Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences (2016) 6, 179–184
HO ST E D BY Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences
journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/egyptian-journal-of-forensic-sciences
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Development of latent fingerprints on
wet non-porous surfaces with SPR based
on basic fuchsin dye
* Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Rohatgi),
[email protected] (A.K. Kapoor).
Peer review under responsibility of The International Association of
Law and Forensic Sciences (IALFS).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejfs.2015.05.0072090-536X ª 2015 The International Association of Law and Forensic Sciences (IALFS). Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Richa Rohatgi *, A.K. Kapoor
Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi, Delhi 110007, India
Received 13 April 2015; accepted 22 May 2015Available online 15 July 2015
KEYWORDS
Fingerprints;
Forensic science;
Small particle reagent
Abstract: Small particle reagent (SPR) is a technique performed to detect latent fingerprints left on
wet and moist surfaces based upon the reaction between fatty acid residuals present in the traces
and hydrophobic tails of the specific reagent. Those tails are linked to a hydrophilic head of zinc
carbonate based formulation to give coloured precipitate. In the present study, we have prepared
a novel SPR formulation constituting of zinc carbonate based on basic fuchsin dye for the develop-
ment of latent fingerprints on wet surfaces. It was shown to develop clear, sharp and detailed fin-
gerprints on non-porous surfaces after these were immersed in water for up to 45 days. The ability
of the present formulations to detect weak and chance prints not only enhances its utility, but also
its potentiality in forensic casework investigations. The raw materials used to prepare the SPR are
cost-effective and non-hazardous.ª 2015 The International Association of Law and Forensic Sciences (IALFS). Production and hosting by
Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1. Introduction
Criminals usually tread carefully and try not to leave anytraces at the scene of the crime. Investigators are frequently
faced with the fingerprint detection and their subsequent devel-opment tasks. In some cases offenders try to destroy the tracesby throwing items, e.g., bottles, firearms, plastics, foils, etc. inwater or by exposing the scene and objects to extreme
conditions like arson. Previously many researchers have devel-
oped and used fingerprint powder formulations, with each for-mula consisting of a colourant for contrast and a resinousmaterial for good adhesion. Hundreds of fingerprint powder
formulas have been developed over the years. In the past, pow-der dusting, ninhydrin dipping, iodine fuming and silvernitrate soaking, cyanoacrylate fuming were the most com-
monly used techniques for latent print development. These tra-ditional techniques are quite effective for many surfaces.1–5
However, these traditional methods for latent print detection
are not always effective and scientists have attempted toimprove the existing methods for the visualization of latentprints. The list of different powders which have been used byvarious workers6–28 for the development of latent fingerprints
on different surfaces is shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Displays various chemical powders used by different workers for development of latent fingerprints.
Sudan III Bridges (1963)6
Lead powder Graham (1969)7
Rhodamine 6G Almog and Gabay (1980)8
Titanium oxide powder Goode and Morris (1983)9
Rhodamine B dye Kerr et al. (1983)10 and Sodhi et al. (2003)21
Rhodamine 6G Sears and Fitzgerald (2003)11 and Exline et al. (2003)22
Fluorescein dye Kerr et al. (1983)12
Basic fuchsin dye Howard (1993)13and Sodhi et al. (2004)25
Eosin blue dye Sodhi et al. (1997)14 and Dhall et al. (2013)27
Eosin yellow dye Sodhi and Kaur (1999)15 and Dhall et al. (2013)27
Phloxine B dye Sodhi and Kaur (2000)16
Guinea green dye Sodhi and Kaur (2001)17
Aniline blue dye Sodhi and Kaur (2002)18
Azure I dye Sodhi et al. (2003)19
Azure II dye Sodhi and Kaur (2004)20
Basic yellow 40 Exline et al. (2003)22
Basic red Exline et al. (2003)22
Congo red dye Sodhi et al. (2003)23
Cyano blue dye Sodhi and Kaur (2004)24
Crystal violet dye Sodhi and Kaur (2012)26 and Rohatgi et al. (2014)28
180 R. Rohatgi, A.K. Kapoor
SPR is a technique performed to detect latent fingerprintsleft on wet or moist surfaces based upon the reaction between
the fatty-acid residuals present in the traces and hydrophobictails of the specific reagents. Those tails are linked to a hydro-philic head, which reacts with metal salt to give coloured pre-
cipitate. In conventional small particle reagent, a suspension ofmolybdenum disulphide in a surfactant solution is used as abase material. Zinc carbonate, titanium dioxide and ferric
oxide are some other materials used in SPR. However, as thebase material is grey in colour, the fingerprints developed ondark coloured surfaces are not sufficiently clear due to lackof contrast.29–31 Therefore, a formulation based on white
coloured basic zinc carbonate, basic fuchsin and a commercialliquid detergent was prepared for developing latent finger-prints on crime scene evidence that were exposed to water
Picture 1 Latent prints developed on non-porous metallic surfaces a
with formulation B.
