Think about the hypothesis that all fingerprints are unique. That's voodoo. First off you would have to fingerprint everybody to check it. And secondly they don't actually match fingerprints, but match a description of the fingerprint that throws out most of the data (like taking a million books and reducing them all into one byte hashes of their text, and then claiming that Moby Dick is a plagiarized version of Henry V because they produce the same 8-bit hash!)
The problem is, these things were indicators, but they have been manipulated to be used as if they were proof.
If the suspect is a red head male, and the witness describes seeing a red head male, then the jury is inclined to think that's the same guy.
The problem is, these things were indicators, but they have been manipulated to be used as if they were proof.
If the suspect is a red head male, and the witness describes seeing a red head male, then the jury is inclined to think that's the same guy.
IT's human nature.
Even in New York City.
Where there are at least 84,000 red headed males!