Mensuration de la coude [Measurement of the cubit (from the tip of the middle finger to

the elbow)]
A photograph from Alphonse Bertillon's photo album from his exhibition at the 1893
World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago.
Courtesy of the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa
Image 1 of 1
Alphonse Bertillon (18531914)
Alphonse Bertillon (18531914), the son of medical professor Louis Bertillon, was a
French criminologist and anthropologist who created the first system of physical
measurements, photography, and record-keeping that police could use to identify
recidivist criminals. Before Bertillon, suspects could only be identified through
eyewitness accounts and unorganized files of photographs.
Bertillon began his career as a records clerk in the Parisian police department. His
obsessive love of order led him to reject the unsystematic methods used to identify
suspects and motivated him to develop his own method, which combined systematic
measurement and photography. In 1883, the Parisian police adopted his anthropometric
system, called signaletics or bertillonage. Bertillon identified individuals by
measurements of the head and body, shape formations of the ear, eyebrow, mouth, eye,
etc., individual markings such as tattoos and scars, and personality characteristics. The
measurements were made into a formula that referred to a single unique individual, and
recorded onto cards which also bore a photographic frontal and profile portrait of the
suspect (the "mug shot"). The cards were then systematically filed and cross-indexed, so
they could be easily retrieved. In 1884, Bertillon used his method to identify 241 multiple
offenders, and after this demonstration, bertillonage was adopted by police forces in
Great Britain, Europe, and the Americas.
But bertillonage was difficult to implement. The measuring tools needed frequent
recalibration and maintenance; the process was labor intensive, requiring rigorously
trained, highly motivated and competent technicians, and was expensive. When
individuals were measured several times, even well-trained officers made their
measurements in different ways and sometimes failed to obtain the exact same numbers.
Measurements could also change as the criminal aged. Eventually, police departments
began to abandon bertillonage in favor of fingerprint identification, although some
elements, such as the inventorying of basic information and features, scars, tattoos, and
the mug shot, were retained.
One of Bertillon's most important contributions to forensics was the systematic use of
photography to document crime scenes and evidence. He devised a method of
photographing crime scenes with a camera mounted on a high tripod, to document and
survey the scene before it was disturbed by investigators. He also developed "metric
photography," which used measured grids to document the dimensions of a particular
space and the objects in it.
By the mid-1890s, Bertillon had achieved international celebrity, through articles in
popular publications, exhibition displays, and international expositions. He fought
vociferously against those who advocated fingerprint identificationbut eventually
incorporated fingerprinting into his system, albeit grudgingly. He also worked to further
the development of other forensic scientific techniques, such as handwriting analysis,
galvanoplastic compounds to preserve footprints and other impressions, ballistics, and a
dynamometer which measured the degree of force used in breaking and entering.

Bertillon System of Criminal Identification
The techniques of criminal identification used by American law enforcement
today are rooted in the science of anthropometry, which focuses on the
meticulous measurement and recording of different parts and components of the
human body. Generally, law enforcement of the late 19th and very early 20th
centuries believed that each individual had a unique combination of
measurements of different body parts, and comparing these measurements
could be used to distinguish between individuals.

Alphonse Bertillon was a French criminologist who first developed this
anthropometric system of physical measurements of body parts, especially
components of the head and face, to produce a detailed description of an
individual. This system, invented in 1879, became known as the Bertillon
system, or bertillonage, and quickly gained wide acceptance as a reliable,
scientific method of criminal investigation. In 1884 alone, French police used
Bertillons system to help capture 241 repeat offenders, which helped establish
the systems effectiveness. Primarily, investigators used the Bertillon system to
determine if a suspect in custody had been involved in previous crimes. Law
enforcement agencies began to create archives of records of known criminals,
which contained his or her anthropometric measurements, as well as full-face
and profile photographs of the perpetrator (now commonly known as "mugshots,"
which are still in use today).

The Bertillon system was introduced in the U.S. in 1887 by R.W. McClaughry,
Warden of the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet. McClaughry translated
Bertillons 1885 edition of Signaletic Instructions Including the Theory and
Practice of Anthropometrical Identification from French to English, and its use in
the States became quickly and widely accepted. The Bertillon system continued
as the dominant criminal identification method both in the U.S. and Europe for
almost three decades. In 1903, the case of the West Brothers demonstrated
the reliability of the emerging science of fingerprint identification over that of the
Bertillon system.
In 1903, a man named Will West was committed to the penitentiary at
Leavenworth, Kansas, where he was photographed and measured using the
Bertillon system. Will Wests measurements were found to be almost identical to
a criminal at the same penitentiary named William West, who was committed for
murder in 1901 and was serving a life sentence. Furthermore, their photographs
showed that the two men bore a close physical resemblance to one another,
although it was not clear that they were even related. In the ensuing confusion
surrounding the true identities of the two men, their fingerprints conclusively
identified them and demonstrated clearly that the adoption of a fingerprint
identification system was more reliable than the older Bertillon system.
Bertillons anthropometric measurement system never quite recovered its
exclusive status as the preferred criminal identification system. It was eventually
displaced by fingerprint analysis, although Bertillon measurements were
commonly used in conjunction with fingerprinting into the early decades of the
20th century. Today, fingerprint analysis is used by law enforcement agencies all
over the world to track down criminals and conclusively identify them.
Many artifacts in the collection of the Museum serve to document the history of
criminal identification techniques, including those used in earlier centuries and
decades but which were superseded by more advanced and accurate scientific
techniques. The arc of this technological evolution is important to preserve.
Through the study of such artifacts, the public can learn about American law
enforcement not only as it exists now, but also discover the history and
influences that made the field what it is today.




Eugne Franois Vidocq was an 18th century French crook-turned-cop who was
a confidant of at least two famous contemporary French writers and an
inspiration for many others around the world.
Victor Hugo based not one but two characters in Les Miserables on Vidocq -
both Jean Valjean and Inspector Javert. Honore Balzac's character Vautran, in
Pere Goriot, was also modeled after him.
Vidocq's legendary crime-solving reputation was also lauded in Poe's Murders in
the Rue Morgue and in Herman Melville's Moby Dick. The fugitive in Charles
Dickens' Great Expectations was also inspired by Vidocq's real-life exploits.
Vidocq's life story is amazing. As a fugitive from French justice, he first offered
his services as a police spy and informer. Later, he became so successful at
catching criminals that he was named the first chief of the Sret, in 1811.
Vidocq eventually directed a force of 28 detectives, all of whom were also former
criminals.
Eugne Franois Vidocq is considered by historians and those in law
enforcement to be the father of modern criminal investigation. Monsieur Vidocq:
introduced record keeping (a card-index system), criminalistics, and the
science of ballistics into police work;
was the first to make plaster-of-paris casts of foot/shoe impressions;
was a master of disguise and surveillance;
held patents on indelible ink and unalterable bond paper;
and founded the first modern detective agency and credit bureau, Le
Bureau des Renseignements.
After he resigned from the Sret, Vidocq published Memoires, a book which
became a best-seller in Europe and firmly established him as the world's greatest
detective.
Vidocq's regard for his fellow man also was legendary. He was a philanthropist
who helped the poor and abandoned of Paris. At the same time that he was
pursuing the guilty, he was also freeing the innocent. Vidocq's personal
character, coupled with his skills as an investigator, are the source of The Vidocq
Society's inspiration for solving crime and helping others.





