- Forum
- Lounge
- Fingerprint Violation
- Page 2
Fingerprint Violation
Pages: 12
| No need to go through the extra effort of copying his fingerprints and framing him for something he didn't do, which is liable to fail, to boot. |
If only it was true that it takes extra effort (any effort?) to duplicate someones fingerprints and plant them at a murder scene. It's dead simple!
It's no different to any sort of method to deflect blame away from the actual perpetrators - just ask Putin and the polonium tea and other poisonings, the journalist in Turkey and the prince and ...
They even took the impossibly extra effort, woe, of false passports and disguises. States don't have a lot of trouble with documentation.
I wonder why they didn't just go up and blast their targets away and then just write a letter to the police and say "It was me. Sincerely, Ganado".
(Ironically, I am beginning to feel sorry for Ganado, or Gonads as I have called him at times.)
@Norm Gunderson
This one case alone proves the point. I don't think anyone would like to go through what Brandon Mayfield went through. The only silver lining in his case is that he was exonerated and compensated for his pain and suffering, but what about all those other individuals who weren't so lucky.
One notable thing about Mayfield's case was that the Spanish authorities could at least find his prints to be a false match. This also reinforces my suspicions that organisations like AFIS can be very effective at framing an individual when having up to date / current prints of the person as that print duplicated will provide the strongest match as opposed to using a very old print and trying to "age" it computationally.
An individual I know told me that he was required to provide a fingerprint clearance certificate in order for him to apply for certain jobs. When he inquired what the reason for the clearance certificate was they told him it was for verifying his criminal status. Strangely when he told them to use his ID number and verify against police records he was told some bullshit about the fingerprinting mechanism also helps avoid identity theft. When asking the agencies involved how this will prevent identity theft in a particular context they were unable to explain.
I find this conduct very strange and suspicious as there was not a single valid reason as to why go the AFIS route as opposed to the other whence the AFIS route can actually place an individual at risk.
| As I understand it, that is exactly how AFIS works & is used. This is a case where it was used to wrongly identify a suspect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield |
This one case alone proves the point. I don't think anyone would like to go through what Brandon Mayfield went through. The only silver lining in his case is that he was exonerated and compensated for his pain and suffering, but what about all those other individuals who weren't so lucky.
One notable thing about Mayfield's case was that the Spanish authorities could at least find his prints to be a false match. This also reinforces my suspicions that organisations like AFIS can be very effective at framing an individual when having up to date / current prints of the person as that print duplicated will provide the strongest match as opposed to using a very old print and trying to "age" it computationally.
An individual I know told me that he was required to provide a fingerprint clearance certificate in order for him to apply for certain jobs. When he inquired what the reason for the clearance certificate was they told him it was for verifying his criminal status. Strangely when he told them to use his ID number and verify against police records he was told some bullshit about the fingerprinting mechanism also helps avoid identity theft. When asking the agencies involved how this will prevent identity theft in a particular context they were unable to explain.
I find this conduct very strange and suspicious as there was not a single valid reason as to why go the AFIS route as opposed to the other whence the AFIS route can actually place an individual at risk.
| Guys like Snowden and Assange are not on the run because the exposed such criminal activity relating to cartoon organisations but real ones. ie they not just running from make believe characters like the coyote chasing the roadrunner. |
| suppose he is the countries top genetic scientist and have work/abilities that some organisations would like to own/exploit. |
A. The motivation to remove Ganado for at least 10 years, with the understanding that it might fail.
B. The motivation to specifically not murder Ganado.
C. Sufficient amounts of A that they'll be willing to commit murder.
...Or not, because you supposed that and then didn't do anything with it. You understand that just making suppositions does not constitute an argument, right?
| his employer could also frame him for stealing equipment or information or a large number of other crimes which would still ultimately be bad news for him. |
Do you have these sorts of thoughts regularly? Most people are not too worried about having their fingerprints copied and used to frame them of murder. Hell, they're not even worried about being framed for anything, and they still end up being correct almost all of the time.
Now, I'm not saying you have paranoid delusions. I'm not one to diagnose that sort of thing. I'm saying you might have them.
@mbozzi
This is exactly the essence of what I felt about the situation but was unable to articulate in the way you've put it - thank you!
