chapter 1-5

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and problem statement

Every crime occurred must have a mark left by the criminals. Fingerprint

is one of the most important evidences in order to put the person who

conduct the crime into custody. However, there are many types of

evidence left by criminal while the crime occurred such as fingerprints.

The fingerprints might be found of clothes, paper or any other porous

surface.

The detection and enhancement of latent fingermarks need a proper

method of chemical enhancement sequences depend on the surface of the

fingermarks found (Lennard et al., 2009). Sarah (2011), states that the

appearance of friction ridge marks can be affected by factors related to the

physical action or deposition. There are many factors that can affect the

ridge skin mark in term of force applied during deposition, duration and

angle of friction ridge and surface contact. The most widely used methods

2

for detecting latent fingermarks on porous surfaces rely upon the detection

of the amino acids present in natural skin secretions (Lennard et al., 2009).

Correct sequence of chemical enhancement in determining the

fingermarks is vital because it can save in term of cost and time. The

sequences, consisting of complementary detection methods that vary from

least destructive to more destructive, need to be optimised and validated

under local conditions before casework implementation. Marriot et al.

(2014), suggested that for paper substrates, the generally accepted

approach is to apply non-destructive optical methods first, followed by one

or more amino acid reagents, then a method such as physical developer

that targets any sebaceous material that may be apply for optimum result.

Marriot et al. (2014), added that the traditional amino acid reagent for

fingermark detection is ninhydrin, which was first proposed for this

application in 1954. Based on this previous research, fingermarks can be

developed by using correct chemical enhancement in order to produce

high quality of latent fingerprints. Jelly et al. (2003), added that chemical

imaging is used to get the images of the fingerprints that have been

developed. Chemical imaging combines atomic spectroscopy and

advanced imaging for the substance analysis of materials. Fluorescence

chemical imaging and obvious absorbance chemical imaging give

numerous advantages and expanded abilities for legal researchers. Thus

this technique is non-destructive technique.

3

1.2 Significance of study

This study is conducted in order to produce high quality of latent

fingerprints on porous surface by using different sequences of chemical

enhancement. In recent study done by Marriot et al. (2014), the

fingerprints was achieved by applying these sequences in donor trials, on

fingermarks deposited by a number of individuals on 4 different paper

substrates, and in pseudo operational trials on pages taken from 5-year-old

university examination booklets. However, in this study is focusing on

individual from 20 years old and above. This is because crime does

usually conduct by this range of age despite of various genders.

1.3 Objectives of study

This research is conducted to develop the latent fingerprints on porous

surface which is A4 paper. Thus, it is also to determine which sequences

of chemical enhancement method will produce better quality of

fingerprints by using Bandey’s rating.

4

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 FINGERPRINTS

Fingermarks has been widely used in identification of criminal in crime

scene. This is considered as the most prominent type of evidence in

forensic science world Marriot (2013). Neuman et al. (2012), stated that

there are approximately 330,000 crime scenes in UK, which lead to the

identification of approximately 32,000 suspects. However, most of the

fingermarks found in crime scene are not visible with naked eyes and its

referred as latent fingerprints Marriot (2013). D’Elia et al. (2015), said that

latent fingermarks refer to fingerprints that cannot be observed with naked

eyes. D’Elia et al. (2015), states that this type of fingermark was usually

found on objects commonly handled or accidently touched while the crime

occurs. Sweat pores of the papillary ridges leave a deposition of a

perspiration on surface which the finger has contact in it that eventually

formed a latent fingerprint (Sodhi & Kaur, 2015). Thus, human body

produces three types of gland which are eccrine, apocrine and sebaceous.

This secretion is later contributed to fingerprint deposit.

5

2.1.1 LATENT FINGERPRINTS

Fingerprints are divided into 3 types which is patent prints, plastic prints

and latent prints. Each of these has different characteristics. Patent prints

are visible prints that happen when an outside substance on the skin of a

finger interacts with the smooth surface of another item. These prints leave

a particular edge impression that is obvious with the bare eye without

mechanical upgrade of any sort. Meanwhile plastic prints are visible,

impressed prints that occur when a finger touches a soft, malleable surface

resulting in an indentation. For example when fingerprint are found on

those that are freshly painted or coated, or those that contain wax, gum,

blood or any other substance that will soften when hand held and then

retain the finger ridge impressions. However, scientists are more keen on

latent fingerprints for the as their convenience in criminal examinations

and the difficulties identified with the obtaining and handling of low

quality and profoundly misshaped pictures (Perez et al., 2016).

