Besides all the other arguments, fingerprints aren’t like the movies. You need a reasonably flat surface to get a fingerprint from.
Getting a fingerprint from a house or a car to prove that someone was there at some point, any time in the past, is possible. Getting a fingerprint from a plastic baggy to prove someone held it would be much harder.
The distortions would make it extremely hard to match against a database. If they compare it to you then it might show a match, so if you’re a suspect they might make a direct comparison. If they compare it to the cop? Remember the cop is innocent until proven guilty, so they can’t compel them to give fingerprints for comparison. Yes, they could be in a database, but remember the distortion makes it hard to automatically find this.
Any lab work has a cost, and police are lazy. They aren’t going to spend time or money trying to solve a case. They go with best effort.
Uhm, cops are already fingerprinted. It’s on file as part of the background check. Any defense attorney would be able to file the necessary subpoena for that record. (It’s kept for all sorts of reasons.)
Further, fingerprints are considered “evidence”, and can just be collected, even if they weren’t on file, a simple subpoena would compel it- and again, any defense attorney can file and get it.
The cop-legally- enjoys exactly the same protections of due process you do. And that includes access to any potentially exculpatory evidence.
It’s going to be much harder to prove that the cop planted it, though, for one thing fingerprints on the outside are easily explained away, even if they exist or aren’t so damaged as to be useless. And cops normally aren’t stupid enough to live prints in hard to explain places.
For another, the deck is stacked in the cop’s favor- the court trusts them. Frequently, in the face of overwhelming evidence they can’t be trusted.
Besides all the other arguments, fingerprints aren’t like the movies. You need a reasonably flat surface to get a fingerprint from.
Getting a fingerprint from a house or a car to prove that someone was there at some point, any time in the past, is possible. Getting a fingerprint from a plastic baggy to prove someone held it would be much harder.
The distortions would make it extremely hard to match against a database. If they compare it to you then it might show a match, so if you’re a suspect they might make a direct comparison. If they compare it to the cop? Remember the cop is innocent until proven guilty, so they can’t compel them to give fingerprints for comparison. Yes, they could be in a database, but remember the distortion makes it hard to automatically find this.
Any lab work has a cost, and police are lazy. They aren’t going to spend time or money trying to solve a case. They go with best effort.
Uhm, cops are already fingerprinted. It’s on file as part of the background check. Any defense attorney would be able to file the necessary subpoena for that record. (It’s kept for all sorts of reasons.)
Further, fingerprints are considered “evidence”, and can just be collected, even if they weren’t on file, a simple subpoena would compel it- and again, any defense attorney can file and get it.
The cop-legally- enjoys exactly the same protections of due process you do. And that includes access to any potentially exculpatory evidence.
It’s going to be much harder to prove that the cop planted it, though, for one thing fingerprints on the outside are easily explained away, even if they exist or aren’t so damaged as to be useless. And cops normally aren’t stupid enough to live prints in hard to explain places.
For another, the deck is stacked in the cop’s favor- the court trusts them. Frequently, in the face of overwhelming evidence they can’t be trusted.
Yeah no one is fingerprinting a possession case.