This flies in the face of the logic:
The reason is, when you allow for unreliability a.) on your end; b.) on the police's end; and c.) on potential witnesses' end Almost any random info you provide can be used to manufacture plausible connections between you and some crime you had nothing to do with. |
This is exactly the essence of what I felt about the situation but was unable to articulate in the way you've put it - thank you!
This flies in the face of the logic:
| But if you have nothing to hide, there is no problem if your country is decent. |
The more I read the @helios grooming going on and on with feigned and instant expertise the more I'm reminded of the Pink Panther and how he's become our very own Inspector Clouseau.
ROFL - @helios and his black moustache. He should give up smaking ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEE_-C0Nwjw
ROFL - @helios and his black moustache. He should give up smaking ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEE_-C0Nwjw
@againtry, I take it you haven't done any work with fingerprinting. If you had, you know that fingerprints are not distinct. Software libraries typically go from a fingerprint image to some hash, but not easily from that internal representation back to a fingerprint.
Throwing your toys out and attempting to insult those who disagree with you when you hit some boiling point is unhelpful for those who read the forum.
Throwing your toys out and attempting to insult those who disagree with you when you hit some boiling point is unhelpful for those who read the forum.
@kbw,
Wow, what a prat you are. i'm surprised I read one of your posts. Nobody else does. Your one of the most boring, unhelpful and arrogant posters here.
As for fingerprints and DNA I bet your's are all over your 'toys'. Like an Albatross I bet you 'toys' are rancid and very smelly from overuse.
Wow, what a prat you are. i'm surprised I read one of your posts. Nobody else does. Your one of the most boring, unhelpful and arrogant posters here.
As for fingerprints and DNA I bet your's are all over your 'toys'. Like an Albatross I bet you 'toys' are rancid and very smelly from overuse.
@kbw, The prat as we know it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqW_BZu5Xk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqW_BZu5Xk
Last edited on
@helios
If that was purely it, I don't think these guys would be that effective in the noise they are making. Peoples rights to privacy was/is being violated on the basis that it is for national security. One has to draw a line even on this national security thing. And when one dig deep enough it sometimes become evident that the government is actually being controlled by multi-national corporations which ultimately imply that "national security" is actually a code name for THEIR AGENDA.
@helios
His boss may not want him gone if he is the top genetic scientist in the country but instead may want leverage over him in ways that might make him (Ganado) feel guilty:
scenrio::: Ganado is at a work function being held at the company offices. Someone slips something in his drink without him knowing.
He gets plastered and not really sure of all his actions.
Next day, the boss claims someone broke into his desk ... the police or some third party agency gets called in to dust for fingerprints.
Ganados prints get found all over his bosses desk thus incriminating him.
Since he himself isn't sure of his state the previous night he is unable to refute the allegation.
His boss might then offer him some shady deal which he (Ganado) might be inclined to accept in order not for his boss to press charges against him for breaking into his desk.
Obviously this is a contrived situation I sucked out of my thumb but the posibilites are endless if you have a boss who is a dick.
And I've heard many a person refer to their boss as a dick.
| I don't follow. How does the fact that the US seeks to [prosecute treason (including the publishing of classified information)] |
If that was purely it, I don't think these guys would be that effective in the noise they are making. Peoples rights to privacy was/is being violated on the basis that it is for national security. One has to draw a line even on this national security thing. And when one dig deep enough it sometimes become evident that the government is actually being controlled by multi-national corporations which ultimately imply that "national security" is actually a code name for THEIR AGENDA.
@helios
| But... why? If his employer wants him gone he can just fire him. |
His boss may not want him gone if he is the top genetic scientist in the country but instead may want leverage over him in ways that might make him (Ganado) feel guilty:
scenrio::: Ganado is at a work function being held at the company offices. Someone slips something in his drink without him knowing.
He gets plastered and not really sure of all his actions.
Next day, the boss claims someone broke into his desk ... the police or some third party agency gets called in to dust for fingerprints.
Ganados prints get found all over his bosses desk thus incriminating him.
Since he himself isn't sure of his state the previous night he is unable to refute the allegation.
His boss might then offer him some shady deal which he (Ganado) might be inclined to accept in order not for his boss to press charges against him for breaking into his desk.
Obviously this is a contrived situation I sucked out of my thumb but the posibilites are endless if you have a boss who is a dick.
And I've heard many a person refer to their boss as a dick.
@helios
In the context I mentioned why would such a company want to remove Ganado for at least 10 years if "owning him" for the next 10~20 years will be very profitable for them.
