Why the Delay?

Let us now turn our attention to some discrepancies in the Grand Jury testimony of Deputy Medical Examiner Dr. Ogbonna Chinwah about the Autopsy Report, and how the findings of the Medical Examiner have been misrepresented by the “expert” hired by the prosecution, Prof. Wilson C. Hayes of Oregon State University. First, let’s examine some of the testimony of Dr. Chinwah, who performed the autopsy of Lauren. While Dr. Chinwah appears to be testifying truthfully here, the questioning of him is being cleverly orchestrated by Prosecutor Craig Hum so that Dr. Chinwah’s answers have the practical effect of misleading the Grand Jury.

After establishing Dr. Chinwah’s qualifications, Prosecutor Hum goes on to question him about the procedure in preparing an Autopsy Report, and how long it generally takes. Here is the testimony, beginning on page 113:

22

       Q      NOW, AFTER AN AUTOPSY IS PERFORMED, IS AN

23

AUTOPSY REPORT PREPARED?

24

       A      YES.  THE DEPUTY MEDICAL EXAMINER PREPARES

25

A REPORT.

26

       Q      AND HOW DO YOU DO THAT?  IN OTHER WORDS,

27

WHAT IS DONE FOR YOU TO PREPARE AN AUTOPSY REPORT?  LET'S

28

SAY YOU ARE DOING AN AUTOPSY.  HOW DO WE GET AN AUTOPSY

114

1

REPORT FROM THAT?

2

       A      AT THE TIME OF AUTOPSY THERE ARE FORMS THAT

3

WE USE AT THE AUTOPSY ROOM AND AT THE AUTOPSY TABLE, WITH

4

A DESK THERE.  AND AS WE PERFORM THE AUTOPSY, WE MAKE

5

NOTES, WE WRITE DOWN THINGS.  FOR EXAMPLE, WE MEASURE

6

EACH ORGAN.  AND WE HAVE A BOARD, WE WRITE THEM DOWN

7

THERE.

8

              AND AT THE END OF THE AUTOPSY, BEFORE

9

LEAVING THE -- BEFORE YOU TAKE OFF YOUR CLOTHES, THERE IS

10

A TABLE THERE WITH THE PAPERS, HAVING THAT UNIQUE NUMBER

11

ON IT.  AND WE ALSO DO DIAGRAMS AS WE CONTINUE WITH THE

12

AUTOPSY, AND THOSE DIAGRAMS ARE DONE ON THOSE PAPERS.

13

              AND AFTER THE AUTOPSY THOSE PAPERS, WE TAKE

14

THEM TO THE OFFICE.  AND FROM ALL THE NOTATIONS THAT WE

15

HAVE MADE, OBSERVATIONS WE HAVE MADE ON THOSE PAPERS,

16

THEN WE MAKE A DICTATION OF THE AUTOPSY, DICTATE IT.  AND

17

THE DICTATION IS TRANSCRIBED BY THE TRANSCRIBING SECTION

18

OF THE DEPARTMENT.  AFTER THE TRANSCRIBING, THE REPORT

19

COMES BACK TO THE DEPUTY MEDICAL EXAMINER FOR REVIEW.

20

AND IF THERE IS ANY CORRECTIONS, THEY ARE MADE.  THEN THE

21

FINAL REPORT IS TYPED WHEN ALL THE INFORMATION IS

22

COMPLETED ON THAT CASE.

23

       Q      SO YOU TAKE NOTES DURING THE AUTOPSY, AND

24

THEN FROM THOSE NOTES AND DIAGRAMS YOU ACTUALLY DICTATE A

25

REPORT INTO A TAPE; YOU MAKE A TAPE?

26

       A      THAT'S CORRECT.

27

       Q      AND THEN THE TAPE IS SENT TO YOUR

28

TRANSCRIPTION PEOPLE, WHO MAKE A WRITTEN TRANSCRIPTION OF

115

1

YOUR REPORT, AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO YOU TO MAKE SURE

2

THAT IT'S ALL CORRECT?

