Dr G Medical Examiner

[sleutherontheside]

FWIW Discovery Health has a Dr. G. marathon today. For anyone that has not had a chance to see her in action. The show really captures her attention to detail and professionalism...as well as her respect for those on her table and their families.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Honestly, the case against Casey is weak. Most of the scientific evidence, came from the car, which had a very distorted chain of custody. They have a hard time proving beyond a reasonable doubt that there even was a death, let alone one caused by Casey. I still see Casey walking after trial with maybe probation. Maybe.

I would of agreed before the remains were found that it was going to be hard to convict Casey. However, now that the remains were found the key will be three things. The car, The remains, and Casey's finger prints on that duct tape (if they found any, which IMO they did). Add that to her not ever reporting her child missing, Cindy did 31 days later and the circumstantial evidence and there is the case in a nut shell....JMO

 

[ablins]

I have looked for a thread and could not find one that satisfied my curiosity on the subject of the State Medical Examiner's Determination of Murder. Feel free to move or merge if you know where another thread is. Anyway, how can the State ME determine a death was murder without a Cause of Death? Could other evidence from the scene have been taken into consideration or would that be allowed ? Just wondering if we could list ways that they could rule something Homicide without COD? I truly hope the defense cannot benefit from the ruling? I know there was a gatorade bottle with a syringe taken in at the dump scene, but was that it?:waitasec:

 

[rosiegirl04]

I have looked for a thread and could not find one that satisfied my curiosity on the subject of the State Medical Examiner's Determination of Murder. Feel free to move or merge if you know where another thread is. Anyway, how can the State ME determine a death was murder without a Cause of Death? Could other evidence from the scene have been taken into consideration or would that be allowed ? Just wondering if we could list ways that they could rule something Homicide without COD? I truly hope the defense cannot benefit from the ruling? I know there was a gatorade bottle with a syringe taken in at the dump scene, but was that it?:waitasec:

we cant forget the duct tape, heart shaped sticker, and the triple bagging. that alone for me would mean homicide.

 

[SoSueMe]

Duct tape. You wouldn't end up with duct tape around your head or mouth if it were accidental. You also probably wouldn't end up in the woods.

 

[KenoshaKid]

we cant forget the duct tape, heart shaped sticker, and the triple bagging. that alone for me would mean homicide.

And decomp in the trunk.

 

[Valhall]

The medical examiner can take into account ALL information available at the time of the autopsy in ruling "cause of death". In other words, that ruling is based on more than physical evidence. "Manner of death" is based on physical evidence obtained during the autopsy. So Dr. G ruled homicide based on the evidence (whether BC wants to call it that yet or not) obtained to date, most likely including the 31 days KC did not report Caylee missing, the fact Caylee was hidden in a trash bag and left in a swamp, and even the lifestyle her mother was leading while she didn't report her missing. In short form, "cause of death" is more subjective than "manner of death".

 

[nephers]

I have looked for a thread and could not find one that satisfied my curiosity on the subject of the State Medical Examiner's Determination of Murder. Feel free to move or merge if you know where another thread is. Anyway, how can the State ME determine a death was murder without a Cause of Death? Could other evidence from the scene have been taken into consideration or would that be allowed ? Just wondering if we could list ways that they could rule something Homicide without COD? I truly hope the defense cannot benefit from the ruling? I know there was a gatorade bottle with a syringe taken in at the dump scene, but was that it?:waitasec:

I think they can rule it homicide because:

1. skeletal remains were found... this rules out natural cause of death b/c there wasn't an immediate 911 call saying "my daughter was right here, I turned for a minute and now she's gone". Meaning the child didn't just wonder off and say, get lost in the woods and starve to death.

2. Duct tape on the skull...I don't have kids but I think it's pretty safe to say a two year old wouldn't put duct tape over her mouth, put a sticker over it, and then wonder off into the woods.

I think those two reasons would be strong enough to support a homicide ruling.

 

[Devon]

The M.E. determined that the manner of death was homicide. She didn't specify murder. I posted about this term at the end of this thread:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78216&page=2

 

[Patty G]

The medical examiner determined the cause of death is that of a "homicide". Homicide is the killing of one human being by another human being.

Murder is the act of killing another human being with malice, traditionally called "malice aforethought." Malice is defined as the intent to kill or to inflict bodily injury, either express or implied. If a deadly weapon is used, intent to kill will necessarily be implied by a court of law. The presumption is that if the assailant brought a deadly weapon with him/her there was an intent to use the weapon. If the assailant picked up a weapon at the scene of the crime in an act of defense or in a provoked fit of rage, there might not be malice.

http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/violent_crimes/murder.htm

 

[Chezhire]

The medical examiner determined the cause of death is that of a "homicide". Homicide is the killing of one human being by another human being.

Murder is the act of killing another human being with malice, traditionally called "malice aforethought." Malice is defined as the intent to kill or to inflict bodily injury, either express or implied. If a deadly weapon is used, intent to kill will necessarily be implied by a court of law. The presumption is that if the assailant brought a deadly weapon with him/her there was an intent to use the weapon. If the assailant picked up a weapon at the scene of the crime in an act of defense or in a provoked fit of rage, there might not be malice.

http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/violent_crimes/murder.htm

You're correct, as usual Patty G.