for varied periods of time. The present study is done toinvestigate if novel SPR formulation prepared can recover
latent fingerprints on glass and metal surfaces submerged instagnant water at various time intervals. The subsequentresults were compared with already in use SPR formulation
based on crystal violet dye to conclude its efficacy.28
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Basic zinc carbonate was purchased from Glaxo Laboratories,while basic fuchsin and crystal violet were procured fromSigma–Aldrich32 and GenteelR liquid detergent was used as
fter immersion in water (a) 5 days with formulation A; (b) 10 days
Picture 2 Fingerprints developed by formulation A, after immersion for (a) 10 days and (b) 20 days, respectively.
Picture 3 Latent prints developed with formulation A, after immersion for (a) 30 days on glass slide and (b) 35 days aluminium foil slide
respectively.
Development of latent fingerprints on wet non-porous surfaces with SPR 181
the surfactant solution. 20 individuals, both males and females,with variable donor capabilities, were asked for their con-sented groomed fingerprints for the study.
Latent fingerprints were developed on metallic spoon, alu-minium foil and glass slide simulating metal body firearms,knives, door knobs, bottles etc. where there is higher probabil-
ity of culprit leaving chance impressions. The fingerprints wereimpinged on selected non-porous surfaces. These wereimmersed in clean water for 45 days and their development
through SPR composition was done every day. The experimentwas conducted in the summer season in Delhi, India when thetemperature was 40–43 �C and relative humidity was 26–34%.
For evaluating shelf life, the composition was stored in a
glass beaker covered with an aluminium foil under ambient
laboratory conditions. The test solution remained stable forabout 50 days.
2.2. Method
Two formulations A and B were prepared. For formulation A,a suspension of 5.0 g of basic zinc carbonate in 75 ml distilled
water, 100 mg basic fuchsin dye and 0.3 ml commercial liquiddetergent was added. Formulation B was prepared by adding100 mg crystal violet to a suspension of 5.0 g of basic zinc car-
bonate in 75 ml distilled water followed by 0.3 ml of commer-cial liquid detergent. About 200 ml of clean water was taken inseparate containers, so as to simulate conditions of a suspectedweapon recovered, from a flowing river or a stagnant pool of
Picture 4 Images of latent prints developed with formulation B, after 40 days of immersion in water on spoon and glass slide
respectively.
Table 2 Finger mark quality scale.
Grade Description
0 No visible prints
1 Poor quality, very few visible ridges
2 Poor quality, some ridge details visible or partial mark
with limited characteristics
3 Reasonable quality, ridge-details and some characteristics
visible, identification possible
4 Good quality prints, ridge-details and characteristics
visible, probable identification
5 Excellent quality, very clear prints, identification assured
182 R. Rohatgi, A.K. Kapoor
water, for two dye solutions, respectively. Thirty sets of threesurfaces, impinged with latent fingerprints were immersed in
both containers for 45 days. One set of three surfaces wastaken out and sprayed with both SPR formulations separatelyevery day for 45 days. The formulations were given one minute
to react with the wetted latent fingerprint. The surfaces werewashed under a gentle stream of water for 20–30 s and thendried for 40 s. Clear and sharp fingerprints could be observed
as in Pictures 1–4.To determine the quality level of fingerprint development a
Finger mark Quality Scale assessment33 was used Table 2.
Table 3 Quality (grades) of developed fingerprints on wet non-por
Immersion period (in days) 1–5 6–10 11–15 16–
Formulation A
Metallic spoon 5 5 5 5
Aluminium foil 5 5 5 5
Glass slide 5 4 3 2
Formulation B
Metallic spoon 5 5 5 5
Aluminium foil 5 5 5 4
Glass slide 5 4 3 2
3. Results and discussion
Small particle reagent technique has proved its worth in detect-ing fingerprints on moist, non-porous smooth surfaces. In thepresent experimental study both formulations A and B provide
evidence of clear, sharp and good contrast results on alu-minium foil, metallic spoon and glass surfaces. The resultsshown for the first 20 days have been excellent by both formu-
lations A and B on all three surfaces. Thereafter a considerabledecrease in the quality of prints developed by both formula-tions was observed.