3

       A      THAT'S RIGHT.

4

       Q      AND IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE INCORRECT,

5

DO YOU MAKE CHANGES ON THE REPORT AND SEND IT BACK TO BE

6

FIXED?

7

       A      THAT'S RIGHT.

8

       Q      AND ONCE THE ENTIRE REPORT IS CORRECT, IS

9

THAT WHEN YOU SIGN IT, SHOWING THAT IT'S CORRECT?

10

       A      YES.

11

       Q      AND THE AUTOPSY REPORTS, HOW CLOSE IN TIME

12

ARE THEY PREPARED?

13

              LET ME ASK IT THIS WAY:  HOW CLOSE IN TIME

14

DO YOU DICTATE THE REPORT, HOW CLOSE IN TIME TO ACTUALLY

15

PERFORMING THE AUTOPSY?

16

       A      GENERALLY WE DO IT THE SAME DAY.  BUT

17

OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE SOME CASES WE DO IT THE FOLLOWING

18

DAY.  BUT USUALLY IT IS DONE WITHIN 48 HOURS.

In this somewhat long exchange, Dr. Chinwah explains generally how an Autopsy Report is prepared, and how long it takes. The essence of his remarks is that, under normal circumstances, the report is prepared within a matter of days, and any errors that are found are promptly corrected, and the report is finalized very quickly. What was not asked was whether such was the case with Lauren’s Autopsy Report, though the impression created was that it was (i.e., that the Autopsy Report was completed soon after the autopsy was performed). But in fact, such was not the case, and the practical effect of this testimony was to, once again, mislead the Grand Jury. Let’s look at the last page of Dr. Chinwah’s report:

The date at the bottom left is the transcription date, which is more than two months after Lauren’s death. But since Dr. Chinwah testified that the dictation is usually done within 48 hours of the autopsy itself, we must necessarily conclude that such a dictation was also done in this case as well. Therefore, the report that we are looking at here is not the original, but rather is a revision. And this raises the question: What was in Dr. Chinwah’s original report that the investigators [presumably] do not want us to see?

Anyway, Dr. Chinwah didn’t get around to finally signing his report until early May of ’01—almost fully half a year after Lauren’s death. Notice also that this page references the “pediatric consultant.” The pediatric consultant did not become involved in the case until March of ’01, so this part of this report could not possibly have been part of the transcription. This in turn raises the potential that Dr. Chinwah’s report was altered after the transcription. But the big question here is, why did it take so long for the Autopsy Report to be completed?

There is yet another inconsistency we ought to look at in Dr. Chinwah’s report. On the seventh page of his report there is a somewhat curious statement regarding “radiology” (i.e., x-rays):

What seems unusual here is the wording of the second statement as compared with he first. With regard to “photography,” we are told that photographs “have been taken.” But with regard to “radiology,” we are told that the body “is” fluoroscoped and that x-rays “are” taken of the entire body. Okay. But have they indeed been? Perhaps we are meant to believe that they have, but a close examination of other parts of the Autopsy Report raises some questions about this.

In the Radiology Consultant’s Report, we read:

And in the Medical Report (please note the highlighted entries), we read:

According to this document, there were only four x-rays of Lauren’s body were taken, and it appears that the entire body was not fluoroscoped or x-rayed—contrary to what Dr. Chinwah seems to suggest in his report. But this does give us a bit of illumination on the radiology consultant’s notation that there was only “limited radiographic survey,” i.e., of only the skull, chest, and right forearm. This is not a minor point. It indicates that an exhaustive examination of Lauren’s body, in order to discover all injuries, was not performed. And it also calls into serious question the curious comment by Dr. Chinwah, that the entire body “is” x-rayed and fluoroscoped—even though this one apparently wasn’t. Dr. Chinwah seems to be trying to create the impression that it was, without actually quite saying so. And the fact that this comment occurs in a report that was apparently revised after the fact raises further questions still.

