Abstract: A review of personal experience, published accounts, interviews, case reports, and data collected from more than 4,000 student questionnaires pertaining to the recovery of latent prints from human skin is presented. The surface conditions of the body and the ambient environment (temperature and humidity) are discussed, and recommendations are presented to achieve optimum results. This article provides a guideline for the processing of human skin for latent prints and suggests that efforts to obtain latent prints from human skin are sporadic and should be increased.

Introduction

Controlled studies and efforts by forensic scientists and investigators in the mid-1960s through the 1970s provided a stepping-stone into the recovery of prints from human skin in actual homicide cases [1-12]. The focus of these efforts seems to have been on determining the best methods to obtain the prints, without considering environmental factors that could possibly impact their successful recovery. In the last 9 years of teaching and 13 years of research on this subject, we have run into the following beliefs and statements:

• It is unlikely that prints may be developed on human skin.
• Fingerprints will have been washed away.
• There are time constraints on the successful recovery of prints from dead bodies.
• The body must be processed at the scene.
• The body must be fresh (not refrigerated).
• Natural skin shedding destroys latent prints left on the skin’s surface.
• Specific surface temperatures of the skin and body are required for the successful recovery of prints.
• Prints can only be recovered from dead bodies.
• Prints have only been recovered from bodies located in Florida and that is because of the use of suntan oil.

Negative attitudes and the lack of definitive guidelines easily equated to a hit-and-miss approach that was usually accompanied by negative results. Processing a body for print evidence can be a long, methodical, labor-intensive task. Even the most experienced investigator may become disillusioned when results are negative. Ongoing research and field applications have proven that, with practice, prints can in fact be successfully recovered.

Background

The authors have gathered and analyzed case histories and published accounts (Appendix 1). This effort has led to new areas of research and has expanded the understanding of human skin and the sophisticated level of interaction between skin, latent prints, and the environment. During testing of procedures for the transference or recovery of fingerprint evidence from human skin, it was determined that by raising or lowering, as appropriate, the environmental temperature and relative humidity, print recovery was either increased or decreased. In addition, the surface temperature of the skin could be controlled by mechanical means (such as a small battery-operated fan). Participants in the workshops validated these concepts with their results. This interaction reveals that proportionately balanced relative humidity and temperature, as well as the surface temperature of the skin, are key factors that have been largely overlooked.

Persistence on the part of a few bore fruit in the mid-1970s. The Miami-Dade Police Department in Miami, Florida, had positive results in five cases involving physical assault or homicide. One of them, in 1978 [13], produced the first known identification of prints from human skin that resulted in a first-degree murder conviction. The other four cases included a previously unpublished 1975 assault case that the author worked (an unidentifiable print was obtained from a living victim’s wrist where the suspect had grabbed the victim) and three other previously reported cases [14]. Japan and Canada followed with successful cases in 1981 [15] and 1982 [16].

The authors conducted a review of pertinent data from actual cases in which prints were recovered from human skin (Appendix 1). Common factors were compiled and analyzed and a proposed method was outlined. Research was conducted during week-long courses to verify the validity of the method. Informal guidelines were developed [17-20]. The guidelines were disseminated through training classes starting in 1992. They were put to the test and quickly produced positive results in five separate field cases1 in different parts of the country.

Three of those cases in the early 1990s reported the successful recovery of identifiable prints. The fourth met with partial success, because the impressions were not of an identifiable nature. However, the impressions were used as corroborative evidence. (The limited results of the fourth case were attributed to an inability to control environmental conditions.) The results of all five cases were correlated and examined to further refine the guidelines or protocols.

1 (Case #61) Dec. 14, 1993 - Greensboro, NC : Body found in graveyard. Partial palmprint recovered from inner thigh using heated photo paper transfer medium applied to cold body in cold environment. Transfer medium transported into controlled warm environment, left for 8 hours, then processed. 2) Nov. 1994 - Desert in Southwest USA: Impression of thumb and finger of left hand recovered from neck using a Ziploc quart-size freezer bag. Body was processed during the day. 3) (Case #62) Feb. 1994 - Miami, FL: Hispanic male found in trash heap; drug-related homicide. Two partial palmprints recovered from ankle using heated fixed photo paper transfer medium applied to cold body in 50s temperature environment. 4) (Case #49) Dec. 17, 1994 - Miami, FL: Female victim of sexual battery and homicide (serial killing). Fingerprint recovered from inner thigh using cool Kromekote card applied to surface. 5) (Case #51) Dec. 25, 1994 - Miami, FL: Female victim of home invasion robbery homicide. Fingerprint recovered from upper, outer right arm using heated transfer medium applied to cold body in cold environment. (Note: case # refers to Appendix 1.)