EUGENE-FRANCOIS VIDOCQ: THE WORLDS FIRST DETECTIVE[1]
By Jim fisher
Criminal investigation, as a specialized function within the field of law enforcement, has
only been practiced since the first or second decade of the twentieth century, and then by
only a handful of practitioners. Modern law enforcement didnt exist until the turn of the
twentieth century. Up until then, civil order was maintained by the military, private
security, citizen groups, members of crime victims families, and vigilante organizations.
Beginning in 1285, the English employed a method of policing referred to as the watch
and ward, a system comprised of unpaid constables and night watchmen. The watch and
ward systems in England and colonial America were ineffective against rising crime
rates. Homicide, rape, and other crimes of violence were dealt with, if dealt with at all,
outside the government. Victims of theft, if they wanted their property returned, had to
offer rewards to watchmen, or ransom it back from the thieves. Eventually the system
collapsed under the weight of staggering crime and untrained constables and watchmen.
The first remotely modern police agency in England, the metropolitan police of London
(Scotland Yard), was established in 1829. The New York City Police Department,
Americas first professional law enforcement agency, was established in 1844 as
governmentally independent of the judiciary. According to todays standards, however,
the New York City Police Department was a decentralized, undisciplined and relatively
ineffective operation. The police in different parts of the city wore different uniforms,
laws were not evenly enforced throughout the boroughs, and corruption was rampant. It
would be decades before criminal records would be properly maintained, investigative
procedures established, and qualified patrolmen and detectives hired, trained and
supervised.
In America, the first detective bureau was created in 1857 by the New York City Police
Department, but it would be thirty years before the department would employ their first
celebrated detective, Thomas J. Byrnes. Born in Ireland in 1842, Byrnes came to New
York City as a child. He fought in the Civil War and in 1863 joined the New York City
Police Department as a patrolman. In 1878, as a detective, he solved a three million
dollar bank burglary in Manhattan. Two years later he was named chief of the forty-man
detective bureau. At this time New York City, one-third the size of London, had three
times the crime, including some 30,000 professional thieves and 2,000 gambling
houses. Having taught his detectives to identify criminals according to the way they
committed their crimes, a particularly useful lead in burglary investigation, Byrnes
became the American father of the M.O. technique in criminal investigation. He was also
one of the first in America to routinely use informants, and because he had a reputation of
beating confessions out of suspects, is considered the father of the third degree. That the
acquisition of confessions through physical force was considered progress in the field
says a lot about this period in the history of criminal investigation.[2]
Allan Pinkerton was perhaps the most celebrated and innovative criminal investigator of
the mid to late nineteenth century in America. Born in Glasgow, Scotland in 1819, he
moved to the United States in 1842 where he took up the trade of barrel maker. He
joined the Cook County Sheriffs office shortly thereafter and in 1849 was appointed the
Chicago Police Departments first detective. He resigned in frustration a year later to
form his own private investigative agency. By 1869, with offices across the country, the
Pinkerton National Detective Agency, forty years before the creation of the FBI, was the
countrys first national investigative force. Its motto, We Never Sleep, and its logo of
the unblinking eye, became part of American culture and the symbol of professional
crime fighting.
Pinkerton was one of the first in America to understand the value of criminal record
keeping, and as such began collecting and recording information of individual criminals
in the era before Alphonse Bertillons body measurements and the science of
fingerprinting. Whenever a Pinkerton man took an offender into custody, he made note
of scars, tattoos, moles and other notable physical characteristics that distinguished this
person from everyone else. Pinkerton also amassed the nations largest rogues
gallery. The photographs were initially daguerreotypes, then tintypes, and when the wet-
plate process was developed after the Civil War, the agency mounted their prints on
paper. The reverse sides of these paper mounted photographs bore detailed physical
descriptions of subjects, including notes regarding the offenders criminal specialty.[3]
Because there were only a handful of dedicated criminal investigators in America during
this era, Thomas Byrnes and Allan Pinkerton were aberrations. The first American text
on general criminal investigation wasnt published until 1930.[4] The word detective
didnt find its way into the Oxford Dictionary until 1843. Charles Dickens, in his 1853
novel Bleak House, featuring Inspector Bucket, a character inspired by Dickens friend
Inspector Field of Scotland Yard, was the first writer to use the word detective.
Prior to the mid-1800s when pioneers like Thomas Byrnes and Allan Pinkerton were
laying the groundwork for modern criminal investigation, before the era of scientific
criminal identification, it was virtually impossible to identify and appropriately deal with
habitual offenders. Unless a police officer, jailor, or victim remembered a criminals
face, the offender could use an alias to avoid being arrested on an outstanding warrant, or
as an escapee, avoid being returned to prison. Few defendants of this era were ever
convicted as repeat offenders. The problems in trying to identify criminals during this
period is described in a 1935 text, published in America, called Modern Criminal
Investigation:
They (the criminals) were planless, unmethodical, and gave rise to serious
mistakes. Contemporary accounts from the beginning of the nineteenth century of the
identification parades in London give a good picture of the conditions which existed in
olden times. Owing to the heavy penalties dealt to second offenders, criminals made
every possible effort to appear as first offenders. In order to check up on these persons,
certain days of the week were designated for a parade of the newly arrested
criminals. They were lined up in the prison yard, and experienced policemen from the
different districts of the city scrutinized them carefully to discover whether criminals
were posing under assumed names.[5]
The attempt to identify and keep track of criminals, in more barbaric times, led to the
practice of branding. In France criminals were branded with red-hot irons as were
criminals in Holland, Russia, and China which didnt abandon the practice until 1905. In
England and colonial America it wasnt uncommon for offenders to have their ears
cropped or their nostrils split. In ancient India, adulterers had their noses amputated.
It was during this period, before the time of Thomas Byrnes and Allan Pinkerton, that a
thirty-four-year old Frenchman and ex-convict named Eugene-Francois Vidocq, began
working as an undercover operative for Monsieur Henry, the Paris Prefect of
Police. Vidocq wasnt a professional criminal, his problems with the law had to do with
his killing a man in a duel, a man he had caught in bed with is wife. His habit of
escaping from prison had lengthened his sentences for minor offenses, creating a certain
notoriety and begrudging respect among the police. His experience as a convict also
made him familiar with the world of the criminal, knowledge he put to good use in
solving crimes. He was so successful, Monsieur Henry, in 1811, put Vidocq in charge of
Frances first investigative bureau, a unit within the Paris Police Department called the
Surete. In time the Surete would become so effective, its services would be made
available to all of France.
Shortly after he was made head of the Surete, Vidocq hired, as investigators, eight ex-
convicts. Operating on the theory that it takes a crook to catch a crook, Vidocq
concocted sham arrests of his men in order to get them into prison where they developed
intelligence on the criminal world. He got them out of prison by arranging fake
escapes. During his first year as head of the Surete, Vidocq and his men arrested 812
major offenders, all of whom were convicted and sent to prison.
Throughout his twenty-three year career as head of the Surete, the colorful and
flamboyant investigator, using disguises and ruses, would frequent the jails, taverns, and
back streets of Paris, mingling with the citys most notorious killers, robbers, and
thieves. Whenever he caught a criminal red-handed, Vidocq would offer the subject two
options: he could either go to prison, or work as an informant. Using this technique,
Vidocq recruited a small army of snitches who kept him informed of underworld
activities.
The use of undercover operatives and informants werent Vidocqs only investigative
innovations. He was the first to collect criminal intelligence and maintain records on
individual offenders. He kept files of index cards containing names, alias, physical
descriptions, and arrest histories for every arrestee. An arrest card would also include a
description of the offenders criminal specialty and his method of operation. For
example, if a burglar was known as a second-story house-thief who only operated at night
when the occupants were asleep, this would be noted on the card. By 1833, Vidocqs
offender files filled an entire room and kept four record clerks working full time.
In Vidocqs day, there was no such thing as forensic science. In fact, there was very little
science. Nevertheless, Vidocq utilized, along with his other tricks of the trade, a
primitive form of forensic science that in a number of cases brought criminals to
justice. In this he was a true pioneer, a man of great ambition, imagination and
talent. He is perhaps one of the few geniuses to practice the art and science of criminal
investigation. What follows are examples how he brought science and scientific
methodology to the investigation of crime:[6]
Sometime during the 1820s, Vidocq investigated a case involving a man named Lambert
who had used a letter he had forged to swindle a widow out of her estate. At Lamberts
trial, the defendant claimed that the victim had mistaken him for someone else, a case of
misidentification. In support of this defense, Lamberts attorney planned to present his
client as a respectable, law-abiding citizen who had never been in trouble with the law.
Vidocq took the stand on behalf of the prosecution, and anticipating the defense, brought
with him an index card from his criminal files--at that time made up of 60,000 of them--
that contained Lamberts name, physical description, criminal record, and method of
operation as a con man and swindler. Having never been exposed like this, Lambert was
stunned. Vidocq, in addressing the issue of the forged letter, informed the court that he
had consulted four professors at the University of Paris who had assured him that a
persons handwriting was unique. He then showed the jury the questioned letter and
samples of the defendants handwriting. All of this was to much for the defendant who
rose from the defense table, confessed his crime, and begged for mercy.
Vidocq, by comparing questioned writing with the defendants known handwriting to
identify him as the writer of a forged document, was fifty years ahead of his time. He
was using expertise and standard forensic methodology before forensic science
existed. Through this case, he became the worlds first forensic document examiner.
In 1822, Isabelle dArcy, the young wife of a Paris businessman, was shot to death in a an
apartment she shared with her husband. Her killer had fired a bullet into her
forehead. Because she was much younger than her wealthy husband, and had a lover, the
police suspected that the husband had shot her with one of his dueling pistols. Vidocq
examined the dueling pistols and found that the interior of the barrels were free of
gunshot residue, making it doubtful that either gun was the murder weapon. He also
determined that the victims jewelry was missing which caused him to suspect theft as the
motive, thus eliminating the husband as the prime suspect.
To learn more about the general nature of the murder weapon, Vidocq asked the
undertaker to take the slug out of the victims head, which was in effect a crude
autopsy. At the time, postmortem examinations were being performed in England,
America and in several European countries, but in France cutting into a dead body was
considered desecration of a corpse.[7] The undertaker removed the bullet, but did so
secretly to avoid a public uproar. Once Vidocq had the bullet, he was able to determine
that it was too large to have been fired by the husbands dueling pistols.
Suspecting the victims boyfriend, Vidocq searched his apartment and found a pistol and
the victims jewelry. The fatal bullet fit nicely into the chamber of the suspects
firearm. When confronted with the evidence, the boyfriend confessed that he had
murdered his lover for her jewelry. Vidocq had applied, a hundred years before it
became a court-accepted discipline, the science of forensic firearms identification.
In 1825 a self-made millionaire named Mattieu was found beaten to death in his Paris
mansion where he lived alone. In searching the crime scene, Vidocq found bloodstains
on the hardwood floor in the second-story study, stains on the marble staircase leading to
the first floor, and dried blood on the front door latch. Vidocq figured that Mattieu had
caught and struggled with an intruder who had killed him. The blood on the staircase and
on the door latch, according to Vidocqs thinking, had come from the burglar. Without a
suspect in mind, Vidocq visited taverns in Paris frequented by thieves and came upon a
known burglar who looked like he had recently been in an altercation. In order to get
samples of the suspects blood, Vidocq picked a fight with this man. When the dust
settled, Vidocq wiped the suspects face with his handkerchief. At the police station,
Vidocq treated his blood-soaked handkerchief with a chemical that turned the drying
bloodstains into a bright red color. He applied the same chemical to the crime scene
blood left by the intruder, and when those stains turned bright red as well, concluded that
he had connected his suspect, through his blood, to the murder site. Confronted with
Vidocqs findings, the suspect confessed, and a month later was executed by guillotine.
Vidocqs blood identification technique made headlines all over Europe, earning him the
reputation of being the worlds first scientific investigator. Vidocq must have realized
that in 1825 there was no way to scientifically identify blood, let alone individualize
it. The ability to identify human blood, and group it into three categoriesA, B, and
ABwouldnt come until two German scientists developed the technology in 1900. The
technique of individualizing blood wouldnt exist until the mid-1980s when scientists
discovered DNA fingerprinting.
Vidocqs exploitation of incriminating evidence, including phony scientific proof, to
coax confessions out of suspects, in an era when it was customary, and legal, simply to
beat admissions out of people, put him far ahead of his time. In America, confessions
acquired through physical abuse, if found to be trustworthy evidence by the court,
were admissible up until 1936 when the U.S. Supreme Court, in Brown v. Mississippi
prohibited the use of all confessions acquired through violence. In America, well into the
twentieth century, the idea of tricking confessions out of suspects instead of beating them
out, was not standard operating procedure. The first American book on the techniques
of nonviolent criminal interrogation, of using persuasion and psychology to get suspects
to confess, wasnt published until 1942.[8] Vidocqs methods of criminal interrogation
and his interest in physical, crime scene evidence--for example he was the first to make
plaster-of-paris casts of footwear impressions--would lay dormant for decades. He was
too far ahead of his time to have an impact on the future of criminal investigation within
his own lifespan.
As early as 1820, Vidocqs efforts to keep track of and identify habitual offenders got
him thinking about fingerprints as a method of physically individualizing
arrestees. While Vidocq wasnt the first to think about the ridges on the skin of the
fingers, hands and feetin 1684 an Englishman named Nehemiah Grew described this
aspect of human anatomy in a book; and a contemporary of Vidocqs, another
Englishman, J.E. Purkinje, published a thesis in Latin describing finger and palm
ridgesVidocq was the first to consider the law enforcement and investigative potential
of fingerprints. In 1880, sixty years after Vidocqs interest in the subject, a Scottish
physician named Henry Faulds wrote a letter to the English journal Nature entitled, On
The Skin Furrows of the Hand, in which he contemplated the use of finger marks as
valuable crime scene evidence.[9] In America, Mark Twain, in his books, Life on the
Mississippi (1883) and Puddnhead Wilson, a detective novel published in 1894,
mentioned fingerprints.
In the 1820s,Vidocq tried to take inked impressions of some of his arrestees, but the ink
dried on their fingers before he could transfer the impression onto paper. He didnt
realize that slow-drying printers ink was perfect the job. Even if he had found a way to
fingerprint offenders, these impressions would simply be an addition to his index card
system. Until 1901 when the Englishman Edward Richard Henry found a way to group
and classify fingerprint patterns, there was no way to use fingerprints as a method of
filing and retrieving criminal histories.[10] Vidocq continued to experiment with
fingerprints up until the day he left the Surete, at one point preserving fingerprint
impressions in clay. When he died a wealthy and famous man in 1857 at the age of 82,
no one was thinking of fingerprinting as a way to scientifically identify
criminals. Vodocq, not unlike many forward-thinking pioneers, died without the
satisfaction of knowing how accurately he had foreseen the future of criminal
investigation and forensic science