2.1.2 FINGERPRINTS DEPOSITED

Latent fingerprints can be found in either porous or non-porous surface.

Many researches have been done in developing fingerprints in various

porous and non porous surface. Based on research done by Marriot et al.

(2014), latent fingerprints can be enhanced by using various chemical

enhancement sequences to get better quality. Paper are commonly used as a

porous substrate to deposite latent fingerprints. Other porous substrate

6

should also be analyzed if either latent fingerprints will develop likewise

on the paper substrate.

2.2 CHEMICAL ENHANCEMENT

Chemical enhancement is used to develop latent fingerprint that found in

crime scene. Goldstone et al. (2015), said that there are various fingerprint

enhancement techniques that have been developed over the year to

improve the enhancement fingerprints either in porous and non-porous

surface. Meanwhile, there are mny advance studies about fingerprints

development exposed on extreme condition and environment (Goldstone et

al., 2015). Despite on many chemical enhancements that exist today,

Ninhydrin remains as the most common chemical method for treatment of

paper substrates even there is significant research efforts pointed at

synthesis of Ninhydrin analogues (Marriot et al., 2014). Based on the

research done by Braasch et al. (2015), it is found that Ninhydrin reacted

with amino acid by Ruhemann in the 1910’s and later it is developed and

used for presumptive test for amino acids in biological samples. Braasch et

al. (2015), added that fingermark visualization becomes apparent after

being published by Oden and von Hosten in the 1950’s. Later on, many

reagents with similar reaction were investigated and lead of DFO that first

synthesis by Druey and Schmidt in the 1950’s and designed for fingermark

visualization in the 1980’s by Grigg and co-workers ( Braasch et al.,

2015).

7

2.2.1 CHEMICAL ENHANCEMENT SEQUENCES

Marriot et al. (2014), suggested that appropriate sequences of chemical

development are important because the nature of fingermarks found are

vary depends on circumstance of the case that under investigation. These

chemicals from synthetic developments are important in order to get

higher efficiency visualization of latent fingermarks other than its increase

the fluorescence properties (Mangle et al., 2015). Even until today,

Ninhydrin is most common used in chemical enhancement of latent

fingermark. Until the alternative of Ninhydrin was introduced which is

1,8-diazafluoren-9-one (DFO) to replace it. However, rather than replacing

Ninhydrin, DFO is proved work more effective when used in sequences

with Ninhydrin to develop fingermarks (Marriot et al., 2014).

2.2.2 NINHYDRIN

Ninhydrin was first used as a method in developing fingerprints was by

Oden and von Hofsten in 1954 . Since that, it has become the most

common chemical used in developing latent fingerprints (Marriot et al.,

2014). Yang & Lian (2014), said that ninhydrin was used as a part of

fingerprint developing membrane that also include pressure-sensitive

emulsifier as exemplified chemicals. Thus, concentration of developing

agent, modifying ions and thickness of membrane were studied to get the

optimum developed latent fingerprints. Ninhydrin is an ideal reagent for

creating latent fingerprints on porous surfaces and has adequate

8

affectability for genuine application. Be that as it may, there are a few

limitations to utilizing ninhydrin, for example, foundation tinge,

disintegration of the printing ink and its combustible attributes (Yang &

Lian, 2014). Marriot (2014), added that because of the accomplishment of

ninhydrin in identifying latent prints on porous surfaces, further research

into creating ninhydrin analogs with improved fluorescence properties

happened. The absolute most encouraging analogs found from this

exploration were the reagents 1,8-diazafluorene-9-one (DFO) and 1,2-

indanedione (IND).

Figure 2.1 : Ninhydrin chemical structure

2.2.3 1,8-diazafluorene-9-one (DFO)

DFO or 1,8-diazafluoren-9-one was initially synthesised by Druey and

Schmidt in 1950 yet was presented as a suitable reagent for the

development of latent prints on porous substrates by Grigg and Pounds in

1990 (Jelly et al., 2009). Marriot (2014), said that when the DFO reagent

comes in contact with fingermark deposits, it forms a pale pink-purple

product. DFO are now utilized as a part of the forensic science tools to

9

enhance latent fingerprints stored on porous surfaces because of the

arrangement of fluorescent items by responding with the amino acids

present in the papillary exudate (D’Elia et al., 2015). Thus, D’Elia et, al

added that the paper, like all the porous surfaces, absorbs very quickly the

hydrosoluble component of the sweat, while the liposoluble part remains

on the surface for 12–24 hours. Only a small amount of secretion remains

on the substrate for a longer period. Both 1,2-indanedione (1,2-IND) and

(DFO) react with the amino acids present in papillary exudate giving

fluorescent products, even if in some cases it is possible to observe the

enhanced fingerprint in the visible range too.