In January 1991, the JFI published an article listing six reported cases involving the recovery of prints from human skin [14]. The article addressed common denominators in the reported field cases where prints were recovered. Since those initial days, additional cases have been recorded and examined for similarities along with continuing clinical research (Table 1).

Table 1
Reported successful recoveries of latent prints from human skin.

Of particular note is the recovery of print evidence from bodies that were exposed to extreme heat or cold, buried bodies, embalmed bodies, and bodies that were exposed to the elements for extended periods of time. Keys to the successful recovery of prints include condition of the skin’s surface, ambient and skin surface temperature, relative humidity, and scene environment (indoor or outdoor).

The authors’ review of 429 Miami-Dade Police Department homicide case files (spanning 1994 to 1997) indicates that only a small portion of murder victims meet the criteria for processing for latent print evidence. For instance, if a subject shoots a person from a distance of several feet away and there is no evidence of physical contact between the two, then there would be no reason to process the body for prints. The review indicated that nineteen (4%) of the murder victims met the criteria for processing the body for prints. All nineteen cases were processed and five of those cases (26% recovery rate) resulted in print evidence.

Although the history of a case determines whether or not a body should be processed, certain criteria are critical for success. These are skill, equipment, attitude, and knowledge. Some investigators have better print processing skills than others. The higher the level of skill, the better the chance of success, but all of the skill in the world will not help if the necessary equipment and supplies are not available when they are needed. Having the technical knowledge, being prepared with a good plan of action, and being confident that this is possible can make the difference between success and failure. Weakness in any of these areas will hinder success in retrieving print evidence from skin.

The authors, from 1996 to the present, have conducted an ongoing survey of more than 4,000 peers to date, by means of a questionnaire filled out by attendees at workshops, classes, and seminars (Appendix 2). The surveys indicated that approximately 1% (40) of those participating had attended a formal training course in the recovery of print evidence from human skin. However, a considerably higher number, 12% (480), indicated they had processed a body, living or dead, for print evidence based on what they had read or what they were told by others.

It was determined from the same surveys that there have been approximately 70 different methods (or variations) used to process human skin for print evidence (Appendix 3). Successful direct transfer methods include Kromekote card, 20 lb bond paper, cash register tape, and iodine silver plate. Chemicals that have been used successfully are ortho tolidine, benzidine, amido black, and cyanoacrylate.

According to the cases studied to date, the direct transfer method has been the most successful method in recovering latent prints. The next most successful method is the direct application of magnetic powder to the surface of the skin. Other methods of recovery have been superglue, chemical development, and the detection and visualization of print evidence with forensic light sources.

These reviews do not support the use of chemical development or superglue fumes as primary methods of recovering print evidence from human skin. Although there has been success with these techniques, they must not be seen as the primary means of recovery unless the circumstances so dictate.

Understanding the physiology and dynamics of residue secreted from normal, healthy skin and the functions of the skin in living and deceased persons will assist in the selection of a processing method or a series of sequential methods. Various methods may be used in the successful recovery process, including powder applied to a surface, chemical application, laser excitation, superglue, and photography. The methods vary in the use of different direct transfer media and also in the control of the temperature and humidity (both in the environment and on the surface of the skin).

Normal, healthy skin in a living person is a functioning organ that sheds regularly and actively produces new cells. It is covered with an emulsified mixture of watery secretions from sweat glands and fatty lipids that are secreted by sebaceous glands. These secretions help cause or create the hydrolipid layer (the acid mantle) on the skin’s surface. Disturbance of the integrity of this barrier results in a brisk metabolic response to restore the barrier functions to normal. This creates a domino effect in a burst of body secretions to replenish the surface of the skin [21].