Scotland Yard

Scotland Yard (officially New Scotland Yard, though an official Scotland Yard has
never existed) is a metonym for the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police Service, the
territorial police force responsible for policing most of London.
The name derives from the location of the original Metropolitan Police headquarters at 4
Whitehall Place, which had a rear entrance on a street called Great Scotland Yard.
[1]
The
Scotland Yard entrance became the public entrance to the police station, and over time
the street and the Metropolitan Police became synonymous. The New York Times wrote in
1964 that just as Wall Street gave its name to New York's financial district, Scotland
Yard became the name for police activity in London.
[2]

The force moved away from Scotland Yard in 1890, and the name New Scotland Yard
was adopted for subsequent headquarters. The current New Scotland Yard is located on
Broadway in Victoria and has been the Metropolitan Police's headquarters since 1967. In
2013 it was announced that the force will move to a smaller building on the Victoria
Embankment in 2015, which will be renamed Scotland Yard.
[3]

Contents

History[edit source | editbeta]


Old Scotland Yard
Commonly known as the Met, the Metropolitan Police Service is responsible for law
enforcement within Greater London, excluding the square mile of the City of London,
which is covered by the City of London Police. Additionally, the London Underground
and National Rail networks are the responsibility of the British Transport Police. The
Metropolitan Police was formed by Robert Peel with the implementation of the
Metropolitan Police Act, passed by Parliament in 1829.
[1]
Peel, with the help of Eugne-
Franois Vidocq, selected the original site on Whitehall Place for the new police
headquarters. The first two commissioners, Charles Rowan and Richard Mayne, along
with various police officers and staff, occupied the building. Previously a private house, 4
Whitehall Place backed onto a street called Great Scotland Yard.


The original New Scotland Yard, now called the Norman Shaw Buildings
By 1887, the Met headquarters had expanded from 4 Whitehall Place into several
neighbouring addresses, including 3, 5, 21 and 22 Whitehall Place; 8 and 9 Great
Scotland Yard, and several stables.
[1]
Eventually, the service outgrew its original site, and
new headquarters were built on the Victoria Embankment, overlooking the River
Thames, south of what is now the Ministry of Defence's headquarters. In 1888, during the
construction of the new building, workers discovered the dismembered torso of a female;
the case, known as the 'Whitehall Mystery', has never been solved. In 1890, police
headquarters moved to the new location, which was named New Scotland Yard. By this
time, the Met had grown from its initial 1,000 officers to about 13,000 and needed more
administrative staff and a bigger headquarters. Further increases in the size and
responsibilities of the force required even more administrators, and in 1907 and 1940,
New Scotland Yard was extended further. This complex is now a Grade I listed structure
known as the Norman Shaw Buildings.
The original building at 4 Whitehall Place still has a rear entrance on Great Scotland
Yard. Stables for some of the mounted branch are still located at 7 Great Scotland Yard,
across the street from the first headquarters.
By the 1960s the requirements of modern technology and further increases in the size of
the force meant that it had outgrown its Victoria Embankment site. In 1967 New Scotland
Yard moved to the present building on Broadway, which was an existing office block
acquired under a long-term lease; the first New Scotland Yard is now partly used as the
base for the Met's Territorial Support Group.
Current headquarters of Scotland Yard[edit source | editbeta]
The Met's senior management team, who oversee the service, is based at New Scotland
Yard at 10 Broadway, close to St. James's Park station, along with the Met's crime
database. This uses a national computer system developed for major crime enquiries by
all British forces, called Home Office Large Major Enquiry System, more commonly
referred to by its acronym HOLMES, which recognises the great fictional detective
Sherlock Holmes. The training programme is called 'Elementary', after Holmes's well-
known, yet apocryphal, phrase "elementary, my dear Watson". Administrative functions
are based at the Empress State Building, and communication handling at the three
Metcall complexes, rather than at Scotland Yard.
A number of security measures were added to the exterior of New Scotland Yard during
the 2000s, including concrete barriers in front of ground-level windows as a
countermeasure against car bombing, a concrete wall around the entrance to the building,
and a covered walkway from the street to the entrance into the building. Armed officers
from the Diplomatic Protection Group patrol the exterior of the building along with
security staff.
The Metropolitan Police Authority bought the freehold of the building for around 120
million in 2008.
[4]

In May 2013 the Met confirmed that the New Scotland Yard building on Broadway will
be sold and the force's headquarters will be moved to the Curtis Green Building on the
Victoria Embankment, which will be renamed Scotland Yard. A competition was
announced for architects to redesign the building prior to the Met moving to it in 2015.
[5]