Figure 2.2 : Proposed reaction mechanism of DFO and an amino acid (Jellyet al., 2009)

10

2.2.4 PHYSICAL DEVELOPER

According to Marriot et al. (2014), physical developer nature are

destructive and for that reason it often used last in chemical sequence in

developing fingermarks due to this nature. The physical developer

technique is a way to develop fingerprints on dry and wet, porous things,

including paper articles, dirt based items and cement tapes. The procedure

includes an oxidation–reduction couple whereby an answer of an iron salt

lessens fluid silver nitrate to finely isolated metallic silver (Sodhi & Kaur,

2015). Sodhi & Kaur (2015), added that the physical developer technique

for detection of latent fingerprints depends on the association amongst

lipids and unsaturated fat constituents of sweat buildup, with colloidal

silver particles. It had been realized that colloidal silver particulates have

fondness for such natural subsidiaries. Since these biomolecules are

essentially insoluble in water, the physical developer can detect latent

impressions on wet porous items as well. According to research done by

Marriot et al. (2014), working solution with physical developer has many

drawbacks, such as the preparation of the solution is relatively high cost,

involves numerous water washes and also it is very sensitive to

environmental conditions.

11

2.2.5 CHEMICAL ENHANCEMENT VS BLACK POWDER

Using chemical and physical methods in developing latent fingerprints is

vital because latent prints can not be seen with naked eyes. In that case,

various chemical and physical methods have been developed in order to get

the best outcome depends on the sources of prints found (Errington et al.,

2016). According to Weston-Ford et al. (2016), the most commonly used,

cheap and oldest technique is using contrasting powders for development

of latent fingerprints. Compare with powder, detecting latent fingermarks

on porous surface by using chemical enhancement were rely upon the

detection of amino acid in human skin (Jelly, 2009). It can be said that

based on this previous research that chemical enhancement will provide

better development since it does react with amino acid and fatty acid in

human skin (Marriot, 2014).

2.3 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FINGERMARKS

According to Saferstein et al. (2007), when a finger touches the surface,

sweat and along with oils that have been pickup by finger by touching the

hairy parts of the body, is exchanged onto the surface not withstanding

contaminants from the nature, accordingly leaving an impression of the

finger’s edge designs. Marriot (2014), said that the characteristic parts that

can be found in a fingermark are delivered by organs in the body. Of the

organs present in the body, the essential contributor to the fingermark store

are eccrine and sebaceous organs. Marriot (2014), added that eccrine

12

organs are available on the palms of the hands and the soles of the feet and

emit prevalently water and in addition an intricate blend of amino acids,

proteins and lactate and inorganic Na+, K+, Cl- and follow with metal

particles. According to Ramotowski (2001), sebaceous glands then again

are situated on the mid-section, back and forehead (connected with hair

roots). These secretions are made essentially out of unsaturated fats,

glycerides, cholesterol, squalene and an assortment of lipid esters.

According to Marriot (2014), Once a fingermark has been placed on a

surface it experiences further changes and degradation as the chemicals in

the imprint keep on reacting with each other, the surface and nature. Sears

et al. (2012), stated that environmental factors like temperature, humidity,

air flow and light affect the way chemical in the fingermark behave.

2.4 FINGERPRINTS AS EVIDENCE

According to Ramotowski et al. (2016), fingermarks have been utilized for

over a century for distinguishing evidence purposes amid examinations

and as confirmation in court. While, the use of such marks for

recognizable proof by and large makes a solid connection between an area

or object and a individual, there are no approved logical strategies for

precisely deciding the time of contact between the imprint and the surface.

Fingerprints are most likely be found in documents or paper substrate

since human use hand to hold it. Based on research done by Fieldhouse

(2011), the presence of friction ridge skin imprints can be influenced by

13

variables identified with the physical activity of deposition. Such

components incorporate the force applied amid deposition, the length and

the point of friction ridge and surface contact. Over the year, fingerprints

evidence have been used to solve many crime cases since it have been

used to replace the Bertillon’s system (Saferstein, 2015).