One final point that has to be noted from the Medical Report is the “Autopsy Class.” According to the Medical Report, this was supposedly a “Class A” autopsy. We have been told that this is the most exhaustive level of autopsy, one that is performed when there is foul play suspected. And because it is so exhaustive, it is necessary for the Coroner to hold on to the body of the decedent for a number of days, as it takes time to perform all the necessary examinations. But please note below the date on the Order for Release for Lauren’s body:

According to this document, Lauren’s was released on the 10^th of November of 2000, just two days after Lauren’s death, and the day after the autopsy was performed. On this account, it seems doubtful that a “Class A” autopsy was performed. Bearing this in mind, consider the following testimony (page 118 of the Grand Jury transcript), Dr. Chinwah testifying:

25

              ON PALPATION OF THE CHEEK THERE WAS -- ONE

26

COULD FEEL SOME FRACTURE OF THE MAXILLA ON THE LEFT SIDE.

The language here is a bit technical, but upon questioning by Prosecutor Hum, on page 120 of the transcript, Dr. Chinwah explains the technical terms:

5

       Q      YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT, I BELIEVE YOU SAID,

6

THAT UPON PALPATION YOU COULD FEEL SOMETHING, AND THEN

7

YOU WERE POINTING TO YOUR CHEEKBONE AREA.  I THINK YOU

8

SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE MAXILLA.

9

       A      YES.

10

       Q      WHAT IS PALPATION?  WHAT IS MAXILLA?

11

       A      PALPATION IS TO PRESS, IS TO FEEL.

12

GENERALLY -- I WILL NOT USE THE WORD "NEVER."  BUT WE DO

13

NOT CUT INTO THE FACE, INTO THE SKIN OF THE FACE.  WE DO

14

NOT LIKE TO MUTILATE BODIES.

15

              BUT BY PRESSING ON THE BONE YOU CAN FEEL

16

THE FRACTURE.

Notice in the testimony above Dr. Chinwah suggests that, while they are reluctant to cut into the face, there are instances of where it does sometimes happen. And I should think that the instances where it does happen are those where it is important to perform an autopsy as exhaustive as possible—in other words, a “Class A” autopsy (like this one ostensibly was). The fact that Dr. Chinwah declined to cut into the face here (while perhaps not absolutely dispositive of the issue) tends to indicate that this was not actually a “Class A” autopsy.

Let us now examine where Dr. Chinwah discusses this fracture in the Autopsy Report, from page 11 of it, which is page 2 of his report:

EVIDENCE OF INJURY:

EXTERNAL:

Head/face:  There is extensive abrasion contusion of the forehead involving an area about 3-1/4 inch in diameter.  The abrasion contusion extends down the face over the nose lip to the chin.  It also extends to the left side of the face and the cheek.  On the forehead are multiple irregular lacerations, some oriented horizontally, others diagonally.  They vary in size from 1/4 inch to 1-1/2 inches.  Three of the larger lacerations are gaping and underlying irregular skull fractures are evident.  Palpation of the left facial bone reveals fracture of the maxillary bone.

According to Dr. Chinwah as he wrote in his report in the Autopsy Report, there is “extensive abrasion contusion” that extends down the face and extends to the left side of the face and to the cheek. This is illustrated on a chart on page 30 of the Autopsy Report. As there was already injury to the left side of Lauren’s face—the injury that presumably caused the fracture in the first place—this should have lessened Dr. Chinwah’s reluctance to cut into the face.

Moreover, this fracture does not seen to be documented in the chart of skull fractures that is found on page 32 of the Autopsy Report. As such, both of these situations serve to indicate that this autopsy was not performed as a “Class A” autopsy. As such, this seems to be yet another instance where a misrepresentation has been put forth, and the Grand Jury has been misled. But further, it serves to show that, at the time when the autopsy was performed, there was nothing to indicate either to the Coroner’s Investigator (Allen Moses) or to the Assistant Medical Examiner (Dr. Chinwah) that Lauren Key’s death was anything more than a very tragic accident.