CANADA Canada - Sonia Varaschin, 42, Orangeville, 29 Aug 2010 - #1

pinkeyesucks said:

I wonder if the drivers seat was still adjusted to the person's height, or if he remembered to put the seat back up to where Sonia would normally have it.

Click to expand...

Great observation.

What about an approximate height range of the perp, based on shoe size?

Wondergirl said:

Great observation.

What about an approximate height range of the perp, based on shoe size?

Click to expand...

I don't think think would be an accurate.


For ex. My Son in Law is 6 ft 2 in and size 9 1/2

He is also 60 lbs heavier than me.

I am 5 ft 10 in and size 10 shoe

Valleyboy said:

I don't think think would be an accurate.


For ex. My Son in Law is 6 ft 2 in and size 9 1/2

He is also 60 lbs heavier than me.

I am 5 ft 10 in and size 10 shoe

Click to expand...

I also agree that it wouldn't be accurate to judge a persons height on shoe size.

Valleyboy said:

I don't think think would be an accurate.


For ex. My Son in Law is 6 ft 2 in and size 9 1/2

He is also 60 lbs heavier than me.

I am 5 ft 10 in and size 10 shoe

Click to expand...

nettie_82 said:

I also agree that it wouldn't be accurate to judge a persons height on shoe size.

Click to expand...

Anecdotally, I would agree with you both.

Scientifically, though, I think that there are formulas that are used, and general correlations that can be made between foot size (length and width), and height.

Here is one example, from Forensic Science International, where they did a study on the issue.

Stature and sex estimate using foot and shoe dimensions:

The aim of the study was to develop a formula to estimate the stature and sex of an individual using foot and shoe dimensions. To this aim the stature, right and left shoe sizes, and maximum and minimum feet length and width measurements of a target group of 569 individuals were taken.

The group was composed of 294 males and 275 females. The highest correlation coefficient was found in length measurements.

A notable difference between males and females existed with regard to both right and left foot and shoe length and width averages and shoe sizes (p <0.001).

Among the group, a significant correlation was found in regard to stature and right shoe length (r=0.591, p<0.001), with the correlation between stature and right foot length and stature and right shoe length being 0.579 (p<0.001); as for the female group, there was a significant correlation between stature and right foot length and stature and right shoe length (r=0.460, p<0.001).

In application of the formula, if sex is lower than 0.50, the shoe belongs to a male, if higher, then to female. The formula which was obtained in regression analysis in order to estimate the stature when the measurements of shoe and foot were known.

It was understood that foot and shoe sizes are a criteria to estimate the stature of a person that there was a strong relationship between foot and shoe length and width and that these can be used to aid estimation.

It was found that in sex estimate, foot and shoe lengths are better in helping the estimate than width measurements, and that the use of shoe measurements rather than bare foot measurements are better to obtain meaningful results.

http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(04)00576-6/abstract

Not to forget good ol' Wikipedia, lol:

Footprints can also allow the detective to find the approximate height by the size of the foot[4], footprint and shoeprint. The Foot tends to be approximately 15% of the person's height[5][6]. Individualistic characteristics of the footprints like numerous creases, flatfoot character, horizontal and vertical ridges, corns, deformities etc. can help the forensic scientist in cases pertaining to criminal identification[7]. In some forensic cases, the need may also arise to estimate body weight from the size of the footprints[8].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footprint

Wondergirl said:

Not to forget good ol' Wikipedia, lol:

Footprints can also allow the detective to find the approximate height by the size of the foot[4], footprint and shoeprint. The Foot tends to be approximately 15% of the person's height[5][6]. Individualistic characteristics of the footprints like numerous creases, flatfoot character, horizontal and vertical ridges, corns, deformities etc. can help the forensic scientist in cases pertaining to criminal identification[7]. In some forensic cases, the need may also arise to estimate body weight from the size of the footprints[8].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footprint

Click to expand...

Guess how this kind of information was gathered? Back many years ago, Canadian LE were collecting data. They went to fairs and exhibitions, where ordinary folks stood on a flat surface and walked on a treadmill, while a computer gathered data. Participants' weight and height were noted. Tread patterns on shoes were recorded. There's a wide cross-section of people at fairs and exhibitions.