Or what exactly do you mean by remove him for 10 years and what exactly might fail?
| The motivation to remove Ganado for at least 10 years, with the understanding that it might fail |
In the context I mentioned why would such a company want to remove Ganado for at least 10 years if "owning him" for the next 10~20 years will be very profitable for them.
Or what exactly do you mean by remove him for 10 years and what exactly might fail?
@helios
I already mentioned some above (like getting leverage in order to "own him").
However could it also not be that Ganado is very very difficult to kill. There was such a guy back in the 1950s ~ 1970s called Danny Greene [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Greene] that was quite hard for even the Italian Mafia to kill (albeit they were the branch in America however they did have ties with the big guys in Italy). They tried shooting, bombing, among many other things but nothing was working.
Fair enough - they eventually got a hit man that did the job but before that they even considered getting him framed by the law as it seemed more possible than killing him.
B. The motivation to specifically not murder Ganado.I already mentioned some above (like getting leverage in order to "own him").
However could it also not be that Ganado is very very difficult to kill. There was such a guy back in the 1950s ~ 1970s called Danny Greene [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Greene] that was quite hard for even the Italian Mafia to kill (albeit they were the branch in America however they did have ties with the big guys in Italy). They tried shooting, bombing, among many other things but nothing was working.
Fair enough - they eventually got a hit man that did the job but before that they even considered getting him framed by the law as it seemed more possible than killing him.
@helios
To each his own - if it doesn't bother you then good for you. I suppose you were never targeted that way but that doesn't mean you never won't be.
So you may very well go and hand in your fingerprints in order to secure a job but what happens sometime down the future when your boss or the board that runs your company decides to frame you for some critical disagreement (ie company politics).
Then you might be very sorry you handed a "gun" to such people. At the time when you gave t to them (your fingerprints) all was good and you had no inclination that this could ever happen.
Another reason why I concern myself with this type of thing is because it has the potential to affect me very negatively especially if I would like to apply for some higher paying job.
So if I hand in my fingerprints I run the risk of being falsely implicated as discussed already or I don't hand in my fingerprints and get rejected for the positions purely on that basis - so yes it does affect me and most likely many others as well.
Simply put another way as well: many years ago I had an insurance broker (a much older man) come to my company to sell me a life insurance policy ... even though he tried passing off a thick file of documents for me to signed off on, my eye was quick enough to luckily see a section where I would have given him power of attorney.
Once I saw that, I wanted to have no more dealings with him but kindly showed him the door. This insurance broker took offense and claimed that he was only going to use this power of attorney to gather financial data concerning myself so as to "tailor make" the best possible policies for me.
Unfortunately for him I had experience in the past where I signed power of attorney for executor rights to an estate with the understanding that these attorneys and other individuals involved were going to be respectful and "above board" with all their dealings concerning the estate.
Later however when I learned that their dealings was anything but good concerning the estate I was given the finger and told by the attorneys that I gave up my rights by signing over power of attorney and had no further say in the matter.
So when it came to the older insurance broker that tried to get me to sign power of attorney over to him I was quick to give him the "finger" because I had a bad past experience in this regard.
When it however comes to my fingerprints being violated from a previous experience then NO - it hasn't happened and I would sure as shit not want to be at the reciprocating end of such a mistake as I did when the attorneys showed me the finger.
I can assure you it will be much more than misappropriated funds and a finger in my face - could more like be my face behind bars.
| Do you have these sorts of thoughts regularly? Most people are not too worried about having their fingerprints copied and used to frame them of murder. |
To each his own - if it doesn't bother you then good for you. I suppose you were never targeted that way but that doesn't mean you never won't be.
So you may very well go and hand in your fingerprints in order to secure a job but what happens sometime down the future when your boss or the board that runs your company decides to frame you for some critical disagreement (ie company politics).
Then you might be very sorry you handed a "gun" to such people. At the time when you gave t to them (your fingerprints) all was good and you had no inclination that this could ever happen.
Another reason why I concern myself with this type of thing is because it has the potential to affect me very negatively especially if I would like to apply for some higher paying job.
So if I hand in my fingerprints I run the risk of being falsely implicated as discussed already or I don't hand in my fingerprints and get rejected for the positions purely on that basis - so yes it does affect me and most likely many others as well.
