Skip to content

The Dangers of Forensic Evidence

July 19, 2011

Six years after my encounter with the police, – in April 1993 Craig D. Harvey, a New York State Police trooper was charged with fabricating evidence [1] after he admitted he and another trooper “lifted fingerprints” from items the suspect John Spencer, had touched while in Troop C headquarters and during his arrest.  Harvey attached the fingerprints to evidence cards, and later claimed that he had pulled the fingerprints from the scene of the murder.  This forged forensic evidence, was then used during the trial, and John Spencer was sentenced to 50 years to life in prison, for a crime he never committed.  Craig D. Harvey was a Police Lieutenant, who headed the identification unit, and was a 16-year veteran of the force.  He pleaded guilty on July 29, 1993 to fabricating evidence in three cases, and agreed to serve 2½ to 7 years in prison. – David L. Harding was a 7-year veteran of the Police force, and was sentenced on December 16, 1992, to 4 to 12 years in prison and fined $20,000 for fabricating evidence in four documented cases. – Robert M. Lishansky was an 11-year veteran of the Police force, was sentenced June 10, 1993 to 6 to 18 years in prison for fabricating evidence in 21 cases.  Now fabricated fingerprint evidence is bad enough, so imagine the damage they could do with someone’s DNA, which is so much easier to plant than that of a fingerprint.

In the case of the late Philip John Jones, like me, he too was writing about and exposing the Freemasons and illuminati.  He believed he was poisoned by a married women he’d been having an affair with, and that she took physical parts of his body, such as dead skin, nails, body and head hair etc.  He also believes he was a victim of a honey-trap kind of setup, as her husband seemed aware of their affair.  So what he’s basically saying is that she may well have been sent by those he was about to expose, an undercover agent [her] or agents [and her husband] to gather a physical linkage they needed, to either set him up, or make some kind of poison that killed him, she apparently was administering him “vitamins tablets” daily and for a period of time, and would always take them away with her, which is rather odd, as isn’t this the kind of thing you normally leave in the cupboard or draw?

I have read part of the case, and believe he more likely died of cancer in which he was diagnosed of dying from on the 24th November 2009.  I mainly include these following few lines, to highlight how easy it is to set-up someone by gaining their DNA via this way: “Aware of his vulnerabilities, they used a ‘damsel in distress’ to gain access to his personal space, and his personal castoffs [hair, nails, skin-dandruff etc. found in his bathroom] in order to directly manipulate his health.  And more than likely, to ensure the probability of their success, a mixture of homemade ‘vitamins’ compounded by his Inamorata of the moment were added to seal his fate”.  Source: edited version by L. C. Vincent. [2]


During December 2010, and whilst Julian Assange was still remanded in police custody and kept in solitary confinement at Wandsworth Prison in London, Wikileaks disclosed a confidential US State Department cable that revealed the State Department had asked embassies abroad to collect biometric information [DNA] on individuals that include the Director General of the World Health Organisation [WHO] and key advisors to United Nations, including Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.  And I’m glad to see Wikileaks have been able to shine the light on the seriousness of this matter, and how prevalent this kind of sinister way in gathering peoples DNA really is, and how easy it can be obtained.

I would also like to add, that in my own personal opinion, the allegations brought forward by those two unscrupulous honey-pot women in Sweden, most certainly look false, and a more worrying thing is, that they too could have obtained Mr Assange’s DNA or other biometric information such as his saliva, semen or fingerprints, and I think this kind of knowledge should be made public, in case somewhere along the line, ‘they’, Mr Assange’s enemies, suddenly try and come out with some other, but even far more worse allegations than his presently facing, they even may try a use it as evidence against him in the present case?  Because what’s interesting to note Mr Assange, it’s quite possible that they now too have your DNA as well as your fingerprints following your recent spell in “Wanno”.

In Michael Mansfield’s book: Memoirs of a Radical Lawyer, in his chapter ‘Prints and Impressions’The Angry Brigade and the Fallibility of Forensic Science, he raises such dangers and also mentions, that he too has suspected the validity of certain fingerprint evidence in past trials, and that he could see how it could be possible to fabricate such evidence to begin with.  However, saying that, – even he throws some doubt as to whether it could be successfully done without the forensic scientist discovering this fact, but before I go onto that here’s what Mansfield’s says about his own experience, page 36, – he talks about a case in 1975 where one of his defendants, Cornelius McFadden, was accused of planting a firebomb contained within a cigarette packet, though it didn’t detonate, so was therefore discovered.  McFadden’s fingerprints were alleged to have been found on the face of an alarm clock used to activate the device, though he vehemently denied ever touching it.

