294
00:18:21,520 --> 00:18:32,280
Speaker 4: through my father's practice.

295
00:18:33,600 --> 00:18:36,560
Speaker 2: All right, so you became an attorney and got a

296
00:18:36,640 --> 00:18:38,640
Speaker 2: chance to right some of the wrongs that you saw

297
00:18:38,720 --> 00:18:42,440
Speaker 2: of the system. But what were your thoughts about fingerprints

298
00:18:42,480 --> 00:18:43,800
Speaker 2: when you first started out?

299
00:18:44,720 --> 00:18:47,280
Speaker 4: I have to acknowledge. So I've been a public defender

300
00:18:47,320 --> 00:18:50,679
Speaker 4: for thirty years, and I certainly had fingerprint cases, and

301
00:18:50,880 --> 00:18:55,000
Speaker 4: I also accepted without questioning that they were based on

302
00:18:55,080 --> 00:19:00,160
Speaker 4: science and that an expert could actually testify that a

303
00:19:00,200 --> 00:19:04,919
Speaker 4: single finger made this print from the crime scene. And

304
00:19:05,119 --> 00:19:09,440
Speaker 4: fingerprints have been accepted as evidence in courts for over

305
00:19:09,520 --> 00:19:13,719
Speaker 4: one hundred years, and people assume that it's reliable.

306
00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:17,040
Speaker 2: So this is something that always fascinated me. I don't

307
00:19:17,080 --> 00:19:19,520
Speaker 2: even know when it was that I began to believe this,

308
00:19:19,680 --> 00:19:24,000
Speaker 2: but even I had come to the belief that fingerprints

309
00:19:24,000 --> 00:19:26,240
Speaker 2: were sort of the gold standard, And that seems to

310
00:19:26,280 --> 00:19:29,960
Speaker 2: be sort of a consistent, you know, collective thought in

311
00:19:30,000 --> 00:19:34,159
Speaker 2: the American psyche that fingerprints are regarded as being just

312
00:19:34,320 --> 00:19:36,080
Speaker 2: really reliable. Why do you think that is?

313
00:19:36,840 --> 00:19:40,879
Speaker 4: They're in popular culture. We've all grown up being given

314
00:19:40,960 --> 00:19:44,199
Speaker 4: a certain perspective on what fingerprints are. When I started

315
00:19:44,200 --> 00:19:47,159
Speaker 4: getting an interest in fingerprints, I would say to people

316
00:19:47,320 --> 00:19:49,919
Speaker 4: outside the legal system, my friends, I would say, you know,

317
00:19:50,440 --> 00:19:54,160
Speaker 4: when you think about how a fingerprint from a crime

318
00:19:54,240 --> 00:19:57,919
Speaker 4: scene is compared to the known print of somebody, what

319
00:19:57,960 --> 00:20:01,800
Speaker 4: does that look like in your mind? We'll always say, well,

320
00:20:02,119 --> 00:20:05,960
Speaker 4: I envision the crime scene print on a screen right

321
00:20:06,000 --> 00:20:09,320
Speaker 4: next to the known fingerprint, and then I see a

322
00:20:09,400 --> 00:20:12,920
Speaker 4: computer merging them and bells going off, going ding ding ding.

323
00:20:13,000 --> 00:20:16,480
Speaker 4: It matches, and that makes sense. It makes sense that

324
00:20:16,520 --> 00:20:19,240
Speaker 4: people would think that. When I tell people that that's

325
00:20:19,280 --> 00:20:23,240
Speaker 4: not at all what happens, they are shocked. Lay people

326
00:20:23,359 --> 00:20:25,840
Speaker 4: hear that there are these databases, and they tend to

327
00:20:25,880 --> 00:20:28,760
Speaker 4: think that everybody's fingerprints are in it. And so I

328
00:20:28,800 --> 00:20:33,560
Speaker 4: think what people believe is that, Okay, you get a

329
00:20:33,800 --> 00:20:36,520
Speaker 4: fingerprint off a gun and you put it in a

330
00:20:36,600 --> 00:20:39,760
Speaker 4: database and the computer comes up with the match and

331
00:20:39,840 --> 00:20:43,439
Speaker 4: that's it. So that's not true at all. So of

332
00:20:43,520 --> 00:20:47,399
Speaker 4: course we're all entrenched in popular culture. We've been told

333
00:20:47,520 --> 00:20:51,600
Speaker 4: for many, many years fingerprints are fantastic, and you know,

334
00:20:51,640 --> 00:20:55,760
Speaker 4: why would anybody take the time to actually look to

335
00:20:55,840 --> 00:20:57,000
Speaker 4: see what they do?