Lots of good info at this link:


Types of footwear evidence

Footwear evidence can come in at least three forms, footwear outsole impressions, footwear insole impressions and footwear trace evidence.

Footwear outsole impressions

Footwear outsole impressions are impressions left on an object that was caused by contact with a piece of footwear. These can left on the ground or raised surface by persons treading over it, left on doors or walls by persons attempting to kick or climb over a wall or even left on other persons after being kicked or stomped on.

There can also be latent impressions not easily visible to the naked eye, on many different surfaces such as floor tiles, concrete or even carpet. Detection may require the use of additional specialized light sources such as portable ultraviolet lighting. Recovery typically includes photography as well as lifting with "gel" or "electrostatic" dust lifters.

Footwear insole imprints

Footwear insole imprints are imprints left in the inside of footwear caused by contact from the person&#8217;s foot. Analysis of the insole imprints can be used to link a person(s) to a piece of footwear.

Footwear trace evidence

Footwear trace evidence is trace evidence that is recovered from footwear. Types of trace evidence that could be recovered include skin, glass fragments, body hair, fibres from clothing or carpets, soil particles, dust and bodily fluids. The study of this trace evidence could be used to link a piece of footwear to a location or owner. dna can be one of the contributing factors in forensic footwear evidence.

Detection of footwear evidence



Shoeprints left on a dusty surface.



Footwear impressions can be detected with a variety of methods including:

• Using artificial light sources to provide oblique,coaxial, and polarized light for detection of visible and latent impressions.
• Using electrostatic lifting devices to lift dusty impressions.
• Using physical or chemical enhancement methods to develop or enhance faint impressions.

Recovery of footwear impression evidence

Footwear evidence occurs most often as either footwear impressions left in a soft surface, such as mud or as dust deposits, which are difficult for the human eye to detect. At violent crimescenes footmarks can be left as a result of a person standing in blood and subsequently trailing it as they move around the scene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_footwear_evidence

Wondergirl said:

In some forensic cases, the need may also arise to estimate body weight from the size of the footprints.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footprint

Click to expand...

Well that is certainly interesting!!! I wore the same shoe size when I was a fat young adult....as I did during the next 20 years when I was 50 or so lbs thinner and at a healthy weight...and that I still do now that I am big and fat again.

Mommy2Sarah said:

Well that is certainly interesting!!! I wore the same shoe size when I was a fat young adult....as I did during the next 20 years when I was 50 or so lbs thinner and at a healthy weight...and that I still do now that I am big and fat again.

Click to expand...

LOL

Thanks for the laugh. That's what you get for quoting Wikipedia, hahaha. In all seriousness though, I think they are referring to scientific things like depth of the print etc. (that I won't even begin to discuss, way above my head!), to determine weight etc. I think it gets quite technical, but, maybe it is all just rubbish....dunno.

I was throwing it out there for discussion, in case there were some forensic sleuthers who knew the answer to the questions on the science of it all.

Take your height and multiply it by .15 (using the 15% "rule" above), you should get your foot size (apx.), according to the theory above.

I'm pretty sure they can somewhat guesstimate weight by how a shoeprint is left. My hubby is fluffy, and his shoes wear differently than our sons, who wear the same size but aren't, well, fluffy. I can always tell whose shoes are whose by the wear even if they buy the same shoe-which they often do.

Not scientific or anything, just a t93 household factoid.

Approximate height and wearer:

Measurements of footwear impression dimensions can be used to provide the approximate height of a suspect. With shoeprint size information, investigators can refer to statistical data to approximate the height of the person since shoeprint vs. height relationship follows a normal distribution. Height can also be approximate by stride length which could be measured from a set of footwear impressions.

Activity of wearer when imprint was made:

Analysis of a plastic footwear impression can also be used help determine the activity of the wearing when the imprint was made. The footwear imprint left by person is different when they are walking, running or carry heavy loads. A footwear impression left by running person will typically deeper in the heel and toe sections of the shoeprint. A person carrying a heavy load such as a body will cause deeper prints than a person not carrying anything.


