FINGER PRINTS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXV, Issue 34, 10 February 1913, Page 3

FINGER PRINTS

VALUE AS EVIDENCE CRITICISM AND DEFENCE. Finger-print evidence wae criticised very severely by Mr. J. Samuel, counsel for a prisoner (Krauech) in the Supreme Court, on Saturday. Counsel quoted the ■case in the Victorian Courts, where the Chief Justice of Victoria, in April, 1912, refused to commit a man on purely finger-print evidence. Counsel was proceeding to refer to the recent Fitzroy murder, 'when His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman ruled the reading of a recent newspaper cable meesage out as objectionable. Exception was also taken ( to the method of preparation of fincerprints for the camera. Tho fact that scientists had not investigated the problem was a matter of comment by counsel, who read extracts to that' effect. The Crown Prosecutor pointed out that the Full Court of Victoria absolutely disapproved of the Chief Justice's statement. His Honour : I may say, ako, that the learned Chief Justice of New Zealand absolutely disapproves of Mr. Justice Maddens attitude; and that I myaclf absolutely disapprove of it. I may not bo in a position to set myself as an authority against Mr. Justice Maddens judgment. I think that what you have read is certainly irrelevant. You need not discuss it further. I shall have something to saj' about it later. His Honour, in summing up to the jury, specially referred to the value of finger-print evidence, which had been so directly attacked, and which in the caso of tho youth Krausch the jury had been asked to discard, on tho ground that it was not scientifically valid cviMost of the Judges of the Supremo Court had had experience, of finger-prints. The jury were asked, on the high authority of the Chief Justice of Victoria, to pooh-pooh the evidence. "All I can say," said his Honour, "is that I disapprove, and his Honour's colleagues disapproved, of his remarks. This is an extremely important matter, as it affects the reliance to be placed on finger-print evidence in the future. On this point it is worthy of note- that tho most modern burglar has the highest opinion of it— -he takes care to wear gloves while at work. Finger-print evidence was a new thing, but it might be very soon it would be accepted 'absolutely as a matter of fact. You have the evidence that from tho time of birth finger-prints do not alter in any individual.- That is an' important fact. The other important fact, is no person's finger-prints are identical with' the finger-prints of any other person. It. is an absolute fact that no two individual finger-prints can be alike." The great value of finger-print evidence, continued his Honour, was that it was easily collected and easily put before a jury. His Honour illustrated the point of fingerprint evidence by producing a bunch of k&ys. He asked if it was possible, if all the people of Wellington could be examined, that anyone else would possess the same number of identical keys on the bunch. Instances were given by his Honour of the validity .oi finger print evidence, and concluded by restating his absolute disagreement with the Chief Justice of Victoria on the matter.