There is no one perfect method for obtaining prints from skin. The selection of the method and processing materials to be used must be based upon the unique facts of each individual case: environment; temperature and humidity factors (skin surface and ambient); and the investigator’s experience, skill, and judgment.

In every case, at least one processing target area should be established on the body. A target area is defined for these purposes as an area of exposed surface skin that is suspected of having been touched by the perpetrator. The establishment of target areas is based on certain indicators. Indicators are the position of the body; evidence that the body was moved; partially clad remains; nude body; redressed, posed, or displayed body; eye witness account(s); and in the case of a living person, information provided by the victim. Case histories have demonstrated that victims’ bodies were frequently handled by the extremities, with prints being recovered from the ankles, wrist, and under the armpits. Other areas where prints have been found are the neck, abdomen, small of the back, buttocks, and inner thighs. Bruising or underlying tissue damage and swelling may also be other indicators. Redness of the skin surface is especially prevalent on living persons.

Temperature and Humidity Considerations

Temperature

The efforts thus far suggest that the most productive temperature and humidity ranges for the recovery of latent prints from human skin are as indicated in Table 2.

Table 2
Temperature and relative humidity window for
processing human skin for latent prints.

Prints from the Skin of Living Persons

Surface skin temperature of a victim must be considered in conjunction with the temperature of the transfer medium. The surface temperature of human skin is not absolute and ranges from the low 80 degrees to 95 degrees Fahrenheit in live persons. In general, skin temperature is dependent upon its location on the body (e.g., arm, leg, throat, head, etc.) and whether or not it is exposed to the environment. (This information was gathered from the class questionnaires and personal observations.) Control of the temperature of the skin, the environment, and the transfer medium, in relationship to each other, is vital [9, 22-26].

With the recent successful recoveries of latent prints from living persons comes the responsibility to stress discretion and common sense when processing the skin of a living person. Irresponsible processing of a living victim has occurred in the past and should not be repeated [27].

If the victim is alive, overheating or overdryness of the skin may be a serious problem [14, 24, 26, 28-32]. This may be dealt with by keeping the victim as calm and cool as possible. This also imposes serious time constraints on how long the prints are retrievable. The successful recovery time of prints in actual cases involving living victims has been no more than five hours to date. In all instances, the victims were in environments described as comfortable or air-conditioned.

The surface of the skin may be cooled to preserve print evidence. A small battery-operated fan will rapidly cool target areas of the skin of living persons when its airflow is gently applied across the surface of the skin.

Prints from the Skin of Deceased Persons

If the victim is dead, two factors come into play that help preserve latent print evidence. One is a well-established, but not universally understood, fact that the human body stops actively secreting oils and sweat at the time of death [25]. The other is that the skin surface begins its own cooling process, which is affected by environmental conditions. Normal body functions of the living person are energy-generated and cease after death. There is no energy; therefore, normal body functions stop. The glands no longer secrete residues, and the problems with ongoing secretions diluting the print residue cease. "The surface temperature of skin will seek the ambient temperature of an environment, and if the environment is cooler than the average surface temperature of the skin, it reduces the liquid state of the residues" [33]. Simply providing a cooler environment will cool the skin surface.

It has been reported that if the surface of the skin is 89.6 oF or higher [34], the residues will be in a liquid state or diffuse. It has been further stated that this will wash away prints [23]. There are a couple of ways to overcome this. One is to use a cool direct transfer medium against the warmer skin. Another successful method is to cool the appropriate area of the skin to approximately 85 oF or 86 oF and process with a direct powder application. A third option is to cool the victim, living or dead, by placing in a cool, air-conditioned environment until the surface temperature is lowered sufficiently for processing. According to Reichardt, et al:

Tests on living humans have indicated that latent impressions on the surface of the skin can be lifted on Kromekote cards and developed up to 1 1/2 h after the print is placed on the skin. Some individuals may retain prints longer because of the condition of the skin and environmental conditions. Pronounced heavy perspiration may have an undesirable effect on latent impressions on the surface of the skin of living victims, although comfortable temperatures do not produce sufficient perspiration to greatly harm a print. Low-level secretions of the sebaceous glands and sweat glands tend to have no noticeable effect on the skin's ability to retain latent fingerprint impressions over a reasonable length of time. Under some circumstances the buildup of secretions may reach a threshold that will mask any print present on the skin. Cosmetic oils and body lotions on the skin seriously affect the ability of the skin to retain latent fingerprint impressions. However, the lifting of latent prints from living victims of physical crimes is practical. [11]

