Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | C | Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice

Forensic barefoot morphology comparison.

Article Excerpt
Introduction

Forensic barefoot morphology comparison is a term that has been coined recently to refer to the forensic examination of the impressions of weight-bearing areas of the human foot. Research has shown that the shapes of barefoot impressions are sufficiently variable to make it possible to include or exclude a suspect as being the person who created a particular footprint recovered at a crime scene. As an example, identical twins who may appear to be indistinguishable and will have the same DNA profile, will have barefoot impressions that are obviously different (Kennedy 2000). When the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) first contemplated the use of this technique while investigating a serial murder case, a background search found evidence of some successful cases (Kennedy 2000) and background research (Robbins 1985; Bodziak and Monson 1987; Bodziak and Monson 1989), but also some problems with previous cases being overturned and re-examined, due to a lack of proper research, and conclusions given by witnesses who were inexperienced in the forensic field (Gold 2003). As a consequence, the RCMP embarked on a research program before any evidence was presented in a court of law, and has continued to further that research.

Forensic scientists are constantly searching for new and reliable means to identify a criminal or at least to link a suspect to a crime scene. Fingerprints are generally accepted as being unique to an individual, so finding a latent impression of friction ridges at a crime scene can be used to unequivocally link a person to that scene (Cowger 1983; Ashbaugh 1999). When exactly the identified individual was at the scene, and whether or not s/he committed the crime, may require further investigation and supporting evidence, but the fingerprint will definitely place her/him at the location. DNA evidence collected at a crime scene can be used to state, with high probability, that a certain individual was likely at the scene. Footwear and tire impressions can be linked to shoes of a particular size and pattern (Bodziak 2000), or tires of a particular size and tread design (McDonald 1989; Nause 2001). Further, if unique cuts and marks are evident in the crime scene impression, it may be possible to match the marks to a particular shoe or tire. Tool mark impressions from, for example, attempts to pry open a window could possibly be linked to the particular tool that was used to commit the crime. Striations on a bullet or firing pin marks on a recovered cartridge case can be used to link a particular firearm to the crime under investigation.

Forensic odontologists compare bitemark impressions on human skin with the teeth, or exemplars...