Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Forensic Facial Analysis

  • Martin Paul EvisonEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_170


Closed-circuit television (CCTV) systems, digital cameras, webcams, and mobile devices are the source of a burgeoning number of facial images used in criminal investigations and prosecutions. Given the significance of facial identification to the courts – as well as to cases involving questioned identity documents and border control and immigration disputes – it is important that the strengths and weaknesses of methods used are properly understood.

Identification of an alleged offender is fundamental to the judicial process. Courts rely heavily on eyewitness evidence of identification, and they continue to do so where facial images are concerned. Evidence of identification, however, is widely acknowledged to be problematic. Procedures and processes intended to make identification more reliable – whether for use in investigation or in court – are perennial challenges.

Where facial image evidence is in issue, eyewitness evidence of investigators or other witnesses familiar with...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. ACPO (2009) Facial identification guidance. Association of Chief Police Officers, London. http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/Facial%20ID.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2012
  2. Anonymous (1999) The strange story of Adolph Beck. Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. APCO (2012) Public encouraged to identify criminals with mobile app. Br Assoc Public Saf Commun Off J. http://www.bapcojournal.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/2239/Public_encouraged_to_identify_criminals_with_mobile_app.html. Accessed 30 July 2012
  4. Bertillon A (1885) Identification anthropométrique: instructions signalétiques. Melun, ParisGoogle Scholar
  5. Bromby MC, Plews S (2006) Guidance for evaluating levels of support. FIAG: Forensic Imagery Analysis Group. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1550752. Accessed 20 July 2012
  6. Bruce V, Henderson Z, Greenwood K, Hancock PJB, Burton AM, Miller P (1999) Verification of face identities from images captured on video. J Exp Psychol Appl 5(4):339–360Google Scholar
  7. Bruce V, Henderson Z, Newman C, Burton AM (2001) Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. J Exp Psychol Appl 7(3):207–218Google Scholar
  8. Burton AM, Wilson S, Cowan M, Bruce V (1999) Face recognition in poor-quality video: evidence from security surveillance. Psychol Sci 10(3):243–248Google Scholar
  9. Cole S (2001) Suspect identities: a history of fingerprinting and criminal identification. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Dessimoz D, Champod C (2007) Linkages between biometrics and forensic science. In: Jain AK (ed) Handbook of biometrics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. Devlin P (1976) Report to the secretary of state for the home department of the departmental committee on evidence of identification in criminal cases. H.M.S.O, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Dror IE, Mnookin JL (2010) The use of technology in human expert domains: challenges and risks arising from the use of automated fingerprint identification systems in forensic science. Law Probab Risk 9:47–67Google Scholar
  13. Dror IE, Charlton D, Peron AE (2006) Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making erroneous identifications. Forensic Sci Int 156(1):74–78Google Scholar
  14. Edmond G (2011) The building blocks of forensic science and law: recent work on DNA profiling (and photo comparison). Soc Stud Sci 41(1):127–152Google Scholar
  15. Evison MP (2011) Biometrics for forensics. In: van Tilborg HCA, Jajodia S (eds) Encyclopedia of cryptography and security. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Evison MP, Vorder Bruegge RW (2010) Computer-aided forensic facial comparison. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  17. Evison MP, Dryden I, Fieller NRJ, Mallett XDG, Morecroft L, Schofield D, Vorder Bruegge RW (2010) Key parameters of face shape variation in 3D in a large sample. J Forensic Sci 55:159–162Google Scholar
  18. Grimston J (2011) Eagle-eye of the yard can spot rioters by their ears. The Sunday Times, 20 Nov 2011Google Scholar
  19. Jon D (2009) Closed circuit television’s key role in modern policing. Doktor Jon’s guide to CCTV and IP video surveillance. http://www.doktorjon.co.uk/pdf/DCI%20Neville%20interview0509.pdf
  20. Kemp R, Towell N, Pike G (1997) When seeing should not be believing: photographs, credit cards and fraud. Appl Cogn Psychol 11(3):211–222Google Scholar
  21. Mallett XGD, Evison MP (2013) Forensic facial comparison: issues of admissibility in the development of novel analytical techniques. J Forensic Sci (in press)Google Scholar
  22. Mardia KV, Coombes A, Kirkbride J, Linney A, Bowie LJ (1996) On statistical problems with face identification from photographs. J Appl Stat 23:655–676Google Scholar
  23. NRC (2009) Strengthening forensic science in the United States: a path forward. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Porter G, Doran G (2000) An anatomical and photographic technique for forensic facial identification. Forensic Sci Int 114(2):97–105Google Scholar
  25. Rennison A (2008) Manual of forensic science regulation. Home Office, Office of the Forensic Science Regulator, London. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/operational-policing/Manual_of_Regulation_22.9.08.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2012
  26. Russell R, Duchaine B, Nakayama K (2009) Super-recognizers: people with extraordinary face recognition ability. Psychon Bull Rev 16(2):252–257Google Scholar
  27. Saks M, Koehler J (2005) The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science. Science 309:892–895Google Scholar
  28. SWGIT (2012) Best practices for forensic photographic comparison. International Association for Identification: Scientific Working Group on Imaging Technology. http://www.theiai.org/guidelines/swgit/guidelines/section_16_v1-0.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2012
  29. Vanezis P, Brierley C (1996) Facial image comparison of crime suspects using video superimposition. Sci Justice 36(1):27–33Google Scholar
  30. Vanezis P, Lu D, Cockburn J, Gonzalez A, McCombe G, Trujillo O, Vanezis M (1996) Morphological classification of facial features in adult Caucasian males based on an assessment of photographs of 50 subjects. J Forensic Sci 41(5):786–791Google Scholar
  31. Yoshino M, Matsuda H, Kubota S, Imaizumi K, Miyasaka S (2000) Computer-assisted facial image identification system using a 3-D physiognomic range finder. Forensic Sci Int 109(3):225–237Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northumbria University Centre for Forensic ScienceNorthumbria UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK