Evaluation of the one-step Lumicyano™ used in the visualisation of fingermarks on fabrics

This study consisted of three parts to evaluate the performance of Lumicyano? on a variety of fabrics. One part assessed the impact of dye percentage (8%, 9% and 10%) on visualisation of fingermark detail and luminescent brightness in split grab marks. A 9% dye produced the highest quality detail of grab impressions with least interference from background fluorescence. The second part investigated the optimal relative humidity (RH, 75–84%) for certain fabric types using Lumicyano on split, six-series depletion fingermarks. It was concluded that the recommended RH of 80% remained the ideal cyanoacrylate fuming environment. The final and third part of this study determined the impact of sequential addition of Basic Yellow 40 (BY40) on Lumicyano compared to traditional cyanoacrylate (CA) followed with BY40 application. Results from this study demonstrated that Lumicyano on its own developed fingermarks with superior quality to Lumicyano with sequential addition of BY40 or traditional cyanoacrylate followed by BY40. Inclusion of more fabrics, donors and longer ageing periods should be explored in future studies to determine what frameworks are best for certain types of fabrics.     

An investigation into the use of a portable cyanoacrylate fuming system (SUPERfume®) and aluminum powder for the development of latent fingermarks

Abstract: Few techniques offer “in situ” methods of friction ridge skin mark development. “In situ” development reduces mark transportation, degradation, and often cost. The effectiveness of cyanoacrylate fuming using the SUPERfume^® and dusting with aluminum powder for latent fingermark development on several nonporous surfaces, stored in various temperature environments for time periods up to 52 weeks, was investigated. Five thousand and four hundred latent fingermarks were deposited under controlled conditions and graded. The results suggested that cyanoacrylate fuming (SUPERfume^®, Foster and Freeman, U.K.) was more effective at developing latent fingermarks on textured and smooth plastic surfaces and for marks stored in temperatures of 37°C, whereas aluminum powder was more effective on glass, enameled metal paint, and varnished wood, and for storage temperatures below 20°C. There were no significant benefits to using either technique for marks older than 24 h, but it was possible to develop fingermarks following 52 weeks of storage using both techniques.