336
00:20:58,080 --> 00:21:01,120
Speaker 2: So tell us a little bit about what they actually do.

337
00:21:01,520 --> 00:21:04,760
Speaker 2: Practically speaking, how does it actually work? What af fingerprint

338
00:21:04,920 --> 00:21:06,959
Speaker 2: examiners look at.

339
00:21:06,960 --> 00:21:11,320
Speaker 4: The way fingerprint examiners actually look at fingerprints is through

340
00:21:11,359 --> 00:21:16,119
Speaker 4: what they call a methodology called ACEV. So it's a

341
00:21:16,119 --> 00:21:24,000
Speaker 4: c slash V, which is analysis, comparison, evaluation and verification.

342
00:21:24,880 --> 00:21:27,920
Speaker 4: So here's a description of what they actually do. Let's

343
00:21:27,920 --> 00:21:32,320
Speaker 4: say a person is shot with a gun. They will

344
00:21:33,040 --> 00:21:35,840
Speaker 4: lift and by lift, I mean they'll look for a

345
00:21:36,000 --> 00:21:40,159
Speaker 4: fingerprint on that gun, and then they will try to

346
00:21:40,320 --> 00:21:43,760
Speaker 4: remove that fingerprint so that they can compare it. So

347
00:21:43,840 --> 00:21:48,240
Speaker 4: the A part is analysis. They are supposed to look

348
00:21:48,359 --> 00:21:52,840
Speaker 4: at that fingerprint to see whether there is enough detail

349
00:21:53,080 --> 00:21:56,800
Speaker 4: in it to go any further. People have seen these

350
00:21:56,840 --> 00:22:01,119
Speaker 4: pictures of somebody rolling their finger over ad of ink,

351
00:22:01,440 --> 00:22:04,520
Speaker 4: and that's how you get the print. That's not what happens.

352
00:22:04,840 --> 00:22:08,920
Speaker 4: When people touch objects. You get a fragment, and sometimes

353
00:22:08,920 --> 00:22:12,840
Speaker 4: it's smeared, and sometimes there's dust on it, sometimes there's oil.

354
00:22:12,920 --> 00:22:15,720
Speaker 4: There are a lot of different factors. And so here's

355
00:22:15,800 --> 00:22:19,240
Speaker 4: the deal. It's not that you're comparing a fully rolled

356
00:22:19,240 --> 00:22:22,840
Speaker 4: fingerprint to a fully rolled fingerprint. You are first looking

357
00:22:22,920 --> 00:22:26,560
Speaker 4: at a fragment of the print, and it is totally

358
00:22:26,640 --> 00:22:31,800
Speaker 4: within the subjectivity, the subjective discretion of a fingerprint analysis

359
00:22:31,880 --> 00:22:36,159
Speaker 4: or examiner to decide whether there is enough information on

360
00:22:36,320 --> 00:22:39,840
Speaker 4: that print to even go ahead and compare it. So

361
00:22:40,000 --> 00:22:41,000
Speaker 4: just think about.

362
00:22:40,720 --> 00:22:44,679
Speaker 2: That, right, that's kind of scary because it's up to

363
00:22:45,119 --> 00:22:49,280
Speaker 2: the judgment call of one analyst on that particular day,

364
00:22:49,720 --> 00:22:53,239
Speaker 2: and I'm quite sure that another analyst looking at the

365
00:22:53,280 --> 00:22:56,399
Speaker 2: same portion of a print might come up with the

366
00:22:56,400 --> 00:23:00,879
Speaker 2: opposite conclusion. So it turns out that the A in

367
00:23:01,080 --> 00:23:05,760
Speaker 2: ACV the very first step is problematic and pretty flawed.

368
00:23:05,960 --> 00:23:08,920
Speaker 2: So the next letter is the C for comparison, where

369
00:23:08,920 --> 00:23:11,600
Speaker 2: you're taking a print left at a crime scene and

370
00:23:11,680 --> 00:23:14,800
Speaker 2: comparing it to a suspects print. So tell us a

371
00:23:14,840 --> 00:23:16,959
Speaker 2: little bit about what that process.

