Vacuum metal deposition (VMD) is a highly sensitive technique originally introduced for detecting latent fingermarks on smooth non-porous surfaces such as carrier bags, plastics and glass. The current study explores whether VMD can be used in the examination of clothing from physical and sexual assault cases in order to visualise identifiable fingermark ridge detail and/or palmar flexion crease detail, thus allowing potential areas to be indicated for DNA swabbing and/or to determine the sequence of events. Four different fabrics were utilised during this study - nylon, polyester, polycotton and cotton, along with 15 donors who ranged in their age and propensity to leave fingermarks, from good to medium to poor as determined by results obtained from test runs using paper and plastic carrier bags processed with VMD. Once samples were collected they were kept for a determined time (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 14, 21 or 28 days) and then treated using the gold/zinc metal VMD process. From the results, it appears that greater ridge detail is visible on the smoother non-porous fabrics, such as nylon whereas on rougher porous fabrics, such as cotton, only empty prints and impressions, rather than any ridge details, were visible. All fabrics did however allow the development of touch marks that could be targeted for DNA taping thus potentially leading to a DNA profile and possible identification of a suspect.

No abstract

There are a number of studies discussing recent developments of a one-step fluorescent cyanoacrylate (superglue) process. This study carried out a pseudo operational trial to compare an example of a one-step fluorescent superglue product, Lumicyano, with the two recommended techniques for plastic carrier bags; superglue fuming followed by basic yellow 40 (BY40) dyeing and powder suspension. 100 plastic carrier bags were collected from the place of work and the items were treated as found without any fingermark deposition. The bags were split into three and treated with the three techniques and a comparable number of fingermarks was detected by each technique (average of 300 fingermarks). The items treated with Lumicyano were sequentially processed with BY40 and an additional 43 fingermarks were detected. Lumicyano appears to be a suitable technique for the development of fingermarks on plastic carrier bags and it can help save lab space and time as it does not require dyeing or drying procedures. Furthermore, contrary to other one-step cyanoacrylate products, existing superglue cabinets do not require any modification for the treatment of articles with Lumicyano. To date, there is little peer reviewed articles in the literature on trials related to Lumicyano and this study aims to contribute to fill this gap.

A number of pseudo-operational trials were set up to compare the atmospheric/humidity and vacuum cyanoacrylate fuming processes on plastic carrier bags. The fuming processes were compared using two-step cyanoacrylate fuming with basic yellow 40 (BY40) staining and a one-step fluorescent cyanoacrylate fuming, Lumicyano 4%. Preliminary work using planted fingermarks and split depletions were performed to identify the optimum vacuum fuming conditions. The first pseudo-operational trial compared the different fuming conditions (atmospheric/humidity vs. vacuum) for the two-step process where an additional 50% more marks were detected with the atmospheric/humidity process. None of the marks by the vacuum process could be observed visually; however, a significant number of marks were detected by fluorescence after BY40 staining. The second trial repeated the same work in trial 1 using the one-step cyanoacrylate process, Lumicyano at a concentration of 4%. Trial 2 provided comparable results to trial 1 and all the items were then re-treated with Lumicyano 4% at atmospheric/humidity conditions before dyeing with BY40 to provide the sequences of process A (Lumicyano 4% atmospheric-Lumicyano 4% atmospheric-BY40) and process B (Lumicyano 4% vacuum-Lumicyano 4% atmospheric-BY40). The number of marks (visual and fluorescent) was counted after each treatment with a substantial increase in the number of detected marks in the second and third treatments of the process. The increased detection rate after the double Lumicyano process was unexpected and may have important implications. Trial 3 was performed to investigate whether the amount of cyanoacrylate and/or fuming time had an impact on the results observed in trial 2 whereas trial 4 assessed if the double process using conventional cyanoacrylate, rather than Lumicyano 4%, provided an increased detection rate. Trials 3 and 4 confirmed that doubling the amount of Lumicyano 4% cyanoacrylate and fuming time produced a lower detection rate than the double process with Lumicyano 4%. Furthermore, the double process with conventional cyanoacrylate did not provide any benefit. Scanning electron microscopy was also performed to investigate the morphology of the cyanoacrylate polymer under different conditions. The atmospheric/humidity process appears to be superior to the vacuum process for both the two-step and one-step cyanoacrylate fuming, although the two-step process performed better in comparison to the one-step process under vacuum conditions. Nonetheless, the use of vacuum cyanoacrylate fuming may have certain operational advantages and its use does not adversely affect subsequent cyanoacrylate fuming with atmospheric/humidity conditions.

This study presents a number of pseudo-operational trials on plastic bags investigating the double and co-fuming process of a one-step fluorescent cyanoacrylate (Lumicyano TM ) with comparisons to the two-step process with basic yellow 40 (BY40) staining for the detection of latent fingermarks. The results demonstrate that both the Lumicyano solution and dye contribute to the increased detection of latent fingermarks during the double fuming process (trial 1). Co-fuming the Lumicyano solution and dye separately (at a concentration of 8%) but simultaneously was less effective than 8% Lumicyano (trial 2). Co-fuming Lumicyano 8% and an additional 8% Lumicyano dye by weight was more effective than Lumicyano 8% (trial 3), possibly due to increased fluorescent material deposition during co-fuming allowing for better visualisation. The use of BY40 after Lumicyano resulted in a considerable increase of detected fingermarks. luorescence