Most Georgia residents have heard of using fingerprints to catch a criminal. Many people even have their prints on file with law enforcement. But are fingerprints actually enough to convict a person of a crime? For those building criminal defense plans after arrests, understanding this evidence could make the difference between being innocent and having criminal records.
Shows on television make it seem as though fingerprints are all that law enforcement officials need in order to arrest and convict a person of a crime. But fingerprints alone may not be enough to bring a conviction against someone accused of a crime. Even FBI agents who are considered experts in the field of fingerprinting have made mistakes in fingerprint analysis on important cases.
Fingerprints have different patterns on them for each person and are generally considered to be unique among people. The identifying characteristics are ridges, swirls, arches and other unique features. Even though fingerprints are unique to each individual, it takes a person skilled in fingerprint analysis to make sure the fingerprint is processed and evaluated correctly. Additionally, fingerprints are usually not left in a perfect condition, as they can be smeared or just partial prints. All of these factors can be the cause of an incorrect identification.
When a person is facing a criminal charge, it can feel like the whole world is against them. A Georgia attorney skilled in criminal defense can help a person feel like he or she is not alone. The attorney can investigate the charges against his or her client, how the arrest was made and evaluate the evidence the prosecution has. After reviewing these details, an attorney will be in the best position to discuss the various legal options available to his or her client.
Source: clickondetroit.com, “Fingerprint evidence is compelling but not always foolproof“, Kevin Dietz, Accessed on Nov. 2, 2016