372
00:23:16,600 --> 00:23:21,840
Speaker 4: Entails, Mary, So once you make the decision to go forward,

373
00:23:22,040 --> 00:23:26,600
Speaker 4: then you are onto the C or comparison, and you're

374
00:23:26,680 --> 00:23:32,119
Speaker 4: comparing the fully rolled print to the fragment of a print. So, Josh,

375
00:23:32,200 --> 00:23:35,280
Speaker 4: you might look and compare those two fingerprints and say,

376
00:23:35,800 --> 00:23:38,919
Speaker 4: you know, I see enough here. I see twelve points

377
00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:42,439
Speaker 4: of comparison. That's enough for me to say that this

378
00:23:42,840 --> 00:23:48,679
Speaker 4: is the same person. I might look at it and say, oh,

379
00:23:48,800 --> 00:23:51,920
Speaker 4: I see five points of comparison. I think that's enough

380
00:23:51,920 --> 00:23:55,439
Speaker 4: to declare that it's a match. So, once again, it

381
00:23:55,520 --> 00:23:58,240
Speaker 4: is completely subjective.

382
00:23:58,600 --> 00:24:03,040
Speaker 2: Right, and saying, well, sometimes we think ten points that

383
00:24:03,080 --> 00:24:06,840
Speaker 2: look the same between a rolled print and a fragment

384
00:24:06,840 --> 00:24:10,199
Speaker 2: of a print are enough similarities to declare match, and

385
00:24:10,280 --> 00:24:13,159
Speaker 2: sometimes we think five is enough, And that just doesn't

386
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:16,960
Speaker 2: seem scientific, it doesn't seem very reliable. And so, Mary,

387
00:24:17,440 --> 00:24:20,920
Speaker 2: something we've been addressing a lot on this podcast is

388
00:24:21,080 --> 00:24:24,600
Speaker 2: the two thousand and nine NAS report. Tell us a

389
00:24:24,680 --> 00:24:29,000
Speaker 2: little bit about what the NAS report said about fingerprints.

390
00:24:29,920 --> 00:24:33,840
Speaker 4: The National Academy of Science is the most prestigious scientific

391
00:24:33,920 --> 00:24:39,199
Speaker 4: body in the United States and they advise Congress on

392
00:24:39,480 --> 00:24:43,400
Speaker 4: issues of science, medicine, pretty much anything you can think

393
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:47,560
Speaker 4: of when it comes to sciences, and the National Academy

394
00:24:47,600 --> 00:24:52,920
Speaker 4: of Science was asked to examine the comparative forensic sciences.

395
00:24:53,480 --> 00:24:57,879
Speaker 4: It was a groundbreaking report and it was very in depth.

396
00:24:58,080 --> 00:25:03,320
Speaker 4: They took testimony, the elicited research, and it rocked the

397
00:25:03,359 --> 00:25:07,160
Speaker 4: forensic science community. One of the things that you realize

398
00:25:07,200 --> 00:25:09,800
Speaker 4: when you look at the report, if you are a scientist,

399
00:25:09,880 --> 00:25:12,600
Speaker 4: you know that there are certain tenets of science, like

400
00:25:12,640 --> 00:25:16,040
Speaker 4: you have to be able to replicate the process. When

401
00:25:16,040 --> 00:25:20,920
Speaker 4: a scientist does an experiment, they document what they do.

402
00:25:21,560 --> 00:25:24,359
Speaker 4: And the National Academy of Science was very clear that

403
00:25:24,480 --> 00:25:28,399
Speaker 4: fingerprint examiners, as well as any other comparative forensic examiners,

404
00:25:28,520 --> 00:25:32,200
Speaker 4: do not provide documentation. And I found this to be true.

405
00:25:32,240 --> 00:25:36,240
Speaker 4: You would order, you would ask for a fingerprint examiner's file,

406
00:25:36,840 --> 00:25:40,439
Speaker 4: and you wouldn't really see many notes. You wouldn't know

407
00:25:40,560 --> 00:25:43,040
Speaker 4: what they were actually looking at. You might have a

408
00:25:43,080 --> 00:25:45,760
Speaker 4: picture of a fingerprint with some circles on it, but

409
00:25:46,240 --> 00:25:48,400
Speaker 4: you wouldn't know what they were looking at, so there

410
00:25:48,440 --> 00:25:52,359
Speaker 4: was no way to replicate the process that they actually used.

