Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study

NewsBot · Apr 29, 2016

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Meeting a Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study.
Nirenberg M
J Forensic Sci. 2016 May;61(3):833-841

This article is an introduction to the United States Supreme Court's standard of admissibility of forensic evidence and testimony at trial, known as the Daubert standard, with emphasis on how this standard applies to the field of forensic podiatry. The author, a forensic podiatrist, provided law enforcement with evidence tying a bloody sock-clad footprint found at the scene of a homicide to the suspect. In 2014, the author testified at a pretrial hearing, known as "a Daubert hearing," to address the admissibility of this evidence in court. This was the first instance of forensic podiatry being the primary subject of a Daubert hearing. The hearing resulted in the court ordering this evidence admissible. The expert's testimony contributed to the suspect's conviction. This article serves as a reference for forensic podiatrists and experts in similar fields that involve impression evidence, providing evidentiary standards and their impact on expert evidence and testimony.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Apr 29, 2016

Related Threads:
Forensic podiatry
The Emergence of Forensic Podiatry
The world's oldest human footprints are getting crime scene analysis
Effect of frame rate on the ability to identify characteristics of gait from CTV
Burglar convicted with help of gait analysis by podiatrist
Forensic bacterial DNA profiles of insoles to identfy owners
Forensic Medicine of the Lower Extremity

NewsBot · Nov 3, 2021

Forensic podiatry evidence and admissibility in court
Harendra Nath Singh
International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology

Daubert standard is a set of criteria used to determine whether an expert testimony is admissibility in Court. Under the Daubert
standard, the trial judge serves a role as the “gatekeeper” who determines whether expert testimony is considered reputable and
relevant. Similarly, the judge employs a Dubert test to verify whether the testimony of the expert is based on scientifically valid
reasoning and whether it has been properly applied to the facts of the issue [1][2]. The procedure of scientific examination that
fails to comply with the Daubert standard may result in the rejection of any expert testimony in the court. In the matter of
footwear impression evidence examination, the evidence of footwear impression identification was first accepted in court in 1786
in the Richardson case at Kirkcudbright in Scotland [3]. Footwear impression evidence has been accepted in the US Court since
the 1930s. The techniques and methods used in footwear evidence examination are widely accepted in several forensic science
communities and the ACE-V methods have been described in numerous forensic journals, books, and seminars around the
world. Evidence of footwear impression is regularly accepted in courts in the United States, Canada, and Europe as well as other
many countries in the world but so far several Indian courts have ruled that the footprint and footwear impression evidence is a
“rudimentary science” and they cannot be safely relied upon. [
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Looking for Forensic Podiatry: Principles and Methods, Second Edition

Forensic Podiatry: Panjab University professor's research goes to US

Forensic podiatry pseudoscience?

Podiatry forensic expert at risk of being struck off

The Emergence of Forensic Podiatry

Forensic Podiatry: New Course

Forensic Podiatry Club

Share This Page