14

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 COLLECTING SAMPLE

The sample was taken from five students which are each from them

donated thumbprints from dominant and non dominant hand. This is

because in real world scenarios, the culprit may randomly used dominant

or non dominant hand. The donors were taken from both genders which

are male and female because crime is not only committed by one type of

gender only. The sample were appropriately labeled according to donor

and time when the fingerprints were deposited. All samples were taken in

the same time interval since the fingerprints were analyzed for 0 hour, 24

hours and 48 hours. Fingerprints were depleted in A4 paper. Before

depleted on A4 paper each student was doing hands grooming in order to

get the best result of fingerprints. By doing hands grooming, the

fingerprints deposited should appear brighter than not doing hands

grooming. The samples were divided evenly between sequence one that

using Ninhydrin, DFO and Physical Developer and the other sequence that

15

use Ninhydrin and Physical Developer. Total fingerprints used for all time

interval and chemical sequence is 30 fingerprints.

Table 3.1 Donor List

DonorNumber Gender Age Weight Height Occupation

1 Female 23 64 Kg 160cm Student

2 Male 23 48 Kg 172cm Student



5 Male 25 81 Kg 170cm Student

3.2 CHEMICAL AND EQUIPMENT

The chemical used is Ninhydrin, 1,8-diazafluoren-9-one (DFO) and silver

nitrate act as physical developer. These chemicals were already available

in Forensic Lab, UiTM Shah Alam.

3.3 DEVELOPMENT OF FINGERPRINTS

3.3.1 APPLICATION OF FIRST REAGENT: NINHYDRIN

The samples were treated with Ninhydrin reagent in a fume hood. When

applying the Ninhydrin it must be sprayed at least 12-15cm from the

16

sample. The reagent is carefully applied to the sample by wearing gloves

because Ninhydrin can leaves stain on skin and it is flammable. After

wearing appropriate protective gears, Ninhydrin were sprayed until the

sample is damped. Then, the specimen was allow to air dry for a 5 minutes.

Some bluish or purplish ninhydrin stains may be faintly visible at this

point. Make a sandwich with two thicknesses of paper, followed by the

sample and then two more layers of paper. To accelerate the development

process, steam iron was used to heat the sample. Apply for about 10

minutes until the prints develop.

3.3.2 APPLICATION OF SECOND REAGENT: DFO

Application of 1,8-diazafluorene-9-one (DFO) were applied when after

Ninhydrin treated. The samples that needs to be treated with DFO were

separated other samples. DFO also need to work in fume hood. Since DFO

are sensitive to light, the room must be in dark to preserve the sample

when treated with DFO. DFO then were sprayed onto the surface of the

sample with 12-15cm in range from sample to source. After that, the

sample treated were left air dry for about 5 minutes. Then, the sample

were heated by iron for about 10-15minutes to speed up the reaction.

Always remember to keep all this process in dark since DFO is sensitive to

light. After the process of ironing the sample then it can be exposed to

light.

17

3.3.3 APPLICATION OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPER: SILVER NITRATE

Following the sample that have been treated with Ninhydrin and DFO, all

the samples then were treated with physical developer which is silver

nitrate. Samples are separated with sequence one and two to avoid

confusion which samples were treated with Ninhydrin only and samples

that were treated with Ninhydrin and DFO. Application of physical

developer is also the same with Ninhydrin and DFO. It needed to spray at

range 12-15cm to samples. After the samples were left air dry for about

5minutes, the sample were left under the sunlight to absorb the UV

radiation for about 5minutes. Do not exceed more than 5minutes because

the samples will become dark and the fingerprint will disappear.

3.4 ANALYSING FINGERPRINTS

All the treated samples of fingerprints than were analyzed it details of the

development by using UVITEC Dna Documentation and software

FireReader V4. The images developed is observed and captured by the

camera in scientific grade camera with electronically variable shutter

speed. The settings of the camera is set at manual and the exposure of UV

florescence .

18

CHAPTER 4

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 FINGERPRINTS INVESTIGATION

4.1.1 Rating Procedure

From the given samples that based on time period from 0 hour to 48 hours,

the samples from 5 donors were processed by using sequence 1 and

compared it with sequence 2

Sequence 1 : Ninhydrin→DFO→Physical Developer

Sequence 2 : Ninhydrin→Physical Developer

After being applied with reagents, samples then photographed for later

assessment. Fingerprints were then given rating by using Bandey rating

that assessing the quality fingermark from the sample.