Mansfield goes on to say he and his team had to examine whether it was possible the fingerprints had been planted.  Page 37, he states that when it came to cross-examining the prosecution fingerprint expert, they asked him; “…lifted [fingerprints] from a crime scene and then deposited onto a laboratory slide, is there any reason why it cannot also be placed on any other surface?” The expert was adamant ‘this was not possible’, though Mansfield and his team went on to prove it could be done by ways as I’ve already explained, – whereas when they did it in the court to prove the possibility, they used Ninhydrin aluminium fine dusting powder, a smooth piece of glass surface, and Sellotape to prove the point, and very effectively they did.

However, Mansfield goes on to question his teams own findings in regards to some complications from a forensic point of view by asking on page 38; “How do you remove the Sellotape from the transposed mark without leaving an outline of the sticky tape?”  “How do you prevent some of the fingerprint powder remaining on the transferred mark?”“Most of all, the whole operation would necessitate corruption on a massive scale by Scene of Crime Officers [SOCO’s], laboratory assistants, liaison officers, exhibits officers and fingerprint experts themselves.”  It seems as if Mansfield is assuming, that surely they would find some form of residue of Ninhydrin aluminium fine dusting powder used by forensic teams in helping to emphasise suspected prints, and that this procedure would contaminate that evidence, and that traces of the aluminium powder would be found among the transferred print.

Other processes can be used such as Iodine or fluorescence lighting etc.  Normally when a suspected print is found, it is then dusted with the fine powder which is then blown away, and the remaining powder sticks to the fingerprint ridges thus revealing the required print.  Then once this has been established, it is normally then “lifted” using sticky tape and then transferred to a piece of white paper or card [or glass slide], which then enables the forensic scientist to truly examine it close-up, and perhaps compare it, or them, to the current fingerprint database. – After all, if a finger print had been found on the direct surface of the bodywork of car, a kitchen worktop surface, fridge, freezer, cooker or a sheet of glass etc., then obviously you wouldn’t normally be able to take these kind of sized items along to the laboratory for further examination.

Mansfield’s assumption is specific to a sequence of events, which is in order to be able to successfully dust-down and highlight a hidden fingerprint, – that during that detection process it would be far too difficult, or in fact impossible for someone else, and especially so by a police officer, to then be able to fraudulently lift and transfer and then ‘plant’ a fingerprint without it being discovered, this is what had happened by a forensic scientist.

Though how it’s successfully done, is that the transfer of the fingerprint is done ‘prior’ to forensic examination, and of course by an unscrupulous police officer or someone else hoping to frame another person.  Try it yourself now, stop reading, go and pick up a ceramic cup, make sure it’s dark in colour, as white is harder to see, grip the cup firmly in your hand making sure your fingerprints are on the surface, now angle the cup under a light, and you will clearly be able to see your fingerprints.  If you can’t, then perhaps your hands are too clean, so wait awhile or dirty them up a little.  If you had done this on a glass surface, then the prints would be so much more prominent and even clearer to see.  If you then got some Sellotape, placed it over the print, smoothed it down, and them peeled it off again, then re-laid the Sellotape down again onto say a windowpane surface, you would have successful transferred the print, and of course no Ninhydrin aluminium dusting powder was ever used or present.

However, if forensic expert was to then dust down the same windowpane with the aluminium dusting powder, the print would jump out and obviously be clearly seen.  And a quick reminder, fingerprints can be obtained from a variety of surfaces, seats, tables, cell doors, toilets doors, handles, cups and glasses, tins of drinks and items you’ve been handed to look at etc., – and one more thing, even if there was an outline of sticky tape as Mansfield suggest, by simply using a cotton wool bud, white spirit or nail varnish remover, – this will soon solve that problem.

