Fingerprint is one of the most common evidence found at a crime scene. Owing to the uniqueness of fingerprint, it is useful for suspect identification. Typically, the questioned fingerprint is of limited contribution due to blurriness of the minutia or absence of potential suspect. However, it is still useful if the ethnicity or sex of the questioned fingerprint could be inferred to narrow down the scope of searching of suspect. Therefore, this study aims to examine sexual and ethnic differences in fingerprint patterns among the three major ethnic groups in Malaysia, i.e. Malays, Chinese and Indians. In total, 2000 plain fingerprints were collected from all the ten fingers of 200 Malaysians (i.e. 99 males and 101 females). Each of the three ethnic groups was represented by at least 60 subjects. Descriptive statistics and hypothesis test were performed to assess the sexual and ethnic variability of fingerprint patterns. In addition, simple correspondence analysis was also conducted to support the descriptive and inferential statistics. By considering fingerprint patterns in all the ten fingers, loop was the most frequent pattern in Malays (23.0%) and Indians (23.2%), while Chinese (13.9%) showed slightly higher frequency of whorl than Malays (9.6%) and Indians (10.3%). The relative distribution of fingerprint patterns of male was similar to that of female. In conclusion, fingerprint patterns could be used to infer the ethnicity rather than the sex of a suspect in the Malaysian context.
A Forensic Study of Ethnicity and Sex Differences in Fingerprint Patterns in a Malaysian Sub-population
Author
Abstrak
Cap jari merupakan sejenis bahan bukti yang paling biasa dijumpai di tempat kejadian. Disebabkan keunikan corak cap jari, ia berguna untuk pengenalpastian suspek. Pada kebiasaannya, sumbangan cap jari yang dipertikaikan agak terhad disebabkan oleh kekaburan minutia atau ketiadaan suspek yang berpotensi. Walau bagaimanapun, ia masih berguna jika etnisiti atau jantina cap jari yang dipertikaikan dapat ditaabirkan untuk mengecilkan skop pencarian suspek. Oleh demikian, kajian ini bertujuan memeriksa perbezaan jantina dan etnisiti dalam corak cap jari di kalangan tiga kumpulan etnik utama di Malaysia, iaitu Melayu, Cina dan India. Sejumlah 2000 cap jari telah dikutip daripada sepuluh jari bagi 200 subjek Malaysia (99 lelaki dan 101 perempuan). Setiap tiga kumpulan etnik itu diwakili oleh sekurang-kurangnya 60 subjek. Statistik perihalan dan ujian hipotesis telah dijalankan untuk menilai variasi jantina dan etnisiti dalam corak cap jari. Tambahan pula, analisis penghubungan mudah juga dijalankan untuk menyokong statistik perihalan dan statistik pentakbiran. Dengan mempertimbangkan corak cap jari semua sepuluh jari, membulat merupakan corak yang paling kerap di Melayu (23.0%) dan India (23.2%); sementara Cina (13.9%) menunjukkan frekuenksi sedikit tinggi dalam pusaran berbanding Melayu (9.6%) dan India (10.3%). Taburan relatif corak cap jari lelaki adalah serupa dengan taburan relatif corak jari perempuan. Sebagai kesimpulannya, corak cap jari mungkin boleh digunakan untuk menaabir etnisiti suspek daripada jantina suspek dalam konteks Malaysia.
Kata kunci
Abstract
Keywords
|
|
|
Related Images
![Distributional variations of the three fingerprint patterns [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] in the three primary ethnic groups [Chinese (pink), Indians (blue), Malays (green)]](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._1.jpg "Distributional variations of the three fingerprint patterns [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] in the three primary ethnic groups [Chinese (pink), Indians (blue), Malays (green)]")
![Distributional variations of the three fingerprint patterns [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] by sex and ethnicity [female Chinese (light pink), female Indians (light blue), female Malays (light green), male Chinese (pink), male Indians (blue) and male Malays (green)]](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._2.jpg "Distributional variations of the three fingerprint patterns [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] by sex and ethnicity [female Chinese (light pink), female Indians (light blue), female Malays (light green), male Chinese (pink), male Indians (blue) and male Malays (green)]")
![Figure 3: Distributional variations of the nine fingerprint patterns [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] in the three ethnic groups [Chinese (pink), Indians (blue), Malays (green)]](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._3.jpg "Figure 3: Distributional variations of the nine fingerprint patterns [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] in the three ethnic groups [Chinese (pink), Indians (blue), Malays (green)]")
![Distributional variations of the nine fingerprint patterns [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] by sex and ethnicity [female Chinese (light pink), female Indians (light blue), female Malays (light green), male Chinese (pink), male Indians (blue) and male Malays (green)]](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._4.jpg "Distributional variations of the nine fingerprint patterns [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] by sex and ethnicity [female Chinese (light pink), female Indians (light blue), female Malays (light green), male Chinese (pink), male Indians (blue) and male Malays (green)]")
![Analysis of correspondence between the fingerprint types [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] and the ethnic groups [Chinese (C), Malays (M), Indians (I)] by fingers: (a) R1; (b) R2; (c) R3; (d) L1; (e) L2; (f) L3; (g) L4; (h) L5.](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._5.jpg "Analysis of correspondence between the fingerprint types [arch (1), loop (2), whorl (3)] and the ethnic groups [Chinese (C), Malays (M), Indians (I)] by fingers: (a) R1; (b) R2; (c) R3; (d) L1; (e) L2; (f) L3; (g) L4; (h) L5.")
![Analysis of correspondence between the fingerprint types [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] and the ethnic groups [Chinese (C), Malays (M), Indians (I)] by fingers: (a) R1; (b) R2; (c) R3; (d) L1; (e) L2; (f) L3; (g) L4; (h) L5.](https://medicineandhealthukm.com/sites/medicineandhealthukm.com/files/manuscript/siti_noorain/fig._6.jpg "Analysis of correspondence between the fingerprint types [plain arch (1), tented arch (2), ulnar loop (3), radial loop (4), double loop (5), plain whorl (6), central pocket loop whorl (7), accidental whorl (8), unknown (9)] and the ethnic groups [Chinese (C), Malays (M), Indians (I)] by fingers: (a) R1; (b) R2; (c) R3; (d) L1; (e) L2; (f) L3; (g) L4; (h) L5.")