Composition A developed sufficiently clear and identifiablefingerprints on all three non-porous surfaces which hadremained in clean water for up to 30 days (mean 3.33) whilecomposition B gave reasonably good results up to 20 days
on all three surfaces (mean 3.33).The most suitable surface which showed reasonable quality
of ridge-details and identifiable characteristics with mean 3.8
was aluminium foil that is to say, there was no one instancewhen prints developed on aluminium foil gave print gradingbelow 2. On the contrary, the glass slide was found to be the
least productive surface in terms of developing latent printsunder wet conditions. It was observed from the experimentthat the clarity of the prints decreases with an increase in
ous surfaces.
20 21–25 26–30 31–35 36–40 41–45
5 5 4 3 2
4 4 3 2 1 and 0
2 1 and 0
4 3 2 1 and 0
3 2 1 and 0
2 1 and 0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Formula�on A Formula�on B Formula�on A Formula�on B Formula�on A Formula�on B
Metallic spoon Aluminum Foil Glass slide
1-10 days
11-20 days
21-30 days
31-40 days
41-50 days
Graph 1 Shows the comparative of two formulations A and B on different surfaces w.r.t. immersion period.
Development of latent fingerprints on wet non-porous surfaces with SPR 183
immersion time irrespective of the surface type. Thus, it can beconcluded from the above experiment that formulation Adevelops excellent results on aluminium foil immersed in waterfor up to 30 days. It may also be concluded from the above
experiment that SPR based on basic fuchsin and crystal violetcan be a good substitute to conventional SPR because of theirfluorescent contrasting and non-toxic properties. Results are
presented in Table 3 and Graph 1.
4. Conclusion
The aim of this study was to evaluate the possibility of devel-oping fingerprints with uniquely formulated composition A onsurfaces submerged in water. It can, therefore, be concluded
that this aim has been achieved, showing that, even underwet and moist conditions, it is possible to develop finger marksand that infallible evidence such as fingerprints should not be
overlooked on physical evidences found in drainage water,pool, river etc. The results showed that the most effectivemethod for developing finger marks on non-porous surfacesexposed to water is SPR.30 The new SPR composition proved
to give better results when compared with results given by for-mulation B. The raw materials used for preparing the presentsmall particle reagent are cost-effective and easily available.
These pose no occupational hazard to the user.
Funding
UGC assisted this study financially in the form of JuniorResearch Fellowship to the corresponding author.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from the participants of thestudy.
Ethical approval
Necessary ethical approval was obtained from the university’s
ethical committee.
Conflict of interest
None.
References
1. Champod C, Lennard C, Margot P, Stoilovic M. Fingerprints and
other ridge skin impressions. Boca Raton. Florida: CRC Press;
2004, Sandridge: Home Office, PSDB; 1998.
2. Kent T. Manual of fingerprint development techniques. 2nd
ed. Sandridge: Home Office, PSDB; 1998.
3. Lee HC, Gaensslen RE. Advances in fingerprint technology. 2nd
ed. Boca Raton. Florida: CRC Press; 2001.
4. Kabklang P, Riengrojpitak S, Suwansamrith W. Latent fingerprint
detection by various formulae of SPR on wet non-porous surfaces.
J Sci Res Chula Univ 2009;34(2).
5. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. Powder method for detecting latent finger-
prints: a review. Forensic Sci Int 2001;120(2):172–6.
6. Bridges BC. Practical fingerprinting. New York: Funk and Wag-
nalls Company Inc.; 1963.
7. Graham D. Some technical aspects of demonstration and visual-
ization of fingerprints on human skin. J Forensic Sci
1969;14(1):1–12.
8. Almog J, Gabay A. Chemical reagents for the development of
latent fingerprints. III. Visualization of latent fingerprints by
fluorescent reagents in vapor phase. J Forensic Sci
1980;25(2):408–10.
9. Goode GC, Morris JR. Latent fingerprints: a review of their origin,
composition and methods of detection. Aldermaston: AWRE
Report No. O 22/83; 1983.
