Result.

: In the field of forensic footwear examination, it is a widely held belief that patterns of accidental marks found on footwear and footwear impressions possess a high degree of uniqueness. This belief, however, has not been thoroughly studied in a numerical way using controlled experiments. As a result, this form of valuable physical evidence has been the subject of admissibility challenges. In this study, we apply statistical techniques used in facial pattern recognition, to a minimal set of information gleaned from accidental patterns. That is, in order to maximize the amount of potential similarity between patterns, we only use the coordinate locations of accidental marks (on the top portion of a footwear impression) to characterize the entire pattern. This allows us to numerically gauge how similar two patterns are to one another in a worst-case scenario, i.e., in the absence of a tremendous amount of information normally available to the footwear examiner such as accidental mark size and shape. The patterns were recorded from the top portion of the shoe soles (i.e., not the heel) of five shoe pairs. All shoes were the same make and model and all were worn by the same person for a period of 30 days. We found that in 2030 dimensional principal component (PC) space (99.5% variance retained), patterns from the same shoe, even at different points in time, tended to cluster closer to each other than patterns from different shoes. Correct shoe identification rates using maximum likelihood linear classification analysis and the hold-one-out procedure ranged from 81% to 100%. Although low in variance, three-dimensional PC plots were made and generally corroborated the findings in the much higher dimensional PC-space. This study is intended to be a starting point for future research to build statistical models on the formation and evolution of accidental patterns.

The results of this study demonstrated the widely accepted proposition that the accidental damage found on footwear outsoles was randomly produced. The study attempted to eliminate as many variables contributing to the formation of these accidental marks as possible. By using the same style of boots, in the same new condition, the same walking path, the same environmental conditions, and the same duration of use, the authors were able to eliminate all major contributing factors to the formation of these marks. The results also indicate that these accidental marks may be created by a single walking event, representing one of many changes occurring in the evolution of the damage and wear represented on the outsole. Additional studies are recommended. The use of random damage characteristics has been reliably used in the comparison of known outsoles to questioned impressions found at crime scenes. These damage characteristics are formed through the use of the shoes while they are worn. The presence of these characteristics allows the footwear examiner to individualize one shoe as having made an impression. This study hypothesized that these characteristics could be created during a single common activity and that the characteristics would exist in sufficient numbers to individualize the shoes. This study sought to answer the following questions: (1) would random characteristics be created in sufficient numbers to allow for individualization; (2) would these random characteristics share any common location or orientation with other characteristics found on outsoles; and (3) would two pairs of shoes worn by the same individual under the same physical characteristics exhibit accidental characteristics allowing for This type of evidence is created when one object is pressed against another material such as soil with enough force that an impression is made of the object. Although soil is used as an example here, any material that can be manipulated with force may contain impression evidence. Other such materials may be wet cement or tar, wood, snow and even metal.

Most only think of shoes and tires when considering impression evidence, but tools and bullets can also cause impressions.

Shoe impressions can provide a great deal of information for investigators about the offender. First, a shoe impression can allow the identification of the type of shoe worn by the offender, although this may only be considered class evidence if there is not any defects or wear that might allow for individualization of the specific shoe. Individual wear patterns on a shoe can be caused by the way a person walks or if the shoe is used in an area such as on gravel or hot tar that causes unique defects. If a specific shoe can be identified and linked to a suspect, this can be used to prove that the suspect was at the crime scene. If there is a series of crimes where shoe impressions were found, this can be used to link the cases as being committed by the same offender. Several different shoe impressions at a crime scene can assist in identifying more than one offender responsible for a crime. Depending upon the condition of the soil and when the crime scene is found, it may be possible to use shoe impressions to estimate the size of the offender by measuring the depth of the impression as compared to a known sample