OT: bitter, cynical political rant

[Ron Kracht]

Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

>On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 01:30:30PM -0700, Bob Rasmussen wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Gee, then why did the FBI say it was "a guaranteed, 100% accurate
>>>match"?
>>>      
>>>
>>This case took place in my town, so the local newspaper (The Oregonian)
>>was very interested. According to their last report, there were issues of
>>collecting the fingerprint, communication between Spain and the FBI,
>>destruction of the original, and more. In short, many fingers will be
>>pointed. Personally, I will avoid any rants until more data is in. But
>>then I'm not in talk radio...
>>    
>>
>
>AFAIC, if the FBI spokesman was quoted *accurately*, then it's time;
>you can rant all you like.  :-)
>
>  
>
The quote is accurate. The attribution is not. That statement was made 
during a hearing in the case (as I remember it was a bail hearing) by a 
prosecutor in Portland.

At the time the statement was made the FBI knew (who knows about the 
prosecutor?) full well that the Spanish police did not consider the 
print to be a match. As a matter of fact the Spanish authorities told 
the FBI almost immediately that they considered that the print 
conclusively did _not_ match the Portland lawyer. As a result of that 
communication, two weeks before the lawyer was arrested, there was a 
meeting in Spain between the FBI (including the expert who made the 
match) and Spanish fingerprint experts. Although the FBI expert does not 
speak Spanish two other FBI official at the meeting are reportedly 
fluent. The Spanish experts pointed out that the print had only 7 of the 
15 matching points of reference that they require for a match. They 
additionally pointed out that several aspects of the print were 
obviously different from those of the Portland lawyer. The FBI would not 
budge and at the conclusion of the meeting the Spanish authorities 
agreed to leave the issue marked as 'open' so as to, in their eyes, 
avoid embarrassing the FBI.

At that meeting the Spanish authorities offered to allow the FBI to 
examine the original print but the FBI was not then interested.  Later 
when the mismatch became embarrassing public knowledge the FBI asked to 
examine the original print but it had by then been degraded to the point 
of uselessness by further tests.

If anyone it interested I can find the original attributions for all 
this information. Much of it comes from overseas newspapers, some of it 
from interviews with Spanish authorities who were at the above mentioned 
meeting. The FBI, to its credit, has indicated that all the fault in the 
case lies with the FBI. Sadly, some of those with an "it's a sign of 
weakness to admit to a mistake" mentality have tried to shift blame to 
the Spaniards.