Establish link between footwear impression and specific piece of footwear:

A specific piece of footwear can be linked to a specific footwear impression with careful analysis. Every piece of footwear will show different amounts of tread wear, different amounts of damage in the form of tiny cuts and nicks. These unique characteristics will also show on the impression left by the footwear

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_footwear_evidence

Wondergirl said:

Approximate height and wearer:

Measurements of footwear impression dimensions can be used to provide the approximate height of a suspect. With shoeprint size information, investigators can refer to statistical data to approximate the height of the person since shoeprint vs. height relationship follows a normal distribution. Height can also be approximate by stride length which could be measured from a set of footwear impressions.

Activity of wearer when imprint was made:

Analysis of a plastic footwear impression can also be used help determine the activity of the wearing when the imprint was made. The footwear imprint left by person is different when they are walking, running or carry heavy loads. A footwear impression left by running person will typically deeper in the heel and toe sections of the shoeprint. A person carrying a heavy load such as a body will cause deeper prints than a person not carrying anything.


Establish link between footwear impression and specific piece of footwear:

A specific piece of footwear can be linked to a specific footwear impression with careful analysis. Every piece of footwear will show different amounts of tread wear, different amounts of damage in the form of tiny cuts and nicks. These unique characteristics will also show on the impression left by the footwear

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_footwear_evidence

Click to expand...

The treadmill I mentioned was for gait analysis (and stride length), I believe. Certain people have distinctive gait patterns. That, too, would be indicated in tread wear.

People carrying a load would leave a different footprint after they put the load in the trunk of the car, for example.

I do believe this science is still developing. I wonder if these techniques were used in another case that comes to mind. :cat:

PeonyLover said:

I note that you mentioned that you are a resident of Orangeville...do you know if there are Red Light Cameras at the intersections of Broadway&10 or 10 & 9 where the person would in all likelihood have driven in order to get to the site where the remains were found?

Click to expand...

If the animal who did this knows Orangeville and the area as police suspect. There are are two main routes to get to that location and one route that is all back roads. 1. Bypass to hwy 10 probably the quickest route from her home.
2. Broadway to Hwy 10 closest to town hall. 3. Townline/Winston Churchill to Beech Grove Sd Rd. Out of the way but all dark country rds. I would hope if there are camera's at any of the main intersections (! & 2) police would have them and be scanning them.

I just got the new Marks Work Warehouse flyer in the mail, Dakota boots are on sale!

Wondergirl said:

Take your height and multiply it by .15 (using the 15% "rule" above), you should get your foot size (apx.), according to the theory above.

Click to expand...

I guess I just have small feet, because no matter how I do this I end up with an answer that is 2 sizes off. I like being "exceptional"!

just by a few things said on one of the facebook pages, I am sure Sonia knew her killer quite well, this I dont think has anything to do with a stranger or even a stalking admirer or maintenance man sexual deviant........I really do think this was a man quite significant in her life, be it boyfriend,, ex, lover, neighbour or maybe even a good friend or friendly colleague

revampz said:

just by a few things said on one of the facebook pages, I am sure Sonia knew her killer quite well, this I dont think has anything to do with a stranger or even a stalking admirer or maintenance man sexual deviant........I really do think this was a man quite significant in her life, be it boyfriend,, ex, lover, neighbour or maybe even a good friend or friendly colleague

Click to expand...

Just curious, what is being said and by whom?

Valleyboy said:

I don't think think would be an accurate.


For ex. My Son in Law is 6 ft 2 in and size 9 1/2

He is also 60 lbs heavier than me.

I am 5 ft 10 in and size 10 shoe

Click to expand...

I would have to concur that it would only be an estimate of actual height if directly comparing shoe size to height. My ex husband was a whopping 5 ft 5 in, and wore a 10, and my current husband is 6 ft and wears the same.

And in thinking about it, realistically, the average male height in Canada is 5 foot 9 1/2 inches. So in asking for an estimate of height based on shoe size what margin for error would be tolerable? Would it be 2 inches on either side of that? Or more? Perhaps less? I guess it is kind of a pointless argument in this case, since we already assume we are looking for an average sized man with average sized feet. I keep getting caught up in the silly details and missing the main point. Most people full grown men come within a few inches either side of 5ft 9inches. It would be more helpful perhaps to have an estimate of weight to go along with it all. That would be more telling, don't you think?