摘要：
    没人知道究竟有多少人因为指纹识别错误而被关进监狱，蒙受不白之冤。但一项最新的研究结果显示，美国每年可能会有1000例甚至更多不为人知的指纹鉴定错误。
    Nobody knows how many people sit wrongfully convicted in prison due to errors in fingerprint matching. But a new study suggests there could be a thousand or more unknown identification errors a year in the United States.

    没人知道究竟有多少人因为指纹识别错误而被关进监狱，蒙受不白之冤。但一项最新的研究结果显示，美国每年可能会有1000例甚至更多不为人知的指纹鉴定错误。

    据“生活科学网”9月13日报道，美国加州大学尔湾分校的犯罪学者西蒙·科勒对自1920年以来，已知的22个指纹鉴定错误案例进行了检验。他发现，这些错案中的很大一部分都是在一些“非常偶然的情况下”被揭示出来的，比如在宣判有罪之后进行的DNA检测中、外国警方对案件进行干涉等。其中还有一起指纹鉴定错案是由于一场致命的实验室意外事故，才迫使相关人员对证据进行重新鉴定。

    另外一个被大肆宣扬且备受人们关注的指纹识别错误案例和2004年的西班牙马德里火车爆炸案有关。美国俄勒冈州波特兰市的一名律师布兰顿·梅菲尔德因为被怀疑是这场爆炸案的嫌犯，被警方监禁了2个星期。美国联邦调查局的调查人员将在现场发现的指纹和梅菲尔德的指纹“匹配成功”，而且当时还有一名中立检查者对这一指纹匹配结果进行了校验。但西班牙警方却对此持不同看法，他们坚持认为现场遗留的指纹并不是梅菲尔德的，并最终确定了另外一个人才是这枚指纹的真正主人。事后，美国联邦调查局不得不承认自己的失误，并将梅菲尔德无罪释放。

    而科勒认为这些广受瞩目的案例不过是众多错案中的冰山一角。其它一些研究曾显示，比对指纹的出错率为0.8％。而2002年，由美国各个犯罪研究室经手处理的全部案件中，可能存在高达1900例的错误指纹匹配。

    科勒说，公众们通常都会相信指纹分析是一贯正确的。对此，他表示，“与其盲目坚信指纹鉴定的错误率为零，不如承认其中显而易见的失误，并将其公开进行探讨分析，找到建设性的方法，尽量避免让一些无辜者蒙受不白之冤”。

    报道说，科勒的这项研究被详细发表在最新一期的《刑法与犯罪学杂志》杂志上。

    （国际在线独家资讯 王高山）

本稿件为国际在线专稿，媒体转载请注明稿件来源和译者姓名。

    Nobody knows how many people sit wrongfully convicted in prison due to errors in fingerprint matching. But a new study suggests there could be a thousand or more unknown identification errors a year in the United States.

    Criminologist Simon Cole of the University of California at Irvine examined all 22 known cases of fingerprint mistakes made since 1920.

    Most of the 22 cases were revealed only through "extremely fortuitous circumstances," such as a post-conviction DNA test, the intervention of foreign police and in one case a deadly lab accident that led to the re-evaluation of evidence, Cole said today.

    One highly publicized example was the case of Brandon Mayfield, a Portland lawyer held for two weeks as a suspect in the Madrid train bombings in 2004. FBI investigators matched prints at the scene to Mayfield, and an independent examiner verified the match. But Spanish National Police examiners insisted the prints did not match Mayfield and eventually identified another man who matched the prints.

    The FBI acknowledged the error and Mayfield was released.

    Cole thinks the high-profile cases are the tip of an iceberg of wrongfully accused, cases that are sometimes swept under the rug or lead to convictions. Other studies have shown an error rate of 0.8 percent in matching prints. Multiplied across all cases processed by U.S. crime labs in 2002, that would b e 1,900 mistaken fingerprint matches.

    Cole says the public is led to believe that fingerprint analysis is infallible.

    "Rather than blindly insisting there is zero error in fingerprint matching, we should acknowledge the obvious, study the errors openly and find constructive ways to prevent faulty evidence from being used to convict innocent people," Cole said.

    His study is detailed in the current issue of the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology