Expert witness testimony

Fiscal: Honorable judge alano, the prosecution would like to call our next witness mr.
Donnie ray solon, to the winess stand

Judge: is mr. Solon present?

Solon: yes your honor.

J: proceed
Blah blah blah

F: Mr. Solon, on what particular field in investigation that you are specialized with?

Solon: in finger print examination maam

F: for How many years that youve been in practice on that field?

Solon: for about 5 years maam

F: are you aware for the reason why you are summoned into this court?

S: yes maam, Im summoned into this court to explain my findings on the finger print
comparison of the latent finger print in the alleged murder weapon that my team have
found in the crime scene

F: may you discuss your findings?

S: yes maam. First of all I would like you to look into the projected image. The picture
projects the latent print that we have found in this knife. Ive marked significant points
in this presentation for comparison. The first is the center ridge that joins with the ridge
that curves around it. As we count to the left we skip 3 ridges and the fourth ridge is a
ridge ending that faces up. The next ridge to the left is a bifurcation which faces
upward. The next ridge to the left is a bifurcation that faces downward and the next
ridge is as well. Counting two ridges upward, this third ridge stops in ridge ending.
Skipping one ridge, the second ridge is another ridge ending. Coming down this ridge
and skipping one ridge to the left the second ridge is ridge ending which flows down to
a bifurcation. From this bifurcation we count two ridges to the right to another
bifurcation. Skipping two ridges, the third is a ridge ending.
And Now I will show you the known finger print that we collected from the
suspect, we will now look back and forth between the two prints looking for matching
points that are same relatively same position in both prints. First of all, the known print
is also a right slope loop. This will serve as the starting point of identification. Here we
have the same ridge that comes up and ends in the ridge that curves around it. As we
count to the left we skip 3 ridges and the fourth ridge is a ridge ending going upward
and the next ridge is a bifurcation which faces upward. The next two ridges are
downward bifurcation. As we count up from there we have a ridge ending on the third
ridge and another ridge ending on the second ridge pass that one. Skipping one ridge
we find another ridge ending with a bifurcation below, Just like in the latent print. There
is another bifurcation on the second ridge to the right And a ridge ending on the third
ridge pass that. Now you can see that everything lines up to be the same in the two
prints with each point about same distance apart and more importantly that the ridges
have the same unit relationship.

F: so in short you are implying that the fingerprint found in the weapon as well as the
collected fingerprint from the accused are relatively the same?

S: yes maam because there are enough clear features that shows same orientation
and unit relationship in both prints to comes to the conclusion of identification that
these two prints were made by the same finger.

F: no more Question your honor

Cross:

Judge: Atty. Arena does the defense still have some clarifications?

A: yes your honor

J: okay proeed

A: Mr. examiner on what particular fingerprint of the accused did you compare the
developed latent print?

S: on his right thumb print maam

A: can you state your reason why you only present one fingerprint comparison?

S: Ive present only one fingerprint comparison because the latent print that I have
presented is the only latent print that weve been able to extract from the crime scene.

A: how can you be sure that it is conclusive that the accused fingerprint and the latent
print you collected were the same just by comparing one particular print?

S: By applying the dogmatic principle of Fingerprint, the principle of variation, which
states that no fingerprint are exactly alike and the law of multiplicity, which the greater
the number of points of similarities and dissimilarities of those being compared, the
greater is the probability for the conclusion to be correct. That means it is conclusive
that the two prints being compared are relatively the same and it comes from a single
finger.

A: no further Questions your Honor.

J: is the prosecution still have clarifications from their witness?

F: the prosecution have no other clarifications your honor.

J: Mr Witness you can now go back to your sit and we will call for you to testify if this
court finds it necessary in relation to the case (eto ehh di ko pa sure)