411
00:25:52,920 --> 00:25:56,200
Speaker 4: There was no basis for saying that it came from

412
00:25:56,200 --> 00:25:59,680
Speaker 4: the same source. And most of the people who did fingerprints,

413
00:26:00,160 --> 00:26:03,080
Speaker 4: and probably still do in some places, are not scientists.

414
00:26:03,320 --> 00:26:06,159
Speaker 4: They are not recruited because of their scientific background. They

415
00:26:06,160 --> 00:26:10,600
Speaker 4: are often police officers who were apprenticed into this position

416
00:26:10,760 --> 00:26:13,440
Speaker 4: because the police officer who examined the print was going

417
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:18,520
Speaker 4: to retire. And then there's the evaluation where you're actually

418
00:26:18,600 --> 00:26:22,240
Speaker 4: making the decision about whether this comes from the same source,

419
00:26:22,720 --> 00:26:26,440
Speaker 4: and there's a lot of controversy there. Fingerprint examiners used

420
00:26:26,480 --> 00:26:29,520
Speaker 4: to come in and say that they had one hundred

421
00:26:29,520 --> 00:26:32,840
Speaker 4: percent certainty, they were one hundred percent certain that this

422
00:26:33,440 --> 00:26:37,720
Speaker 4: print from the crime scene came from this particular client,

423
00:26:38,480 --> 00:26:40,680
Speaker 4: and there was no basis for that. In fact, that's

424
00:26:40,720 --> 00:26:44,000
Speaker 4: not even allowed anymore. And why is there no basis

425
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:48,320
Speaker 4: for it? You would have to have population statistics, right,

426
00:26:48,359 --> 00:26:51,200
Speaker 4: I mean, that's what DNA has, That's why they come

427
00:26:51,280 --> 00:26:53,639
Speaker 4: up with these numbers. It's one in a million that

428
00:26:53,680 --> 00:26:57,679
Speaker 4: it came from this person. There are no population statistics

429
00:26:57,720 --> 00:27:00,359
Speaker 4: regarding fingerprints.

430
00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:11,960
Speaker 2: Okay, so we're seeing that there are a lot of

431
00:27:12,000 --> 00:27:15,919
Speaker 2: flaws with both analyzing and comparing prints, the A and

432
00:27:15,960 --> 00:27:18,920
Speaker 2: the C and ACE that neither of these steps are

433
00:27:18,920 --> 00:27:23,840
Speaker 2: actually rooted in the scientific methods. And now we're onto E, right, ACE.

434
00:27:24,960 --> 00:27:28,320
Speaker 2: So the E is evaluation where they decide if it's

435
00:27:28,320 --> 00:27:30,600
Speaker 2: a match or not. And so it seems that if

436
00:27:30,640 --> 00:27:34,680
Speaker 2: analyzing and comparing the prints aren't scientifically proven to work,

437
00:27:35,119 --> 00:27:38,320
Speaker 2: the evaluation of those prints and deciding whether or not

438
00:27:38,359 --> 00:27:40,520
Speaker 2: it's a match can't be done to any degree of

439
00:27:40,640 --> 00:27:44,680
Speaker 2: certainty either. That just seems like common sense. So this

440
00:27:45,000 --> 00:27:49,440
Speaker 2: is purely subjective. But there's one last letter in these

441
00:27:49,480 --> 00:27:53,960
Speaker 2: steps that examiners follow, and that's the V for verification. Right,

442
00:27:54,000 --> 00:27:58,359
Speaker 2: it's ACE V. And I'm already skeptical because the first

443
00:27:58,359 --> 00:28:00,760
Speaker 2: three steps of the process or flawed, So how could

444
00:28:00,760 --> 00:28:02,320
Speaker 2: the results be verified?

445
00:28:03,240 --> 00:28:08,280
Speaker 4: Imagine this, A fingerprint examiner would decide that this fragment

446
00:28:08,280 --> 00:28:11,280
Speaker 4: of a print came from this particular person, and then

447
00:28:11,320 --> 00:28:15,480
Speaker 4: they would hand it off to another fingerprint examiner for verification.