In popular culture[edit source | editbeta]
Scotland Yard has become internationally famous as a symbol of policing, and detectives
from Scotland Yard feature in many works of crime fiction. They were frequent allies,
and sometimes antagonists, of Sherlock Holmes in Arthur Conan Doyle's famous stories
(for instance, Inspector Lestrade). It is also referred to in Around the World in Eighty
Days.
Many novelists have adopted fictional Scotland Yard detectives as the heroes or heroines
of their stories. John Creasey's stories featuring George Gideon are amongst the earliest
police procedurals. Commander Adam Dalgliesh, created by P. D. James, and Inspector
Richard Jury, created by Martha Grimes are notable recent examples. A somewhat more
improbable example is Baroness Orczy's aristocratic female Scotland Yard detective
Molly Robertson-Kirk, known as Lady Molly of Scotland Yard. Agatha Christie's
numerous mystery novels often referenced Scotland Yard, most notably in her Hercule
Poirot series.
During the 1930s, there was a short-lived pulp magazine called variously Scotland Yard,
Scotland Yard Detective Stories or Scotland Yard International Detective, which, despite
the name, concentrated more on lurid crime stories set in the United States than anything
to do with the Metropolitan Police.
Leslie Charteris features Detective Inspector (later Detective Chief Inspector) Claud
Eustace Teal of Scotland Yard in several of his Saint novels, a character who reappeared
in various dramatic incarnations of the series, notably on television by Ivor Dean.
Scotland Yard was the name of a series of cinema featurettes made between 1953 and
1961. Introduced by Edgar Lustgarten, each episode featured a dramatised reconstruction
of a "true crime" story. The series was succeeded by The Scales of Justice, which dealt
with a similar theme.
In the James Bond novels and short stories by Ian Fleming and others, Assistant
Commissioner Sir Ronald Vallance is a recurring fictional character who works for
Scotland Yard. Gala Brand, who works for Ronnie Vallance at Scotland Yard, is featured
in the 1955 novel Moonraker.
Fabian of the Yard was a television series filmed and transmitted by the BBC between
1954 and 1956, based upon the career of the by then retired Detective Inspector Robert
Fabian. A long running gag to end skits in Monty Python's Flying Circus is a policeman
in a tan raincoat and a fedora bursting in, and announcing himself as so-and-so "of the
Yard".
[6][7][8][9]






Famous Slough
William James Herschel and the discovery of
fingerprinting

previous section next section

William James Herschel was born in Slough on 9th
January 1833, the grandson of astronomer William
Herschel, and the son of John Herschel, also an
astronomer. His father asked him to choose a career
other than astronomy, so he joined the East India
Company, and in 1853 was posted to Bengal.
Following the Indian Mutiny of 1858, Herschel became
a member of the Indian Civil Service, and was posted
to Jungipoor. In July 1858 he drew up a contract with a
local man, Mr Konai, for the supply of road-making
materials. In order to prevent Konai denying his
signature at a later date, Herschel made him put a
hand-print on the document.

Herschel continued to experiment
with hand-prints, soon realising that
only fingers needed to be used. He


collected prints from friends and
family, and came to the conclusion
that a person's fingerprints do not
change over time. He suggested to
the governor of Bengal that
fingerprints should be used on legal
documents, in order to prevent
impersonation and the repudiation
of contracts, but this suggestion
was not acted upon.
Prints of hands
and fingers
made by W. J.
Herschel


In 1877, Herschel was appointed Magistrate of
Hooghly. He instituted the taking of pensioners'
fingerprints, so that their pensions could not be
collected by an imposter. He also began the
fingerprinting of criminals, so that their jail sentences
could not be carried out by a hired impostor.
Herschel returned to England in 1878, and in 1880
published a letter in 'Nature', explaining his
experiences with fingerprinting. In 1916, the year
before he died, he published an account of his work
entitled 'The Origin of Fingerprinting'.
Although he developed the technique of fingerprinting,
Herschel only ever used it as an administrative tool. He
did not realise that it could be used to catch criminals -
it was Francis Galton and Edward Henry, building on
the foundations that Herschel had laid, that turned
fingerprinting into a tool for fighting crime.


Sir William James Herschel, 2nd Baronet (9 January 1833 24 October 1917)
[1]
was a
British officer in India who used fingerprints for identification on contracts.
[1][2][3]
He was
born in Slough in Buckinghamshire (now Berkshire), a son of the astronomer, John
Herschel. He lived at Warfield in Berkshire.
Herschel is credited with being the first European to note the value of fingerprints for
identification. He recognized that fingerprints were unique and permanent. Herschel
documented his own fingerprints over his lifetime to prove permanence. He was also
credited with being the first person to use fingerprints in a practical manner. As early as
the 1850s, working as a British officer for the Indian Civil Service in the Bengal region
of India, he started putting fingerprints on contracts.
[1]

In 1858, Herschel used whole handprints as a signature on contracts, following the Indian
Rebellion of 1857, which changed Bengal directly to British control (the British Raj,
ending control by the British East India Company). Local businessman Rajyadhar
Konai
[4]
was the first person Herschel handprinted, apparently more as a way of getting
Konai to honor a contract he had signed than as a means of identification; it was only
sometime later that he gave serious thought to the efficacy of fingerprints as
identification

Herschel, William James
18331918
BRITISH
MAGISTRATE
William James Herschel is considered one of the first Europeans to recognize the
value of fingerprints for identification purposes. He began using fingerprints and
handprints, instead of signatures, in his work as a magistrate in colonial India in
the 1850s and 1860s. He later collaborated with scientist Francis Galton ,
whose work led to establishing the first fingerprint classification system,
implemented by Scotland Yard in 1901.
Herschel had always been fascinated by fingerprints. As a young man, he
collected the fingerprints of his family members and friends as mementos,
noticing that each impression was unique to each person, and that the patterns
didn't change with age. In 1858, when he went to work in Jungipoor, India, as
chief magistrate, Herschel found himself looking for a way to seal a contract with
a local businessman. He asked for the man's handprint, and this unique method
of signature secured Herschel's deal. Subsequently, Herschel began using
handprints, and then fingerprints, on pensions, deeds, and jail warrants as a way
to prevent fraud in a society where illiteracy was high.
At approximately the same time, Scottish physician and missionary Henry
Faulds was studying the use of fingerprints in Japan. He wrote an article
outlining his idea of using fingerprints to assist in criminal investigations for the
scientific journal Nature in 1880. Herschel read the article and wrote a response
to Faulds' piece in Nature's next issue. In it Herschel asserted that he had been
collecting fingerprints since the 1860s, and was therefore the true inventor of this
method.
In 1892, the debate caught the attention of Francis Galton, a British scientist and
cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton published Finger Prints, a work that established
the uniqueness of fingerprints and suggested creating a classification system for
them. Galton also publicly sided with Herschel, and thus Galton and Herschel
became widely known as the two main innovators in fingerprint collection. Years
later, Faulds' contributions were also recognized by the scientific community.
As one of the forefathers of fingerprint identification, Herschel's story and
research has been well-documented in numerous books and journal articles,
including the 2003 Imprint of the Raj by Chandak Sengoopta.
see also Evidence; Fingerprint.

Faulds was a Scottish doctor and missionary and a pioneer of the identification of people
through their fingerprints.
Henry Faulds was born on 1 June 1843 in Beith, North Ayrshire. He went to work in Glasgow
as a clerk, and then decided to study medicine. He became a missionary and in 1873 he
was sent to Japan where he founded and then became the surgeon superintendent of Tuskiji
Hospital in Tokyo. He became fluent in Japanese, taught at the local university and was also
responsible for founding the Tokyo Institute for the Blind.
In the late 1870s, Faulds became involved in archaeological digs in Japan and noticed on
shards of ancient pottery the fingerprints of those who had made them. He began to study
modern fingerprints and wrote to Charles Darwin with his ideas. Darwin forwarded them to
a relation, Francis Galton. In 1880, Faulds published a paper in 'Nature' magazine on
fingerprints, observing that they could be used to catch criminals and suggesting how this
could be done. Shortly afterwards Sir William Herschel, a British civil servant working in
India, published a letter in 'Nature', where he explained that he had been using fingerprints
as a method of signature.
In 1886, Faulds returned to Britain and offered his fingerprinting system to Scotland Yard,
who declined the offer. Two years later, however, Galton delivered a paper to the Royal
Institution, stating that Herschel had suggested forensic usage before Faulds, under the
erroneous impression that his article had been the earlier of the two. This prompted a battle
of letters between Faulds and Herschel that would continue until 1917, when Herschel
conceded that Faulds had been the first to suggest a forensic use for fingerprints.
After his return from Japan, Faulds worked in London and then as a police surgeon in
Staffordshire. He died in March 1930, bitter at the lack of recognition he had received for his
work.


