Yes
Admissible as evidence
Yes, palm prints can be admissible in court as evidence. Palm prints can be used to identify individuals just like fingerprints. The admissibility of palm print evidence will depend on the circumstances of the case and the rules of evidence in the jurisdiction.
yes we have as these palm prints are unique like our fingerprints. If we do not have palm prints we will not be able to use our palms to hold things as these things will slip off easily from our palms
No, parents do not have the same palm prints. Just like fingerprints, palm prints are unique to each individual due to the distinct patterns and ridges formed during fetal development. Even identical twins have different palm prints, making them a reliable means of identification.
Cats do have unique paw prints, which are similar to fingerprints in humans. However, cat paw prints do not have the same intricate patterns and ridges as human fingerprints. Instead, cat paw prints are made up of distinctive pads and toe prints that can be used to identify individual cats.
no they find the DNA from the fingerprints and the look on the computer then the person who made the fingerprints his/her face will come on to the computer
Fingerprints left at a crime scene are called latent prints. These prints can be collected and used as evidence to help identify suspects and link them to the crime.
Voice prints, also known as voice authentication or speaker recognition, can be admissible in court as evidence if certain criteria are met. This includes using reliable methods to generate voice prints and having experts testify to their accuracy and reliability. However, the decision to admit voice prints as evidence ultimately rests with the judge overseeing the case.
Nope! Lip prints are like fingerprints, they're all different
A method of studying fingerprints to establish identification.(finger prints)
They have paw prints, everyone knows that!1
Fingerprints.