Fingerprints


I always find it amazing, no matter what era, how fast fingerprints are identified. Today's nonsense CSI instant fingerprint results with pictures and all personal information pales in comparison to the 1960s & how fast a fingerprint lifted from an item was identified as Kimble's. Fingerprint ID priority would have always pushed those prints back in the pack since they were just for inquiry and not a criminal investigation. They would first have to be classified so it would probably been months, if not a year, to work them thru the non-computerized files. Today's AFIS makes it easier and faster, but a request for just an ID with no ongoing criminal investigation would still take quite a while. Oh well it is TV after all.

reply

Maybe a Law Enforcement person can reply here. Maybe escaped felon's prints would be at the top of lists?

reply

Maybe so, but there would still be a long delay in getting results. The prints obtained would not be a complete set and maybe only one identifible print. Back in the Kimble era there was no AFIS or computerized records of any kind. If one good print were obtained in Arizona, it would more than likely have been sent to the state print section for classification then compared against similar classified prints in their files. Other than Indiana, Kimble's prints would not be in their system. So it's off to the FBI in DC for them to look at. It would be easier for them because of already being classified. Classification would give the examiner several results to compare the sample with. Remember that this would all have to be done without benefit of computers and prints would travel by mail to their destination before anything is done. Even today prints have to be read and compared by a human examiner for a positive result after being submitted to the AFIS system. It's my understanding that an AFIS submission will result in multiple possible matches and then an examiner has to compare the suspect print with each print card that the system identified. But like I said in my original post, it is TV and results must be obtained quickly to fit into the limited time that Kimble spent in one location.

reply

While the subject of fingerprints is examined, what about at the scene of the murder? It seems unlikely Fred Johnson (the OAM) was wearing a glove, was expecting anyone home, nor took time to wipe any prints. The house was not dusted? It was so evident that Richard killed his wife?

There are points brought up in the finale that may indicate Johnson should have some prints on file for prior legitimate jobs, therefore a match could have been made...perhaps...

reply

Not that I find this thread the least bit interesting, but I will share this thought. If Fred Johnson had prints on file and he was there to burglarize the Kimble's home, doesn't it make sense he would have been careful not to leave his prints behind so they could be identified?

I know some people want every single detail explained to them by the producers for every single episode, but I think the makers of this show knew that most fans were pretty smart and that they could and would use their imaginations to figure out all the little details that others are so hung up on.

The people that put this show together were not dumb. They knew what they were doing and they did it well. Not everything about "The Fugitive" (or any other show) is 100% accurate 100% of the time. But it doesn't have to be. Just enjoy the show for what it is - one of the best (if not the best) TV series of all time. Great stories, great writers, great actors and a fine producer. A show with a heart and soul and a moral that people continue to draw from.

reply

Yeah, Johnson isn't wearing a glove in the scene where he kills Helen. But maybe he took a moment to remove them while Chandler was cowering on the stairs? Maybe? His smile makes it clear that he has realized Lloyd isn't a threat, after all..

Or maybe he did wear a glove and you may just accept that the scene isn't too accurate because it's Chandler's flashback..

reply