Posted by Roy M. Carter on December 01, 1999 at 18:48:12:
I have been a latent print examiner for over twenty years and have been a Certified Latent Print Examiner throught the I.A.I. for over seventeen years. I am currently employed with an agency that does proficiency testing twice a year and we are currently preparing for evaluation for A.S.C.L.D. accreditation.
First, let me say that I have known Pat Wertheim for longer than either one of us would probably admit, both as a professional colleague and as a student in his classes.He is without peer as regards the passion with which he embraces latent print matters. Anyone who would question his integrity or credibility simply does not know Pat. And apparently these same people who are questioning Pat's good name also don't know much about what constitutes an identification either, because this one, that they claim to be an identification and have so desparately clung to, is certainly not, by no stretch of the imagination, an identification. I am incredulous that a competent examiner could arrive at the conclusion that these two prints share a common source, much less finding three "stooges" to verify his huge mistake. Seems to me, at some point the SCRO is going to have to "come clean" and admit their mistake since pretty much the rest of the world knows that it is a mistake and if they don't, their credibility as an organization should be pretty well shot.
So as not to leave David Grieve out, I have known him since I became associated with the I.A.I. and I would place him in the same category as Pat regarding his credibility, integrity and passion for this business.
Seems to me that the SCRO needs to take a hard look inward amidst a great deal of soul searching and DO THE RIGHT THING.