Reading Comprehension

PT136 · S1 · P2 · Q14 Reliability and Admissibility of Fingerprint Evidence

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Passage A In this appeal of his criminal conviction, the defendant challenges the fingerprint evidence used against him at trial, claiming that fingerprint identification theory has not been adequately tested.

Topic

The reliability and standards of fingerprint identification as evidence in criminal trials

Framework

Present Debate

Main Point

Passage A argues that while fingerprint identification may lack uniform scientific standards, it is a valuable and reliable form of evidence that courts should continue to accept. Passage B, in contrast, points out the lack of objective standards and the unknown error rates, challenging the premise that fingerprint identification is as reliable as claimed. *The Most Valuable Sentences:* - Passage A: (P3). - Passage B: (P1).

Passage A: Court Response to the Challenge

The defendant in a criminal trial challenges the fingerprint evidence used to convict him, focusing on the lack of scientific testing, absence of studies proving the uniqueness of fingerprints, and undefined error rates. He also criticizes the lack of uniform standards among examiners, especially regarding the number of matching features needed for identification.

P2: Concerns About Standards and Error Rates

The defendant argues that examiners don’t have consistent guidelines and references courtroom testimony that there's no standard for “points of identification.” He emphasizes that error rates for fingerprint misidentification aren't established.

P3: Court Defense of Fingerprint Evidence

Although the court concedes that fingerprint evidence isn’t a “scientific law,” it notes a long history of expert agreement on its reliability and widespread courtroom use. The judge acknowledges that more rigorous standards may be helpful, but sees no cause to reject print evidence entirely due to its track record.

14.

Passage B differs from passage A in that passage B is more

  1. optimistic in its conclusions

    Opposite (if anything)

    Given that Passage B is more skeptical of whether we should be trusting fingerprinting evidence as much as we do, if anything we would say that Passage B is more pessimistic.

    3% picked this

  2. Correct

    general in focus

    Why this is right

    This doesn't have anything to do with each author's main stance towards fingerprinting, but if we ask ourselves, "Did Passage B have a more general focus than Passage A?", the answer is definitely 'yes'. After all, Passage B's essay is about fingerprinting in general. How much can we trust it, given that it doesn't have uniform / standardized practices and given that we have very fuzzy estimations of its accuracy. Passage A, although it does delve into some of these general questions, is at heart still written by an Appeals court judge, weighing in on the specific issue of whether the lower trial court was correct in admitting fingerprinting evidence of this specific defendant's trial.

    Skill tested: Author's Attitude · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    55% picked this

  3. tentative in its claims

    Fails B: Claims vs. Fingerprinting Attitude

    B's author is more tentative when it comes to trusting fingerprinting evidence, but B's author isn't tentative in his claims. Look at his first three sentences: - fingerprint examiners lack objective standards - there is simply no consensus - there is no fixed requirement As it continues, B's author says more stuff like - no fingerprint examiner can answer such questions - the answers are critical - the error rate has received little study Passage A definitely uses some non-tentative claims in its final paragraph, but since we can't point to any tentative claims in Passage B, we can't say that B was more tentative. Passage B is uncertain about what the actual accuracy of fingerprinting is, but he's not tentative about claiming that uncertainty. He is definitively, passionately claiming that uncertainty.

    25% picked this

  4. respectful of opposing claims

    Fails A

    There's nothing disrespectful in Passage A, since it's written by an Appeals court judge, and thus has a very diplomatic lawyerly tone. The end of its 2nd and beginning of its 3rd paragraphs also feature respectful concessions: - while further testing and more consistent standards may be desirable ... - while it may be true that different agencies require different things for a match ...

    5% picked this

  5. dependent on unsubstantiated assumptions

    Opposite

    Passage B would argue that Passage A is more dependent on unsubstantiated assumptions. Passage B would say that anyone trusting fingerprinting is assuming - despite a thorough lack of standards within the industry, that fingerprint examiners are consistently doing high accuracy work - that smudged / partial fingerprints typical of a crime scene do not degrade the trustworthiness of the print-match - that the odds of having a close-enough match between the fingerprints of two different people are greater than 1 in 1000

    12% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free