Identification: Prints – Footprints

K Krishan, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India

T Kanchan, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University, Mangalore, India
r 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
This article is a revision of the previous edition article by T. Brown, G.N. Rutty, volume 3, pp 13 –18, r 2005, Elsevier Ltd.

Abstract

A footprint is an impressed representation of the morphological features of the weight-bearing areas of the
plantar surface of the foot. Studies have shown that a footprint is unique to a person. Whenever the
plantar surface of the foot comes in contact with surfaces such as a hard or muddy floor, snow, etc., it
leaves an impression with various morphological and individual features. The plantar surface also leaves
footprints on the insoles of footwear. Therefore, footprint evidence recovered from a crime scene can be
important in linking an individual with a crime. This chapter explores various issues related to footprints,
how they are recovered and collected from the scene of crime, their morphological and individual
characteristics, various methods of analysis and examination of footprints, estimation of the biological
profile of an individual from footprints by estimation of stature and sex, relationship of body weight and
footprints, and dermatoglyphic features such as footprint ridge density.

Introduction complete, are inadvertently left by the culprits. Foot

“Forensic podiatry is the application of sound and re-
searched podiatric knowledge and experience in forensic
investigations, to show the association of an individual
with a scene of crime, or to answer any other legal
question concerned with the foot or footwear that re-
quires knowledge of the functioning foot” (Vernon and
McCourt, 1999; DiMaggio and Vernon, 2011). Thus,
forensic podiatry deals with presentation and interpret-
ation of the evidence pertaining to feet, footprints,
footwear, and foot bones in a legal setting. Forensic
podiatry may concern issues related to human identifi-
cation, linking a suspect with a crime scene or resolving
legal issues concerned with the function of the foot.
Forensic podiatry is a relatively new and growing spe-
ciality in the broad field of forensic sciences. One of the
tasks of the forensic podiatrist is to help in establishing
the personal identity of the individuals in crime scene
investigations. The pedal evidence may be in the form of
dynamic and static footprints, foot impressions on the
insoles of footwear, i.e., shoes etc., on a variety of sur-
faces, in substrates such as soils, sand, or snow. Some-
times, partial or complete pedal remains are found
which can be identified by comparing them with the
available antemortem records such as X-rays. At times,
forensic podiatrists may be involved in analyzing
and comparing the gait of unknown individuals based
upon the evidence of series of foot impressions and
CCTV footage.
Footprints are important evidence frequently re-
covered from various crime scenes. It is likely that a
perpetrator will leave footwear impressions in crimes
such as robbery, shoplifting, murder, sexual assaults,
etc.; at times bare footprints, both partial as well as
impressions found at a crime scene can be two-dimen-
sional as well as three-dimensional. On a two-dimen-
sional surface, the bare human foot is known to leave
relatively consistent foot impressions with little effect
due to slippage or distortion. However, problems are
encountered when foot impressions are made in three-
dimensional substrates such as sand or mud. In some
cases, the culprit may leave a trail of footprints which
may point towards movement at the crime scene. Al-
though bare footprints in general are not as common as
the evidence related to footwear at the scene of crime, in
certain cases, such as sexual assaults/rapes and murders,
footprint evidence may be quite common (Reel et al.,
2010; Kanchan et al., 2012). Footprints are likely to be
found less frequently in Western countries with their
temperate climate than in other parts of the world,
particularly in developing countries such as India where
people walk barefoot owing to climatic conditions, and
religious and economic reasons.
History
Examination of footprints and its use in criminal in-
vestigations has a long history. The use of footprints in
tracking criminals dates back to 1888 when a criminal
by the name of LeDru was identified from footprints he
left at the crime scene. For decades, police investigating
agencies in the Indian subcontinent have used a local
trained footprint tracker called a ‘khoji’ (a traditional
detective who studies and tracks footprints recovered at
a crime scene to their destination and locates and in-
terrogates witnesses or anyone who can offer clues to
the identity of the perpetrators) (Kanchan et al., 2012).