An explorer and anthropologist, Francis Galton is known for his pioneering studies of human
intelligence. He devoted the latter part of his life to eugenics, i.e. improving the physical and
mental makeup of the human species by selected parenthood.
Galton's parents, both from important Quaker families, might have served as excellent examples
of his ideas on hereditary genius. His mother, Frances Anne Violetta Darwin, was the daughter
of the physician Erasmus Darwin, the author of Zoonomia or the Laws of Organic Life, in which
he set out his ideas of evolution. Charles Darwin was also a grandson of Erasmus Darwin.
Galton's father, Samuel Tertius Galton, was a banker from a family which contained many rich
bankers and gunsmiths. Francis was youngest of his parents seven children having three older
brothers and three older sisters.
Francis attended a number of small schools in the Birmingham area before entering King
Edward's School in Birmingham in 1836. He spent two years at this school but did not find the
emphasis on classics and religion to his liking. Since his parents had decided that he should
follow a medical career, he was an apprentice to several different medical men in Birmingham
for around a year. Following this he went to London where he studied medicine at King's
College for one year. Then, in 1840, he made a quick tour of the Continent visiting Giessen,
Vienna, Constanza, Constantinople, Smyrna, and Athens. It was at this stage that, in his own
words, (see [6]):-
... a passion for travel seized me as if I had been a migratory bird.
On his return to England Galton entered Trinity College, Cambridge, to study medicine in the
autumn of 1840. He quickly changed his studies to mathematics, studying with Hopkins, the best
Cambridge mathematics tutor, but he became ill during his third year and was unable to complete
his degree. Much of his problems at this time came from the fact that his father was seriously ill,
and that was undoubtedly a major factor in his failing to be able to complete the Mathematical
Tripos. His intention at this time was to return to a medical career, and indeed he went back to
London where he took up his medical studies again. However, after his father died in 1844, he
found himself well off with [6]:-
... a sufficient fortune to make me independent of the medical profession.
No longer needing to think in terms of a career since he was financially secure, Galton decided to
follow his passion for travel and made a trip with friends up the Nile to Khartoum. There was
much interest in the Nile at this time with a great deal of speculation as to its source. In fact the
Nile is two rivers, the White Nile and the Blue Nile, which join at Khartoum and flow together to
the sea. (In fact the source of the Nile was not discovered to be Lake Victoria until 1858.) Galton
also visited the Holy Land and Syria before deciding that he would devote himself to sport,
which he did for five years from 1845 at 1850.
Deciding that sport did not suit him, Galton began to plan more ambitious travels. He consulted
the Royal Geographical Society before deciding on a trip to south west Africa. David
Livingstone had sent a report to a meeting of the Royal Geographical Society on finding Ngami
Lake in 1849 which is located in the north west of present day Botswana. The existence of the
lake, to the north of the waterless Kalahari Desert, was already known to Europeans but
Livingstone was the first European to see it. Galton aimed to find a passage to the lake from the
south west, and with this plan in mind his expedition landed in Walvis Bay (in present day
Namibia). East of Walvis Bay was the region known as Damaraland, which had been first visited
by Europeans in 1791. In fact Walvis Bay to Ngami Lake is around 550 miles and, despite two
attempts to reach the lake, Galton's party failed in both attempts. It was a very worthwhile
expedition, however, and they learnt much of this region which had been little explored by
Europeans. When Galton returned to England he published an account of his journeys in
Tropical South Africa (1953). He was elected a fellow of the Royal Geographical Society in
1853 as a result of his explorations and, three years later, he was elected a fellow of the Royal
Society.
On 1 August 1853 Galton married Louisa Jane Butler, the daughter of the dean of Peterborough
who had previously been headmaster of Harrow School. He wrote another interesting book
aimed at giving advice to explorers The art of travel but, although he continued to travel a great
deal in Europe, he made no further explorations as a result of his health which never recovered
from his African experience.
Perhaps it was the publication of Charles Darwin's Origin of the species in 1859 which marked a
change in direction of Galton's interests. Galton was the cousin of Charles Darwin, so perhaps it
was natural that he should be one of the first to be converted by the book. He became convinced
that pre-eminence in various fields was due almost entirely to hereditary factors, something
which was completely at odds with thinking at the time which basically believed that everyone
was born with equal abilities. After reading Galton's book Hereditary Genius (1869) Charles
Darwin wrote to him saying [6]:-
You have made a convert of an opponent in one sense for I have always maintained that,
excepting fools, men did not differ much in intellect, only in zeal and hard work.
Galton opposed those who claimed intelligence or character were determined by environmental
factors and defined "genius" as:-
... an ability that was exceptionally high and at the same time inborn.
He inquired into racial differences, something almost unacceptable today, and was one of the
first to employ questionnaire and survey methods, which he used to investigate mental imagery
in different groups of people.
Although weak in mathematics, despite studying the Mathematical Tripos for two years, his
ideas strongly influenced the development of statistics particularly his proof that a normal
mixture of normal distributions is itself normal. Another of his major findings was reversion.
This was his formulation of regression and its link to the bivariate normal distribution. His work
led him to the study of eugenics [3]:-
Galton may be described as the founder of the study of eugenics. His principal contributions to
science consisted in his anthropological inquiries, especially into the laws of heredity, where the
distinguishing feature of his work was the application of statistical methods. In 1869, in
'Hereditary Genius', he endeavoured to prove that genius is mainly a matter of ancestry, and he
followed that up with many other books and papers on various aspects of the subject.
Let us examine Galton's contribution to statistics in a little more detail. In around 1875 he was
experimenting with sweet-pea seeds. He used 100 seeds of each of seven different diameters and
constructed a two-way plot of diameters of the original seeds against the diameters of the seeds
of the next generation. He noticed that the median diameter of the offspring of the large seeds
were less than that of their parents while the median diameter of the offspring of the small seeds
were greater than that of their parents. Galton realised that the off-spring tended to revert towards
the mean size. Certainly he did not understand at this stage that his findings would apply to any
two-way plot, thinking rather than it was peculiar to the situation with which he was
experimenting. At first he called the phenomena 'reversion', but later changed the name to
'regression'.
In 1884-85 the International Health Exhibition was held and in connection with this Galton set
up a laboratory to measure human statistics. He collected data such as height, weight, and
strength of a large number of people devising himself the apparatus used to make the
measurements. This laboratory continued in existence after the International Health Exhibition
closed and it was the forerunner of the Biometric Laboratory run by Karl Pearson at University
College, London.
Galton now made further progress with the ideas he had already formed concerning regression.
He made two-way plots of heights of parents and the heights of their adult children. He was able
to draw the plots in such a way that the coefficient of regression became the slope of the
regression line. In 1888 he also examined the size of two different organs from the same person
and applied the methods he had been developing to study the degree of association of the sizes.
He defined an index of correlation as a measure of the degree to which the two were related.
However, when there are more than two measures which were correlated, he failed to understand
the complexity of the mathematics involved.
In 1889 Galton published Natural inheritance in which presented as summary of the work he had
done on correlation and regression. He gave a good account of the concepts which he had
introduced as well as the techniques which he had discovered. Karl Pearson read Natural
inheritance and it had a profound influence on his thinking:-
It was Galton who first freed me from the prejudice that sound mathematics could only be
applied to natural phenomena under the category of causation. Here for the first time was a
possibility - I will not say a certainty - of reaching knowledge as valid as physical knowledge
was thought to be, in the field of living forms and above all in the field of human conduct.
Among the data which Galton collected in his laboratory were impressions of fingers. He was
able to show that the fingerprint pattern remained constant as the person grew older, and he
devised characteristics of the fingerprints which could be used as unique identifiers of the person
based on grouping the patterns into arches, loops, and whorls. On the topic he published Finger
prints (1893), Blurred finger prints (1893), and Finger print directory (1895). His identification
system became the basis for the classification of Sir Edward R Henry, who later became chief
commissioner of the London metropolitan police. The Galton-Henry system of fingerprint
classification was published in June 1900, and began to be used at Scotland Yard in 1901 as an
identifier on criminal records. It was soon used throughout the world in criminal investigations.
As well as being an indefatigable investigator of human intelligence, Galton made important
contributions to the fields of meteorology, anthropometry, and physical anthropology. He
published Meteorographica, or methods of mapping the weather in 1863. He created the term
anticyclone and pointed out its importance in weather forecasting. Along with other important
contributions made to meteorology, this led to him serving on the governing committee of the
Meteorological Office.
Galton received many honours for his contributions, perhaps the most notable being that he was
knighted in 1909 [3]:-
He was in his 89th year when the Prime Minister offered to submit his name to the King for a
knighthood. With his usual modesty he accepted ...
He also received the Royal Medal from the Royal Society in 1876, the Darwin Medal of the
same Society in 1902, and its Copley Medal in 1910. He was awarded the Huxley Medal from
the Anthropological Institute in 1901 and the Darwin-Wallace Medal from the Linnean Society
in 1908.
He played a major role in British science. In addition to the contributions mentioned above he
was general secretary of the British Association from 1863 to 1867 and was sectional president
on four occasions. He also served on the Kew committee of the Royal Society. His health began
to limit the contributions he could make as he grew older [3]:-
His first sore trial was his deafness, which cut him off from scientific gatherings where at one
time he was a familiar figure. ... After a time he lost the power of walking and had to exchange
his daily constitutional for a bath chair, but no murmur of complaint escaped him. He dearly
loved the fresh air and cared not how he got it, often sitting in his open balcony when most
persons of his age would have crouched over the
Vucetich, Juan
7/20/18581/25/1925
CROATIAN
POLICE OFFICIAL
Juan (Josip) Vucetich was a Croatian-born Argentinean anthropologist and police official who pioneered
the use of fingerprinting. In 1882, at the age of 24, he left his birthplace of Lesina and immigrated to
Argentina. He was one of the front-runners of scientific dactyloscopy (identification by fingerprints).
Fingerprints were already used on clay tablets for business transactions in ancient Babylon and more
recently in the fourteenth century for identification purposes. But in 1788 J. C. Mayers recognized that
friction ridges are unique. Until 1890, however, the technology used for individualization was the
anthropometric method designed by the French criminalist Alphonse Bertillon (18531914), based on
the size of body, head, and limbs.
In the 1880s Argentine police considered it necessary to create a department that would take care of
identifying individuals and commissioned doctor Augusto P. Drago to study the method established by the
Bertillon. Subsequently, the Police of the City of Buenos Aires created a division dedicated to
anthropometric identification. While Drago was establishing anthropometric identification in Buenos Aires,
Vucetich was investigating fingerprints in the nearby La Plata Office of Identification and Statistics.
Inspired by an article from the French Revue Scientifique that reported on the English scientist Francis
Galton's (18221911) experiments with fingerprints and their potential use in identification, Vucetich
started to collect impressions of all ten fingers to include with the anthropometric measurements he took
from arrested men. His intense study led him to confirm that fingerprints could be classified by groups. In
1891 Vucetich devised his own fingerprint classification method by means of impressions. He also
invented the necessary elements to obtain the best possible quality of fingerprints and implemented every
resource to systematize the method. It wasn't until 1894, however, that his superiors were convinced that
anthropometry measurements were not necessary in addition to full sets of fingerprint records. By this
time Vucetich had refined his classification system and was able to categorize a large number of
fingerprint cards into small groups that were easily searched.
Vucetich's new recognition procedure of the classification system was originally called Icnofalangometra
or Galtonean method and was later changed to dactiloscopy at the suggestion of another fingerprint
pioneer, Francisco Latzina. It consisted of 101 types of fingerprints that Vucetich personally had classified
based on Galton's incomplete taxonomy. On September 1, 1891, Vucetich's method began to be applied
officially for the individualization of 23 felons, and in March 1892 Vucetich opened the first fingerprint
bureau at San Nicholas, Buenos Aires.
Within a short time of the bureau being set up, the first conviction by means of fingerprint evidence in a
murder trial was obtained. In June 1892 a colleague of Vucetich's, Inspector Eduardo Alvarez, took
digital impressions from a crime scene at Necochea. Eventually, Vucetich was able to identify Francisca
Rojas, who had murdered her two sons and cut her own throat in an attempt to blame a neighboring
ranch worker. Rojas's bloody print was left on a door post of her hut, taken to the fingerprint bureau for
comparison with the inked fingerprint impressions of the ranch worker, and eventually proved Rojas's
identity as the murderer.
The insight obtained by the police department through Vucetich's simple and efficient fingerprinting
identification method encouraged the government to widen the filiations procedure and in 1900 the first
identification cards were issued. Argentinean police adopted Vucetich's method of fingerprinting
classification and it was widely spread to police forces all over the world for being scientifically efficient
and superior to the existing methods.
Vucetich published all his methods, theories, and findings, which eventually were translated in the book
General Instructions for the Anthropometric System and Digital Impressions. His work Dactiloscopa
Comparada (Comparative Dactyloscopy) came out in 1904 and is considered to be his masterpiece,
which led him to receive awards and honors from around the world.
Juan Vucetich created the most flawless system of fingerprint classification and is credited as being the
first person to use a latent fingerprint to solve a crime. His work and perseverance went beyond his
commitment. He made investigational trips to India and China trying to find out the origins of identification
by fingerprints, and he attended scientific congresses and published numerous books based on his
findings.
While Juan Vucetich's system is still used in most Spanish countries, William Henry's system of fingerprint
classification, which was officially adopted by Scotland Yard as their identification system in 1901,
continues to be in use in the United States and in Europe. A majority of the identification bureaus around
the world use either the Vucetich or the Henry classification system. International organizations such as
Interpol now use both methods.
Juan Vucetich died in the city of Dolores, province of Buenos Aires. He donated his files and his library to
the Faculty of Judicial and Social Sciences of the National University of La Plata, which served to create
the museum that bears his name. In the honor of Vucetic, La Plata Police Academy has been named
"Escuela de policia Juan Vucetic."

