耳纹相关问题研究

在法庭科学界,耳纹是一个新兴的研究课题,引起了欧洲、北美诸多法庭科学专家的极大兴趣。耳纹痕迹研究的三项阶段性成果：第一,耳纹痕迹显现提取问题的研究,包括耳纹痕迹的显现方法、显现效果与遗留时间的关系、显现效果与遗留客体的关系以及提取方法等具体问题;第二,耳纹认定人身问题的研究,在小范围耳纹样本实验研究的基础上,讨论了耳纹认定人身的科学性,并且提出耳纹认定人身的步骤、方法及认定标准;第三,根据现场遗留耳纹痕迹推定遗留人身高的研究,通过实验统计分析,试图找到一个公式,根据现场发现的耳纹痕迹遗留高度推定嫌疑人身高。     

3种常见皮革及其制品痕迹检验初探

为了扩大痕迹检验范围,笔者通过实验,对猪、羊、牛3种常见皮革及其制品的样本痕迹进行了观察研究,揭示了皮革痕迹的固有特征和皮革制品痕迹的特征。结果表明,利用上述特征,可对皮革制品痕迹进行同一认定检验。     

论司法实践中的痕迹鉴定和同一认定结论

痕迹鉴定是一种司法活动，经鉴定后得出的结论尤其是同一认定结论在司法实践中具有很大的价值，某些时候成为定案的主要或唯一证据。但在实践中，却曾发现本来只能给出种类认定等其它结论，却得出了同一认定结论；或者能够得出同一结论却只给出种类认定等其它结论。前者有可能误导法官，被法庭采信成为定案的证据之一，导致冤、假、错案：后者则淹没了同一认定结论在司法实践中应有的价值。只有掌握痕迹鉴定的规律，充分挖掘痕迹本身的信息，才能最大程度发挥同一认定结论的司法价值。     

订书钉上痕迹的检验及鉴定

订书钉作为一种装订材料,被订书机打入文件等纸张上起固定作用。在打入过程中,订书机刀片是否会在订书钉背面留下痕迹,以及留下的痕迹有无检验条件,可否利用上述痕迹进行订书机的同一认定等等问题,此前未见报道。本文从订书钉、订书机的生产、使用方面进行了实验分析。     

非制式枪支射击自制底火子弹弹壳痕迹检验

由制式64式手枪改制的枪支,其射击弹头、弹壳上的痕迹位置、形态也因改制手法和部件的不同而存在差异,给检验增加了难度,利用其射击弹头、弹壳上的痕迹对发射枪支进行同一认定具有重要的意义。本案中,笔者在非制式64式手枪的拉壳钩上使用颜色标记,并对标记枪支发射的带有自制底火的改制弹壳进行检验,从而对拉壳钩在异常位置遗留的痕迹进行了确认,为使用异常位置拉壳钩痕迹进行发射枪支的同一认定提供了依据。     

95式5．8mm自动步枪射击弹壳上痕迹的研究

目的研究95式5.8mm自动步枪射击弹壳上痕迹的检验价值。方法用10支95式5.8mm自动步枪分别射击50发,对收集的500枚射击弹壳在显微镜下观察测量。结果弹壳上痕迹反映普遍较浅,痕迹具有特殊性。结论95式5.8mm自动步枪射击弹壳上痕迹具有一定的同一认定价值。     

枪弹痕迹情报网络共享与交换

枪弹痕迹的远程会商,是利用计算机网络基础设施,采用多种网络多媒体技术,集中枪弹痕迹同一认定所需要的特征参数及有关资料,约请专家在网络上进行商讨,就某一案件枪弹痕迹同一认定,得出明确结论的一种新的工作方式。枪弹痕迹的远程会商能否实现,其很大程度取决于对枪弹痕迹鉴定本质的认识。为此,必须对枪弹痕迹的特征进行分类,并对每一类痕迹所能具备的鉴定价值属性进行确认。根据枪弹痕迹的形成机理、部位以及各特征层次的不同属性,可以确定主要将弹底痕迹特征中的击针头痕迹、后膛加工纹痕迹、抛壳挺痕迹作为枪弹痕迹远程会商系统工作的主…     

司法证明同一论

同一是人类思维活动的基本范畴,同一认定是人类认识活动的基本方法,也是司法证明活动中认定案件事实的基本方法.传统的同一认定理论把同一认定局限在物证技术鉴定的范畴.实际上,同一认定是刑事诉讼证明的最终目标,同一认定理论对整个案件的司法证明活动都有指导意义.在刑事诉讼中,整个案件的同一认定就是"人事同一认定".同一认定的依据是客体特征.同一认定的条件包括特征组合的特定性、稳定性和反映性.同一认定的基本方法是特征排除法,包括直接排除法和间接排除法.同一认定的基本步骤包括对客体特征或诉讼证据的分别审查、比较审查和综合审查.同一认定理论是刑事诉讼证明的基本原理之一.     