Encyclopedia of Forensic and Legal Medicine, Volume 3 doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-800034-2.00209-3 81

82 Identification: Prints – Footprints
The ‘khojis’ used to study the individual characteristics
and unique features which helped them to track the
perpetrators. ‘Khojis’ however, are no longer used in
modern day investigations.
The famous Ruxton murder case of 1935 illustrated
the use of foot casts that assisted in the identification of
the mutilated body parts of Isabella Ruxton and her
maid. In this particular case, Dr. Ruxton had killed and
dismembered his wife and their housemaid. When the
feet of the victims were discovered during the investi-
gations, casts were made from them which were sub-
sequently shown to fit the missing women’s shoes. In
1953, New Scotland Yard reported a case where a thief
had left his shoes at a crime scene. The suspect denied his
presence at the crime scene and also rejected the claim
that the shoes belonged to him. However, he willingly
volunteered an old pair of his boots for comparison with
the shoes found at the crime scene. After analysis, it was
held that the shoes and boots exhibited the same unusual
wear patterns on the outside. When casting material was
poured into the shoes and the boots for comparison of
the insole patterns, the casts were very similar and the
thief was convicted (Kennedy, 2000). Thus, footprints
have been widely used in criminal investigations and
forensic identification throughout the world. There are
many such cases where criminals were convicted on the
basis of footprints recovered as crime scene evidence.
American Society of Forensic Podiatry, and Various
Programs Relating to Footprints
Pedal evidence found at a crime scene is recognized and
accepted in different courts of law. Considering the im-
portance of footprints and other pedal evidence in fo-
rensic investigations, the American Society of Forensic
Podiatry (ASFP) was formed in September 2003. At
present, it is the only organization in the world dedi-
cated to the use of podiatry in forensic sciences. The
main aims of the ASFP were to promote the use of po-
diatry in forensic cases utilizing the analysis and evalu-
ation of evidence related to the human foot, and to
develop and maintain the highest standards of practice
in the discipline (see American Society of Forensic Po-
diatry, http://www.theasfp.org/). The other important
aim of the organization is to develop a worldwide
database of footprints, similar to other biometric char-
acteristics such as fingerprints. In July 2007, the ASFP
members also established a forensic podiatry sub-
committee within the structure of the International As-
sociation of Identification (IAI); the oldest and largest
forensic organization in the world.
Forensic podiatry groups are established at the New
York College of Podiatric Medicine as well as at the
Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine. In these
schools, the DPM (Degree in Podiatric Medicine) stu-
dents learn not only about forensic podiatry but also
about general procedures related to identification and
presentation of pedal evidence and other legal know-
ledge applicable to current cases.
In 1985, Louise M. Robbins published a book on
footprints entitled Footprints – Collection, Analysis
and Interpretation. The book is based upon her experi-
ence as a physical and forensic anthropologist, her
forensic casework related to footprint evidence, and
her footprint research on 514 subjects. The book de-
scribes the collection methods in detail and analyzes
the footprints in both qualitative and quantitative
terms, such as morphological features and various geo-
metric measurements of the foot, footprints, and foot
outlines. The book further elaborates on the estimation
of height and body weight from complete and partial
footprints in both the sexes. The only textbook dedi-
cated to this discipline is Forensic Podiatry – Principles
and Methods by DiMaggio and Vernon (2011). This
textbook clarifies the use of pedal evidence in forensic
examinations.
Morphological and Individual Characteristics of
Footprints
A footprint is considered to be an impression of the
morphological features or shape of the weight-bearing
areas of the plantar surface of the foot. The plantar
surface leaves an impression of its various morpho-
logical features on whichever surface it comes in contact
with, be it a floor or the insole of the shoes (Krishan,
2007; Robbins, 1978). The shape, size, form, and other
features of the footprint are not only unique to an in-
dividual but also can provide valuable clues regarding
the personal identity of the individuals in forensic
examinations. The variations in morphology of the foot
are the product of heredity and environment, and may
be due to the particular alignment of the bones to one
another, and even the way in which they are held by
connective tissues. This alignment of the bones differs
not only among individuals but also between the left and
right feet of the same individual (Robbins, 1985; Ken-
nedy, 1996). This is why two feet cannot make identical
footprints; even identical twins (monozygotic) do not
have identical footprints.
The shape of the footprint may be normal, flatfoot,
semi-flatfoot, curved foot, or one of the variations pos-
sible among the different types. Flatfoot (pes planus) is
defined as the condition in which the foot does not have
a normal arch, and thus, the complete instep region of
the plantar surface of the foot is impressed on the sur-
face (Figure 1). In some individuals a semi-flatfoot
condition can be seen. In a study by Krishan (2007), the
frequency of flatfoot in an adult population from a re-
gion in North India was found to be 1.54%. The
frequency, however, may vary among different popu-
lations. Flatfoot is observed more commonly on the left

