Member Boardroom About SWGs Search

Recent Updates 9-4-12: Updated the Terminology document with new terms from the Error Rate document 8-12-12: updated the reference to the version number in the Reporting document and table; arranged current documents in the current area and drafts in the draft area 7-26-12: Made some link updates on the documents page 7-22-12: replaced the examinations/conclusions document with the version containing an updated NIST diagram; updated the Reporting document to be a final document (not a draft); updated the simultaneous document to reflect "Latent" only; updated the Conduct, Blind Verification, Validation, & Terminology documents to reflect "Latent & Tenprint" 6-23-12: Posted the final error rate document and the new Draft Reporting document 4-21-12: Posted the latest SWGFAST documents: many new drafts for comments and 2 new position papers under "Other Documents" 3-25-12: Updated the Members page 3-14-12: Posted the link to the 2012 NIST Human Factors working group report 12-07-11: Posted the SWGFAST response to the RDT&E NSTC Working Group request for references 10-27-11: Posted the new DRAFT Standard for Reporting document 10-26-11: Posted the new DRAFT Errors, DRAFT Documentation (Tenprint), Final Technical Review and Final Examinations- Conclusions documents 10-23-11: Updated to version 4.0 of the bylaws; posted a new position statement on the use of AFIS ranks and scores 10-15-11: Updated the Documents page with archived versions of recently replaced documents that are pending formatting; Added a legal course to the Resources page 9-21-11: Added the SWGFAST Origin and Growth link at the bottom of this box   SWGFAST Origin and Growth Read about the origin and growth of SWGFAST

Message from the SWGFAST Chair

The mission of the Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study and Technology (SWGFAST) is to establish consensus guidelines and standards for the forensic examination of friction ridge impressions.

SWGFAST, established in 1995, is one of several Scientific Working Groups (SWG). Historically the group’s discussions and documents were directed towards the interest of the latent print community. Several professionals representing the tenprint community petitioned SWGFAST in 2006 to assist them with finding a forum that would provide similar representation for their interest. A standing committee to specifically address the work associated with the examination of tenprint records was established within SWGFAST in March 2007. Over time it became evident that the committee’s work product blended nearly seamlessly into that developed for latent prints.

During the Fall 2011 meeting of SWGFAST, members decided to eliminate the standing tenprint committee in favor of expanding the general membership to include both latent print and tenprint practitioners. As the SWGFAST chair I would like to express my personal recognition of, and appreciation for, the efforts of the dedicated professionals from the tenprint community, listed below, who as committee members, pioneered laying of the path that will guide the community into the future.

Camille Bourque, Jamie Craig, Mona Lisa Maynard, Judith Miller, Candy Whitney, Kimberly Yada, Kenneth Blue, Kevin Burke, David Cotton, Michael Gorden, Joseph Means, and Charles Smith.

They accepted a difficult challenge for the benefit of many.

Continuing to Move Forward

In late 2010 I wrote an article for Identification News titled, Mandated Adherence to SWG Standards. The intent of the article was to increase the community’s awareness for the need to review and comment on SWGFAST documents. I presented the question of what an agency would do if application of the SWGFAST documents were to be mandated. Based on the recommendations published in the NAS report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States – A Path Forward, some believe that such a mandate could become a reality.

The opening paragraph of the Mandated Adherence to SWG Standards article reads:

The 2009 NAS report on forensic science has generated considerable discussion about many aspects of the work that we are dedicated to. Since the initial Tsunami that accompanied the release we have witnessed seemingly limited interest and very little impact on our work. With the passing of time some practitioners have all but disregarded it.

Following the publication it was pleasing to witness an increase in the number of comments received over what ordinarily would have been expected. What influence the article may have had on the level of participation is unknown, but some comments returned with the reviews did reflect on it. The remaining challenges are to further increase participation and create a subtle way to provide a continuous reminder of the potential impact that the documents could have on all practitioners and the need to be involved in the process.

SWGFAST realizes that not all laboratories operate in adherence with existing standards and guidelines. This presents a troubling concern as to why. The reasons could include: policies in the lab haven’t been challenged, it takes time and effort to introduce changes, it’s comfortable doing things a certain way, there’s not a perceived need for change, they disagree with the standards and guidelines, etc. In order for SWGFAST to address some of these concerns, feedback on our documents is essential. Even so, the question remains, what impact would it have on your operation if compliance was suddenly mandated? Regardless how troubling it may be to answer, each laboratory needs to consider the impact.

SWGFAST recognizes the importance the NAS report poses and acknowledges that many actions have already occurred as a result of the report. These actions have been observed at all levels: from the individual practitioner, unit or laboratory, to the court (including interest from the defense and the prosecution), to the solicitation of and design of research. The report does represent ‘A Path Forward’. As with nearly any path through uncharted territory, the degree of difficulty and time that it will take to get to the end are unknown, but it is the goal that will be achieved upon reaching each milestone that is important. For all who could potentially be influenced by the effects of the report there is a need to avoid becoming complacent about it, and isolating themselves from what is changing due to it. Working together as a bonded forensic community rather than individuals will make our journey far easier as we continue to follow the path forward.

Since the issuance of the NAS report, the work of SWGFAST has been directed specifically towards addressing it.

Leonard Butt, Chair
Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge
Analysis, Study and Technology

September 2011