The importance of e-fits and artwork in the Madeleine McCann investigation.

[John]

When it comes to missing children several tools are available to police and other investigators.  E-fits and artists impressions have become commonplace over the last seven years in the search for Madeleine McCann who disappeared from her parents holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on 3rd May 2007.

Artists impressions in particular are extremely useful where young children have been missing for several years as has been seen in Madeleine's case.  Within the last year several artists impressions have been published which purport to show what she will look like now some 7 years on.



Artists impression of Madeleine commissioned by the Daily Star.       Official artists impression released by Find Madeleine.


The e-fit or Electronic Facial Identification Technique is a computer-based method of producing facial composites of wanted criminals, based on eyewitness descriptions.  The system first appeared in the late 1980s, programmed by John Platten and has since been progressively refined by Platten and latterly by Dr Matthew Maylin. E-FIT has developed a reputation as a highly reliable and flexible system for feature-based composite construction.

The widespread use of the original E-FIT approach is gradually being superseded by a new version of the program called EFIT-V.  EFIT-V is a full-colour, hybrid system that offers increased flexibility and speed, allowing the face to be constructed using both evolutionary and systematic construction techniques.

E-fits of suspects which have been released following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

[pegasus]

"Until quite recently, the facial composite systems used by international police forces were exclusively based on a construction methodology in which individual facial features (eyes, nose, mouth, eyebrows, etc.) are selected one at a time from a large database and then electronically 'overlaid' to make the composite image. Such systems are often referred to as feature-based since they essentially rely on the selection of individual features in isolation.

However, after a long period of research and development work conducted largely within British Universities, systems based on a rather different principle are finding increasing use by police forces. These systems may be broadly described as holistic or global in that they primarily attempt to create a likeness to the suspect through an evolutionary mechanism in which a witness's response to groups of complete faces (not just features) converges towards an increasingly accurate image. "

Source: Wiki

[sadie]

"Until quite recently, the facial composite systems used by international police forces were exclusively based on a construction methodology in which individual facial features (eyes, nose, mouth, eyebrows, etc.) are selected one at a time from a large database and then electronically 'overlaid' to make the composite image. Such systems are often referred to as feature-based since they essentially rely on the selection of individual features in isolation.

However, after a long period of research and development work conducted largely within British Universities, systems based on a rather different principle are finding increasing use by police forces. These systems may be broadly described as holistic or global in that they primarily attempt to create a likeness to the suspect through an evolutionary mechanism in which a witness's response to groups of complete faces (not just features) converges towards an increasingly accurate image. "

Source: Wiki

Thank you Pegasus.  Seems my ideas were not far off.  Good of you to confirm that

[pegasus]

Thank you Pegasus.  Seems my ideas were not far off.  Good of you to confirm that

Yes your idea of starting off with complete faces and working from there by gradually altering the faces turns out to be correct
(however the faces are all computer generated, no actual photos of real peeps are used).

[sadie]

Yes your idea of starting off with complete faces and working from there by gradually altering the faces turns out to be correct
(however the faces are all computer generated, no actual photos of real peeps are used).

Computer generated based on real faces is best.

To have assembled those images just from vague memories would have been nigh impossible.  To assemble a likelyness to a face even 24 hours later is almost impossible too.  It would take a very good eye and an even better memory to do even that.

[pegasus]

Computer generated based on real faces is best.

To have assembled those images just from vague memories would have been nigh impossible.  To assemble a likelyness to a face even 24 hours later is almost impossible too.  It would take a very good eye and an even better memory to do even that.

If your 24 hour limit was correct, you would have just ruled out EVERY efit in this case.

But luckily people can remember faces for much longer than 24 hours, therefore even efits done years after the event are valuable.

[Brietta]

If your 24 hour limit was correct, you would have just ruled out EVERY efit in this case.

But luckily people can remember faces for much longer than 24 hours, therefore even efits done years after the event are valuable.

I disagree pegasus, I would not trust an efit completed at a remove of even weeks from an event.

I think a fairly accurate representation can be made if the encounter with an individual takes place face to face for a period of time as in the descriptions of door to door collectors.

If an individual has some ‘stand out’ features such as ‘pimply/ugly man’ or ‘buck tooth’ man.  Or if he ‘resembles’ a known face … that can be used as a starting point.

Eye witness identification is not an exact science; but if witnesses declare they have not seen a person’s face and are unable to describe it a fortnight after the event … I think it would be impossible for them to have such detailed recall over a year later.

Jane Tanner described the man’s gait, his hair, his clothing and the way he carried the child … she did not describe his face … because she did not see it.

[sadie]

If your 24 hour limit was correct, you would have just ruled out EVERY efit in this case.

But luckily people can remember faces for much longer than 24 hours, therefore even efits done years after the event are valuable.

Look at some of the Efit faces.  They are bizarre.  But the main features that make the face different from the average will be there ... so they do have a use.

And I agree having an early remembered permanent record is a major benefit.  Useful in later years



I throw out a challenge to any of you.

Look at a stranger once only for a couple of minutes.  The next day, with no stranger there and no original images to amend, try and draw a likeness,

Get someone else to judge the likeness cos your mind might persuade you that you have a good likeness.


To be frank, Pegasus, most people cannot get a good likeness even with the person in front of them.  But starter images help a good deal.



I well remember one man in one of my early life drawing classes.  His drawing of a live model was 50% huge boobs, 25% big head and the rest was rediculously little body, little limbs ... and tiny hands and feet. 

It was obvious what was of interest to him .... but he thought that his images were a near perfect match to the model !  He was very proud of them, bless him.


So it is important that someone else judges the images.

[Alice Purjorick]

I disagree pegasus, I would not trust an efit completed at a remove of even weeks from an event.

I think a fairly accurate representation can be made if the encounter with an individual takes place face to face for a period of time as in the descriptions of door to door collectors.

If an individual has some ‘stand out’ features such as ‘pimply/ugly man’ or ‘buck tooth’ man.  Or if he ‘resembles’ a known face … that can be used as a starting point.

Eye witness identification is not an exact science; but if witnesses declare they have not seen a person’s face and are unable to describe it a fortnight after the event … I think it would be impossible for them to have such detailed recall over a year later.

Jane Tanner described the man’s gait, his hair, his clothing and the way he carried the child … she did not describe his face … because she did not see it.

Kind of like totally irrelevant.
It is what the police think that counts; unless of course you are the police.

[Mr Gray]

Kind of like totally irrelevant.
It is what the police think that counts; unless of course you are the police.

when it comes to id it's what the court/jury think..

the efit is only to try and locate smithman to rule him in or out of the enquiry

[Alice Purjorick]

when it comes to id it's what the court/jury think..

the efit is only to try and locate smithman to rule him in or out of the enquiry

Did I say differently?
Do the police have to ask for a jury ruling to use the efit for the purpose you describe? I think not.

[Mr Gray]

Did I say differently?
Do the police have to ask for a jury ruling to use the efit for the purpose you describe? I think not.

the e fit has little or no evidential value

[jassi]

I don't suppose that will matter if it leads them to the right person

[Alice Purjorick]

the e fit has little or no evidential value

Who said they did?
Remind us what are efits and all their predecessors used for customarily?

[Mr Gray]

I don't suppose that will matter if it leads them to the right person

absolutely right...there will be other evidence if smithman is the perpetrator..