SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE QUESTIONED PRINT MARKED AS "Q" AND THE LEFT THUMBPRINT OF JOSMAN AZNAR MARKED AS 
"S-2" IN RELATION TO OTHER FINGERPRINTS COLLECTED FROM JOSMAN AZNAR AND OTHER ACCUSED WHEN ARRESTED
 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE RECOVERED DISKETTE
          According to Police records of the Carcar Police Station, When the police first arrive at the scene where the body was found last July 18, 1997 only a fragmentation grenade was found in the "'vicinity." Where exactly in relation to the body it was found was not specified or indicated in a map/diagram of the crime scene.

          However, when "elements of the RNG 7 stationed at Sibonga, Cebu" arrive on July 22, 1997 at the same site, they recovered from the cliff a "'black driver diskette marked S3 trio 64 VT with markings JB 70305 NQ2 FC," together with "'a pair of worn black shoes. . . " On July 23, 1997 the diskette allegedly recovered from the site was forward to the  Provincial Director, Cebu Police Provincial Police Office, Lahug, Cebu by SP04 Arturo Unabia of Carcar, Cebu. The same was forwarded on July 24, 1997 to the Director, Criminal Investigation Group, at Gorordo Ave., Cebu City by P/Supt. Mario Potot. On October 3, 1997 it was forwarded to the Chief, PNPCLS RU7 by Police Supt. Napoleon Estilles with a request for "finger impressions" analysis. It was on October 18,  1997 that the fingerprint analysis was '"completed" by P. Inspector Belostrico Lenizo of the PNP Crime Laboratory. 

           COMMENT:
               After almost three (3) months have passed since the alleged date of recovery of the diskette and after so many handlings by different PNP personnel and referrals to many officers at that, it is surprising that the Police have managed to preserve and still develop and lifted a fingerprint from the flat, prominent, smooth metallic part of the diskette. If one adds the fact that the place from which it was recovered was reported by local informants to have experienced heavy rain the days before the diskette was recovered, it is hard to believe that a latent print from the smooth and flat surface remained intact after three months.

               Relevant to this is the observation made by defense expert witness last January 8, 1999 when this exhibit was examined in open court, (a deposition to this effect was

PAGE 2
          made by defense counsel Atty. Sisinio Andales) that no soil particles could be seen on the surface of the diskette - an observation concurred to by P. Inspector Lenizo, who developed and lifted the fingerprint. This latter observation casts further doubt as to the survival of latent prints on the diskette if indeed there was one to start with as well as the actual provenance of this piece of evidence.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
          The alleged lifted fingerprint shows a large dark blob (smudged area) which practically obliterated most and especially its important central portion. Only the edges at the top and base of the fingerprint show some details. Notice that the lower edges of the blob describes a right angle gap (about 90 degrees) with the left (ulnar) side of this angle, when extended from its origin downward would fall some distance to the right of the rectangular-shaped mark found on the lower left quadrant of the lifted fingerprint. The print on the diskette shows the lower edges describing a more open obtuse angle (greater than 90 degrees). If the left side of this angle is prolonged it will hit the upper right hand corner of the rectangular shape marking shown on the photo of the diskette.

          The presence of this big blob on the print invites explanation. It could be due to faulty procedure or to the presence of a sticky surface which prevented the powder from being distributed to the periphery of the print. The 5traight edge tool used to spread the powder.

          The diskette photo also shows less detaila, Iess dark markings indicating that if indeed the print was developed here, a photo made of it was done after (not before) the developed print was "lifted" and pasted on the exhibit card. This not only violates procedures in photo documentation of the procedure but also cast§ doubt on whether the print was indeed developed and lifted initially from the diskette or lifted from another source, and remnants of which merely transferred to this part of the diskette. It is also logical' to expect that if the diskette was actually held between the fingers of the accused, at least one of the other four finger should have left marks on the other side, which should have been developed and lifted.

PAGE 3
SPECIFIC FINDINGS
          Further analysis of Exhibit "Q" and Exhibit "S-2" submitted by the Prosecution in relation to other fingerprints collected from Josman Aznar and the other accused taken by the PNP Crime Laboratory last October 2, 1997 yielded the following findings:

          1.  The shape of the alleged developed and lifted left thumbprint marked "Q" showed a more rectangular shape, more similar to the rolled print of Josman Aznar than to his plain (dabbed or touch on) print of the same finger appearing on the same four.

          2.  The relative width of the rolled on print at the base is nearly the same as the distal (i.e. fingertip) portions of the print up to nearly the tip of the fingerprint, very similar to the alleged lifted and developed print from the diskette. This is different in the plain (dabbed/touch on) print from the left thumb in the same form where the print begins to taper and narrow toward the tip starting at the middle portion of the print.

          3.  The rolled on left thumbprint flattens at the tip portion or even shows slight notching while the plain or dabbed (touch on) print of the same finger tapers to an ovaloid or eliptical shape at the tip. This rolled on characteristic is seen on the print developed and lifted from the diskette marked "'Q".

    4.  The developed and lifted fingerprint from the diskette shows asymmetrical slopes definitely to its left (ulnar) side, just like that of the rolled print of Aznar, and also of the rolled left thumbprint of the other accused (appearing in their suspective PNP Fingerprint Form). On the other hand, the plain (dabbed/touch on) print of the same fingerprint of Aznar symmetrical slopes evenly on both sides of the print, just like the corresponding plain thumbprints of the other accused.

PAGE 4
The above findings can be summarized in the following table of comparisons.
__________________________________________________________________________

                                                                                                                  PLAIN  PRINT 
                                                                            PRINT ON                    (DABBED/
TRAIT LINKED              ROLLED PRINT            DISKETTE                   TOUCH ON
__________________________________________________________________________
1. General Shape           rectangular                   rectangular                    Ovaloid

2. Relative width             Similar from top            More similar from           Narrower toward the
                                       to bottom of print          top to bottom                  the tip starting at the
                                                                                                                   middle

3. Tip Characteristic       Flat or notched             Flat                                Tapers to an ovoid
                                                                                                                  or elliptical shape

4. Sloping of the            Slopes                           Shows slope                    Shows slope
                                      asymmetrically               asymmetrically                 symmetry on
                                      to the left                        to the left                         both sides
__________________________________________________________________________

Note: All characteristics of rolled and plain prints (touch on) showed in corresponding prints of all accused in their respective PNP fingerprint forms.

CONCLUSION
          1.  The characteristics of the alleged left thumbprint developed and lifted from the diskette are more similar to that of tile rolled on fingerprint of the same finger rather than the plain (or dabbed/touch on) print of the analogous.

          2.  As the rolled on fingerprint is typically not the kind of print one leaves while casually touching an object, but must be definitely printed (i.e. rolled on) on a plain surface, the other conclusion would be that the rolled on fingerprint allegedly lifted and developed from the diskette must have been produced by one who consciously rolled a finger on that flat surface.

          3.  lt is highly unlikely that the person claimed by the PNP fingerprint examiner said to be the source of that thumbprint could have left that latent print by simply casually touching that diskette.

signed: JEROME B. BAILEN                                            
              Associate Professor                             
              Laboratory of Physical Anthropology                                  
              University of tile Philippines                                                                 
              Diliman, Quezon City

signed: P/Lt. Col. REYNALDO D. MARCELO (RET)
              Independent Fingerprint Expert