Relative Humidity

Relative humidity, as much as temperature, impacts the recovery of latent prints from the skin (living or dead) just as it apparently does from inanimate substrates. Humidity levels of 40% to 60% are considered to be in the optimum humidity range. This finding is based on observation and the recovery of print evidence in actual field cases as well as previous research [1, 5, 11, 19, 22-24, 35-36].

When an extremely low or dry humidity (below 40%) is encountered, prints may have to be rehydrated. Rehydration may be accomplished by changing the humidity of the environment. When it is not possible to change the humidity of the environment, it is necessary to change the level of moisture of the skin. This has been done with steam wands. Steam wands are effective in cool or cold temperatures but only on dead bodies [37]. Coming from a hot climate, as well as desiring a rejuvenation technique suitable for use on live victims or at warmer temperatures, an alternative method was sought. Spritzing the target area of the skin with a very fine mist of water has proven to be successful in classroom situations on live “victims”. To remove excess moisture, the skin surface should then be dried by means of a handheld battery-powered fan or allowed to air-dry. Another possible method of rehydration is to refrigerate a dead body in a morgue cooler and then remove it to the warmer environment of an examination room. The body will acclimate to the surroundings, which will initially cause condensation on the skin’s surface. This condensation must be allowed to dissipate prior to processing [14, 24, 26, 30-32, 35, 37].

When humidity is too high, the prints on the skin surface or other substrates may need to be dehydrated. Bringing a living person or dead body into an air-conditioned environment or examining facility generally provides the necessary temperature and relative humidity. The victim should be allowed to acclimate to the environment. It has been observed that bodies exposed to extremes such as heat or cold, when transferred to a more suitable environment, have provided good results in the recovery of print evidence.

Selection of the Direct Transfer Medium

A direct transfer medium is defined as any substrate (Table 3) placed directly on the surface of the skin where a latent fingerprint may be located in order to transfer the latent fingerprint from the surface of the skin to the medium itself. The direct transfer method began with iodine silver plate and electronography techniques where the transfer media were rolled against the surface of human skin [2, 3, 7, 12]. It subsequently evolved to the use of a Kromekote card in the early 1970s [11, 38].

Table 3
Direct transfer media used in the
successful recovery of prints from human skin.

The selection of a direct transfer medium may be determined by the location of the target area and the experience of the investigator. In numerous applications and experiments during workshops, it has been determined that transfer media are basically equal. Their efficiency depends mainly on the skill involved in their application. The end result was that, frequently, after several hours of practice, the last transfer medium that was used worked the best in obtaining prints for most workshop participants.

The medium described for use in the direct transfer method was designed for a different end use. When this medium is used for the direct transfer of print residue from the skin surface to the medium itself, the application and guidelines may be new to the user or observer. An understanding of this process is essential for potential success in the recovery of print evidence from the surface of the skin.

The direct transfer method is noninvasive to the body. However, it is strongly recommended (legally required in some states) that the coroner or medical examiner be contacted and agree with your protocols before you start processing.

Direct Transfer Method

Living or Dead Victim

Examine the body and collect the obvious trace evidence. Determine the most likely location of any prints. Measure the temperature of the skin and ambient temperature and humidity. First, use the direct transfer method and apply a direct transfer medium (Kromekote, paper, photo paper, etc.) to the surface of the skin where a suspect latent print may be. If the surface of the skin is warm, apply a cool medium, and if it is cool, apply a warm transfer medium.

The transfer medium should be applied with an equal distribution of firm pressure. Press or roll, and release. This can be accomplished by means of a supple sponge or a medium nap paint roller placed over the medium. A second or third lift may be done with new transfer media to the same area. Multiple lifts of an area assist in the removal of excessive moisture or oils.

Carefully remove the transfer medium from the surface of the skin and set aside, preferably at room temperature. This procedure allows the transfer medium to evaporate moisture. The medium may be processed with fingerprint powder (regular or magnetic).

