Classification of scarred patterns

Emphasis should be placed upon the necessity for fully referencing all scarred patterns. In connection with their proper classification, the following rules should be observed:

In figure 355, the pattern is entirely obliterated. It could have been a small whorl, a small ulnar or radial loop, an arch, or a tented arch. If the opposite finger were an arch or tented arch or whorl, this impression would be classified as arch, tented arch, or whorl (with the same tracing). If the opposite finger were a small-count loop, this would be classified as a loop of the same count. If the opposite finger were a large-count loop, this impression would be given the count of the opposite finger even though it could never have had that count. If the opposite finger were scarred in the same fashion or were amputated or missing, both impressions would be classified as whorls with meeting tracings.

Fig. 355

[Fig. 355]

In figure 356, the general type of the pattern could have been loop (ulnar if in the right hand) or whorl. If the opposite finger were a whorl this would be classified as a whorl, and with the same tracing. If a radial loop were opposite, this would be classified as an ulnar loop (if in the right hand). The ridge count can be obtained with a fair degree of accuracy. If an arch or tented arch were opposite, this impression would be classified as a loop because it looks as if it had been a loop.

Fig. 356

[Fig. 356]

In figure 357, the ridge count cannot be determined accurately but it would be classified as a loop, no matter what the opposite finger might be. If the opposite finger were a loop with a count of from 6 to 17, this impression would be given that count. If the count of the opposite loop were less or more than 6 to 17, the count for this finger would be given I or O in the subsecondary classification depending upon whether the opposite finger was I or O, but would not be given less than 6 nor more than 17 counts as its possibility is limited to those counts.

Fig. 357

[Fig. 357]

A pattern with a scar similar to either scar in figures 358 and 359 would always be given a loop as it could be seen readily that there was no possibility of its having been any other type of pattern.

Fig. 358

Fig. 359

[Figs. 358-359]

Classification of amputations and fingers missing at birth

When one or more amputations appear upon a fingerprint card, it may be filed separately from those having no amputations in order to facilitate searching. It is to be noted that before it may be filed in the amputation group, the card must contain a definite and unequivocal statement or marking by the contributor to the effect that a certain finger or fingers have been amputated or were missing at birth. This prevents the appearance on later cards of impressions of fingers thought to have been amputated but which in reality were merely injured and bandaged when previous prints were submitted.

If one finger is amputated, it is given a classification identical with that of the opposite finger, including pattern and ridge count, or tracing, and referenced to every other possible classification.

If two or more fingers are amputated, they are given classifications identical with the fingers opposite, with no additional references.

If two amputated fingers are opposite each other, both are given the classification of whorls with meeting tracings.

When a fingerprint card bearing a notation of fingers missing at birth is classified, the missing fingers should be treated as amputations in that they are given the identical classifications of the opposite fingers and are filed in the amputation group. As these fingers are missing from a prenatal cause, they would have always received the identical classification of the opposite finger on any previous occasion.

If all 10 fingers are amputated or missing at birth, the classification will be

If both hands are amputated or missing at birth, the footprints should be taken as they, too, bear friction ridges with definite patterns. A footprint file is maintained by the FBI for identification purposes in instances where the subject has all fingers amputated or missing at birth.

Partially amputated fingers often present very complex problems and careful consideration should be given to them. The question often arises as to the appropriate groups in which they should be filed, i.e., amputations or nonamputations. As no definite rule may be applied, it is a matter of experience and judgment as to their preferred classification.

In those instances in which a partially amputated finger has half or more than half of the pattern area missing, it is given the classification of the opposite finger. It will be filed in the amputation group under the classification of the opposite finger and reference searches should be conducted in all possible classifications in the nonamputation groups. If two or more of the fingers are amputated in this manner, they are given the classification of the opposite fingers only and are governed by the rules concerning amputations.

Generally, a "tip amputation," or one which has less than half of the first joint amputated, will always be printed in the future. Therefore, a partially amputated finger with less than half of the pattern area missing is classified as it appears and is referenced to the opposite finger. It will be filed in the nonamputation group and reference searches should be conducted under the classification of the opposite finger, and in the amputation group. It must be referenced this way even though it never could have originally had the classification of the opposite finger.

Classification of bandaged or imprinted fingers

As noted in the chapter pertaining to "Problems in the Taking of Inked Fingerprints," an indication to the effect "recently injured, bandaged" is not sufficient to file a fingerprint card. It is obvious that a fingerprint card bearing these notations cannot be properly classified or filed. If the injury is temporary, and if possible, these prints should not be taken until after healing.

If fingers are injured to the extent that it is impossible to secure inked impressions by special inking devices, the unprinted fingers are given classifications identical with the classifications of the fingers opposite. If only one finger is lacking, reference searches should be conducted in every possible classification. If more than one finger is lacking, they should be given the classifications of the opposite fingers, but no reference searches should be conducted. If there are two lacking, opposite each other, they should be classified as whorls with meeting tracings.

If, however, in the case of an injured finger, observation is made of the ridges of the finger itself and indicated on the print, this classification should be, insofar as it is possible, utilized. For example, a missing impression labeled "ulnar loop of about 8 counts" by the individual taking the prints, should be searched in the subsecondary as both I and O but should not be referenced as a pattern other than a loop. If the finger is used as the final, or key, it should be searched enough counts on each side of 8 to allow for possible error in the counting by the contributor using his naked eye.