19

Table 4.1 : Absolute Bandey scale for donor trials

Rating Definition

0 No evidence of a fingermark

1Weak development; evidence of contact but

no ridge detail

2

Limited development; about 1/3 of ridge

detail present but probably cannot be used for

identification purposes

3Strong development; between 1/3 and 2/3 of

ridge detail present; identifiable fingermark

4Very strong development; full ridge detail

present; identifiable fingermark

4.1.2 Applying scales to sample

Figures 4.1 and 4.2 below show the fingermark development from the

sample that aged from 0 hour based on both sequences. While, the tables

show that the sample is aging and the development of the fingermarks is

decreased as the time increased.

20

Figure 4.1 : Sample from 0 hour that taken from left hand based on the firstsequence.

Figure 4.2 : Sample from 0 hour that taken from left hand based on thesecond sequence

Following the sample from the figures, there were significant different

from above sequence. The rating were given as below:

21

Bandey’s Scale

Sequence 1 : 3

Sequence 2 : 2

From the above ratings given, the sequence 1 which was treated with

Ninhydrin, DFO and the physical developer which is silver nitrate were

given 3 rating based on Bandey’s scale. This development indicates that

strong development present with 1/3 and 2/3 details were present and can

be used as identification. This is different with sequence 2 which are

Ninhydrin and physical developer only were treated on the sample

compared with sequence 1 that also have DFO as treated reagent. The

Bandey’s rating is given as 2 due to its limited development. The

development is only about 1/3 of ridge detail present but probably cannot

be used for identification purposes. In forensic world, the need of details

of evidence is very important to link the suspects into the crime scene.

(Saferstein et al., 2007).

22

4.2 SAMPLE AT 0 HOUR

The samples at 0 hour were used as standard to others sample.

Theoretically, sample at 0 hour should develop the most of fingerprints

from donor sample. This is because the sample were yet to aged and it

should develop well.

Sequence 1

Table 4.2 : Sequence 1 fingerprints rating based on donor samples

SampleRating for left

handRating for right

handAverage rating

1 3 3 3

2 1 1 1

3 3 3 3

4 3 3 3

5 2 2 2

Average

Total Rating2.4

23

Sequence 2

Table 4.2.1 : Sequence 2 fingerprints rating based on donor samples



handAverage rating

1 2 3 2.5

2 1 1 1

3 2 1 1.5

4 3 3 3

5 1 1 1

Average

Total Rating1.8

Based on the Table 4.2 which is from sequence 1, it shows the fingerprints

rating based on Bandey’s rating. The rating of average is 2.4, this indicate

the average rating of the fingerprints. Islam et al. (2015), said that from

recent findings in small scale experiments indicate fatty acids tend to be

present in higher concentrations in male donors, such as saturated C15,

C16 and C17 acids although wide variations in composition were

observed due to the sampling protocol. This can be the reason why the

average rating is not high. The samples were taken from 3 female and 2

male. Even though the number 2 samples were taken from male donor, it

indicates low Bandey’s rating. This might be because of the deposition of

fingerprints techniques was not right and differ with other donors.

Meanwhile, the results from sequence 2 in Table 4.2.1 showed that lower

24

development from the samples. The average rating is 1.8 which is 0.6

lower than from the sequence 1. From these data, it can be said that the

sequence 1 that use 1,8-diazafluoren-9-one (DFO) have significant value

in developing fingerprints. DFO reacts with ninhydrin and silver nitrate to

gives better development.

4.3 SAMPLE AGED AT 24 HOURS

Samples at this stage is expected start aging and the development were

expected to be less than the sample from 0 hour.

Sequence 1




handAverage rating

1 3 3 3

2 1 1 1

3 3 3 3

4 3 3 3

5 0 1 1

Average

Total Rating2.2

25

Sequence 2




handAverage rating

1 2 2 2

2 1 0 1

3 2 1 1.5

4 3 3 3

5 1 1 1

Average

Total Rating1.7

Based on the sample that aged at 24 hours, both of development

techniques using sequence 1 and sequence 2 were used in order to develop

the most of fingerprints from the samples. There were no significant

different data value based on the. The differences were too low compared

with sample at 0 hour. This is because the samples are preserved well in

normal condition so that the aging process was slowed down. However,

the sample from donor no 5 is no observed when using DFO based on the

data in Table 4.3, other than that other samples were well developed than

sequence 2. Based on this result, it can be said that this is happened

because the wrong techniques of deposition fingerprints on substrate. This

is the common problems in forensic world, there were always fingerprints

found at the crime scene but not every each of them can be used as

identification based on the ridges and minutiae.