Simply put another way as well: many years ago I had an insurance broker (a much older man) come to my company to sell me a life insurance policy ... even though he tried passing off a thick file of documents for me to signed off on, my eye was quick enough to luckily see a section where I would have given him power of attorney.
Once I saw that, I wanted to have no more dealings with him but kindly showed him the door. This insurance broker took offense and claimed that he was only going to use this power of attorney to gather financial data concerning myself so as to "tailor make" the best possible policies for me.
Unfortunately for him I had experience in the past where I signed power of attorney for executor rights to an estate with the understanding that these attorneys and other individuals involved were going to be respectful and "above board" with all their dealings concerning the estate.
Later however when I learned that their dealings was anything but good concerning the estate I was given the finger and told by the attorneys that I gave up my rights by signing over power of attorney and had no further say in the matter.
So when it came to the older insurance broker that tried to get me to sign power of attorney over to him I was quick to give him the "finger" because I had a bad past experience in this regard.
When it however comes to my fingerprints being violated from a previous experience then NO - it hasn't happened and I would sure as shit not want to be at the reciprocating end of such a mistake as I did when the attorneys showed me the finger.
I can assure you it will be much more than misappropriated funds and a finger in my face - could more like be my face behind bars.
Last edited on
| If that was purely it, I don't think these guys would be that effective in the noise they are making. |
| His boss may not want him gone if [...] |
I'm sorry, but this sounds like the premise of a movie, not something anyone needs to be seriously worried about, even for those who are in exceptional positions.
By the way, forget about fingerprints. If you're really worried about being falsely accused what you should avoid is getting blackout drunk. A false rape accusation can easily ruin a person's life and they happen all the time. At least have yourself as a witness in your favor.
| Or what exactly do you mean by remove him for 10 years and what exactly might fail? |
| I suppose you were never targeted that way |
| So if I hand in my fingerprints I run the risk of being falsely implicated as discussed already or I don't hand in my fingerprints and get rejected for the positions purely on that basis - so yes it does affect me and most likely many others as well. |
| Unfortunately for him I had experience in the past where I signed power of attorney for executor rights to an estate with the understanding that these attorneys and other individuals involved were going to be respectful and "above board" with all their dealings concerning the estate. Later however when I learned that their dealings was anything but good concerning the estate I was given the finger and told by the attorneys that I gave up my rights by signing over power of attorney and had no further say in the matter. |
Powers of attorney are very powerful legal tools. I'm shocked to hear you have to sign one over for something as mundane as that.
@helios desperately fighting a rear guard action by obscuring the issues and hijacking the thread. Now we're off the know-all drivel instead to go down to the pampas family tree. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel to maintain a mis-informed non-argument.
@helios
I agree that false rape charges occur and can ruin one's life but I'd rather be fighting a false rape charge where my intoxicated state is the only circumstantial evidence as opposed to having my fingerprints all over the crime scene as well.
Getting blackout drunk may very well be out of your control especially if someone slips something into your drink. Volunteering your fingerprints however is a choice you have control over.
You may have control in watching your drink like a hawk so that nobody can slip anything in, but if you going to be that concerned about your drink at a party then why not be concerned about your fingerprints?
as long as the number of kittens that live in a certain office in Langley has relevant probable cause however strictly speaking kittens are considered property and thereby can be confiscated under various laws but when it comes to humans the story is quite different.
For example, I would argue that the size of my wife's bra has nothing to do with classified information except for my own personal purposes :)
If there was a large number of official examples of such then we would not be having this discussion now as the law and society would have to address it. So the answer is NO - I can't find official examples around myself but I do know of people who felt certain bad events that occurred to them did not totally add up in the particular context they were in and could not rule out some level of foul play.
Obviously the cases that do get exposed are often high caliber ones: but that is not to say that there are most probably many lower caliber ones occurring that we never hear about or become recognized as such.
I have had certain life threatening events happen to me and my family however don't have proof to pinpoint the perpetrators. All I can say is that I ruffled some tail feathers of certain individuals and groups that was being unfair in their dealing with me in the first place.
Obviously they did not like being challenged so on the basis of motive would have to claim them responsible. Beside myself, I know of other individuals who have far greater targets on their backs because of the intellectual property and abilities they own ...
