"BY THE TIME ROBBINS DIED IN 1987, APPEALS COURTS HAD OVERTURNED MANY OF THE CASES IN WHICH SHE HAD TESTIFIED. AND THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FORENSIC SCIENCES, IN A RARE REBUKE OF ONE OF ITS MEMBERS, CONCLUDED HER COURTROOM WORK WAS NOT GROUNDED IN SCIENCE.
BUT IN A LABORATORY AT THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE IN OTTAWA, THE EFFORT TO DETERMINE IDENTITY FROM FEET AND SHOES IS GETTING NEW LIFE.
SGT. ROBERT KENNEDY, A VETERAN FINGERPRINT ANALYST, SAYS HE CAN TELL WHO WORE A SHOE BY COMPARING IMPRESSIONS LEFT ON AN INSOLE WITH A PERSON'S FOOT.
KENNEDY CALLS IT "BAREFOOT MORPHOLOGY." LIKE ROBBINS, HIS WORK HAS HELPED PROSECUTORS OBTAIN CONVICTIONS;"
STAFF REPORTERS: FLYNN REPORTERS FLYNN MCROBERTS, STEVE MILLS, AND MAURICE POSSLEY;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago Tribune staff reporters Flynn McRoberts, Steve Mills and Maurice Possley reported in a section of a massive story headed "Unproven Techniques sway courts, erode justice" that RCMP Sergeant Robert Kennedy had tried to place footprint identification on a scientific basis;
"Distinguishing the forensic fringe from the cutting edge can be difficult enough; keeping a debunked science from re-entering the courts can be even tougher," the October 17. 2004, portion of the article began.
"North Carolina anthropologist Louise Robbins helped send more than a dozen defendants across the country to prison or to Death Row with her self-proclaimed power to identify criminals through shoe prints," the article continued;
"On occasion she even said she could use the method to determine a person's height, sex and race.
By the time Robbins died in 1987, appeals courts had overturned many of the cases in which she had testified. And the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, in a rare rebuke of one of its members, concluded her courtroom work was not grounded in science.
But in a laboratory at the headquarters of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Ottawa, the effort to determine identity from feet and shoes is getting new life.
Sgt. Robert Kennedy, a veteran fingerprint analyst, says he can tell who wore a shoe by comparing impressions left on an insole with a person's foot.
Kennedy calls it "barefoot morphology." Like Robbins, his work has helped prosecutors obtain convictions.
"I know there've been questions about this. Louise Robbins was a real problem," Kennedy said in an interview in his office. But "you don't want to just let an area of forensic science go by the wayside. It's good evidence."
Unlike Robbins, Kennedy has tried to base his work in science. Since the early 1990s, he has been visiting army bases and other sites to build a database of footprints that now exceeds 10,000 sets.
In the 1998 trial of Jeffrey Jones in South Carolina, Kennedy's work proved crucial to sending Jones to Death Row.
Police investigating a double murder believed a boot that had left a bloody impression in the victims' kitchen belonged to the killer. They matched the impression to a boot found in a house that Jones shared with another man, James Brown, who admitted his role in the killings. In exchange for a life sentence, Brown testified against Jones.
No physical evidence linked Jones to the crime, and he denied involvement. Though the boots were size 9 1/2 and Jones wore between an 11 and 11 1/2, prosecutors said he was wearing them when the murders were committed.
At the trial, South Carolina crime lab analyst Steven Derrick, who had never before testified to such a comparison, said he examined the boot insole and an impression from one of Jones' feet.
Derrick concluded that the only way someone else's foot could have made the impression on the boot insole would be if the person had precisely the same foot characteristics--such as the shape and the distance between toes.
Derrick also testified that he had not made a comparison with the feet of Brown, who claimed the size 9 1/2 boots were too big for him.
Kennedy vouched for Derrick's work as well as the field of barefoot morphology, testifying that he talked Derrick through the comparison process.
In 2001, the South Carolina Supreme Court reined in such evidence, ruling there was insufficient science to support it. The court ordered the state to either try Jones again or set him free.
Even with the ruling, prosecutor Dayton Riddle said he would use the insole evidence again when he takes Jones back to trial.
"That's good science, despite the fact it got reversed," Riddle said. "I think what happened there is that I was a little bit ahead of the curve.""
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