26

4.4 SAMPLE AGED AT 48 HOURS

At 48 hours, the sample expected to be aging fully. This is because the

oxidation process between fingerprints and substrate paper have occur.

Over time the volatile components of a fingerprint evaporate out of he

residue. (Islam et al., 2015). Islam et al. (2015), added that finding

suggested that the ridges turned out to be progressively weak and

geologically unpredictable, through expanded defenselessness to physical

disintegration from contact and air streams that cross the unique mark

surface.

Sequence 1




handAverage rating

1 0 1 1

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

5 0 0 0

Average

Total Rating0.2

27

4.4.1 Sequence 2




handAverage rating

1 1 2 1.5

2 0 0 0

3 1 1 1

4 2 2 2

5 2 2 1

Average

Total Rating1.1

As expected from the previous research, the fingerprints will aged as the

time increased. However, based on the data tabulated in the Table 4.4 and

Table 4.4.1 it showed that the Bandey’s rating at sequence 2 which is no

DFO reagent were used in the chemical sequence to developed

fingermarks were developing more details fingermarks compared with

sequence 1. From this data, it is very different with the samples at 0 hour

and 24 hours that both showed that sequence 1 is better in developing

fingerprints by using Ninhydrin, DFO and silver nitrate as physical

developer compared with Ninhydrin and physical developer only. Marriot

et al. (2014), said that this phenomenon suggests that the sebaceous

fraction targeted by this lipid stain had been removed earlier in the

detection sequences, possibly due to the solvents used in the amino acid

reagents or the heat treatment required for the Ninhydrin and DFO

28

development. Heat treatment was used as a catalyst to speed up the

reaction between fingerprints sample and reagents such Ninhydrin and

DFO.

4.5 OVERALL RESULT

Table 4.5 : Overall result based on both sequence

Bandey’s Rating

Aged Group Sequence 1 Sequence 2

0 Hour 2.4 1.8

24 Hours 2.2 1.7

48 Hours 0.2 1.1

CombinedAverage

1.6 1.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 Hour 24 Hours 48 Hours

Graph of Bandey's Rating Over Time

Time

Ban

dey'

s R

atin

g

Sequence 1Sequence 2

Figure 4.3: Graph of comparison based on Bandey’s rating over time.

29

Based on the data tabulate on the Table 4.5 it shows that both of the

chemical sequences have significant value at 0 hour and 24 hours.

Chemical sequence 1 have better development compared with sequence 2.

However, when the fingerprints aged for 48 hours it showed that the

sequence 2 have better development compared with sequence 1. An

overall rating based on 0 hour, 24 hours, and 48 hours the value were not

very significant on both sequence.

30

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSION

Following the laboratory investigation done in this study, there is no great

significant value of fingerprint development based on sequence 1 and

sequence 2. The significant value is measured if the value of the

fingerprints showed a great value of different. In this study, the margin

difference is only 0.1 on average based on Bandey’s rating. This can be

concluded that both of the sequence can be used in real life situation in

crime cases. However, by applying Ninhydrin itself has developed a good

development, but it is advisable that Ninhydrin is treated with DFO on

aged sample such as sample at 24 hours. Therefore, it is recommended that

if Ninhydrin is being used for the development of latent fingermarks on

porous substrates then DFO should still be employed. But if Ninhydrin is

being used with silver nitrate in the development process it will be less

effective, but still can be used in serious casework. Fingerprints also

31

appear better in person who has more weight because the lipid contain in

body is greater than person who has less weight Yang (2014).

5.2 FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

For further research in development of fingermarks on porous surface, it

should cover in area of new developing reagents that can be used to

develop absolute fingerprints without needed to be used with other

reagents. New research should also cover in developing fingerprints on

wood and clothes as these material also a porous surface. Thus, sample

taken should be the whole palm of hands to get better data.