Figure 1 A footprint showing that the length of the second toe from
the heel is greater than that of the first toe, varying degrees of
interspaces between the toes, and a typical flatfoot appearance.
than on the right side. The individualistic characteristics
of the footprints are also used in studying the biological
variations in individuals as well as populations and
hence form a part of forensic anthropology casework.
Footprints can be classified into four types based on
the relative morphological lengths of the first, second,
and third toes. These toe lengths are known to vary
among individuals as well as populations (Figure 1). The
four easily distinguishable types include: (a) when
T14T2, (b) when T24T1, (c) when T34T1 and T2,
and (d) when T1¼T2 T3. ¼ Krishan (2007) in his study
on 1040 adult males from north India showed that the
frequency of the (a) type is the highest (62.50% on the
left and 62.21% on the right side), followed by (b) type
(32.88% left and 33.07% right) and (d) type (3.75% left
Identification: Prints – Footprints 83
Humps
Toe stem
Figure 2 A footprint showing a typical toe-line curvature and humps
on the ball line and toe stem; the instep region (arch region) of the
footprint is not impressed.
and 3.85% right). The (c) type was the least frequent
(0.86%) type of footprint.
The toe area forms an important part of footprint
morphology. The shape and size of the toe vary to a
great extent from individual to individual. Long toes,
short toes, round toes, missing toes, partially cut toes,
and damaged toes can sometimes be used to base an
opinion regarding personal identification (Laskowski
and Vernon, 1988). The position of the toe pad, inter-
spaces between the toes, distance of each toe pad from
the ball region/line, and contours of the toe pad (oval,
rounded, long, and short) may also show unique fea-
tures (Figure 2). Similarly, the presence or absence of the
toe stem may also be considered important. A big toe
stem (toe-1 stem) is usually impressed in a footprint;
however, stem impressions of toes 2, 3, and 4 and per-
haps toe 5 are rarely seen in a footprint (Krishan, 2007).
The number and shape of humps in the toe or ball line
(Figure 2) also vary in the footprints of different
84 Identification: Prints – Footprints

Crease marks

Single vertical
crease mark

(a) (b)

Figure 3 (a) A footprint showing numerous crease marks in the ball region. (b) A footprint showing a single vertical big crease mark running
through the ball region.

individuals. A hump may be defined as a protruding

curvature in the ball line. The hump may be straight,
curved, bulging, or irregular. The toe line can have one,
two, or more humps, or no humps.
Another individual characteristic often present in
footprints are crease marks. Crease marks are formed
by the skinfolds in the plantar surface of the foot.
These creases may be long lasting or temporary and
both can help in identification of the individuals.
Crease marks can be in a vertical direction, horizontal,
crossed in some cases, and in different directions in
others. In a population crease marks are found to be
more prevalent in females than males, and in flat feet
compared to normal feet. Not a footprints show
crease marks; whereas some prints have a single big Hallux valgus
crease mark running through the ball region, others (bunion deformity)
may have numerous crease marks in the ball as well as
Figure 4 Feet of the same person showing hallux valgus (bunions).
in the instep region (Figure 3).
Identity may also be based upon deformities (Fig-
ure 4) and other peculiar characteristics of footprints. characteristics of footprints, there can be other tempor-
One such rare characteristic is the presence of horizontal ary peculiarities such as pits, cracks, corns, wounds,
ridges running across the instep region, as demon- etc., which may be helpful in establishing identity in
strated by Krishan (2007). In addition to the above certain cases.

Figure 5 Footwear (bathroom slipper) showing footprints (prints of
the weight-bearing areas of the plantar surface) on its insole.
The individual characteristics of footprints can
also be noted from the insoles of footwear. The im-
pression of the weight-bearing areas of the plantar
surface of the foot, i.e., the impression of the toes
and toe line, impression of the ball region of the foot,
area of the instep region of the foot which is usually
impressed, and the heel region, can cause discoloration
and marks inside footwear (Figure 5). These impressions
may be compared while examining shoes/footwear left
at crime scenes. Thus, footwear can be compared with
the suspect’s footprints for individual characteristics. At
times, any wear and tear of the outer sole of the suspect’s
footwear and known footwear are also examined and
compared/matched. The wear pattern should be con-
sistent in both the footwear if worn by the same person
for some time.
Identification: Prints – Footprints 85
Collection of Footprints at the Crime Scene
Collection of evidence from a crime scene is one of
the essential and important parts of a criminal investi-
gation. The investigator needs to look for pedal evidence
immediately upon entering the crime scene and
take appropriate action to locate and preserve that evi-
dence (DiMaggio, 2008). A systematic search needs to
be performed on walkways, building entryways, and
exterior areas. Pedal evidence such as partial and com-
plete footprints recovered at a crime scene needs to be
transported to the laboratory for further analysis since
these cannot be analyzed and evaluated at the crime
scene. Sometimes prints cannot be seen with the naked
eye and may have to be enhanced using UV light. There
are various methods of collecting footprint evidence
from the scene of crime. The methods depend upon the
circumstances in which the footprints are found. There
are at least three methods for obtaining a permanent
record of footprints recovered from a crime scene:
photographing the original prints, casting the original
prints, and collecting the original prints. The original
footprint may be collected for analysis depending on the
surfaces and substrates on which the footprints are
formed.
Methods of Analyzing Footprints
In the past many authors have tried to devise different
methods for analyzing footprints; the ultimate aim is to
compare the questioned footprint with a print collected
from a known person. In addition, the analysis may also
help to determine the biological profile of an unknown
footprint by estimation of stature and sex. The main
purpose of the investigator is to describe the footprint
being examined in detail. In the first instance, the mor-
phological features of the footprints such as peculiarities
and special features of the toe, ball, arch, and heel region
are noted. The shape, size, orientation, and angulations
of the features are also taken into consideration, which
may help in the identification process.
Norman Gunn Method
Dr. Norman Gunn, a Canadian forensic podiatrist, de-
vised this method of analyzing footprints in the early
1970s and the method is described in DiMaggio and
Vernon (2011). In this method, six lines are drawn – five
from the rearmost part of the heel of the footprints to the
anterior-most part of each of the five toes. The sixth line
is drawn across the widest part of the ball of the foot-
print area (Figure 6(a)). Then the measurement of each
of the lines is taken and recorded. These measurements
can be compared with corresponding measurements of
the questioned footprints. Gunn introduced another
approach (Figure 6(b)) for analysis of partial footprints
86 Identification: Prints – Footprints
(a)
Figure 6 (a) A footprint analysis according to the Norman Gunn method, i.e., five toe length measurements from the heel and one foot breadth
measurement; (b) another use of the Norman Gunn method when partial footprints are available for examination (here any of the points used to
draw the six basic lines can be used as reference points for adding further lines).
to strengthen the evidence provided. According to
DiMaggio and Vernon (2011), any of the points used to
draw the basic six lines in this approach can be used as
reference points for adding further lines.
Robbins’s Diagonal and Parallel Axis Method
The diagonal and parallel axis method of footprint an-
alysis was devised in 1976 by Louise M. Robbins,
a forensic anthropologist from the United States. The
method is explained in her book entitled Footprints:
Collection, Analysis and Interpretation. Robbins de-
scribed both qualitative as well as quantitative methods
of footprint analysis. She described various morpho-
logical features in each part of the footprint such as
the individual characteristics in the toe area and
ball region. She also explained various contours of the
arch and heel region of the footprint that may help in
the identification process. For her quantitative method
she developed a specially designed transparent metric
grid, called the ‘Robbins’ grid,’ for analyzing footprints.
She divided the footprint into 10 sections representing
the morphological features such as the toes, ball, arch,
and heel, as well as shape contours. She defined desig-
nated longitudinal axis (DLA) and the base line (BL)
perpendicular to it for providing alignment for the par-
allel axis and diagonal axis measurements of the foot-
print. For the ‘parallel axis method’ (Figure 7(a)), the
distance from the terminal landmark of each toe to
the BL is measured parallel to the DLA. However, for
(b)
the ‘diagonal method’ (Figure 7(b)), the distance from
the terminal landmark of each toe to the pternion
landmark at the heel (the most posterior point of the
heel) is taken for five footprint length measurements.
Here the Robbins’ grid serves as a ruler by using a metric
scale along the sides of the grid. In cases where a Rob-
bins’ grid is not available, a metric ruler can serve the
purpose of measuring the foot. As shown in Figure 7(b),
the diagonal measurement is taken by positioning the
ruler’s zero point or the metric scale’s zero point on the
side of the grid of the pternion landmark (Robbins,
1985). The length of the ruler or grid is positioned from
the pternion to the terminal landmark of each toe and
the measurements are recorded. Similarly Robbins
(1985) defined various measurements for each part of
the foot, such as length–breadth measurements of the
toes, ball region, instep region as well as heel region.
Some of the important measurements, i.e., footprint
length measurements from the toes to the heel and
footprint breadth measurements at the ball and heel with
different landmarks, are shown in Figure 8.
Barker and Scheuer (1998) revised the Robbins
method of linear measurements. They collected data on
walking and standing footprints from 105 subjects.
Standard construction lines were made on each print
according to a series of predetermined rules (Figure 9).
The construction lines were secondary to a central ‘lin-
ear axis’ that passed through the footprint between the
first and second toes. This method ensures reproduci-
bility in measurements taken from footprints.

DLA
(a) 90
Figure 7 (a) Parallel axis method of footprint analysis as devised by Robbins; (b) diagonal axis method of footprint analysis as devised by
Robbins (this method is similar to the one devised by Norman Gunn; however, Robbins utilized DLA and BL with various defined landmarks for
taking measurements).
The Optical Center Method
The Optical Center method was introduced by Kennedy
in the 1990s while working with the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police. Since 1989 a database of approximately
4000 footprints has been compiled by the Royal Can-
adian Mounted Police to study the uniqueness of bare
foot morphology. Inked two-dimensional impressions
were taken from volunteers and 38 measurements were
entered into a computerized database along with a tra-
cing of each footprint. The optical center of the toes and
heel were introduced as landmarks to obtain a greater
range of barefoot dimensions. In this method, Kennedy
illustrated the use of the optical center of the heel to en-
sure reproducibility for foot measurements. He used a
simple concentric circle template to identify the optical
center of the heel and then took measurements to the
optical center of the toes as well as to points on the
metatarsal ridge, and finally, as with other methods,
peripheral point measurements (Figure 10). A computer
database was used to store and compare the measure-
ments from each barefoot impression. As each new set of
Identification: Prints – Footprints 87
DLA
d1.t
d2.t
d3.t
d4.t
d5.t
90
BL (b) BL
pte
impressions was obtained, the data were entered into the
system and compared with the features of previously
entered impressions. The results obtained from this study
have shown that a significant degree of individuality can
be established for barefoot impressions. To date, there are
no two impressions that share the same characteristics.
Kennedy also found that only three to five input meas-
urements were required to eliminate all other impressions
from the search. To increase the chances of a positive
chance match, a 75 mm error range was arbitrarily given
to each measurement. Even with this variance, all the
other impressions were eliminated using no more than 15
input measurements. Blind searches were also used where
the inked impression may or may not have been present
in the database. In each case, the impression was correctly
identified or eliminated from the database search.
Estimation of Biological Profile from Footprints
It is accepted that a mature foot and its impression are
not only unique to an individual but can also provide
88 Identification: Prints – Footprints
DLA
d1.t
d2.t
d3.t
d4.t
d5.t
mt.m
mt.I
 2
cc.m  Figure 9 Barker and Scheuer method of footprint analysis (linear
ctu.I
90
pte BL
Figure 8 A footprint showing five toe length measurements and
breadths at the ball and heel as taken by Robbins with different
landmarks. Various landmarks: d1.t, d2.t, d3.t, d4.t, and d5.t are the
anteriormost points of each toe for taking foot length measurements.
pte, pternion (mid-rear heel point); mt.m, medial metatarsal point; mt.
l, lateral metatarsal point; cc.m, calcaneal concavity medial; ctu.l,
calcaneal tubercle lateral.
very valuable clues regarding the personal identity in
forensic examinations. In cases where footprints are re-
covered from a crime scene and the investigating officer
has no suspect for the comparison, it is the job of that
officer to obtain clues about the body size of the per-
petrator. In certain cases the footprints may reveal im-
portant information about the biological profile of the
person involved in the crime. In forensic anthropological
terms, the biological profile refers to determination of
age, sex, stature, ethnicity, and body weight. These
parameters help in establishing the identity of the per-
son. Though it is very difficult to associate a foot im-
pression with age and ethnicity of a person, there are
studies that show a correlation of stature, sex, and body
weight with footprints. Thus, the biological profile may
be established from the footprints. Establishing the
biological profile may further narrow down the number
1
4
c 5
5
d
b
axis method). (1) Linear axis: from the apex of the heel through the
arch and ball regions, passing through a point equidistant between
the first and second toes. (2) Heel line: drawn perpendicular to the
linear axis, to pass through a tangent of the heel. (3) A perpendicular
construction line drawn from the heel line through a tangent of the
medial aspect of the heel print. ‘Heel width’ can then be measured
perpendicularly from the intercept to the lateral border of the print (a).
(4) Toe line: drawn perpendicular to the linear axis, to pass through a
tangent to the most distal point of the footprint. Print length is
measured along the linear axis from the heel line to the toe line (b).
‘Big toe length’ is the distance from the ball intersection with the ball
print (c). (5) Perpendicular construction lines are dropped from the
toe line to pass through tangents to the ball print both medially and
laterally. The ‘ball width’ (d) is measured between these
perpendiculars along the toe line.
of suspects in a particular case and will help the investi-
gating officer to focus on a suspect whose profile matches
with the estimated parameters from the footprints.
Estimation of Stature from Footprints
Footprints may be considered as indicators of skeletal
and body structure of a person. Estimation of stature
from footprints is based upon the fact that as with other
parts of the body, the foot size has a definite and positive
relationship with stature of an individual. Using this
paleoanthropologists were able to predict the body
size of an early hominid Australopithecus from a series
of 3.6 million-year-old fossilized footprints preserved in

Figure 10 The optical center method of footprint analysis.
volcanic ash in Laetoli, Tanzania. According to Robbins
(1985), the way in which length and breadth measure-
ments of footprints correlate with the stature of a person
is another kind of individual information that can be
collected. Various studies conducted on the relationship
between stature and footprint length–breadth measure-
ments have found a strong and positive correlation be-
tween the two. Apart from the footprint length
measurements, the correlations between stature and
width at ball and heel were also found to be positive;
however, the correlations between stature and breadth
at the ball are slightly higher than between stature and
heel breadth. This may be clarified by the explanation
provided by Robbins (1986) that the vertical height
must be supported by an adequate base and that the
base must have an adequate width as well as length.
In estimation of stature from footprints, pioneering
work has been conducted by Robbins (1986), Jasuja
and Manjula (1993), Krishan (2008b), Fawzy and
Kamal (2010), Reel et al. (2012), Kanchan et al.
(2012), and Hemy et al. (2013). These researchers
have derived univariate and multivariate regression
Identification: Prints – Footprints 89
models as well as multiplication factors for estimation of
stature from various length and breadth measurements
of the footprints.
Estimation of Sex from Footprints
Morphologically, there are certain differences in the feet
of males and females. However, it is a little difficult to
ascertain sex from footprints recovered from a crime
scene. In the past studies have shown that for a given
stature, on average, the feet of males are longer and
broader than females. Females are also known to have a
smaller instep circumference. Body weight may have an
effect on the overall structure of the foot and this may
prove useful as males, on average, are heavier than
females. All these differences may be reflected in the
footprint and can provide clues to an experienced re-
searcher/examiner as to the sex of the perpetrator.
There are a few studies available on anthropometric
dimensions of feet, where the authors measured the
length and breadth in an attempt to estimate the sex
from foot dimensions (Atamturk, 2010; Krishan et al.,
2011, 2012; Sen et al., 2011). These studies show that
the foot dimensions in males are larger than females and
that the sex determination from these dimensions is
based upon either regression analysis or sectioning point
analysis. All these studies on the estimation of sex were
based on foot dimensions, except for two studies
(Atamturk, 2010; Kanchan et al., 2014) which at-
tempted sex estimation from footprint dimensions.
Atamturk (2010) measured footprints for length,
breadth at ball, and for heel breadth in 506 Turkish
males and females. She concluded that sex can be cor-
rectly assigned in up to 82–96% using multivariate an-
alysis on this sample. Kanchan et al. (2014) devised a
new method of sex determination using a heel–ball
index on footprints of Indian origin. They measured
footprint breadth at ball (BBAL) and footprint breadth
at heel (BHEL), and the heel–ball index of a footprint
was derived as (BHELCBBAL) ×100. They showed
that the heel and ball measurements of the footprints
were larger in males than females. However, the sex
differences in the heel–ball index were statistically
insignificant.
Footprints and Body Weight
For the first time, Robbins (1985, 1986) studied the
relationship between body weight and footprints in 550
American subjects. She found a positive correlation be-
tween the body weight and the length–breadth meas-
urements of the footprints; however, the values of
correlations were not as high as the correlations of
footprint measurements with the stature of a person.
This may be attributed to the fact that in most cases
90 Identification: Prints – Footprints

body weight is much more easily altered than the stat- It has been observed that the fingerprints of females have
ure. Thus, the reliability and accuracy of body weight finer epidermal ridge detail than males (Acree, 1999).
estimation is less than the estimation of stature from the As a result, females have significantly higher ridge
same footprint measurements. As per the Robbins’ density in a defined space of a fingerprint than males.
method, the body weight of a person may be estimated Kanchan et al. (2012a) observed sex-related variations
from a scattergram as well as from regression equations. in the footprint ridge density of south Indian subjects.
Krishan (2008a) modified the method used by Rob- They studied ridge density in footprints following the
bins to estimate body weight from the different meas- method devised by Acree (1999). They defined four
urements of footprints. He studied the effect of areas in footprints (Figure 11), which included the
additional weight on the dimensions of footprints. For medial border of the great toe (F1), the ball of the great
the same reason, he not only studied the footprints of
study participants, but also their footprints when the
participants were holding 5 kg and 20 kg weights. Thus,
three types of footprints based on the original and F1
additional weights were analyzed and compared.
Krishan (2008a) reported a positive and strong correl-
ation between the body weight and length–breadth
measurements of the three types of footprints. The cor-
relation coefficients of breadth at ball with the body
weight were found to be higher and comparable to the
F2
correlations of the body weight with footprint length
measurements. The footprints of persons carrying a
20 kg weight showed even higher correlation values. F3
According to Krishan (2008a), this is due to the fact that
persons of heavier weight tend to have larger breadths
across their ball region. Thus, the body weight of a
person affects the footprint ball breadth to a greater
extent. The findings may be utilized in the examination
and interpretation of cases where perpetrators have
carried heavy items such as filled bags, leaving their
normal footprints along with the weight-bearing foot-
prints at the crime scene.

Dermatoglyphic Features of Footprints and Footprint

Ridge Density

Dermatoglyphics is the study of ridge patterns of the

skin. It is well established that the ridge patterns of the
fingerprints are unique and help in personal identifi-
cation. Fingerprints are often used to make formal
identifications and are still used as evidence in linking a
suspect to a particular crime scene. Despite the value of
fingerprints in forensic investigations, relatively little
work has been carried out into plantar dermatoglyphics.
Footprint identification using dermatoglyphic features of
the plantar surface is regarded as being no less valuable,
where available, than identification by fingerprints. If
plantar friction ridge detail is observed, then a positive
identification can be made in exactly the same way as
fingerprint identification.
The ridge density is defined as the number of ridges in
a defined space of finger, palm, and footprints. This is
another trait of human morphology in which sexual
dimorphism can be demonstrated. Many studies per-
taining to variability of fingerprint ridge density and its
use in the determination of sex have been conducted.
F4
25 mm2 area (not to scale)
Figure 11 Footprint ridge density method for determination of sex;
in order to measure the ridge density or the number of ridges in a
given space, a 5 mm × 5 mm square is drawn on a transparent film
and placed on the footprint in four areas; the count is carried out
diagonally on this square with the help of a magnifying glass
following a method given by Acree (1999). This value represents the
number of ridges in a 25 mm2 area and reflects the ridge density
value. The sex differences in footprint ridge density can be calculated
using various statistical methods. The four areas on the footprint are
defined as follows: F1: medial border of the great toe; F2: the ball of
the great toe; F3: the ball of the 5th toe below the triradius point; F4:
the central prominent part of the heel.

