A Question for LEOs about fingerprints

[Graves]

[Lol]

^Yep, safari sucks.

[Byte Stryke]

I worked in Booking in the JeffCo jail for a short time before I went to the Patrol Division. Of course, we fingerprinted all intakes.

Occasionally, when the right guy came along - usually an amiable drunk - we'd convince him we needed a "nose print" in addition to fingerprints.

Invariably they'd ask why. Our explanation was we had a lot of unsolved burglary cases and the nose prints were needed to build a database in order to identify burglars in the community. "Think about it," we'd tell the guy. "What happens when you put your face up against a window to look inside a building?" It's like a light would come on. "Yeah...you leave a nose print on the window."

It was pretty hilarious to watch a drunk take the ink roller and try to roll it across his nose without getting ink all over his face. It was even funnier to watch them try to "roll" their noses across the back of a fingerprint card.

Working in the jail sucked but there were some special moments.

BAD COP!
No DONUT!

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

Just touching a firearm and having that area swabbed will most likely produce viable DNA. All they need is a couple of cells now. Very cool as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, just having the DNA being present doesn't necessarily mean anything. It doesn't date/time stamp the contact when the transfer occured. Additional investigation is needed to assist in the use of the DNA for prosecution.

They passed 'Katie's Law' in 2010 in which all individuals arrested for felony crimes are swabbed for DNA at the time of arrest. This has resulted in 9 sex assault cases, 3 criminal mischief cases and 28 property crime cases including arson, burglary, robbery and theft that were identified in the first four months of its start. This may be what you were referring to?

Not the "Katie's Law" though maybe that is when it came about. I remember even seeing talk on local news about proposed swabbing at traffic stops/etc to fill the database. Completely unconstitutional so likely it was shot down. I was more proposing a conspiracy theory we thought of the other day....that every cop, fireman, truck driver, pilot, etc. that was submitted to bi-annual or annual bloodwork already had their dna on file.

Hell, it could go as far as anyone who has had any bloodwork done, including anyone who has had a kid in the last couple decades since they do bloodwork on the mother to test for drugs or whatnot - without warrant might I add.

And why would you use WD40? Why not some boric acid, brake clean, bleach, or ammonia..... or just completely destroy any evidence? Or like previously pointed out....don't be a dumbass? If you have the foresight to bring a can of WD-40, you apparently spent enough time thinking about it to realize it was a bad idea in the first place

[Byte Stryke]

And why would you use WD40? Why not some boric acid, brake clean, bleach, or ammonia..... or just completely destroy any evidence? Or like previously pointed out....don't be a dumbass? If you have the foresight to bring a can of WD-40, you apparently spent enough time thinking about it to realize it was a bad idea in the first place

this is what I was thinking...

"hmm need to remove oily fingerprints... BRAKE CLEAN!"


But yeah, I Agree, if you put that much forethought into it you should realize its not a good idea to begin with.