Michael Mansfield QC, also represented victim’s families at the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, and has appeared in some high-profile miscarriage cases, among his portfolio of cases includes Hanratty [post appeal] who was hung in 1962, the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six and the Hyde Park bombing case.  And in the latter case, Danny McNamee’s conviction of conspiracy to cause the explosion in July 1982 was quashed on appeal.[3] – As well as the Stephen Lawrence case, that brought about the new “Double Jeopardy” law, whereas a person can be re-trialled, despite being found not guilty at a previous trial of the same charge. – Regardless to this unjust changing of the law, no one has ever been convicted of Lawrence’s murder.  Mansfield cites that among the major causes of miscarriages of justice that have occurred, it is due to; “improperly obtained confessions, flawed identification or scientific evidence”.  In McNamee’s case, the Court of Appeal found the conviction; “unsafe because of questionable fingerprint evidence”.  Although the appeal process may lead to freedom, psychological pressures can be overwhelming.  Mansfield says; “The greatest iniquity is if you protest your innocence then you forfeit parole.  This often means that you end up serving more time than the person who did commit the crime”.

And this is how the system works, say you were sentenced to 8 years, you’re normally serve 4 years and be entitled to be set free after this period.  However, say you’re truly are not guilty and strongly protest your innocence decide to appeal, it may take 2 years or more before your case can be reheard, – and now let’s say you lost that appeal. – You’re then simply just sent back to prison to “restart” the whole 8 years you was originally first given, despite you’ve already served two years out of it. – You’ll now have to serve 6 years in total before your set free, and not the four.

So, is it any wonder why so many innocent people still decide not to appeal, as the chances and odds are always stacked against you and the likelihood of you being found guilty again is very high and very likely, as you will see by the following figures, as on the 31st  of March 2002, – I couldn’t seem to find more up to date information, – the Criminal Cases Review Commission, established in 1997 alone it had handled some 4,830 applications from people claiming to have suffered rough justice in criminal courts.

Of these, only 161 resulted in referrals to the Court of Appeal and only 64 convictions were quashed.  Now what you have to also consider is this, if 4,830 applications were made in this just quoted period, and the appellants are fully aware they would be sacrificing the time they’ve already served in prison if they were to fail and not win their appeal, then surely it can only therefore reflect how many injustices are really occurring in our courts everyday of the week, bar of course when there not sitting, and that our current appeal system is also flawed.

What’s equally important to consider, is that even though “planted” or fabricated fingerprint evidence is rare and has only occurred in a rather small number of cases in comparison to the overall majority of all other court cases involving such evidence, is the fact what is just as worrying is that the abundant of “wrongly identified” fingerprint evidence, that is far too often used and regularly presented in many cases all over the world as being genuine forensic evidence.

Remember we’re born and bred to believe in and trust authority and our so called; Masonic, Alpha, Delta, Kappa, – I explain all about these groups, – like fraternal experts, and everyone knows that if you find a fingerprint and its submitted and used against the defendant in the dock as being “their fingerprint”, then surely they must be guilty, or at the very least linked to the crime somehow?  Forensic scientists have long claimed fingerprint evidence is infallible, but for example, in a widely publicised error that landed an innocent man behind bars as a suspect in the 2004 Madrid train bombing, alerted the world to the potential flaws in the fingerprint system.

Criminologist Simon Cole has shown that not only do errors occur, but as many as a thousand incorrect fingerprint matches could be made each year in the US alone. [4] This is in spite of safeguards intended to prevent errors.  Cole’s 2009 study was the first to analyse all publicly known mistaken fingerprint matches.  In analysing these cases of faulty matches dating from 1920, which seems rather low, but as Cole suggests, that of the 22 incidents exposed, including eight since 1999 and a rapid increase, are merely the tip of the pyramid, – oops, I meant iceberg.

Despite the publicly acknowledged cases of error, fingerprint examiners have long held that fingerprint identification is “infallible”, and testified in court that their error rate for matching fingerprints is “zero”.  “Rather than blindly insisting there is zero error in fingerprint matching, we should acknowledge the obvious, study the errors openly and find constructive ways to prevent faulty evidence from being used to convict innocent people”, said Cole.  Though, in my opinion the true reason they don’t want to admit they’ve been wrong, and that their error rate is zero, is because they know it’s very likely that many a person has been executed on such “infallible” evidence.  And even though I can’t find the actual statistic for similar cases in the UK, you can basically take it as being very much on par with that of the US, and I dread to think what the statistics are in other countries around the world were corruption is more rife than it is here in the West.

Extract from Trapped in a Masonic World.

[1] <;.

[2] “ – Illuminati Use “Magick” Against Us.” <;.

[3] “INNOCENT – Fighting miscarriages of justice.” <;.

[4] “Study Of Faulty Fingerprints Debunks Forensic Science <;.

Anti-Freemasonry Party link on Facebook;

Free 21 page sample of Trapped in a Masonic World;

© 2011 Copyright – David McCann.


From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: