Nirenberg Michael S, Ansert Elizabeth, Krishan Kewal, Kanchan Tanuj
Friendly Foot Care, PC, 50 W. 94th Place, Crown Point, IN 46307, United States.
Barry University School of Podiatric Medicine, Miami, FL, United States.
Sci Justice. 2019 Sep;59(5):552-557. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2019.03.008. Epub 2019 Apr 1.
In forensic intelligence-gathering, footprints have been shown to be valued evidence found at crime scenes. Forensic podiatrists and footprint examiners use a variety of techniques for measuring footprints for comparison of the crime scene evidence with the exemplar footprints. This study examines three different techniques of obtaining two-dimensional linear measurement data of dynamic bare footprints. Dynamic bare footprints were gathered from 50 students from a podiatric medical school using the Identicator® Inkless Shoe Print Model LE 25P system. After obtaining 100 bilateral footprints from the participants, the quantitative measurement data were collected by using three different measurement techniques: (i) a manual technique using a ruler (direct technique); (ii) an Adobe® Photoshop® technique; and (iii) a GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) technique. The seven Reel linear measurement methodology was used for producing measurements using these three techniques. This study showed that all the mean bare footprint measurements on the right and left feet obtained using the direct technique were larger than those obtained using GIMP and Adobe® Photoshop® images. Differences were also observed in measurements produced using GIMP software and Photoshop images. However, the differences observed in the three techniques used for bare footprint measurements were not found to be statistically significant. The study concludes that there are no significant differences between the three measurement techniques when applied to two-dimensional bare footprints using the Reel method. It further concluded that any of these measurement techniques can be used when employing the Reel methodology for footprint analysis without significant difference.
在法医情报收集工作中，足迹已被证明是在犯罪现场发现的重要证据。法医足病医生和足迹鉴定人员使用多种技术来测量足迹，以便将犯罪现场证据与样本足迹进行比对。本研究考察了获取动态赤足足迹二维线性测量数据的三种不同技术。使用Identicator® 无墨鞋印模型LE 25P系统从一所足病医学院的50名学生中收集动态赤足足迹。在从参与者那里获得100个双侧足迹后，通过使用三种不同的测量技术收集定量测量数据：(i) 使用尺子的手动技术（直接技术）；(ii) Adobe® Photoshop® 技术；以及(iii) GIMP（GNU图像处理程序）技术。使用这三种技术进行测量时采用了七卷轴线性测量方法。本研究表明，使用直接技术获得的左右脚平均赤足足迹测量值均大于使用GIMP和Adobe® Photoshop® 图像获得的测量值。在使用GIMP软件和Photoshop图像产生的测量值中也观察到了差异。然而，用于赤足足迹测量的这三种技术中观察到的差异在统计学上并不显著。该研究得出结论，当使用卷轴方法应用于二维赤足足迹时，这三种测量技术之间没有显著差异。进一步得出结论，在采用卷轴方法进行足迹分析时，可以使用这些测量技术中的任何一种，且不会有显著差异。