The situations I propose here may sound ridiculous but people do ridiculous things in order to get ahead - even commit murder or have you framed etc ...
| If you're really worried about being falsely accused what you should avoid is getting blackout drunk. A false rape accusation can easily ruin a person's life and they happen all the time. |
I agree that false rape charges occur and can ruin one's life but I'd rather be fighting a false rape charge where my intoxicated state is the only circumstantial evidence as opposed to having my fingerprints all over the crime scene as well.
Getting blackout drunk may very well be out of your control especially if someone slips something into your drink. Volunteering your fingerprints however is a choice you have control over.
You may have control in watching your drink like a hawk so that nobody can slip anything in, but if you going to be that concerned about your drink at a party then why not be concerned about your fingerprints?
| The classified information could have been about how many kittens live in a certain office at Langley, and it would have still been a serious crime. |
as long as the number of kittens that live in a certain office in Langley has relevant probable cause however strictly speaking kittens are considered property and thereby can be confiscated under various laws but when it comes to humans the story is quite different.
For example, I would argue that the size of my wife's bra has nothing to do with classified information except for my own personal purposes :)
| how many cases of confirmed framing can you find (i.e. where someone provided or planted falsified evidence)? |
If there was a large number of official examples of such then we would not be having this discussion now as the law and society would have to address it. So the answer is NO - I can't find official examples around myself but I do know of people who felt certain bad events that occurred to them did not totally add up in the particular context they were in and could not rule out some level of foul play.
Obviously the cases that do get exposed are often high caliber ones: but that is not to say that there are most probably many lower caliber ones occurring that we never hear about or become recognized as such.
| Were you? I mean, do you understand why your concerns and the situations you posit sound ridiculous? |
I have had certain life threatening events happen to me and my family however don't have proof to pinpoint the perpetrators. All I can say is that I ruffled some tail feathers of certain individuals and groups that was being unfair in their dealing with me in the first place.
Obviously they did not like being challenged so on the basis of motive would have to claim them responsible. Beside myself, I know of other individuals who have far greater targets on their backs because of the intellectual property and abilities they own ...
The situations I propose here may sound ridiculous but people do ridiculous things in order to get ahead - even commit murder or have you framed etc ...
| If you're so worried about that, why would you want to work there anyway? |
You are right, I usually avoid applying for such jobs. The issue however is that for people like myself (not willing to assume the risk of volunteering my fingerprints ...) we have less jobs that we can apply for.
This is therefore unfair to people like myself and see absolutely no valid reason for such practices to persist. Thus if a class action suite were to be brought against such practices there would ultimately be no valid argument in its favor.
Most of my lawyer buddies don't know what to make of this since the law about such things is still relatively undefined (ie 3D printers are still relatively new technology, so the crimes that can be commissioned with it is still even newer, thus the law still lagging behind).
I therefore naturally brought this topic to this forum as I believe it requires a logical discussion - after all the law should be underpinned by logic.
| That sucks. My mother had to go through something similar with her uncle, who was previously very close to her. I won't go into the details, but suffice it to say he thoroughly abused it. |
Sorry to hear about your moms unfortunately incident - I know from personal experience how devastating such a thing can be and whats worse is that the damage caused is irreversible. It is even more sad when one considers it was someone so close to her and so often one only learns these things when one is much older in life.
| Powers of attorney are very powerful legal tools. I'm shocked to hear you have to sign one over for something as mundane as that |
I was much younger at the time (still at varsity) with a friend 10 years older than myself who was shot ... I became executor of an estate that was at the time much larger than average and was intimidated by the attorneys of the other parties involved that if I mess up with such a large estate I could be held personally liable ...
| if you going to be that concerned about your drink at a party then why not be concerned about your fingerprints? |
Allow me to flip the question over: If someone wants to hurt you they'll use the method that is most effective or convenient for them, not the one you can most easily guard against, correct? So if you're not going to guard against the easier methods, why are you guarding against the more difficult ones? In these matters, either you're completely unassailable or you're vulnerable.
Last edited on
So if you're not going to guard against the easier methods, why are you guarding against the more difficult ones? In these manners, either you're completely unassailable or you're vulnerable. you got me here :) - it is very difficult/impossible to prevent all bad things but I still think guarding against the possibility of your fingerprints being exploited is wise especially while forensic science still relies on them.
| you got me here :) |
Not at all. Risk management is not a zero-sum game is the simple answer. Once again hijacking the thread by false dichotomies is another display of puerile, dismissive and illogical argument (grooming).
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12