Evaluation of Lumicyano cyanoacrylate fuming process for the development of latent fingermarks on plastic carrier bags by means of a pseudo operational comparative trial

Date

2013-11-13

Advisors

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Elsevier

Type

Article

Peer reviewed

Yes

Abstract

There are a number of studies discussing recent developments of a one-step fluorescent cyanoacrylate process. This study is a pseudo operational trial to compare an example of a one-step fluorescent cyanoacrylate product, Lumicyano™, with the two recommended techniques for plastic carrier bags; cyanoacrylate fuming followed by basic yellow 40 (BY40) dyeing and powder suspensions. 100 plastic carrier bags were collected from the place of work and the items were treated as found without any additional fingermark deposition. The bags were split into three and after treatment with the three techniques a comparable number of fingermarks were detected by each technique (average of 300 fingermarks). The items treated with Lumicyano™ were sequentially processed with BY40 and an additional 43 new fingermarks were detected. Lumicyano™ appears to be a suitable technique for the development of fingermarks on plastic carrier bags and it can help save lab space and time as it does not require dyeing or drying procedures. Furthermore, contrary to other one-step cyanoacrylate products, existing cyanoacrylate cabinets do not require any modification for the treatment of articles with Lumicyano™. To date, there is little peer reviewed articles in the literature on trials related to Lumicyano™ and this study aims to contribute to fill this gap.

Description

The author's final peer reviewed version can be found by following the URI link. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.

Keywords

Citation

Farrugia, K. J., Deacon, P. and Fraser, J. (2014) Evaluation of Lumicyano cyanoacrylate fuming process for the development of latent fingermarks on plastic carrier bags by means of a pseudo operational comparative trial. Science & Justice, 54(2), pp.126-132.

Rights

Research Institute