1. The proposition is urged that: Forensic fingerprint identification is
100% accurate (error-free) when performed by a competent
examiner.
2. This proposition can only be falsified (refuted) by the demonstration
of a case in which a “competent” examiner makes an error.
3. When cases of error are exposed, the examiners implicated are
immediately, automatically, and retrospectively deemed
“incompetent.”
4. No exposed error—and no number of exposed errors—can refute the
proposition.
5. The proposition cannot be refuted.
Note also another effect of this: all criminal defendants are forced into the
position of assuming that examiners in their cases are competent. Since
incompetence is only exposed in a retrospective fashion (i.e. by making a
misidentification) and such examiners are almost always excommunicated
from the profession, all criminal defendants are subject to the “infallible”
competent examiner. 354