10. Kerr FM, Haque F, Barson IW. Organic based powders for latent
fingerprint detection on smooth surfaces. Part I. Can Soc. Forensic
Sci Int 1983;16:39–44.
11. Sears VG, Fitzgerald L. The Search for an Improved Water-Based
Dye for Superglue, unpublished PSDB work, presented at Inter-
national Fingerprint Research Group Conference, 19–23 May
2003, Sandridge. London: Home Office; 2003.
12. Kerr FM, Haque F, Westland AD. Organic based powders for
latent fingerprint detection on smooth surfaces. Part II. Can Soc.
Forensic Sci Int 1983;16:140–2.
13. Howard S. Basic fuchsin – a guide to one step processing for black
electrical tape. J Forensic Sci 1993;38(6):1391–403.
14. Sodhi GS, Gupta GP, Kaur J. A novel, cost effective organic
fingerprint powder based on fluorescent Eosin blue dye. Res Pract
Forensic Med 1997;40:121–3.
15. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. A novel, cost effective organic fingerprint
powder based on fluorescent Eosin yellow dye. Indian J Criminol
1999;27(3–4):73–4.
16. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. Novel, cost effective organic fingerprint powder
based on Phloxine B dye. Defence Sci J 2000;50(2):213–5.
17. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. A fingerprint powder formulation based on
Guinea green dye. Res Pract Forensic Med 2001;44:267–8.
18. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. A fingerprint powder formulation based on
Aniline blue dye. Indian Police J 2002;49(3):44–5.
184 R. Rohatgi, A.K. Kapoor
19. Sodhi GS, Kaur J, Garg RK. A fingerprint powder formulation
based on Azure I dye. Indian J Criminol 2003;31(1–2):4–5.
20. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. Fingerprint powder formulation based on
Azure II dye. Defence Sci J 2004;54(2):179–82.
21. Sodhi GS, Kaur J, Garg RK. A fingerprint powder formulation
based on Rhodamine B. J Forensic Ident 2003;53(5):551–5.
22. Exline David L, Wallace Christie, Roux Claude, Lennard Chris,
Nelson Matthew P, Treado Patrick J. Forensic applications of
chemical imaging: latent fingerprint detection using visible absorp-
tion and luminescence. J Forensic Sci September 2003;48(5).
23. Sodhi GS, Kaur J, Garg RK. A fingerprint powder formulation
based on Congo red dye. Int J Med Toxicol Legal Med
2003;5(1):27–8.
24. Sodhi GS, Kaur J. A fingerprint powder formulation involving
Cyano blue dye. Fingerprint Whorld 2004;30(118):163.
25. Sodhi GS, Kaur J, Garg RK. Fingerprint powder formulation
based on basic Fuchsin dye. J Forensic Med Toxicol
2004;21(1):8–9.
26. Sodhi GS, Kaur Jasjeet. A novel fluorescent small particle reagent
for detecting latent fingerprints on wet non-porous items. Egypt J
Forensic Sci 2012;2(2):45–7.
27. Dhall JK, Sodhi GS, Kapoor AK. A novel method for the
development of latent fingerprints recovered from arson simula-
tion. Egypt J Forensic Sci 2013;3(4):99–103.
28. Rohatgi R, Sodhi GS, Kapoor AK. Small particle reagent based
on crystal violet dye for developing latent fingerprints on non-
porous wet surfaces. Egypt J Forensic Sci 2015;5(4):162–5.
29. Cuce P, Polimeni G, Lazzaro AP, Fulvio GD. Small particle
reagents technique can help to point out wet latent fingerprints.
Forensic Sci Int 2004;146(Suppl):S7–8.
30. Polimeni G, Feudale BF, Saravo L, Fulvio GD. A novel approach
to identify the presence of fingerprints on wet surfaces. Forensic
Sci Int 2004;146(Suppl):S45–6.
31. Trapecar Matej. Fingerprint recovery from wet transparent foil.
Egypt J Forensic Sci 2012;2:126–30.
32. Green FJ. The Sigma-Aldrich handbook of stains, dyes and
indicators. Milwaukee: Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc; 1991. p.
300–1.
33. Castello A, Frances F, Verdu F. Solving underwater crimes:
development of latent prints made on submerged objects. Sci
Justice 2013;53:328–31.