Question about autopsies for any medical / LEO people here

[MindPilot]

I've never seen one done or be involved in any way with an autopsy, only what I've seen on the science channels.

It seems to me like they are done and documented in such a way as to be irrefutable. Evidence is collected and saved so anyone with any forensic knowledge can look and the results -- even years later -- and render an opinion.

I mean it's not just one guy cutting apart the body and announcing what he thinks at the time, right? I assume we're talking hard evidence here, tissue samples, lab results, measurements, photographs, video, stuff that is simply not open to belief or disbelief.

So the question really is couldn't Shavios just have their own guy look at the report and if the report is accurate he would arrive at the same conclusion?

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. on the other hand..

remember Henri Paul, the guy who was driving when Princess Di was killed? The levels of carbon monoxide that the autopsy reported were so high he woudl have been comatose before even getting in the car.

The point is - autopsies are as honest as the people conducting them.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/665903

[TryingToWarnYou]

11. Absolute hogwash.

The OP is correct. Tests are performed, specimens collected, internal organs weighed. Its not an issue of the honesty of the ME or anyone.

[oldtime dfl_er]

12. oh good lord Im not suggesting

the autopsy in the Schiavo case was tainted, or that 99.9% of autopsies aren't completely accurate. I'm only saying there can be cases where questionable practices lead to questionable conclusions.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/665903

[Enraged_Ape]

2. Of course

This isn't just some dude saying, "Yep, she up and died. Heart attack, probably", and signing off.

[Carolab]

3. All of the forensic evidence is collected and preserved.

The reports document the findings of general body examination, visual and in-depth (microscopic) tissue section (pathology) examination, toxicology and other reports as required (e.g., if a rape kit was used.)

Autopsies are performed by the M.E. or the coroner or assistant M.E.s, with the assistance of prosectors and (sometimes) investigators.

The reports are used to establish the manner and cause of death by the medical examiner/coroner who has the jurisdiction over the case.

Second opinions do sometimes differ. But it has to be medically sound (based on the findings and not some subjective interpretation).

In this case there would have also been a neuropathology examination and report to substantiate the condition of the brain.

[underpants]

6. Is there a peer review process?

Just wondering

[Carolab]

8. Depends

If it is conducted by the assistant M.E. or a pathology assistant or forensic fellow, then it is reviewed and co-signed by superiors including the M.E. It it's conducted by the chief M.E., though, it's just his/her report and it is not reviewed. However, separate pathology/toxicology/neuropathology reports are conducted by other experts, and their reports are individually signed/reviewed according to their authority.

[underpants]

9. That's pretty much what I figured

Sounds like there are plenty of controls there plus with the science and all....

[supernova]

4. Any coroner worth his or her salt

would be able to look and the report and determine if it was done on the "up and up."

[bleedingheart]

5. High Profile cases like this one are rarely botched

in fact I think the delays in getting the report out were due to the fact that they didn't want to have any "doubts" as to the results.

[kanrok]

7. Nowadays you might be right

But they certainly screwed the pooch in the JFK autopsy. IMHO, autopsies are only as good as the pathologist who performs them. Medical science is not about absolutes. There are a wide range of opinions "within a reasonable degree of medical and scientific certainty." What may seem black and white to a lay person like me may look completely different to any number of medical experts. In general, though, I think we can reasonably rely on autopsies performed by board certified anatomic and forensic pathologists.

[Horse with no Name]

10. They are meticulous

They gather tissue samples of each organ, weigh each organ, take x-rays, take photographs, as well as do pathological studies.
Some of the findings may be subjective, but the blood samples, tissue samples, weights, photos and xrays are all objective pieces of data.
Any other pathologist could independently determine an educated opinion from the samples taken without having her actual body.
What was odd about this particular autopsy--I will say--is how he correlated the facts from 15 years back.
I have to say though, that telephoning friends and family who now have vested interests in various ways regarding bulemia vs. no bulemia, isn't a very reliable source.

[bmbmd]

13. Let me play devil's advocate for a moment.

Take a look at these guys-they screwed up justice in Texas for years. Erdmann in particular was a loose cannon-his practice of "dry-labbing" was to make stuff up to shore up the prosecutor's case. http://www.fdp.dk/uk/grig.htm

This Schiavo case, though, in my opinion, is above reproach.