Case Analysis : Shoe Marks And The Simpson 's House After His Arrest

Decent Essays
5.1 R v T (2010) 5.1. a. Case details In this case, T was tried for the murder. Footwear marks were found at the scene of murder and were recovered by Mr Ryder (expert witness). He compared these footwear marks with the trainers found in the appellant’s house after his arrest. Below shown are the results of the comparison made and the explanation given for each result- 1. The type of sole pattern and configuration (size) of the recovered trainers were same as the marks made at the crime scene. It was revealed that the pattern was one of the most frequently encountered patterns. 2. Wear marks on the trainers recovered was greater than that found from the marks. Explanation for this was given that they can be from additional wear of the trainers in the intervening period and it wasn’t known how often trainers were worn. 3. Marks found on the floor of the crime scene showed particular features which might have resulted from damage to the trainers. As the trainers recovered from the appellant didn’t show any of the above features, following explanations were provided which would not exclude the possibility that the marks had been made by the trainers:- a. The marks resulted from an artefact on the surface of the floor. b. The features could have worn away as the trainers were worn for a certain period of time. c. The marks might have been result of a small stone stuck in the trainers, which have dislodged afterwards. (CCRC, 2010) 5.1. b. Result of evidence comparison
Get Access