Waite, Charles E.
18651926
AMERICAN
FORENSIC SCIENTIST
Forensic scientist Charles E. Waite was involved in a number of landmark advancements in the science
of ballistics over the course of his career. He was the first person to compile a catalog of information on
firearms , and was part of the group of scientists who adapted the comparison microscope for use in
ballistics comparison. Waite also was a co-founder of the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics.
During the 1910s Waite was working as a special investigator for the New York Attorney General's office.
It was at this point that he became involved in a case that would prove pivotal to his career. In 1915, an
illiterate farmer in rural New York was accused of a double murder . Investigators hired a firearms expert
who claimed that the bullets used in the murders matched the gun found in the farmer's house. Stielow,
the farmer, was convicted to the murders and sentenced to death. However, the New York governor
requested a reinvestigation of the case, and Waite was assigned to the job. He worked with microscopy
expert Max Poser to examine the fatal bullets along with bullets test fired from Stielow's gun, studying the
bullets with microscopes . They ultimately determined that Stielow's gun could not have been used in the
murders. The man was pardoned and released.
Waite's experience with the Stielow case inspired him to look into developing a scientific system of
cataloging ballistics information in order to prevent future mistakes. For a number of years he collected
data, visited firearms manufacturers, and traveled around the United States and Europe. Waite, with the
help of Calvin Goddard, created a database of information that was the first of its kind in the area of
ballistics.
In 1925 Waite and fellow scientists Calvin Goddard, Phillip O. Gravelle, and John H. Fisher opened the
Bureau of Forensic Ballistics in New York, New York. Their goal was to offer firearms identification
services to agencies across the U.S. About this same time, Waite and the group also adapted the
comparison microscope so that it could be used for bullet comparison. This capability made it much
easier for examiners to identify matching bullet striations.







Calvin Goddard (ballistics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search







For others with the same name, see Calvin Goddard
Colonel Calvin Hooker Goddard (1891 1955) was a forensic scientist, army officer,
academic, researcher and a pioneer in forensic ballistics. He was born in Baltimore, Maryland.
After graduating from the Boys' Latin School of Maryland in 1907, Goddard graduated with a
Bachelor of Arts degree in 1911 from the Johns Hopkins University and then earned a medical
degree and graduated in 1915.
[1]

Career
He joined the United States Army and became a Colonel. He was also a professor of police
science at Northwestern University and the Military Editor of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. He
was also the editor of the American Journal of Police Science, Americas first scientific police
journal. Colonel Goddard commanded the US Army Crime Laboratory in Japan for a number of
years after World War II.
[2]
Calvin Goddard brought professionalism, the use of the scientific
method, and reliability to Forensic Firearm Identification, at a time when charlatanism was
rampant in this field. His testimony in 1923 in the Frye case and others, paved the way for
judicial acceptance of Firearms Identification.
[3]
According to Goddard's grandson, he may have
been the only army officer who served in four branches: Ordnance Corps, Military Police Corps,
Medical Corps and became a Military Historian.
[4]

Forensic Ballistics
In 1925 Goddard wrote an article for the Army Ordnance titled "Forensic Ballistics" in which he
described the use of the comparison microscope regarding firearms investigations. He is
generally credited with the conception of the term "forensic ballistics", though he later admitted
it to be an inadequate name for the science. In April 1925, Major
[5]
Goddard established the
Bureau of Forensic Ballistics in New York City with C. E. Waite, Philip O. Gravelle and John H.
Fisher. The Bureau was formed to provide firearms identification services throughout America.
Goddard researched, authored and spoke extensively on the subject of forensic ballistics and
firearms identification, becoming the internationally renowned pioneer in forensic ballistics. The
Bureau of Forensic Ballistics, United States first independent criminological laboratory, which
Goddard headed, and where ballistics, fingerprinting, blood analysis and trace evidence were
brought under one roof. When the Lab began publishing the American Journal of Police Science,
which was edited by Colonel Goddard, Hoover strongly encouraged his Special Agents in
Charge to subscribe to it and he supplied articles on fingerprint issues and Bureau responsibilities
to the journal. The following year the Bureau contributed three articles for the journals series
entitled Organized Protection Against Organized Crime. Hoover also sent a number of
representatives to a symposium that Goddard sponsored on scientific crime detection. He was
also an advisor to FBI when they set up a similar Forensic Laboratory.
Comparison Microscope
Main article: Comparison Microscope