32

REFERENCES

, K., de la Hunty, M., Deppe, J., Spindler, X., Cantu, A. A., Maynard, P., … Roux,C. (2013). Nile red: Alternative to physical developer for the detection oflatent fingermarks on wet porous surfaces? Forensic Science International,230(1-3), 74–80.

Cadd, S., Islam, M., Manson, P., & Bleay, S. (2015). Fingerprint composition andaging: A literature review. Science and Justice, 55(4), 219–238.

Chen, C. C., Yang, C. K., Liao, J. S., & Wang, S. M. (2015). Latent fingermarkdevelopment using low-vacuum vaporization of ninhydrin. Forensic ScienceInternational, 257, 314–319.

D’Elia, V., Materazzi, S., Iuliano, G., & Niola, L. (2015). Evaluation andcomparison of 1,2-indanedione and 1,8-diazafluoren-9-one solutions for theenhancement of latent fingerprints on porous surfaces. Forensic ScienceInternational, 254, 205–214.

de la Hunty, M., Moret, S., Chadwick, S., Lennard, C., Spindler, X., & Roux, C.(2015). Understanding Physical Developer (PD): Part II - Is PD targetingeccrine constituents? Forensic Science International, 257, 488–495.

de la Hunty, M., Moret, S., Chadwick, S., Lennard, C., Spindler, X., & Roux, C.(2015). Understanding physical developer (PD): Part I - Is PD targetinglipids? Forensic Science International, 257, 481–487.

Errington, B., Lawson, G., Lewis, S. W., & Smith, G. D. (2016). MicronisedEgyptian blue pigment: A novel near-infrared luminescent fingerprintdusting powder. Dyes and Pigments, 132, 310–315.

Exline, D. L., Wallace, C., Roux, C., Lennard, C., Nelson, M. P., & Treado, P. J.(2003). Forensic applications of chemical imaging: latent fingerprintdetection using visible absorption and luminescence. Journal of ForensicSciences, 48(5), 1047–1053.

Fieldhouse, S. (2011). Consistency and reproducibility in fingermark deposition.Forensic Science International, 207(1-3), 96–100.

Girod, A., Ramotowski, R., Lambrechts, S., Misrielal, P., Aalders, M., &Weyermann, C. (2016). Fingermark age determinations: Legal considerations,review of the literature and practical propositions. Forensic ScienceInternational, 262, 212–226.

33

Goldstone, S. L., Francis, S. C., & Gardner, S. J. (2015). An investigation into theenhancement of sea-spray exposed fingerprints on glass. Forensic ScienceInternational, 252, 33–38.

Howes, L. M., Julian, R., Kelty, S. F., Kemp, N., & Kirkbride, K. P. (2014). Thereadability of expert reports for non-scientist report-users: Reports of DNAanalysis. Forensic Science International, 237, 7–18.

Jelly, R., Patton, E. L. T., Lennard, C., Lewis, S. W., & Lim, K. F. (2009). Thedetection of latent fingermarks on porous surfaces using amino acid sensitivereagents: A review. Analytica Chimica Acta, 652(1-2), 128–142.

Kent, T. (2016). Water content of latent fingerprints – Dispelling the myth.Forensic Science International, 266, 134–138.

Mangle, M. F., Xu, X., & de Puit, M. (2015). Performance of 1,2-indanedione andthe need for sequential treatment of fingerprints. Science and Justice, 55(5),343–346.

Marriott, C. M. (2013). Evaluation of Sequences for the Detection of LatentFingermarks on Porous Substrates. National Centre for Forensic Studies,2013(June), 102.

Marriott, C., Lee, R., Wilkes, Z., Comber, B., Spindler, X., Roux, C., & Lennard,C. (2014). Evaluation of fingermark detection sequences on paper substrates.Forensic Science International, 236, 30–37.

Medina-Perrez, M. A., Moreno, A. M., Ferrer Ballester, M. Mangel, Garcia-Borroto, M., Loyola-Gonzalez, O., & Altamirano-Robles, L. (2016). Latentfingerprint identification using deformable minutiae clustering.Neurocomputing, 175, 851–865.

Mustonen, V., Hakkarainen, K., Tuunainen, J., & Pohjola, P. (2015).Discrepancies in expert decision-making in forensic fingerprint examination.Forensic Science International, 254, 215–226.