 

[Searchfortruth]

The M.E. determined that the manner of death was homicide. She didn't specify murder. I posted about this term at the end of this thread:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78216&page=2

That was interesting, I had some questions myself about the difference between the ME's classification of manner of death as Homicide vs. Murder. ME's never use the term murder when showing manner of death, is that because murder is a criminal finding...not so much a medical finding ? Also helpful (I read this) is that all murders are homicides, but not all homicides are murders. This link also explains the ME's findings/choices when it somes to determining manner, cause of death.

http://www.co.harris.tx.us/me/Cause.aspx

 

[Searchfortruth]

I think the manner and unknown cause of death will be a big issue come trial time. I imagine the defense will use the uncertainty in the ME's findings to try to raise reasonable doubt. I don't think they will be successful, but I think this will be one of the few openings they have to take advantage of.

 

[Searchfortruth]

What I mean by uncertainty in the ME findings is that the defense will try to say, how can you be certain it was a homicide w/out a clear cause of death ? Now the state and the ME have their good reasons, IMO, for ruling the death a homicide (duct tape, disposal of body, no call to LE), but without a cause of death the defense will have opporunities to question. I imagine defense questions like, can you be 100% sure that Caylee did not die as a result of an accident ? It would be almost impossible to persuade a rational jury that Caylee died of an accidental death given the circumstances, but that willl not stop the defense from trying, IMO.

 

[ecs5298]

I have looked for a thread and could not find one that satisfied my curiosity on the subject of the State Medical Examiner's Determination of Murder. Feel free to move or merge if you know where another thread is. Anyway, how can the State ME determine a death was murder without a Cause of Death? Could other evidence from the scene have been taken into consideration or would that be allowed ? Just wondering if we could list ways that they could rule something Homicide without COD? I truly hope the defense cannot benefit from the ruling? I know there was a gatorade bottle with a syringe taken in at the dump scene, but was that it?:waitasec:

Deaths are classified as either natural or non-natural. The death of a 2 year old child with no co-dependent morbidity (read otherwise healthy child) is a non-natural act.

So if the death is non-natural it has to be one of the following.

1. Accidental
2. Homicide
3. Suicide
4. Undetermined

The ME looked at all the associated evidence to try and pigeon hole it into one of the above 4 classifications.

 

[Nore]

Didn't Scott P get convicted on less evidence connecting him to actually doing something to the bodies?
I think there is more here and I feel they had far less evidence on S. than they do on K..I feel B. is just trying to sway anyone who might be on the jury.
IMO.

 

[scandi]

I just got to watch the announcement this morning. Dr. G was obvioulsy distressed at the questions, and appeared to wish to honor Caylee rather than have to deal with legality. I do not know Dr. G's background. She appeared to want to hide behind the Sheriff or whomever the man was representing OCSO. She did appear to be tear eyed. Interesting.

Hi 21merc, I watched the first Dr G show, and it told how she was a young graduate qualified to be a coroner who accepted a job up North in Florida from where she hailed, and was just so thankful it was given to her.

It was a disastrous case where I believe many, many bodies were brought into the morgue at the same time and needed to be ID'ed. There was something almost impossible about the job. Like they were burn victims, or had died many years before. For some reason I think it was a mortician who had been hiding bodies in the cellar for years, pocketing the money and never giving each body what he was suppose to.

Well, she took the job to heart and loved every minute of it. She is married and has 2 or 3 children. But her life is based on giving the respect to each victim that he/she deserves, and that is in finding out exactly what caused their death. Each body is a person to her, and many times the truth is not what was believed to be the case after all. ;}

I totally admire her and hope she is the mentor for many a young person deciding what they want to be when they grow up! Ya Ya

 

[scandi]

That was interesting, I had some questions myself about the difference between the ME's classification of manner of death as Homicide vs. Murder. ME's never use the term murder when showing manner of death, is that because murder is a criminal finding...not so much a medical finding ? Also helpful (I read this) is that all murders are homicides, but not all homicides are murders. This link also explains the ME's findings/choices when it somes to determining manner, cause of death.

http://www.co.harris.tx.us/me/Cause.aspx

Ahhh! Very good SearchForTruth! I can tell you've been a sleuthin'. LOL

It took me a long time to even realize there was a difference, but homicide is the killing of a human being, and murder is a type of homicide. xox

 

[scandi]

Didn't Scott P get convicted on less evidence connecting him to actually doing something to the bodies?
I think there is more here and KC will be nailed. I think witnesses and Maggots will prove she did something!

ITA Twomanywords, Here we have a homicide, a killing of a human being by another person. That is the base. And upon that the prosecutor will build all the Circumstantial and Real {or Direct} evidence on top of it to show there can be no reasonable doubt of Caylee's murder by Casey.

I sincerely believe that will happen. If there ever was a recent case that was a lay down, this has to be it {except for the 'Craig's List' killer IMO}. To the point I can't believe I am even reading this thread as I think this woman's having one hour of recreation a day in a cage for the rest of her life is a done deal!

xox

 

[Searchfortruth]

Didn't Scott P get convicted on less evidence connecting him to actually doing something to the bodies?
I think there is more here and I feel they had far less evidence on S. than they do on K..I feel B. is just trying to sway anyone who might be on the jury.
IMO.

I think there are many similarities in this case and Scott's. I believe this case to have way more evidence. I'm thinking it'll be a slam dunk, even without a cause of death...Just my opinion.