toe (F2), the ball of the 5th toe below the triradius point
(F3), and the central prominent part of the heel (F4). The
mean footprint ridge density was found to be higher in
females than in males in all of the defined areas of
the footprint. They observed a sex differential of 82.6%
from the right and 83.6% from the left footprints
respectively based on total footprint ridge density.
Future of Footprints and Further Research
Research, investigations, and case reports show that
footprints present certain individual characteristics
that can form the basis of identification of a person in
forensic examinations. Footprints recovered from a
crime scene can be used to estimate the stature, sex, and
body weight of unknown suspects, i.e., footprints can
give clues regarding the body size of an individual.
However, this subdiscipline of forensic science is still in
its infancy regarding research and development. Further
research is required regarding the change in impressions
of weight-bearing areas of the plantar surface over a
period of time. There is a lack of studies on the com-
parison of static and dynamic footprints and their effect
on overall dimensions of footprints, and in estimation of
stature from footprints. There is a necessity to improve
new methodologies regarding the manner of walking or
gait pattern of individuals from a series of footprints.
There is also a need to develop and strengthen footprint
databases globally. The United Kingdom and United
States have recognized this and are in the process of
developing such databases to facilitate the use of foot-
prints in forensics.
See also: Anthropology: Overview. Identification: Fingerprints a Key
Identification Parameter − Detection, Identification, and
Interpretation. Identification: Prints − Ear. Pattern Evidence
References
Acree, M.A., 1999. Is there a difference in fingerprint ridge density? Forensic
Science International 102, 35–44.
American Society of Forensic Podiatry, Available at: http://www.theasfp.org/
(accessed 20.05.14).
Atamturk, D., 2010. Estimation of sex from the dimensions of foot, footprints, and
shoe. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 68, 21–29.
Identification: Prints – Footprints 91
Barker, S.L., Scheuer, J.L., 1998. Predictive value of human footprints in a forensic
context. Medicine Science and the Law 38, 341–346.
DiMaggio, J.A., 2008. Forensic Podiatry: Part II. Evidence Technology Magazine 6 (3).
Available at: http://www.evidencemagazine.com/index.
phpoption=com_content&task=view&id=27 (accessed 20.05.14).
DiMaggio, J.A., Vernon, W., 2011. Forensic Podiatry: Principles and Methods.
New York, NY: Humana Press.
Fawzy, I.A., Kamal, N.N., 2010. Stature and body weight estimation from various
footprint measurements among Egyptian population. Journal of Forensic Science
55 (4), 884–888.
Hemy, N., Flavel, A., Ishak, N.I., Franklin, D., 2013. Estimation of stature using
anthropometry of feet and footprints in a Western Australian population. Journal
of Forensic and Legal Medicine 20 (5), 435–441.
Jasuja, O.P., Manjula, 1993. Estimation of stature from footstep length. Forensic
Science International 61, 1–5.
Kanchan, T., Krishan, K., Aparna, K.R., Shyamsunder, S., 2012a. Footprint ridge
density: A new attribute for sexual dimorphism. HOMO − Journal of
Comparative Human Biology 63, 468–480.
Kanchan, T., Krishan, K., Prusty, D., Machado, M., 2014. Heel-ball index: An
analysis of footprint dimensions for determination of sex. Egyptian Journal of
Forensic Sciences 4, 29–33.
Kanchan, T., Krishan, K., ShyamSunder, S., Aparna, K.R., Jaiswal, S., 2012.
Analysis of footprints and its parts for stature estimation in Indian population.
The Foot 22 (3), 175–180.
Kennedy, R.B., 1996. Uniqueness of bare feet and its use as a means of
identification. Forensic Science International 82, 81–87.
Kennedy, R.B., 2000. Bare footprint marks. In: Siegel, J.A., Saukko, P.J., Knupfer, G.
C. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences, vol. 3. London: Academic Press,
pp. 1189–1195.
Krishan, K., 2007. Individualizing characteristics of footprints in Gujjars of North
India. Forensic Science International 169, 137–144.
Krishan, K., 2008a. Establishing correlation of foot prints with body weight: Forensic
aspects. Forensic Science International 179, 63–69.
Krishan, K., 2008b. Estimation of stature from footprint and foot outline dimensions
in Gujjars of North India. Forensic Science International 175, 93–101.
Krishan, K., Kanchan, T., Passi, N., DiMaggio, J., 2012. Heel-ball (HB) index −
Sexual dimorphism of a new index from foot dimensions? Journal of Forensic
Sciences 7, 172–175.
Krishan, K., Kanchan, T., Sharma, A., 2011. Sex determination from hand and foot
dimensions in a North Indian population. Journal of Forensic Sciences 56, 453–459.
Laskowski, G.E., Vernon, K.L., 1988. Barefoot impressions − A preliminary study of
identification characteristics and population frequency of their morphological
features. Journal of Forensic Sciences 33, 378–388.
Reel, S., Rouse, S., Vernon, W., Doherty, P., 2012. Estimation of stature from static
and dynamic footprints. Forensic Science International 219, 283.e1–283.e5.
Reel, S., Rouse, S., Vernon, W., Doherty, P., 2010. Reliability of a two-dimensional
footprint measurement approach. Science and Justice 50, 113–118.
Robbins, L.M., 1978. The individuality of human footprints. Journal of Forensic
Sciences 23, 778–785.
Robbins, L.M., 1985. Footprints: Collection, Analysis and Interpretation. Springfield
IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Robbins, L.M., 1986. Estimating height and weight from size of footprints. Journal
of Forensic Sciences 31, 143–152.
Sen, J., Kanchan, T., Ghosh, S., 2011. Sex estimation from foot dimensions in an
indigenous Indian population. Journal of Forensic Sciences 56, S148–53.
Vernon, D.W., McCourt, F.J., 1999. Forensic podiatry − A review and definition.
British Journal of Podiatry 2, 45–48.