448
00:28:16,280 --> 00:28:19,679
Speaker 4: But the issue was it was never blind. So, Josh,

449
00:28:19,800 --> 00:28:22,159
Speaker 4: let's say you and I were fingerprint examiners in the

450
00:28:22,200 --> 00:28:25,560
Speaker 4: same office and I would make a decision about a print,

451
00:28:25,760 --> 00:28:28,560
Speaker 4: and then I would ask you to verify what I

452
00:28:28,680 --> 00:28:31,720
Speaker 4: had done. And the problem with that is you already

453
00:28:31,840 --> 00:28:35,720
Speaker 4: knew what I had done. It wasn't blind. In science,

454
00:28:35,800 --> 00:28:39,360
Speaker 4: they do blind verification, so that the person who's actually

455
00:28:39,480 --> 00:28:43,880
Speaker 4: attempting to verify or replicate what the first person did

456
00:28:44,040 --> 00:28:47,600
Speaker 4: it doesn't know what the result was actually, So the

457
00:28:47,680 --> 00:28:52,320
Speaker 4: fact that the verification wasn't blind led to what people

458
00:28:52,360 --> 00:28:55,360
Speaker 4: call confirmation bias, which is a huge problem.

459
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:59,200
Speaker 2: All right. So, once the NAS basically said that the

460
00:28:59,400 --> 00:29:03,800
Speaker 2: ACV process is really a recipe for wrongful convictions, this

461
00:29:03,840 --> 00:29:07,440
Speaker 2: should have been an explosion in the criminal justice system

462
00:29:07,600 --> 00:29:09,920
Speaker 2: in the courts, and it just wasn't. And that's, I guess,

463
00:29:10,000 --> 00:29:13,840
Speaker 2: a different issue altogether. We have to keep pushing in

464
00:29:13,880 --> 00:29:17,280
Speaker 2: that regard. But you are still trying to push and

465
00:29:17,400 --> 00:29:21,320
Speaker 2: challenge the admissibility of fingerprints in the criminal justice system.

466
00:29:21,680 --> 00:29:23,840
Speaker 2: And I have to tell you, it just seems like

467
00:29:24,160 --> 00:29:28,200
Speaker 2: it must be so difficult, Mary, because this is not

468
00:29:28,360 --> 00:29:33,040
Speaker 2: like any kind of scientific analysis. But it just feels

469
00:29:33,120 --> 00:29:38,520
Speaker 2: to me that everyone believes fingerprint evidence works. It's so

470
00:29:38,960 --> 00:29:43,520
Speaker 2: ingrained in pop culture, and just like the intrinsic belief

471
00:29:43,600 --> 00:29:46,920
Speaker 2: that people have that we've grown up with. So tell

472
00:29:46,960 --> 00:29:49,800
Speaker 2: me what are some of the problems you've run into

473
00:29:50,480 --> 00:29:54,480
Speaker 2: when trying to call and question this so called science.

474
00:29:55,120 --> 00:29:58,720
Speaker 4: When you're in court litigating this, you're absolutely right. That

475
00:29:58,960 --> 00:30:01,200
Speaker 4: is one of the things you hear from prosecutors and

476
00:30:01,240 --> 00:30:04,400
Speaker 4: you hear from judges. Of course, this is reliable. It's

477
00:30:04,400 --> 00:30:07,320
Speaker 4: been coming into court for decades and decades, and nobody

478
00:30:07,360 --> 00:30:10,560
Speaker 4: has ever challenged it before. So that is a big

479
00:30:10,640 --> 00:30:15,000
Speaker 4: hurdle to get over, much more so than other things

480
00:30:15,120 --> 00:30:17,560
Speaker 4: like bite marks, blood spatter and that sort of thing.