Goddard with Comparison Microscope
Philip O. Gravelle, developed the comparison microscope for the identification of fired bullets
and cartridge cases with the support and guidance of Major Calvin H. Goddard. It was a giant
leap in the science of firearms identification in forensic science. The firearm from which a bullet
or cartridge case has been fired is identified by the comparison of the unique striae left on the
bullet or cartridge case from the worn, machined metal of the barrel, breach block, extractor, or
firing pin in the gun. It was Gravelle who mistrusted his memory. "As long as he could inspect
only one bullet at a time with his microscope, and had to keep the picture of it in his memory
until he placed the comparison bullet under the microscope, scientific precision could not be
attained. He invented the comparison microscope and Goddard made it work."
[6]
Sir Sydney
Smith also appreciated the idea, emphasizing the importance of stereo-microscope in forensic
science and firearms identification. He took the comparison microscope to Scotland and
introduced it to the European scientists for firearms identification and other forensic uses.
Sacco and Vanzetti Case
Main article: Sacco and Vanzetti
Nicola Sacco and Bartolommeo Vanzetti were two Italian-born American anarchists, who were
arrested for the murder of security guard Alessandro Berardelli and the robbery of US$15,766.51
from the factory's payroll in South Braintree, Massachusetts during the afternoon of April 15,
1920. During the trial a worldwide outcry arose, with the firm belief based on railroaded justice
and racial prejudice. On April 8, 1927, their appeals exhausted, Sacco and Vanzetti were finally
sentenced to death in the electric chair. A worldwide outcry arose and Governor Alvin T. Fuller
finally agreed to postpone the executions and set up a committee to reconsider the case. By this
time, firearms examination had improved considerably, and it was now known that an automatic
pistol could be traced by several different methods if both bullet and casing were recovered from
the scene. Automatic pistols could now be traced by unique markings of the rifling on the bullet,
by firing pin indentations on the fired primer, or by unique ejector and extractor marks on the
casing. The committee appointed to review the case used the services of Major Calvin Goddard
in 1927.
[7]
Major Goddard used Philip Gravelle's newly-invented comparison microscope and
helixometer, a hollow, lighted magnifier probe used to inspect gun barrels, to make an
examination of Saccos .32 Colt, the bullet that allegedly killed Berardelli, and the spent casings
allegedly recovered from the scene of the crime.
[7]
(Defenders of Sacco and Vanzetti claim that
the bullet and cartridge case linked to Sacco's pistol were substituted for genuine evidence by the
Massachusetts police.) In the presence of one of the defense experts, he fired several test bullets
from Sacco's gun into a wad of cotton and prepared them for a comparative examination. He then
put the ejected shell casings on the comparison microscope next to casings recovered at the
South Braintree murder scene.
[7]
Then he analyzed them carefully. The third bullet, designated
Bullet III matched the rifling marks found on the barrel of Sacco's .32 Colt,
[7]
while firing pin
marks on a .32 spent casing recovered from the murder scene matched a test shell casing known
to have been fired from Sacco's Colt.
[7]
Even the defense expert agreed that the two cartridges
had been fired from the same gun. The second original defense expert also concurred. The
committee upheld the convictions. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were found guilty and
executed via electrocution in Massachusetts on August 23, 1927.
Later Investigations
One piece of evidence supporting the possibility of Sacco's guilt arose in 1941 when anarchist
leader Carlo Tresca, a member of the Sacco and Vanzetti Defense Committee, told Max
Eastman, "Sacco was guilty but Vanzetti was innocent." Eastman published an article recounting
his conversation with Tresca in National Review in 1961. Later, others would confirm being told
the same information by Tresca, but Tresca's daughter insisted she never told him. Others
pointed to an ongoing feud between Tresca and the Galleanisti, claiming the famous anarchist
was just trying to get even.
In October 1961, ballistics tests were run with improved technology using Sacco's Colt
automatic. The results confirmed that the bullet that killed Berardelli in 1920 came from the
same .32 Colt Auto taken from the pistol in Sacco's possession. Subsequent investigations in
1983 also supported Goddard's findings, however, supporters of innocence have disputed both
tests, nothing that ballistics experts conducting the first test had claimed Sacco's guilt even
before the tests, and that by the 1980s, the old bullets and guns were far too rusty to prove
anything. There was also no evidence Sacco had fired the gun.
The relevance of this evidence was challenged in 1987 when Charlie Whipple, a former Globe
editorial page editor, stated that while working as a reporter back in 1937, he had a conversation
with Boston Police Sergeant Edward J. Seibolt.
[8]
According to Whipple, Seibolt told him that he
was part of a "father-and-son ballistics team" who had worked on the Sacco and Vanzetti case,
and that "we switched the murder weapon in that case."
[8]
When Whipple asked why, Seibolt
replied "we suspected the other side of switching weapons, so we just switched them back."
When Whipple asked if he could print Seibolt's statement, Seibolt replied "If you do, I'll call you
a liar."
[8]
Whipple's story remained unsubstantiated, as Seibolt died in 1961 and never
corroborated the story.
[8]
Moreover, police records indicate that Seibolt was only a Patrolman at
the time of the Sacco and Vanzetti trial, and did not earn a promotion to Sergeant and a position
as a ballistics expert with the Boston Police Department until October 1935.
[9]
A full transcript of
the hearings, on microfilm at Harvard Law School, shows that Judge Webster Thayer made no
determination as to who had switched the barrels, but merely ordered the rusty barrel restored to
Sacco's pistol.
[10]

Sacco's .32 Colt pistol is also claimed to have passed in and out of police custody, and to have
been dismantled several times, both in 1924 prior to the gun barrel switch, and again between
1927 and 1961. The main problem with these charges is that the match to Sacco's gun was based
not only the .32 Colt pistol, but also to the same-caliber bullet that killed Berardelli, as well as to
spent casings found at the scene. In addition to tampering with the pistol, the gun
switcher/dismantler would also have had to access police evidence lockers and exchange the
bullet from Berardelli's body and all spent casings retrieved by police, or else locate the actual
murder weapon, then switch barrel, firing pin, ejector, and extractor, all before Goddard's
examination in 1927 when the first match was made to Sacco's gun. However, skeptics of
Sacco's guilt have repeatedly pointed to a single anomaly that several witnesses to the crime
insisted the gunman, alleged to be Sacco, fired four bullets into Berardelli. "He shot at Berardelli
probably four or five times," one witness said. "He stood guard over him. If this was true, many
ask, how could only one of the fatal bullets be linked to Sacco's gun? In 1927, the defense raised
the suggestion that the fatal bullet had been planted, calling attention to the awkward scratches
on the base of the bullet that differed from those on other bullets. The Lowell Commission
dismissed this claim as desperate but in 1985, historians William Kaiser and David Young made
a compelling case for a switch in their book "Post-Mortem: New Evidence in the Case of Sacco
and Vanzetti."
St. Valentine's Day Massacre
Main article: St. Valentine's Day Massacre
On the morning of Thursday, February 14, 1929, St. Valentine's Day, seven men were killed by
mobsters dressed as Chicago police officers in a garage on the North side of Chicago; six of
them were gang members and a doctor who happened to be at the scene. The hit was initiated by
Al "Scarface" Capone, gangster who led a crime syndicate dedicated to the illegal traffic of
alcoholic beverages during the time of their prohibition in the 1920s and 1930s. Al Capone
cleverly made an alibi by going to Miami when his assassins hit the rival gang led by George
"Bugs" Moran.
Colonel Goddard was the key forensic expert in solving the 1929 St. Valentine's Day Massacre
in which seven gangsters were killed by rival. It was also led to the establishment of The Bureau
of Forensic Ballistics, United States first independent criminological laboratory, at
Northwestern University.
Trivia
Goddard had originally offered his services to the defense, who had rejected his assistance,
continuing to rely on Hamilton's testimony which they felt best fit their view of the case.
The relationship between the FBI and Goddard began with contention but quickly became
cooperative. By the summer of 1935, though, this cordial relationship faded again.
1925-1929
Home > History > 1925-1929
1925

