|
|
|
Case Study (This article was originally printed in the Jan. -- Feb. 1997 issue of the Iowa State Medical Examiner NEWS. It is reprinted here from the Iowa Div. I.A.I. newsletter.)
by THOMAS L. BENNETT, M.D. “Where I trained,” the young pathologist explained to the policeman, “when the cause of death was as clear as this, we only did a `partial autopsy'.” “The cops brought these shootings to us, and we did partial autopsies. It was lots faster that way. Besides, all they really wanted was the bullet. An external examination alone was usually sufficient for them. It's clear they died of a gunshot wound to the head.” The policeman turned to the County Medical Examiner, who in turn just chuckled and said, “That's not the way we do things here in Iowa. Let me tell you a story why we don't.” “The last double homicide I had was a man and a woman, found dead in their bedroom. Each clearly had died of a single gunshot wound to the head. Their eighteen year old stepson was alleging that he had been at a party and had got quite drunk that evening. When he came home at about 2:00 a.m., he got into a heated argument with the parents and must have lost control and shot them, but he just didn't remember. We did full autopsies on each, including toxicology, and found the husband to be clean shaven with an empty bladder, and with caffeine found in his liquid stomach contents. His wife, on the other hand, had a full bladder, empty stomach, and no caffeine in her system.” QUESTIONS: 1. Were full autopsies necessary? 2. When did the two die? 3. Although the identity (who) and cause of death (what) were clear, could the other questions (when, where, why, and how) be answered easily without the autopsy?
ANSWERS: 1. Yes, clearly the autopsies were necessary. These were homicides. In any homicide, gather ALL the evidence, facts, etc., that you can. Indeed, it may be advantageous to even obtain extra samples, such as a gunshot residue evidence from the hands (even if not analyzed immediately) or an extra tube of blood (gray top, which may be stored in a refrigerator.) 2. From the autopsies, it was clear that the two were not killed at 2:00 a.m. as the son had alleged, but rather were killed in the morning, after the father had already gotten up to shave, empty his bladder, and have his first cup of coffee; the wife still being in bed when the fatal shots were fired. The son had probably indeed come home at 2:00 a.m., but had spent the next few hours planning the shootings. 3. When all the steps necessary to answer the questions short of an autopsy take more time than the autopsy, why try to shortcut what is the most thorough method of gathering evidence we have, namely the forensic autopsy?
“Why is there never enough time to do it right the first time, but always
enough time to do it over again?”
This article was reprinted in “THE PRINT” |