Alternate Procedure: Living Person: Magnetic powder may be applied directly to the skin. A small battery-operated fan may be used to reduce the surface temperature of the skin into a temperature range of 85 ºF to 86 ºF and to evaporate moisture prior to the application of powder. Lightly apply the powder to the surface of the skin. Photograph, then lift with fingerprint tape, Mikrosil, and so forth.

Corpse: Magnetic powder may be applied directly to the surface of the skin. Prior to applying the powder, a small battery-operated fan can assist in evaporating any moisture on the surface of the skin. Photograph, then lift with fingerprint tape, Mikrosil, and so forth.

Safety

Safety procedures are established for good reasons. It seems logical that we make an all-out effort to understand the dangers associated with our job and take the proper precautions. Keep in mind that, when dealing with dead bodies, some of the greatest threats are TB, HIV, hepatitis pathogens, and other diseases.

The selection of personal protective equipment (PPE) is predicated upon the anticipated threat level. The level of protection must fit the expected exposure [39, 40]. When threat levels are expected to be of a gross contamination nature, more extensive protection is required. When approaching a scene, it is recommended that the maximum PPE should be employed until the specifics of the conditions are known. The thermal comfort zone [36, 41] of the user is a consideration that must be taken into account when using PPE. Although PPE has been downplayed by many, this is not an issue of image but rather one of serious short- and long-term health risks. An added benefit is that PPE also prevents or reduces inadvertent contamination of a crime scene by the investigators.

The indiscriminate use of chemicals or superglue fuming at crime scenes can be dangerous to those who apply them and to others who are in attendance or enter the scene after the fact. Many chemical solutions are volatile and toxic. The lack of adequate ventilation and the inability to control the environment are serious issues that need to be taken into consideration when chemicals or superglue are used.

Summary

Information regarding the successful processing of human skin for latent print evidence was gathered, examined, and reviewed for common denominators. A course of action was developed and implemented. This information was then reviewed, refined, and finalized on the basis of actual case histories, personal experience, clinical studies, and proper field processes. In conclusion, the factor most commonly associated with successful recoveries in actual cases was the environment in which the body was processed. In reviewing clinical studies, the common factor was also the environment in which the body was processed.

Previously, it was thought that the body should be processed where it was found. This was based largely upon the expected loss or inadvertent destruction of physical evidence if the body were to be moved. The adage of the sooner the body is processed, the better the chance of recovery still holds true. If the body is located where the environment cannot be controlled or is not conducive to processing, then successful recovery of prints is greatly diminished. (Controlled environments, as used here, are usually associated with engineering controls such as air conditioning or heating. Further considerations include, but are not limited to, adequate workspace, dignity for the victim, privacy, security, proper lighting, and ample equipment and material to complete the job.) However, if the body is properly packaged and transported to a facility where environmental controls and good working conditions are available, there is little chance of destroying potential print evidence [9]. An analysis of the reported cases indicated that approximately 42% of the cases were transported from the crime scene to an examining facility or morgue before processing without destroying latent print evidence.

Success has been achieved in the recovery of prints from skin when the body has been placed in an optimum environmental setting after exposure to unfavorable environmental conditions and allowed to acclimate to the improved surroundings. Some of the untoward conditions to which bodies were exposed (and from which prints were recovered) included extreme heat, extreme cold (freezing), and submersion in water.

The bottom line is that success is possible as long as the skin is intact and the temperatures and humidity are in the correct ranges. More well-trained people are needed and body processing should be attempted much more often than it has been.

For further information, please contact:


William C. Sampson
KLS Forensics
2109 Cliffs Trail
Tallahassee, FL 32308
(850) 219-9276
klsforensics.com

