In some parts of the world like India, fingerprints dipped in ink have been used for generations as a type of signature for documentation without needing the signer to be literate. However, it wasn't until around the turn of the twentieth century that *dusting* for fingerprints took the worldwide criminal justice professions by storm. Why was the technology invented so late when the uniqueness of fingerprints was known for so long? How could we get that technology introduced earlier, maybe even far earlier, into justice systems? And, what effect would a standardized, "objective" method like that have both on criminal justice itself and the popular perception of criminal justice, especially if it's introduced in pre-modern times (if possible). For example, would women or immigrants accused of crimes be treated better in courts, or would even strong evidence (in certain cases) like fingerprinting not be enough to combat biases?