02/09/2026    

IN THE COURTS

Court Rules That Forensic Podiatric Evidence Unreliable

 

A Perry woman convicted of murder will get a new trial after Maine’s highest court ruled that key evidence used against her was scientifically unfounded. At trial, the prosecution used testimony from a podiatrist who compared bloody sock-marked footprints found at the crime scene to prints taken from Brackett while she was incarcerated. The podiatrist concluded that the footprints matched Brackett.

 

Brackett’s legal team challenged this evidence, arguing that forensic podiatry—the comparison of bare or sock-covered feet—is not an established or recognized forensic discipline and therefore should not be admissible. The footprint issue stems from the state calling Dr. Michael Nirenberg, a podiatrist in Indiana, to testify. He said there was a “moderate level of support” that Brackett left the footprints at the scene of the murder. Nirenberg compared photographs of bloody footprints to sock-clad footprints of Brackett once she was in police custody.

 

Source: WABI, Digest Wire [2/5/26]