References

1. Bluhm, R. J.; Lougheed, W. J. Results of Time, Temperature, and Humidity on Latent Fingerprints. Ident. News 1960, 10 (1), 4-8.
2. Graham, D; Gray, H. C. The Use of X-Ray Electronography and Autoelectronography in Forensic Investigations. J. For. Sci. 1966, 11 (2), 124-143.
3. MacDonnell, H. L. Recent Advancements in the Processing of Latent Fingerprints. Ident. News 1968, 18 (1), 4-5, 13-15.
4. Gutierrez, C. Developing and Photographing Latent Prints Found on Human Skin. Fingerprint Ident. Mag., 1976, pp 10-12.
5. Shin, D. H.; Argue, D. G. Identification of Fingerprints Left on Human Skin. Can. Soc. For. Sci. J. 1976, 9 (2), 81-84.
6. Dalrymple, B. E; Duff, J. M; Menzel, E. R. Inherent Fingerprint Luminescence Detection by Laser. J. For. Sci. 1977, 22 (1), 106-115.
7. Winstanley, R. Recovery of Latent Fingerprints from Difficult Surfaces by an X-ray Method. J. For. Sci. Soc. 1977, 17 (2-3), 121-125.
8. Adcock, J. M. The Development of Latent Fingerprints on Human Skin: The Iodine-Silver Plate Transfer Method. J. For. Sci. 1977, 22, 599-605.
9. Agdal, N. Fingerprints on a Dead Body: A New Approach. For. Sci. 1977, 9 (2), 105-107.
10. Mooney, D. J. Fingerprints on Human Skin. Ident. News 1977, 27 (2), 5-8.
11. Reichardt, G. J.; Carr, J. C.; Stone, E.G. A Conventional Method for Lifting Fingerprints from Human Skin. J. For. Sci. 1978, 23 (1), 135-141.
12. Knowles, A. M. Aspects of Physiochemical Methods for the Detection of Latent Fingerprints. J. Phys. Electronic Sci. Instrum. 1978, 11, 713-721.
13. Mellis, A. The Spa Murders. Fingerprint Whorld, January 1981, pp 55-57.
14. Bettencourt, D. S. A Compilation of Techniques for Processing Deceased Human Skin for Latent Prints. J. For. Ident. 1991, 41 (2), 111.
15. Imamura, M.; Asahida, M. Fingerprints Lifted from Cadaver Skin Surface. Ident. News 1981, 31 (7), 13-14.
16. Haslett, M. Peel Regional Police Identification Bureau, Brampton, Ontario, Canada. Personal correspondence regarding the development of a latent print on human skin. January 5, 1983.
17. Sampson, W. C. Fingerprint Course Handout Material. Sequential Applications in the Development and Recovery of Latent Fingerprint Evidence from Human Skin. 1997.
18. Sampson, W. C. Glass Recovery Investigative Technique: G.R.I.T. J. For. Ident. 1992, 42 (2), 96-100.
19. Sampson, W. C. Latent Fingerprint Evidence on Human Skin, Part 1. J. For. Ident. 1996, 46 (2), 96-100.
20. Sampson, W. C.; Sampson, K. L.; Shonberger, M. F. Recovery of Latent Fingerprint Evidence from Human Skin: Causation, Isolation and Processing Techniques. KLS Forensics: Tallahassee, FL, 1997.
21. Vincent, P. Skin: A Brief Look Under the Surface, Metropolitan Police (undated) Training Document issued by SO3 Training Section, New Scotland Yard, 19 pgs.
22. Johnson, P. Life of Latents. Ident. News, 1973, 23 (4), 10-13.
23. Donche, A; Hebrard, J. Fingerprint Detection Methods on Skin: Experimental Study on 16 Live Subjects and 23 Cadavers. J. For. Ident. 1994, 44 (6), 623-627.
24. Barnum, C. A; Klasey, D. R. Factors Affecting the Recovery of Latent Prints on Firearms. J. For. Ident. 1997, 47 (2), 141-149.
25. Davis, J. H. MD, Chief Medical Examiner (Retired), Miami-Dade County, Miami, FL. Personal communications, 2004.
26. Fingerprints. www.peelpolice.on.ca/FIS/FIS-Print.html.
27. Grieve, D. L. Strictly Speaking. J. For. Ident. 1997, 47 (5), 620-622.
28. Egawa, M; Oguri, M; Kuwahara, T; Takahashi, M. Effect of Exposure of Human Skin to a Dry Environment. Skin Res. Technol. 2002, 8 (4), 212-218.
29. Mayo Clinic Staff. Dry Skin Overview. www.mayoclinic.com.
30. Effects of Dry Air on the Body. Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease 2000-2004, www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001433.html.