Calvin Goddard
Courtesy of FirearmsID.com
Charles E. Waite, Calvin H. Goddard, Philip O. Gravelle, and John H. Fisher established the
Bureau of Forensic Ballistics in New York City. The Bureau was formed to provide firearms
identification services throughout the United States. After Waite died in 1926, Goddard headed
the bureau until it disbanded in 1929.
Gravelle and Goddard applied comparison microscopy to the field of firearms identification.
This allowed the examiner to more readily identify matching striae.
Goddard and Fisher developed the helixometer, a magnifier probe used to examine the interior of
firearm barrels and accurately measure the pitch of rifling. Limited application led to its
obsolescence.
In June 1925, the Saturday Evening Post published a two-part series of articles entitled
Fingerprinting Bullets The Silent Witness. These articles were instrumental in informing the
public about both the science of firearm identification and the availability of services offered by
the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics.
1926
Captain Edward C. Ned Crossman, a well-known shooter and sports writer, examined firearms
evidence for the Los Angeles County sheriff. He became associated with the Bureau of Forensic
Ballistics, serving as a regional representative for the western portion of the United States.
1927

Sacco & Vanzetti's firearm
A special committee was appointed to review the findings of the Sacco and Vanzetti case.
Colonel Calvin Goddard used the comparison microscope and helixometer (recent technological
advancements previously unavailable) to reexamine recovered evidence bullets and cartridge
cases. He was able to verify that one fatal bullet and one cartridge case had been fired from
Saccos pistol. These findings were verified by subsequent reexaminations in 1961 and 1983.
1929

Thompson machine gun
Intense public interest surrounding the St. Valentines Day Massacre (February 14, 1929,
Chicago, Illinois), coupled with rumors that police officers may have been involved, prompted
local officials to impanel a grand jury to investigate the slaying of seven gangsters by a rival
gangster group.
The grand jury foreman engaged the services of Calvin H. Goddard of the Bureau of Forensic
Ballistics to examine firearms-related evidence, which included fired bullets, pellets, fired
shotshell cases, and fired cartridge cases. Goddard concluded that the killers had used one 12-
gauge shotgun and two Thompson submachine guns. He noted that one of the Thompson
submachine guns was fired using a fifty-round drum magazine while the other was fired using a
twenty-round magazine.
Goddard tested all police Thompson submachine guns, comparing them to the crime scene
evidence. He determined that none of the police weapons were used in the killings; he
subsequently identified firearms obtained during the search of a suspects home as the murder
weapons.
1930-1939
Home > History > 1930-1939
1930

SCDL firearm examiner
Courtesy of the
National Library of
Medicine (NML)
The foreman of the St. Valentines Day Massacre grand jury established the Scientific Crime
Detection Laboratory (SCDL) through private funding. Calvin Goddard became director of the
laboratory, which was affiliated with the Northwestern University School of Law near Chicago.
He remained director until 1934, when he formed a private firm. During his directorship,
Goddard provided scientific training in the areas of firearm and toolmark identification to
numerous individuals who went on to work in other laboratories around the United States.
1932

J. Edgar Hoover
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) laboratory was established at the direction of then
Director J. Edgar Hoover. It is noteworthy that the first person to staff the FBI laboratory
received training from Calvin Goddard at the SCDL.
1934
Major Sir Gerald Burrard wrote a book titled The Identification of Firearms and Forensic
Ballistics, which was published in London, England. In his book, Burrard
discusses many of the early cases that occurred in the British Empire. Burrard acknowledges
Colonel H. W. Todhunter, C.M.G. (former chief inspector of small arms for the British Army) as
the pioneer of firearms identification in the United Kingdom.
1935
Julian S. Hatcher, an experienced U.S. Army ordnance officer, wrote Textbook of Firearms
Investigation, Identification and Evidence, one of two significant books from this period. Major
Hatcher served in a variety of assignments involving the design, manufacture, and testing of
ammunition and firearms. This book was adopted by many firearm examiners throughout the
United States and contained several photographs provided by Captain Ned Crossman.
Jack D. Gunther, a New York attorney and Professor Charles O. Gunther, a professor of
mathematics and a reserve Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army Ordnance Department, co-
authored another important text entitled The Identification of Firearms. Their book provided
additional information about the principles of firearms identification including details of the
Sacco-Vanzetti case. The Gunthers reinforced the need for scientific methodology in the field of
firearms identification.
1938

Courtesy of the
National Library of
Medicine (NML)
Originally a private laboratory under the direction of Calvin Goddard, the Scientific Crime
Detection Laboratory at Northwestern University (SCDL) was bought by the City of Chicago.
The equipment was transferred from the University to the Chicago Police Department and
existing laboratory personnel were offered positions in the new laboratory.
1940-1947

Calvin Goddard firing pistol
for bullet recovery
Courtesy of the
National Library of
Medicine (NML)
A number of state and municipal crime laboratories were established across the United States,
with forensic disciplines that included firearm and toolmark examination.
Laboratories established during this time included
the first criminology laboratory established in Oakland, California,
the Indianapolis Police Department (IPD), a fully equipped crime laboratory under the direction
of a trained scientist,
the first state crime laboratory in Wisconsin, supervised by Charles M. Wilson, who was
associated with Goddard at the SCDL at Northwestern and who later became the director of the
Chicago Police Department Crime Laboratory.
1948
The First American Medicolegal Congress meeting was held in St. Louis, Missouri.
Two papers were presented at the initial meeting concerning firearms identification:
"Firearms Evidence Fact and Fiction," presented by George W. Keenan, Department of Public
Safety, Rochester, New York
"The Recovery, Custody, Marking, and Preservation of Physical Evidence and Standards of
Comparison Including Firearms Exhibits," presented by Charles M. Wilson, of the Wisconsin
State Crime Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin
1949
Colonel Calvin H. Goddard became the commanding officer of the U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Laboratory Far East (Tokyo, Japan). He was instrumental in training examiners
within the U.S. Army Laboratory System until his retirement from the service.
1950
In response to interest generated during the 1948 First American Medicolegal Congress meeting,
the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) was formally established and began
publication of the Journal of Forensic Science (JFS).
1955

Calvin Goddard
Courtesy of FirearmsID.com
Calvin H. Goddard presented an address, "The Unexpected in Firearms Identification," at the
American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Los Angeles, California. Two days after his
presentation, Goddard passed away. Due to the significant contributions Goddard made to the
field of firearm and toolmark identification, he is considered by many firearm examiners
(especially in the U.S.) to be the "father" of the science.
1957

Hatcher text - Jury & Weller
A complete revision of Major General Julian S. Hatchers textbook Firearms Identification
Investigation and Evidence was published. The revision of the book was directed by Frank J.
Jury, New Jersey State Police Crime Laboratory and Jac Weller, a firearms consultant from
Princeton, New Jersey. While updating much of the original material, the revision also contained
a substantial amount of new material.
1958
John E. Davis, an eminent criminalist and Director of the Oakland Police Department
(California) Criminalistics Section (crime laboratory) wrote a book entitled An Introduction to
Tool Marks, Firearms and the Striagraph. Davis provided extensive information about the
examination and identification of firearms and toolmark evidence. He also discussed his
development of a specialized instrument that he named the striagraph. He described the
instrument as a measuring, tracing and recording device suited to the analysis of micro
surface-contours, that is, to the detection of microscopic irregularities in surface smoothness.
Although the instrument never proved to be successful past the research stage, it was the
forerunner of later technology using advanced laser and digital imaging techniques for scanning
the surface of a bullet.
1961

Sacco & Vanzetti
Frances Russell, a Boston author who was convinced of the innocence of Sacco and Vanzetti,
arranged for the reexamination of the firearms evidence by firearm consultants Frank Jury and
Jac Weller. Re-evaluation of the evidence included test firing the evidence firearms and
comparing the test bullets to the bullet that killed the payroll guard. The evidence bullets were
identified as having been fired from the firearm belonging to Sacco and verified the findings
made by Calvin Goddard in 1927.
1962

Mathews' volumes I & II
After nearly a forty-year career, Dr. J. H. Mathews published a two-volume set of books titled
Firearms Identification, which included extensive reference materials collected by Dr. Mathews
during the course of his work in the field of firearms identification.
Volume I contained:
Information concerning the laboratory identification of a firearm
Measurements of rifling data on a wide variety of handguns
Series of appendices that include photographs of the firing pin impressions on rim fire cartridges
Volume II contained:
Several hundred photographs of handguns to assist in their identification
Illustrations of other handguns
Photographs of trademarks and other identification marks
1963

Courtesy of The
National Archives
President John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas. Lee
Harvey Oswald was alleged to have shot and killed both President Kennedy and Officer J.D.
Tippet. While in police custody, Oswald was shot and killed by Jack Ruby.
Firearms examination and identification played an important part in the 1963-64 Warren
Commission investigation of the Kennedy assassination. Three senior firearm examiners from
the FBI Laboratory (Robert A. Frazier, Cortlandt Cunningham, and Charles Killion) examined
the evidence and provided testimony before the Warren Commission. Joseph D. Nicol,
superintendent of the Illinois State Bureau of Criminal Identification, also provided
corroborating testimony to the Commission. A nearly whole bullet, two large bullet fragments,
and three cartridge cases were positively linked to the rifle fired by Oswald.
1963
Major General Julian S. Hatcher, well known in the field of firearms identification, died at age
75