2005式9mm警用转轮手枪射击弹壳痕迹研究

目的 研究2005式9mm警用转轮手枪射击弹壳痕迹,为警用转轮手枪射击弹壳痕迹检验鉴定提供理论依据.方法 预实验中选取10把警用转轮手枪以单动、联动方式分别射击收取弹壳样本,观察识别射击弹壳上各个痕迹的位置、形态及相互关系;补充验证实验中选取其中5把警用转轮手枪以单动方式分别进行射击实验,完善、验证预实验中得出的结论.结果警用转轮手枪射击弹壳上的烟垢痕迹、弹底窝痕迹及击针头痕迹的分布位置、形态具有规律性,具备检验鉴定价值.结论 利用弹底窝痕迹、烟垢痕迹结合击针头痕迹,可以实现射击弹壳的准确定位;利用烟垢痕迹、弹底窝痕迹及击针头痕迹具有推定弹壳先后射击顺序的可能性;通过弹底窝痕迹、击针头痕迹的细节特征比对,可以实现射击枪支的同一认定.     

论有供述案件的同一认定

有被告人供述的案件和没有被告人供述的案件,在进行同一认定时,其证据的质和量应有所区别。有被告人供述案件,它的小同一认定之和达到一定量时,就可推导出大同一认定,即人、事同一认定结论;而没有被告人供述案件,只有当它的小同一认定之和等于大同一认定时,才能作同一认定结论。     

Ear piercing affects earprints: the role of ear piercing in human identification

Previous research conducted into the use of the human ear in the field of forensic identification has focused upon the use of grids and manual methods to measure and catalogue the different anatomical features of the ear. To date, few have considered the importance of the presence of ear piercings and their possible role in human identification. This study aims to highlight the common distribution of piercings of both ears in both genders and to explore the effect of piercings on earprints. The presence of a piercing may, in part, help to explain why partial and not whole earprints are sometimes recovered from a scene of crime (suggesting that the offender's ears may be pierced). The presence of piercings through the tragus and the superior part of the helix are shown to be infrequent and thus may be used to assist the identification of a body, due to its relative rarity with respect to piercings found in other areas of the ear.     

Exploratory study on classification and individualisation of earprints

The FearID research project is aimed at the individualisation of earprints for the purpose of forensic research. The study presented here was carried out within the framework of this project. It intends to combine a review of what is known from literature on the classification and individualisation of earprints with results from a preliminary study of earprints. Possibilities for, and limitations to, the use of earprints in forensic investigation are addressed. Differences between eliminating a suspect, placing a suspect at a crime scene, and linking crimes by prints left at different scenes are considered.     

Repeatability and reproducibility of earprint acquisition

For all forensic disciplines dealing with identification -- e.g., of glass, tool marks, fibers, faces, fingers, handwriting, speakers -- in which manual (subjective, nonautomated) processes play a role, operator dependencies are relevant. With respect to earprint identification, in the period 2002-2005, the Forensic Ear Identification research project collected a database of 1229 donors, three prints per ear, and laid down a "best practice" for print acquisition. Repeatability and reproducibility aspects of the print acquisition are tested. The study suggests that different operators may acquire prints of differing quality, with equal error rates of the matching system ranging from 9% to 19%. Moreover, it turns out that "matching" earprints are more alike when taken in a consecutive row than when taken on separate occasions. This underlines the importance of (1) studying operator effects, (2) operator training, and (3) not gathering "matching" reference material at the same occasion.     

Investigation into the usefulness of DNA profiling of earprints

DNA profiling of biological trace evidence has been used for many years. The application of this technique specifically to the DNA profiling of earprints has not to date been thoroughly investigated. This report presents the results of 60 earprints collected from three healthy adult volunteers under controlled laboratory conditions. DNA profile analysis revealed that high levels of non-donor alleles are observed when earprints are collected for DNA profiling. The source of these non-donor alleles is investigated and the impact that their presence within the profile may have on the use of this technique is discussed.     