31. Barron, I. W.; Hague, F; Westland, A. D. Rejuvenation of Latent Fingerprints by the Freeze-Thaw-Technique. Ident. News 1981, 31 (11), 14-15.
32. Jolly, J. S. Freeze-Thaw Revisited. Ident. News 1983, 33 (4), 13.
33. Allman, D. S.; Pounds, C. A. Detection of Fingerprints on Skin. For. Sci. Rev. 1991, 3 (2), 83-89.
34. Wilkinson, D. A; Watkin, J. E.; Misner, A. H. A Comparison of Techniques for the Visualization of Fingerprints on Human Skin including the Application of Iodine and a-Naphthoflavone. J. For. Ident. 1996, 46 (4), 432-447.
35. Bobev, K. Fingerprints and Factors Affecting Their Condition. J. For. Ident. 1995, 45 (2), 176-183.
36. Fairey, P. W. Passive Cooling and Human Comfort; FSEC publication DN-5; Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida: FL, 1994.
37. Delmas, B. J. Postmortem Latent Print Recovery form Skin Surfaces. J. For. Ident. 1988, 38 (2), 49-56.
38. Hamm, E. D. A Latent from Human Skin. Fingerprint Whorld, October 1988, pp 56-58.
39. How to Select OSHA-Required PPE - Personal Protection Equipment. Environment, Health and Safety Online Dec. 2004, www.ehso.com/OSHA_PPE-Types.htm.
40. Personal Protective Equipment General Requirements; Federal Register # 59: 16334-16364; Occupational Safety & Health Administration, US Department of Labor, 1994.
41. Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-1992; American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers: 2004.
42. Hammer, H. J.; Linder, R. The Demonstration of Fingerprints on Human Skin. For. Sci. Int. 1980, 16, 35-41.
43. Haslett, M. Fingerprints from Skin Using Magna Brush Technique. Ident. News 1986, 34 (2), 7-8.
44. Hamilton, J. L; DeBatista, J. Cyanoacrylate Ester-Latent Print from Murdered Body. F.D.I.A.I. Newsletter, April 1985, 6-7.
45. Wilgus, G. Latent Print Recovery from Human Skin. J. For. Ident. 2002, 52 (2) 133-135.
46. Wilgus, G. Latent Shoeprint Recovery on Human Skin. J. For. Ident. 2004, 54 (4), 428-432.
47. Clements, W. Blood Print on Human Skin. Ident. News 1983, 33 (8), 4, 6.
48. Nutt, J. Latent Prints in Blood. Ident. News 1983, 33 (10), 10-11.
49. Arnold, R. J.; Gallant, J. R.; Kaufman, R. P. Two Latents Developed and Lifted from Homicide Victim Identify Perpetrator. J. For. Ident. 1988, 38 (6), 295-298.
50. Shonberger, F. Always Look Twice. Ident. News 1986, 36 (7), 3, 12.
51. Arndt, C. B. Iodine Silver Plate Transfer Method. RCMP Gazette 1985, 47 (5), 19-21.
52. John, G. L. Latent Lifted from Skin of Dead Body. PNWD/IAI Examiner, July-December 1999, pp 6-7.

Appendix 1

Reported Cases with Prints from Human Skinand Source of Information

Each case has been assigned a case identifier number. The case identifier provides the authors with a means to tabulate the data and provide anonymity for open cases.

Appendix 2

Workshop Survey Questions

Appendix 3

Methods Reported for the Recovery of Fingerprints from the Surface of Skin.

(This table is for historical information only. It should not be considered to be a guideline or protocol.)

Appendix 3
(continued)

Chemical Methods

Appendix 3
(continued)

Lifting Media for Recovering Patent, Plastic,
or Developed Prints from the Surface of Skin

*From the Journal of Forensic Identification Vol. 55, No. 3, May/June 2005
The Official Publication of the International Association for Identification
"Reproduction of the Journal of Forensic Identification, in whole or in part, for noncommercial, educational use is permitted provided proper citation of the source is noted. Reproduction for any other use is prohibited without prior written permission. Requests for permission may be addressed to the editor (of the Journal of Forensic Identification -- jfieditor@theiai.org)."

Article posted: November 14, 2007