Introduction
The development of fingerprint expertise significantly impacted the investigation process and improved their overall quality. This technique allowed forensic specialists to accurately examine the crime scene and make evidence-based assumptions about the possible suspects. One of the most outstanding examples of the role of fingerprints during investigation is the Farrow case.
The case was weird, as the Farrow couple was attacked in the house, but there were no signs of a break-in. However, the detectives’ intelligence helped recognize the signs of the prints, which later were considered fingerprints. As a result, a great discovery in forensic expertise was made. The prints of a smug significantly influenced the development of fingerprint expertise, especially during the Farrow case.
Case Background
The murder happened in 1905 in Deptford, South London. The Farrow couple had a shop, and they both were seventy years old. On March 27th, an incident happened in their shop (About Forensics, n.d.). The employee found the Farrow shop closed and saw the dead body of Thomas Farrow and the unconscious Ann Thomas upstairs. The couple experienced severe beatings, and various injuries were seen. However, the weirdest thing was that there were no signs of a break-in or forced entry by attackers, and only a missing cash box served as a clue for considering robbery.
The investigation was at a dead end, but the excellent observation skills of the detectives helped to find a clue. A greasy fingerprint mark on the cash box caught the attention of the detectives (About Forensics, n.d.). The man recognized a potential fingerprint identification based on the found hint. In addition, the witnesses stated that they saw two men leaving the shop near the time of the murder. One was identified as Alfred Stratton, who had a significant crime past. Alfred and his brother were arrested, and their fingerprints were compared to the found ones, and both brothers were convicted of murder.
The Fingerprints details
The main detail that significantly influenced the case development was the greasy fingerprint-like sign on the cask box. This box was taken from the crime scene to be accurately examined, and the role and possible ways of using found evidence were evaluated. Before this case, the science of fingerprinting was unknown, so evaluating the potential fingerprint significantly improved the forensic area. The presence of loops, arches, and whorls on the fingerprint served as a clue to consider that each person has unique fingerprints that can be used to find a suspect by identifying the fingerprints.
The accurate and careful examination of the fingerprints helped to understand that Alfred Stratton had left these fingerprints. The use of the fingerprint evaluation supported the witness’s words and helped to find the guilty in the murder. This case significantly contributed to the development of fingerprint science and the overall investigation process. This streak helped to analyze fingerprints, their features, and their role in the investigation process. Therefore, fingerprint details can be used to find a person present at the crime scene, as each individual has unique fingerprints.
Fingerprint Collection
The case lacks a description of how the fingerprint was collected, but some assumptions can be made. In 1905, forensic science was in the infant period, so there were no accurately established methods to collect and analyze evidence. If I mention the fingerprints, it was an unknown area that day. It is possible to imagine that the standard methods to collect evidence were used. For instance, it was widely practiced to carefully take the essential evidence from the crime scene to examine it (George Pallas, 2021) accurately. The fingerprint could have been copied from the cash box using adhesive tape or other objects. In this case, the fingerprint form can be saved and afterward accurately examined.
During the case, the comparison process was used, so it is possible to assume that based on the witnesses’ words, the police caught the suspects and compared their fingerprints with those found. At that time, no specific base of fingerprints was established, so a physical comparison was used (George Pallas, 2021). This case launched the process of creating a unique base, where fingerprints of different people were collected and could be compared with the suspects.
Fingerprints Development
There is no information on how the fingerprint on the box was developed. Based on the modern practice, some assumptions can be made. It is known that the fine powder was used to develop latent fingerprints. This powder includes lampblack or graphite, which could reveal the oily residue of the fingertip (Onin Staff, 2023). It is possible to imagine that powder could be used to find the fingerprint during the case. After that, the adhesive tape could help to collect the fingerprint.
Nevertheless, the use of these methods can differ, as it depends on the surface the fingerprint is located. For instance, the cash box has a semi-porous surface, so the mentioned technique can be the most suitable. In addition, the fingerprints should have been analyzed. In those days, there was no base for peoples fingerprints, but detectives discovered each fingerprint is unique. The need to find a suspect occurred, and based on the eyewitnesses, two brothers were arrested. Their fingerprints were collected and compared to those found on the crime scene to define similarities, and Alfreds fingerprint matched. Hence, using powder, tape, and comparison methods helped develop the fingerprint.
Case Influence
During the Farrow case, fingerprints became significant evidence that helped find the guilty. Moreover, this investigation significantly contributed to forensic science and the overall efficiency of detective work. The two brothers were convicted based on the fingerprint analysis. Even with attempts to compromise the reliability of the fingerprint, this evidence was presented with witnesses’ testimonies. The effective identification of the fingerprint on the cash box helped to investigate the murder accurately.
As a result, two brothers were sentenced to death (Myall, 2018). The development of fingerprint science made this case famous and developed the investigation process. This case highlighted the role of fingerprints during the investigation process and their impact on the detectives work. Lastly, the practice of analyzing fingerprints become widely spread since that case.
Conclusion
To conclude, the Farrow case significantly contributed to the development of forensic science. The lack of evidence and no signs of an attack in the house led detectives to a dead end. However, a fingerprint-like mark was noticed on the cash box. After collecting and analyzing it, it was found that each fingerprint is unique, and this information can be helpful during the investigation. As a result, the murderers were found, and so a new area in forensic science was created, including the establishment of researching and analyzing fingerprints.
References
About Forensics. (n.d.). The Stratton Brothers. Web.
George Pallas. (2021). Fingerprint Evidence Leads to Big Break in Murder Case. Web.
Myall, S. (2018). ‘Mask murder’ brothers hanged for slaughter of pensioners during a botched robbery were the first convicted of murder using fingerprint evidence. The Mirror. Web.
Onin Staff. (2023). Fingerprint History. Web.