Un-natural scratches

[reg]

Hehe, everybody's an expert since Jerry Bruckheimer made "CSI" and "CSI Miami", and of course the Discovery Channel airs interesting documentaries on forensic science.

The guys from the SSDeV usually know what they are talking about when they cover forensics and traces tools leave in locks

cf this thread
http://www.lockpicking101.com/viewtopic.php?p=29206&highlight=#29206

This is an ongoing effort by the way, and the winner of the impressioning championship had his lock taken away from him for sending in to forensics research.

Cheers,

reg

[Romstar]

It's nice to know that somebody else knows about this stuff.

Romstar

Hehe, everybody's an expert since Jerry Bruckheimer made "CSI" and "CSI Miami", and of course the Discovery Channel airs interesting documentaries on forensic science.

And what in the world makes you think I learned ANY of this from CSI, or the Discovery Channel?

Hmmm?
Romstar

[Romstar]

Romstar,

From a crime scene standpoint you are right. I understand your point and it is well taken. I am going to to disagree with you to some degree...

My presumption was that the original poster had no illegal intent and was just curious as to whether locksmiths worry about damage to customer locks. Generally, that answer is "No". And customers do not notice tooling marks from a picked lock. If so... the technique is wrong.

My premise was from the practical day to day activities of a locksmith.. Not from what a crime scene investigator would find investigating a crime scene. I presumed (perhaps incorrectly) that amateur work would indeed be obvious.

Once again... "good locksmith + good technique + no crime commited = no customer complaints about scratches!"

Heh,

Makes perfect sense to me, and I think you are right about the original question. I don't think any locksmith is going to leave marks that would cause a customer to complain. Not unless they slipped that is.

Happened to a friend of mine. Drug the tension wrench right across the face of the lock. It wasn't pretty.

Oh well, the things you learn. I like it when people explain their disagreements. It makes it sooo much easier to understand.

Romstar

[raimundo]

a rough unsanded tool will cut the pins, and the complicated angles in the keyway and leave distinct marks, you probably could not trace these marks to a specific tool but you could be certain that the lock had been tampered with using a steel tool on brass. Brass is used to make locks because it is easy to machine with steel tools, and does not wear the cuttters out. Also, it is self lubricating, (usually has a little lead in the alloy for this) in use, the pins will not wear down quickly, brass rubbing against brass just burnishes, no material is removed, but the surfaces are made flat and shiny. any steel tool will cut this shiny surface. A well polished tool will also burnish the brass and cut none of it away, it is this well polished tool that will leave the microscopic marks that could be identified to the specific tool, the rougher tools will cut and recut over the same place and leave a mess that cannot be sorted out to the specific tool unless that tool has some very distinct characteristic. Most talk of marks refers to scratches on the face of the lock made by idiots trying to pick the lock with a penknife.

[Eagerpicker]

It's nice to know that somebody else knows about this stuff.

Romstar

Hehe, everybody's an expert since Jerry Bruckheimer made "CSI" and "CSI Miami", and of course the Discovery Channel airs interesting documentaries on forensic science.

And what in the world makes you think I learned ANY of this from CSI, or the Discovery Channel?

Hmmm?
Romstar

My comment was no allusion to your expert opinions, of course, Romstar. I wouldn't presume to question your knowledge in such matters.

It is simply that these television programmes can "educate" the general public in very specific, scientific areas. Of course it's only scratching the surface what they do, but in an entertainment kind of way they can offer some fascinating bits of knowledge outside the realm of common trivia. Wouldn't you say? Consequently, many tele-educated laymen can be found to offer opinions on subjects of which they really have no proper knowledge. Langteen

[Cypherninja]

I find forensics to an extremely interesting subject. Its mindblowing what they can figure out based on the minutest of details.

Does anybody know any other good sources of forensics info besides the LSS (in the mail ) or those slides linked in one of the other threads (downloading now )?

Just a thought, but would tossing a pick into a rocktumbler along with some ultra-fine sand and cutting oil, then coating it with teflon or nylon do much to substantially reduce the scratching? I know its useless knowledge for legal picking, but I can't help but ask.

[Wesson357]

I've some doubts about determining the manufacturer. Sure you can tell which kind of tool was used, as the dents from a mechanical pickgun look different than pick scratches or the mess that an electric pickgun leaves behind. But I don't think that the scratches between say HPC2000 and Falle differ enough to tell them apart (but the Falle turning tool probably leaves some very distinctive marks). And then you probably wouldn't account for modified/filed down/rounded off picks and so on.
To really tell the different picks apart, you'd need metal from the picks imho and because they're harder than the lock, they won't leave a lot of metal behind.

HPC and Falle picks are made from different substances. These different metals have a unique was of scratching or making marks on the pins and internal parts of a lock. Picking a lock may also leave very small shavings of the actual pick behind, and even though they are very small, the crime lab can still find them. These can be used to identify what type of metal the pick was and that will also help with identifying the manufacturer. Needless to say the FBI has many other new and interesting technologies for identifying toolmarks.