. Personal identification; methods for the identification of individuals, living or dead. rs can only suggest thatthe articles were written by men not thoroughly familiar with the subject. 2. The Case of Charles Crispi. The newspapers of New York Cityhave recorded two cases of great interest here. The first is that of theburglar Charles Crispi, who took out a pane of glass from a door, placed itcarefully aside, reached in, and unlocked the door. Crispi was so careful Accidental Impressions and their Development 287 in handling this ,pane of glass that he left finger marks upon it. Afterone of
. Personal identification; methods for the identification of individuals, living or dead. rs can only suggest thatthe articles were written by men not thoroughly familiar with the subject. 2. The Case of Charles Crispi. The newspapers of New York Cityhave recorded two cases of great interest here. The first is that of theburglar Charles Crispi, who took out a pane of glass from a door, placed itcarefully aside, reached in, and unlocked the door. Crispi was so careful Accidental Impressions and their Development 287 in handling this ,pane of glass that he left finger marks upon it. Afterone of these was developed (Figure 110) an officer at Headquarters foundits duplicate in the files (Figure 109), and Crispi was arrested for the the trial a demonstration was made in the Court Room, and Crispi,realizing that he had made marks on the glass that no other man in theworld could have made, confessed his guilt then and there, upon beingquestioned by the presiding judge. This burglary was committed Feb-ruary 21, 1911, at 171 Wooster St. Crispis trial came later, and on the. Figures 109, 110. Two finger prints made by the same criminal,Charles Crispi. Figure 109 (on the left) was made at Police Headquarters,New York City, and Figure 110 (on the right) was made involuntarily upona piece of glass. There are 16 points of identity. 19th of May, 1911, Judge Rosalsky sentenced Crispi to six months in thepenitentiary. 3. The Printin the Rose Bowl. The case of the Rose Bowl Burglar is still more interesting. There was a burglary committed in Brooklyn byunknown burglars, and a heavy cut glass rose bowl had been moved by oneof them. On the smooth surface of the inside of the bowl was found an im-print (Figure 112), thought to be that of a thumb, but a search of the files atHeadquarters failed to find its duplicate. Some months later there was aburglary in New York City, in which a woman was killed, and one of theburglars was shot and another captured. Both were finger-printed,
Size: 1847px × 1352px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, bookidpersonaliden, bookyear1918
