Why is fingerprint analysis not accurate in crime?

Law

2 answers:

kipiarov [429]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

It is only accurate if the criminal is already in the police database.

Explanation:

The print is matched with a fingerprint that is already in the system.

yulyashka [42]3 years ago

4 0

No one disputes that fingerprinting is a valuable and generally reliable police tool, but despite more than a century of use, fingerprinting has never been scientifically validated. This is significant because of the criteria governing the admission of scientific evidence in the US courts. Latent fingerprints, which are collected from crime scenes, have been used as courtroom evidence for decades. ... But there is little certainty that a set of fingerprints can reliably point to the right person, according to the report.

You might be interested in

Sometimes _______________ is the result of an agreement between the parties. In other cases, it is a court-ordered remedy for br

Anni [7]

Answer:

Recission (Rescission)

Explanation:

This is a contract or law is canceled and the parties would return to positions as if the contract weren't made.

Hope this Helps!

3 0

3 years ago

What crime is committed by anyone (adult) who shall kill a child three years old?

jok3333 [9.3K]

Manslaughter maybe. im not sure

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Come up with 4 unjust Laws and 4 Just Laws

Luden [163]

Unjust laws:

Money Bail. ...
Private Bail Companies. ...
Suspended Drivers Licenses. ...
Excessive Mandatory Minimum Sentences. ...
Wealth-Based Banishment That Outlaws Low-Income Housing. ...
Private Probation Abuses. ...
Parking Tickets to Debtors' Prison. ...
Sex Offense Registration Laws.

Just laws:

It is equal. A just law is one that treats every person the same.
It is based on widely held values. Laws should be based on the values and ethics held by the majority of society.
It is utilitarian. ...
It aims to reduce inequalities. ...
It must minimise delay. ...
It must not be retrospective. ...
The law must be known.

Hope this helps!

4 0

3 years ago

While snowboarding down a slope at Mammoth Mountain Ski Area (Mammoth), 17-year-old David Graham was engaged in a snowball fight

umka2103 [35]

Answer:

Graham's defense is incorrect.

Explanation:

An expression used in this case was “inherent risk”, which establishes the hypothesis of anomalies and errors that compromise any activity and should be seen as an anticipation of what may not work. When planning an activity, you need to be aware of the risks of that activity to achieve the intended goal without obstacles that may interfere with the process required to achieve the goal.

According to Graham's defense there was an inherent risk that covers the snowboard that Graham is practicing and was ignored by Madigan, so Graham is not guilty of any charges. However, the inherent risk of sport does not include snowballing, as Graham was doing. For this reason, we can say that Graham was being negligent and distracted while throwing snowballs. This negligence caused the accident that hurt Madigan, so Graham is guilty and Madigan should be compensated.

8 0

3 years ago

Discuss the challenges involved in the exposure and investigation of (any police misconduct) the crime of domestic violence in p

elena55 [62]

Answer:In a bid to end violence against women, the Ministry of Human Rights (MOHR) Pakistan on Thursday launched a free, nationwide helpline to ...

4 0

3 years ago