Performance of the FearID earprint identification system

The Forensic Ear Identification (FearID) research project was started in order to study the strength of evidence of earprints found on crime scenes. For this purpose, a sample of earprints from 1229 donors over three countries was collected. From each donor three left and three right earprints were gathered. On the one hand, operators denoted contours of the earprints to facilitate segmentation of the images, on the other anthropological specialists denoted anatomically specific locations. On the basis of this, methods for automated classification were developed and used for training of a system that classifies pairs of prints as 'matching' or 'non-matching'. Comparing lab quality prints, the system has an equal error rate of 4%. Starting from a reference database containing two prints per ear, hitlist behaviour is such that in 90% of all query searches the best hit is in the top 0.1% of the list. The results become less favourable (equal error rate of 9%) for print/mark comparisons.     

Interoperator test for anatomical annotation of earprints

As part of the Forensic Ear Identification (FearID) research project, which aims to obtain estimators for the strength of evidence of earmarks found on crime scenes, a large database of earprints (over 1200 donors) has been collected. Starting from a knowledge-based approach where experts add anatomical annotations of minutiae and landmarks present in prints, comparison of pairs of prints is done using the method of Vector Template Matching (VTM). As the annotation process is subjective, a validation experiment was performed to study its stability. Comparing prints on the basis of VTM, it appears that there are interoperator effects, individual operators yielding significantly more consistent results when annotating prints than different operators. The operators being well trained and educated, the observed variation on both clicking frequency and choice of annotation points suggests that implementation of the above is not the best way to go about objectifying earprint comparison. Processes like the above are relevant for any forensic science dealing with identification (e.g., of glass, tool marks, fibers, faces, fingers, handwriting, speakers) where manual (nonautomated) processes play a role. In these cases, results may be operator dependent and the dependencies need to be studied.     

The development of an automatic recognition system for earmark and earprint comparisons

The value of earmarks as an efficient means of personal identification is still subject to debate. It has been argued that the field is lacking a firm systematic and structured data basis to help practitioners to form their conclusions. Typically, there is a paucity of research guiding as to the selectivity of the features used in the comparison process between an earmark and reference earprints taken from an individual. This study proposes a system for the automatic comparison of earprints and earmarks, operating without any manual extraction of key-points or manual annotations. For each donor, a model is created using multiple reference prints, hence capturing the donor within source variability. For each comparison between a mark and a model, images are automatically aligned and a proximity score, based on a normalized 2D correlation coefficient, is calculated. Appropriate use of this score allows deriving a likelihood ratio that can be explored under known state of affairs (both in cases where it is known that the mark has been left by the donor that gave the model and conversely in cases when it is established that the mark originates from a different source). To assess the system performance, a first dataset containing 1229 donors elaborated during the FearID research project was used. Based on these data, for mark-to-print comparisons, the system performed with an equal error rate (EER) of 2.3% and about 88% of marks are found in the first 3 positions of a hitlist. When performing print-to-print transactions, results show an equal error rate of 0.5%. The system was then tested using real-case data obtained from police forces.     

侦查机关内设鉴定机构的负面影响与消解

侦查活动的特殊性使其染指于司法鉴定,侦查机关基于侦查工作之必要内设鉴定机构。侦查机关内设的鉴定机构又因侦查的追诉性质在鉴定活动中难以保持中立性,致使侦查机关的鉴定机构的性质与法律的中立性要求出现一些紧张关系,在诉讼中造成了一些负面影响。司法鉴定制度的改革旨在借助司法行政部门对司法鉴定的统一管理来催生侦查机关的鉴定机构和侦查活动相分离,从而保持侦查机关的鉴定机构具有相对的独立性,并通过制度调整后的外在监督力量与程序的制约机制来缓解这一紧张关系,以促进侦查机关的鉴定机构在诉讼中真正发挥发现事实真相的作用。     

Earmarks as evidence: a critical review.

The use of earmarks as evidence in criminal trials appears to be expanding, but there is something of a dearth of peer-reviewed scientific publications to support the pursuit. This paper is a critical review of the current literature in which we emphasize the weaknesses of the present state of knowledge. Some research directions are proposed to gather statistical knowledge of the within-source and between-source variability of earmarks and earprints. Its ultimate goal is to be able to assess likelihood ratios in relation to this type of evidence.