ME report: Discuss it here

[connie9030]

Dura Mater intact... oops, typographical error.

Uh huh, right. Dr. Horn's testimony continues to evolve to meet the circumstances.

Not to mention he continued to say his report was accurate, until the dura mater penetration vs. intact issue arose.

QUOTE]

Although it's never good to have to admit to a typo in a report I can see how this could innocently happen as it has happened to me. Certainly the consequences were not as great as in this case, however. Dr. Horn mentioned that in most of his autopsies the dura mater is intact. What I think he was trying to say was they don't start with a blank document when writing an autopsy. Since most of the language is the same from autopsy to autopsy they probably have a standard template they use and just make changes to it wherever needed. In this case he didn't notice the statement still read "dura mater intact". I don't believe he typed it that way. I think he was using a template and didn't change that sentence. As for answering the question that his report was correct, what would you expect him to say? No it isn't or I don't know? He had no idea the typo was there, but he should have known. Even a small mistake can cost them the case.

In my situation I was trying to get custody of my grandson last year (I won) and my lawyer drew up the Motion. I didn't even notice until AFTER it was filed that my grandson was referred to in the Motion as a girl (she) and was called Sara instead of John! it wasn't typed that way though. My lawyer used a template and neglected to change everything he should have. I made the same mistake myself today. I provided a quote to my customer. I use a template as most of the quotes have the same language. I had forgotten that I gave my last customer a discount and forgot to remove the language and of course this customer is getting the discount too!

 

[gngr~snap]

Imagine an orange with a pencil hole in it. Would you describe the rind as being "intact"?

Yes it should have been explained better but, the gun shot wound to the head is explained.
IMO he means that dura mater showed no signs of * trauma (strangulation ) or natural disease.
*when someone is strangled to death the dura mater will have evidence of hemorrhaging.

imo

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pip]

Dura Mater intact... oops, typographical error.

Uh huh, right. Dr. Horn's testimony continues to evolve to meet the circumstances.

Not to mention he continued to say his report was accurate, until the dura mater penetration vs. intact issue arose.

QUOTE]

Although it's never good to have to admit to a typo in a report I can see how this could innocently happen as it has happened to me. Certainly the consequences were not as great as in this case, however. Dr. Horn mentioned that in most of his autopsies the dura mater is intact. What I think he was trying to say was they don't start with a blank document when writing an autopsy. Since most of the language is the same from autopsy to autopsy they probably have a standard template they use and just make changes to it wherever needed. In this case he didn't notice the statement still read "dura mater intact". I don't believe he typed it that way. I think he was using a template and didn't change that sentence. As for answering the question that his report was correct, what would you expect him to say? No it isn't or I don't know? He had no idea the typo was there, but he should have known. Even a small mistake can cost them the case.

In my situation I was trying to get custody of my grandson last year (I won) and my lawyer drew up the Motion. I didn't even notice until AFTER it was filed that my grandson was referred to in the Motion as a girl (she) and was called Sara instead of John! it wasn't typed that way though. My lawyer used a template and neglected to change everything he should have. I made the same mistake myself today. I provided a quote to my customer. I use a template as most of the quotes have the same language. I had forgotten that I gave my last customer a discount and forgot to remove the language and of course this customer is getting the discount too!

This is just another point of the 'evolution' of his testimony that contradicts himself and the facts. I don't believe it was a typo. INTACT is the word he used. He can call it as he sees fit now, but it is contradictory to the ACCURATE report he stood by until the moment the dura mater became a sticking point issue. The door to the brain was either open or closed. A very significant and important matter to report in his findings. He reported INTACT.

 

[connie9030]

This is just another point of the 'evolution' of his testimony that contradicts himself and the facts. I don't believe it was a typo. INTACT is the word he used. He can call it as he sees fit now, but it is contradictory to the ACCURATE report he stood by until the moment the dura mater became a sticking point issue. The door to the brain was either open or closed. A very significant and important matter to report in his findings. He reported INTACT.

What he said in response to the typo was that in most of his autopsies the dura mater is intact. I guess the only autopsies where the dura mater is not intact are those where the person died from head trauma which is probably in the minority. I think the template he used for the autopsy report already had that standard sentence in there and he overlooked changing it. The report is not created from scratch. Since all his testimony indicated the bullet penetrated the brain it's obviously a typo. Even the defense atty missed it. But again, this is a situation where any mistake will be amplified by whichever side it benefits.

 

[crz4mm2]

What he said in response to the typo was that in most of his autopsies the dura mater is intact. I guess the only autopsies where the dura mater is not intact are those where the person died from head trauma which is probably in the minority. I think the template he used for the autopsy report already had that standard sentence in there and he overlooked changing it. The report is not created from scratch. Since all his testimony indicated the bullet penetrated the brain it's obviously a typo. Even the defense atty missed it. But again, this is a situation where any mistake will be amplified by whichever side it benefits.

This would be quite COMMON in Electronic records. There is a "normal" template and you have to change the abnormal things, or insert what you want. It is easy to miss things......

 

[LinasK]

I just wanna know, bottom line, is the mistake a big deal, or not?