481
00:30:17,960 --> 00:30:22,440
Speaker 4: The court system always lags behind science, and it was

482
00:30:22,520 --> 00:30:27,880
Speaker 4: an uphill climb to convince judges and prosecutors that there

483
00:30:27,920 --> 00:30:31,240
Speaker 4: were problems with fingerprints, or if you could convince them

484
00:30:31,680 --> 00:30:34,400
Speaker 4: that there were problems, you certainly couldn't convince them that

485
00:30:34,440 --> 00:30:38,200
Speaker 4: they should exclude that evidence. In fact, judges and I

486
00:30:38,240 --> 00:30:40,040
Speaker 4: heard this quite a bit, it's like, well, you know,

487
00:30:40,160 --> 00:30:42,760
Speaker 4: let's just let the jury decide. But then you get

488
00:30:42,800 --> 00:30:46,680
Speaker 4: back to the problem of jurors thinking that fingerprints are

489
00:30:47,360 --> 00:30:49,360
Speaker 4: you know, they've been with us forever. They're embedded in

490
00:30:49,400 --> 00:30:52,640
Speaker 4: popular culture, and you have to get over all of

491
00:30:52,680 --> 00:30:57,200
Speaker 4: that history to convince durers that there are indeed issues. Essentially,

492
00:30:57,640 --> 00:31:02,080
Speaker 4: the presumption is that prints are are infallible. In a

493
00:31:02,160 --> 00:31:04,960
Speaker 4: case where your client is supposed to be presumed innocent

494
00:31:05,200 --> 00:31:08,080
Speaker 4: and the prosecution or the government has to prove their

495
00:31:08,080 --> 00:31:11,920
Speaker 4: case beyond reasonable doubt, a significant piece of evidence is

496
00:31:12,000 --> 00:31:15,360
Speaker 4: presumed to be infallible, and you have a lot of

497
00:31:15,440 --> 00:31:18,200
Speaker 4: work to do to try to educate them that that's

498
00:31:18,240 --> 00:31:19,200
Speaker 4: not the case.

499
00:31:19,640 --> 00:31:22,000
Speaker 2: Right, because it turns out that judges are really no

500
00:31:22,080 --> 00:31:26,800
Speaker 2: different than jurors. I mean, in some instances they're more sophisticated,

501
00:31:26,920 --> 00:31:32,040
Speaker 2: not always. They certainly have less time and frankly sometimes

502
00:31:32,120 --> 00:31:36,680
Speaker 2: less patience, but they're sort of not immune to the

503
00:31:36,720 --> 00:31:40,240
Speaker 2: impact of pop culture and precedent. But look, some people

504
00:31:40,280 --> 00:31:43,000
Speaker 2: may be listening to this and thinking, I don't have

505
00:31:43,000 --> 00:31:44,840
Speaker 2: a law degree, but I want to help. I want

506
00:31:44,920 --> 00:31:47,680
Speaker 2: to do something about this. So do you have any

507
00:31:47,680 --> 00:31:51,960
Speaker 2: ideas for what our listeners can do to help I do?

508
00:31:52,200 --> 00:31:53,920
Speaker 4: And I wanted to go back, just for a moment

509
00:31:54,560 --> 00:31:58,080
Speaker 4: to talk about precedent because where I went in my

510
00:31:58,240 --> 00:32:02,600
Speaker 4: mind are our core saying that actual innocence of a

511
00:32:02,680 --> 00:32:06,600
Speaker 4: client on death row doesn't matter because procedure was followed.

512
00:32:07,200 --> 00:32:12,480
Speaker 4: So that should alert your listeners how how much courts

513
00:32:12,560 --> 00:32:18,360
Speaker 4: adhere to precedent and our deferential to previous findings to

514
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:22,480
Speaker 4: the point where they would authorize that somebody received the

515
00:32:22,520 --> 00:32:26,240
Speaker 4: death penalty because the process was followed. Anyone in the

516
00:32:26,320 --> 00:32:31,880
Speaker 4: public wants the law enforcement, the system to get things right,

517
00:32:32,320 --> 00:32:34,880
Speaker 4: and the only way we can get things right is

518
00:32:35,000 --> 00:32:39,520
Speaker 4: if we understand the limitations of these forensic sciences. So

519
00:32:39,960 --> 00:32:44,320
Speaker 4: people can be writing letters, calling their prosecutors, their policymakers,

520
00:32:44,360 --> 00:32:48,640
Speaker 4: county commissioners, city council members. What are you doing to

521
00:32:48,840 --> 00:32:54,360
Speaker 4: make sure that police officers, that crime lab examiners understand

522
00:32:54,520 --> 00:32:58,400
Speaker 4: this information? And that would be really helpful because people

523
00:32:58,480 --> 00:33:02,320
Speaker 4: really do listen more or to constituents and people in

524
00:33:02,360 --> 00:33:05,840
Speaker 4: the public than they do potentially defense lawyers.

