|
Fingerprints Colin Beavan
I first encountered Colin Beavan’s
“Fingerprints” when his American editor badgered me
for a quote to put on the jacket. I am loathe to give jacket
quotes simply because it means that a new book jumps to the
front of my queue of books to be read and the backlog
increases. But the editor was adamant that I should read
“Fingerprints” because she claimed it was brilliant,
so I did, and it was.
This history of fingerprinting is
full of gory murders, villains and tales of intrigue, and
Beavan exploits each bloody detail in the best tabloid
tradition, while simultaneously explaining with clarity and
enthusiasm the history of what is still one of the most
powerful tools in forensic science, a technique that some
initially called “scientific palmistry”.
Much of the blood and explanation
revolves around the horrific murder of Thomas and Ann Farrow
in 1905, which the newspapers dubbed The Shocking Tragedy of
Deptford. Burglars had broken into Chapman’s Oil and Colour
Shop and killed the manager Mr Farrow, who was left with his
head smashed, blood running into the hearth and soaking the
ashes.
Mrs Farrow, who was also brutally
beaten, clung to life, and the police thought they had a
witness, but she died without regaining consciousness. The
case seemed insoluble, until Scotland Yard Assistant
Commissioner Melvile Macnaghten stumbled upon the shop’s
cashbox hidden under Mr Farrow’s bed. It was adorned with a
single fingerprint. The challenge was not only to identify the
owner of the print, but to convince a British jury for the
first time that they should send a man to the gallows on the
evidence of, as Beavan puts it, “a gob of sweat smeared on a
piece of metal”.
Today, using fingerprints to catch
criminals is routine, but a century ago it was a revolutionary
concept. Indeed, when fingerprinting was first used by within
the legal system, it was used merely for implementing new
sentencing policies once a guilty verdict had been passed, and
nobody thought that it could ever be used gather evidence. In
1844, Amould Bonneville de Marsangy published “De la
Récidivé”, in which he argued for lenient punishments for
first time petty criminals, reserving heavy penalties for
habitual criminals. Sympathising with these new ideas,
Parliament passed the Habitual Criminals Act in 1869, but
repeat offenders merely gave false names to avoid harsh
sentences. The Act would only succeed if there was a foolproof
way of identifying individuals regardless of their
aliases.
Some suggested using photographs of
convicted criminals to identify reoffenders, but there was no
obvious way to file the photos; a suspected reoffender would
have to be checked against a catalogue containing thousands of
mugshots. In France, they tried identification using eleven
body measurements, including height, head width and ear
breadth. This had the advantage that a criminal’s vital
statistics could be filed in numerical order for easy
retrieval, but gathering the vital statistics required time,
equipment, and expertise.
A rival system of identification
relied on fingerprinting. Many contributed to the development
of fingerprinting, including William Herschel and Azizul Haque
in India, but Beavan singles out the Scottish missionary Dr
Henry Faulds as the hero of his book. Faulds had become
interested in the question of identfication following the
trial of the Tichborne Claimant, in which Arthur Orton
pretended to be Roger Tichborne, the heir to a fortune who had
been lost at sea. Orton almost got away with plan, because
over one hundred witnesses mistakenly identified him as Roger
Tichborne. However, the flaws in his story were eventually
revealed under intense cross-examination, and the trial
highlighted the need for a reliable identification
system.
Then, while studying ancient
pottery in Japan, Faulds noticed that potters sometimes left
their prints on their work. He studied the prints, realised
that they were unique, and used them to identify which pots
were made by the same craftsman. Later, when a friend was
arrested for theft, Faulds used fingerprints at the scene of
the crime to prove his friend’s innocence. The link between
prints and crime was forged in Faulds’ mind, and he began
researching fingerprints in detail.
Faulds tried to prove that prints
were unique, that they did not change with age, and that they
grew back even when they were scraped off with a razor.
Perhaps his greatest breakthrough was a method of fingerprint
classification which allowed easy storage and retrieval. He
borrowed his idea from the systems used to organise symbols in
Japanese dictionaries.
Indirectly, fingerprints led to the
conviction of murders as early as 1892. In Argentina, two
children were found murdered in their beds. The main suspect
was a man who had been spurned by the children’s mother, but
Inspector Alvarez discovered a bloody thumbprint at the crime
scene, matched it to the mother’s prints, and accused her of
the murder. She immediately broke down and confessed. It
transpired that she had a secret lover who refused to marry
her because of her children, so she had decided to do away
with them for his sake. Had the mother, Francisca Rojas,
denied everything, then she may have escaped conviction,
because it was unclear that a jury would be convinced by the
microscopic marks left by fingertips. In particular, nobody
had yet proved that no two fingerprints are the same among the
billions of people on the planet.
Eventually, in 1902, the prosecutor
Richard Muir used fingerprint evidence for the first time in a
British court. Eight years later he would prosecute in case of
Dr Crippen, but already he was one of most famous figures in
London. The jury was convinced by Muir’s explanation of
fingerprints and Harry Jackson was sentenced to seven years
for burglary. But some people were unhappy, and one letter
signed by “A disgusted Magistrate” stated: “Scotland Yard,
once known as the world’s finest police organisation, will be
the laughing stock of Europe it if insists on trying to trace
criminals by odd ridges on their skins.”
In 1905, there was the ultimate
test, when fingerprints became the pivotal evidence in the
case against those accused of murdering Thomas and Ann Farrow.
Of course, I cannot reveal whether the verdict was innocent or
guilty. It would be unfair to spoil the ending of Beaton’s
non-fictional book, which is as gripping as any fictional
crime novel.
Find out more from Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.com. |
 |