I truly hope NOT.

NOT- it was a clerical error and he explained that. Anybody with a basic knowledge of brain anatomy understands that with a gunshot wound the outer membrane layer (Dura Mater) would have to be perforated. The defense (JW) was just trying to make hay out of something that is no big deal, no gotcha moment.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Just my comments, based on a BA in psychology, a MS in neuroscience, my experience as a college intern in rehabilitation psychology (rehabilitation from brain injuries), and my attendance at over a dozen neuro-autopsies:

How on earth did Dr Horne keep his cool answering J Willmott's questions?! Oh my gosh! And don't say, "Oh, Jane, it is his job to do that." Haha

Oh and regarding Dr Geffner's testimony (since parts of it are related): I have never ever ever, in 12 years of psychology, anatomy/physiology, and neuroscience experience, education, and teaching, EVER heard anyone talk about the "dura MAYter." Never. (Perhaps it is something you learn as a diplomate! -j/k) It is the freaking dura mahter.


...not that anyone asked but I was listening to it today while I work.

 

[gcharlie]

Its all water under the bridge now, as new testimony will not be allowed in the retrial of the penalty phase. Like others, I am disappointed in the overall lack of detail in the autopsy report. Horn's explanation of the error with respect to the dura mater is credible; in some of my medical records, I have similar types of errors where the physician failed to override common findings that are automatically included in the report.

Because of the controversy that this has stirred up, I believe that more than one forensic pathologist will review all of the autopsy records to better explain whether or not the bullet passed through Travis's brain. Xrays will be an important part of reconstructing the bullet's path. This may happen once the trial has ended and evidence records become available to the public.

In the long run, it doesn't matter to me whether he was shot first, second or last. The amount of injuries she inflicted on him was significant and IMO, showed intent to inflict pain and death.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Its all water under the bridge now, as new testimony will not be allowed in the retrial of the penalty phase. Like others, I am disappointed in the overall lack of detail in the autopsy report. Horn's explanation of the error with respect to the dura mater is credible; in some of my medical records, I have similar types of errors where the physician failed to override common findings that are automatically included in the report.

Because of the controversy that this has stirred up, I believe that more than one forensic pathologist will review all of the autopsy records to better explain whether or not the bullet passed through Travis's brain. Xrays will be an important part of reconstructing the bullet's path. This may happen once the trial has ended and evidence records become available to the public.

In the long run, it doesn't matter to me whether he was shot first, second or last. The amount of injuries she inflicted on him was significant and IMO, showed intent to inflict pain and death.

Yah that's absolutely what I thought...either 1) it was the type of error that you describe, almost like if you (person making the report) is entering into a template - as you said common findings. Or 2) I have seen, not in cases with projectiles like this but in a specific instance where the deceased was found a bit post-mortem, the notation of "intact" to indicate that various "parts" are available for examination rather than decomposed beyond the point of being able to examine or somehow damaged in the process of removing from the skull (what Geffner refers to as "cutting them open"). But again this was not a projectile but a stroke so not sure that it is at all comparable.

As you said, water under the bridge. It just put me back in mind of my rotation/internship days, and as I said I was surprised at Dr Geffner's testimony about the brain injuries & their effects/lack thereof. He does allude to how the brain is like a huge network of connections between different regions, but really the way he was talking about how modular it was seemed to contradict it (as well as my understanding). I really didn't know what to think about that. I also was taken aback when he was looking at the midsaggital section (diagram) of the brain and made a comment to the effect of he was having trouble orienting himself. Just in my opinion/experience that is just something you know like the back of your hand...just odd. *shrug*

 

[geevee]

I thought Dr. Horn dictated/wrote the report in two sections, one to describe each individual wound and then each area/organ (ie dura mater intact, smooth, etc. when describing it as a whole, then where the wound was it was perforated by the bullet). I thought that was how the whole report was laid out, and was somewhat surprised when he agreed there was a typo. I guess after being heckled by JW for so long he just gave up trying to make sense of it to her, I know I would have long before he did.

 

[ElleElle]

I personally believe the gun shot came first, until Dr. Horn testified.

It is more plausible that she tried to shoot first (with grandparent's gun). When that failed, she went for the knife. Travis was a fighter and was putting up a good fight.

It just doesn't makes sense for Jodi to slaughter him, then shoot just "to finish him off".

Jodi wanted a clean hit per se. Her intention was to shoot and run and leave the camera as evidence of his behaviour in the Mormon community. Boy, did her plan go wrong!

All moo.

 

[ElleElle]

Every time I read the ME report, I cannot imagine the fight he put up.

Justice for Travis!

 

[janx]

Don't know how I missed this topic before. It was the single most convincing aspect of the case, imo, along with DNA evidence, palm print, etc..

As they say, "Show me the science" ! :seeya:

 

[wasnt_me]

I personally believe the gun shot came first, until Dr. Horn testified.

It is more plausible that she tried to shoot first (with grandparent's gun). When that failed, she went for the knife. Travis was a fighter and was putting up a good fight.

It just doesn't makes sense for Jodi to slaughter him, then shoot just "to finish him off".