525
00:33:07,880 --> 00:33:10,800
Speaker 2: You know, I've said this before, and I really do

526
00:33:10,920 --> 00:33:15,400
Speaker 2: think it bears repeating. Pressure breaks pipes. What you all

527
00:33:15,520 --> 00:33:19,480
Speaker 2: can do, as listeners of this podcast is take action.

528
00:33:20,400 --> 00:33:23,160
Speaker 2: You're on here because you want to learn something, but

529
00:33:23,240 --> 00:33:26,280
Speaker 2: you also want to do something about it. The way

530
00:33:26,320 --> 00:33:29,360
Speaker 2: that we stop this junk signs from making it into

531
00:33:29,360 --> 00:33:32,040
Speaker 2: our courts is to shine a bright light on it.

532
00:33:33,000 --> 00:33:36,680
Speaker 2: Google the NAS report that we've continually talked about during

533
00:33:36,720 --> 00:33:41,040
Speaker 2: this season. That report details how so many of these

534
00:33:41,080 --> 00:33:46,800
Speaker 2: disciplines of forensic science, including fingerprints, are really problematic. The

535
00:33:46,920 --> 00:33:51,160
Speaker 2: problem is judges don't know about it. Find out who

536
00:33:51,200 --> 00:33:54,560
Speaker 2: your local criminal court judges are and send them the

537
00:33:54,680 --> 00:33:58,840
Speaker 2: NAS report. Highlight the section on fingerprint analysis and send

538
00:33:58,960 --> 00:34:02,960
Speaker 2: to your local criminal court judges. It's only by educating

539
00:34:03,000 --> 00:34:06,200
Speaker 2: our judges and speaking truth to power that we can

540
00:34:06,320 --> 00:34:09,560
Speaker 2: really make change happen. And if you don't think that

541
00:34:09,719 --> 00:34:12,480
Speaker 2: your voice matters, just take a look around the country

542
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:16,440
Speaker 2: right now. It's the collective voice that is causing change

543
00:34:16,480 --> 00:34:19,040
Speaker 2: to happen, and we can do it one step at

544
00:34:19,040 --> 00:34:30,080
Speaker 2: a time in our criminal justice system. Thank you for

545
00:34:30,160 --> 00:34:33,000
Speaker 2: listening to Wrongful Conviction Junk Science. We're going to be

546
00:34:33,040 --> 00:34:36,160
Speaker 2: taking a little break, but our next episode will be

547
00:34:36,239 --> 00:34:39,840
Speaker 2: out on October seventh. In the meantime, we will be

548
00:34:40,200 --> 00:34:43,719
Speaker 2: keeping a critical and close eye on our criminal justice system.

549
00:34:44,280 --> 00:34:47,040
Speaker 2: We would love to hear how you're doing that along

550
00:34:47,080 --> 00:34:49,239
Speaker 2: with us, So please leave us a comment and let

551
00:34:49,320 --> 00:34:51,200
Speaker 2: us know what you've been up to, and stay on

552
00:34:51,239 --> 00:34:55,400
Speaker 2: the Wrongful Conviction podcast feed as Jason Flamm will continue

553
00:34:55,440 --> 00:35:02,640
Speaker 2: to release episodes between now and October seventh. Wrongful Conviction

554
00:35:02,760 --> 00:35:05,680
Speaker 2: Junk Science is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts

555
00:35:05,840 --> 00:35:09,279
Speaker 2: and association with Signal Company Number One. Thanks to our

556
00:35:09,320 --> 00:35:12,560
Speaker 2: executive producer Jason Flamm and the team at Signal Company

557
00:35:12,640 --> 00:35:17,600
Speaker 2: Number One executive producer Kevin Wardis and senior producers Karakornhaber

558
00:35:17,719 --> 00:35:21,400
Speaker 2: and Britz Spangler. Our music was composed by Jay Ralph.

559
00:35:21,960 --> 00:35:25,640
Speaker 2: You can follow me on Instagram at dubin Josh, follow

560
00:35:25,680 --> 00:35:29,480
Speaker 2: the Wrongful Conviction podcast on Facebook and on Instagram at

561
00:35:29,480 --> 00:35:32,680
Speaker 2: Wrongful Conviction and on Twitter at wrong Conviction