by TChris

How reliable is fingerprint evidence? Ask Brandon Mayfield, the Oregon lawyer who was arrested and detained as a material witness for two weeks after the FBI concluded that his fingerprints matched fingerprints found at the site of a train bombing in Spain. The Justice Department’s inspector general recently concluded that the fingerprints were “unusually similar” and that FBI lab technicians were “overly confident” of the match. (TalkLeft background on Mayfield is collected here. More information about the uncertain science of fingerprint comparison can be found in this post, and in this one.)

The inspector general also concluded that there was “no abuse of the USA Patriot Act” in Mayfield’s case, a conclusion that depends on the definition of “abuse.” As TalkLeft reported here and here, “sneak and peek” warrants were issued that permitted Mayfield’s property to be searched without his knowledge. That probably seems abusive to Mayfield, the innocent victim of the FBI’s intrusion. And the FBI's "overconfidence," which permitted it to disregard warnings from Spanish authorities that the prints didn't match, make the decision to subject Mayfield to the sneak and peek searches permitted by the Patriot Act seem even more abusive.