Jodi wanted a clean hit per se. Her intention was to shoot and run and leave the camera as evidence of his behaviour in the Mormon community. Boy, did her plan go wrong!

All moo.

I, too, took for granted because of size and gender, she'd shot him first and then wound up having to stab him. But once I started

1. studying the crime scene
2. listening to the ME
3. being unable to surmount the unlikelihood of the gun jamming on a second shot
4. syncing my belief about being shot in the head to the fact that Travis made it about 15 feet before having his throat slit
5. the gun shell being on top of blood and nowhere near the shower
6. the one blood drop on the short wall that faces the closet (that I think would come from castoff, not high velocity gunshot spatter)
7. the gun shot being on his right, which puts that one castoff drop in the wrong spot (because if the gun jammed and she had to get the knife, he'd probably be out of the shower by the time she returned)
8. The castoff spatter being high up on the wall, making her trajectory highly unlikely because Travis would have to be standing to get that drop that high
9. the idea that she would have had to have the knife nearby instead of having to go get it (based on time between photos and Travis' purported ability to move. I'd think most of the fight would have been in the hall if she had to go find a knife)

There's probably more, but the onslaught of it all made me decide that it had to be knife first.

 

[LambChop]

I, too, took for granted because of size and gender, she'd shot him first and then wound up having to stab him. But once I started

1. studying the crime scene
2. listening to the ME
3. being unable to surmount the unlikelihood of the gun jamming on a second shot
4. syncing my belief about being shot in the head to the fact that Travis made it about 15 feet before having his throat slit
5. the gun shell being on top of blood and nowhere near the shower
   [B][*]the one blood drop on the short wall that faces the closet (that I think would come from castoff, not high velocity gunshot spatter)
   [*]the gun shot being on his right, which puts that one castoff drop in the wrong spot (because if the gun jammed and she had to get the knife, he'd probably be out of the shower by the time she returned)
   [*]The castoff spatter being high up on the wall, making her trajectory highly unlikely because Travis would have to be standing to get that drop that high[/B]
6. the idea that she would have had to have the knife nearby instead of having to go get it (based on time between photos and Travis' purported ability to move. I'd think most of the fight would have been in the hall if she had to go find a knife)

There's probably more, but the onslaught of it all made me decide that it had to be knife first.

BBM: Good catch.

 

[ElleElle]

I, too, took for granted because of size and gender, she'd shot him first and then wound up having to stab him. But once I started

1. studying the crime scene
2. listening to the ME
3. being unable to surmount the unlikelihood of the gun jamming on a second shot
4. syncing my belief about being shot in the head to the fact that Travis made it about 15 feet before having his throat slit
5. the gun shell being on top of blood and nowhere near the shower
6. the one blood drop on the short wall that faces the closet (that I think would come from castoff, not high velocity gunshot spatter)
7. the gun shot being on his right, which puts that one castoff drop in the wrong spot (because if the gun jammed and she had to get the knife, he'd probably be out of the shower by the time she returned)
8. The castoff spatter being high up on the wall, making her trajectory highly unlikely because Travis would have to be standing to get that drop that high
9. the idea that she would have had to have the knife nearby instead of having to go get it (based on time between photos and Travis' purported ability to move. I'd think most of the fight would have been in the hall if she had to go find a knife)

There's probably more, but the onslaught of it all made me decide that it had to be knife first.

:seeya: Great theory!

Also, this photo is very compelling. It tells me he was standing over the sink after he has been stabbed in the heart/chest.

I believe the sink is to the left of the shower.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, he takes a left to get to the sink from the shower. The huge splatter on that door frame puzzles me, though. I think the splatter expert testified that the fatter the splatter, the closer the impact would be to the wall. So if I recalled that correctly, then I wonder if he was on the floor at some point before climbing up onto the sink.

 

[ElleElle]

Yes, he takes a left to get to the sink from the shower. The huge splatter on that door frame puzzles me, though. I think the splatter expert testified that the fatter the splatter, the closer the impact would be to the wall. So if I recalled that correctly, then I wonder if he was on the floor at some point before climbing up onto the sink.

Yes, I believe after the stab in the shower, he fell to his knees and tried to get up holding onto the sink. Then I believe she started to stab poor Travis in the back.

 

[geevee]

Yes, he takes a left to get to the sink from the shower. The huge splatter on that door frame puzzles me, though. I think the splatter expert testified that the fatter the splatter, the closer the impact would be to the wall. So if I recalled that correctly, then I wonder if he was on the floor at some point before climbing up onto the sink.

There is also spatter on the wall under the towels (attached) and a pool on the floor, he had to have been on the floor when the blood got in those areas, and likely already had deep wounds on his front.

 

[wasnt_me]

There is also spatter on the wall under the towels (attached) and a pool on the floor, he had to have been on the floor when the blood got in those areas, and likely already had deep wounds on his front.

What is that chunk of wall missing? Looks like it's on the floor right in front of the wall. Did she stab into the wall or was it something else?

Now I'm recalling blood splatter reaching the bottom of the toilet, according to the expert. Those were smaller droplets, indicating that they'd traveled further.