How reliable are fingerprint identifications?

KRT Wire | 10/27/2004 | Fingerprint evidence not good science, scholar says:

"Just ask Brandon Mayfield, the Oregon lawyer who was arrested in May, jailed for two weeks and branded a terrorist. FBI experts mistakenly linked his fingerprint to the Madrid train bombing that killed 191 people in March - even though Mayfield has never been to Madrid. The fingerprints were later found by Spanish experts to match a foreign terrorist.

"FBI officials have apologized for the error, but they have not yet explained it - which is no surprise to Cole, who has made UCI ground zero for challenging conventional wisdom about fingerprints.

"'They can't explain it, because there is a fallacy at work here: the belief that, because all fingerprints are unique, therefore fingerprint evidence is inherently reliable,' he says. 'It makes sense at first blush, but think about it: No two faces are alike, yet eyewitness identification is difficult and problem-plagued.

"'The real question is not whether all fingerprints are different, but how accurate are fingerprint examiners at matching the small, fragmentary prints you find at crime scenes. And the real answer is, we don't know. No one knows - because there has never been a scientific study to find out. They have never allowed it.'"

If you are interested in justice, read the full article. It's an eye-opener.