Oliveira, T. P., Nogueira, T. L. S., Valentin, E. S. B., Santos, O. C. L., Carvalho,E. F., & Silva, D. A. (2015). Evaluation of collection and extractionmethodologies of latent fingerprints for military application. ForensicScience International: Genetics Supplement Series, 9–10.

Ramotowski, R.S. 2001, "Composition of Latent Print Residue in H.C. Lee, R.E.Gaensslen", Advances in Fingerprint Technology 2nd Edition, , pp. 63-104.

Rohatgi, R., & Kapoor, a. K. (2015). Development of latent fingerprints on wetnon-porous surfaces with SPR based on basic fuchsin dye. Egyptian Journalof Forensic Sciences, 1–6.

34

Saferstein, R. 2007, "Fingerprints" in Criminalistics: An Introduction to ForensicScience, 9th edn, pp. 440-455.

Sears, V.G., Bleay, S.M., Bandey, H.L. & Bowman, V.J. 2012, "A Methodologyfor Fingermark Research", Science and Justice, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 145-160.

Sodhi, G. S., & Kaur, J. (2015). Physical developer method for detection of latentfingerprints: A review. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 1–4. 1

Sodhi, G. S., & Kaur, J. (2015). Physical developer method for detection of latentfingerprints: A review. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 1–4.

Weston-Ford, K. A., Moseley, M. L., Hall, L. J., Marsh, N. P., Morgan, R. M., &Barron, L. P. (2016). The retrieval of fingerprint friction ridge detail fromelephant ivory using reduced-scale magnetic and non-magnetic powderingmaterials. Science and Justice, 56(1), 1–8.

Yang, R., & Lian, J. (2014). Studies on the development of latent fingerprints bythe method of solid-medium ninhydrin. Forensic Science International, 242,123–126.

35

APPENDICES

Sample taken from left thumb that aged for 24 hours using Sequence 1

Sample taken from right thumb thhat aged for 24 hours using Sequence 1

36

Sample taken from left thmb that aged for 24 hours using Sequence 2

Sample taken from right thumb that aged for 24 hours using sequence 2

37


Sample taken from right thumb that aged for 48 hours using Sequence 1

38


Sample taken from right thumb that aged for 48 hours using Sequence 2

39

CURRICULUMVITAE

MOHAMADYUSRIE BIN CHEMOHAMADYAHAYAC-135 Taman Perumahan Gong Badak, 21300 Kuala [email protected]

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

2013-Present University of Technology (UiTM), Shah Alam.Bachelor Of Science (HONS.) Chemistry (ForensicAnalysis)(CGPA 2.33)

Kolej UNIKOP (Usahasama UiTM)Diploma in Science (CGPA:2.86)

2005-2009 SM Teknik TerengganuSijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Pure Science)SPM (3A 3B 2C 2D)

WORKING EXPERIENCE

1.Optometris Fakrul Sdn.Bhd.(2010)

- Customer Service and conductpreliminary eyesight examination

2. Baskin Robbins (2013)

- Customer service and inventory

3. Blink Book (2014)

- In charge for sales and facilitatorin writing camp for student

4. Data Entry (2015)

- Key in data with given document

5. Pos Malaysia (2015)

- Sorting document and mailswitihin Malaysia Region

EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITES

Year 2011-2014

Participation in SUKOP, Kolej UNIKOP

Participation in field work program for Biology at Cameron Highlands

Managing course dinner for Science Club

2015-Current

mailto:[email protected]

40

Participation in Football Piala Pembangunan Pelajar (Third place NR United)

Managing dinner for Forensic Club UiTM Shah Alam

Managing Program Titian Kasih for orphanage house

Participation in Program Satu Desa Sejuta Warna with Law Faculty in BalingKedah

Managing induction program for new students (intake March 2015 and March2016)

Particiation in Football Piala Timbalan Naib Canselor (Grouping NR United)

SKILLS AND STRENGTH

Malay (Excellent)

English (Good)

Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Publisher,MovieMaker (Good)

SELF DESCRIPTION

A fast learner and enthusiastic in works.

Independent that able to work under less supervision and encounter problemin a daily basis.

Able to cooperate with superiors and subordinates and do a good work in ateam.

Able to practice good ethics in work and have an interesting personality.

REFERENCE

Ezlan Elias Lecturer (Chemistry)

Faculty Of Applied Science

Universiti Teknologi Mara, 40450 Shah Alam Selangor.

[email protected]

012-6320656

mailto:[email protected]

chapter 1-5

Documents