1. Eddie Joe Lloyd, quoted in the New York Times (26 August 2002). Lloyd had been sent to prison 17 years ago and was released in 2002 when DNA testing showed a mismatch between his DNA profile and the profile developed from evidence at the crime scene.
2. This story and the quotations from Mr Castor and Dr Blake are taken from Rimer, S. (2002) Convict's DNA sways labs, not a determined prosecutor. New York Times (6 February).
3. For a discussion of the linkages between trust and certainty in the history of science, see Shapin, S. and Schaffer, S. (1985) Leviathan and the Air Pump, Princeton University Press. For a discussion of trust and its connection with legal credibility, see Shapin, S. (1995) Cordelia's love: credibility and the social studies of science. Perspectives on Science 3, 255–275.
4. The first challenge was US versus Mitchell, Cr. No. 96-407 (E.D. Pa., 1999). An insightful history of fingerprinting from the 19th century to the present-day era of DNA profiling is Cole, S. (2001) Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification, Harvard University Press. The importance of DNA profiling, as well as changes in legal admissibility standards, in setting up challenges to fingerprinting is discussed in Mnookin, J. (2001) Fingerprint evidence in an age of DNA profiling. Brooklyn Law Review 67, 13–70.
5. A probabilistic approach to fingerprint evidence;Champod;Fingerprint Whorld,2001