Greg Parker vs Mitch Todd

The autopsy did find the correct cause of death. But what should have occurred was a forensic autopsy to discover what brought it on.

Sounds reasonable. Until you realize that Ferrie was given a forensic autopsy. What do you think the Coroner's office does, greg?

He did not have a FORENSIC autopsy.

Here are the definitions:
Autopsy
Definition
An autopsy is a postmortem assessment or examination of a body to determine the cause of death. An autopsy is performed by a physician trained in pathology.
Purpose
Most autopsies advance medical knowledge and provide evidence for legal action. Medically, autopsies determine the exact cause and circumstances of death, discover the pathway of a disease, and provide valuable information to be used in the care of the living. When foul play is suspected, a government coroner or medical examiner performs autopsies for legal use.This branch of medical study is called forensic medicine. Forensic specialists investigate deaths resulting from violence or occurring under suspicious circumstances.
http://www.ehendrick.org/healthy/00039120.html

He received an autopsy for one purpose - and that purpose was to establish cause of death - it was not done for LEGAL use due to any suspicions about the death or previous investigations - therefore BY DEFINITION it was NOT a forensic autopsy.

Ferrie's autopsy would still be consdered as 'forensic' under this definition. It was performed by the Coroner's office, after all. And did you notice the emphasis placed on searching for buises, lacerations, hypodermic needle marks or other signs of foul play? Was that done because someone in the Coroner's office was bored that day?

None of those are necessarily signs of foul play. An investigation of cause of death requires all the above to be done. Doesn't make it a forensic autopsy. In fact, was anyone with appropriate degrees in forenics even present?

If you don't believe me, how about Nicholas Chetta, the NO coroner who wrote the autopsy report and issued the cause of death. From a 1967 NBC interview:

"...it was a complete forensic autopsy, in which we take particular effort in doing a complete search of every cavity of the body, plus the fact we note any little mark of violence or tattoo or anything else on the surface of the body, and we describe the individual very particularly, plus the fact we actually measure these people and weigh them"

(Tip o' the hat to Reitzes for finding this, BTW)

That interview is the only reference ever made to it being a forensic autopsy. Classic CYA. And I should have known: Dave hasn't got the courage to confront me on this any more and has sent in his understudy.

There were no signs of struggle on or in Ferrie's body. The closest you can get are the two "area[s] of dryness"

Which were also described as "lesions". You guys keep forgetting that word, though. Wonder why?

Perhaps because "two areas of dryness," whether you call them lesions or Ethel Merman or whatever, aren't evidence of any kind of rough handling. Bruises, lacerations, or abrasions would be a different matter. To me, it sounds like they stumbled on proof that Ferrie was a smoker.

And to me, it sound like avoidance on your part because you are aware of what a lesion is: but in case I'm wrong, and you don't, here it is from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: le·sion
1 : INJURY, HARM
2 : an abnormal change in structure of an organ or part due to injury or disease; especially : one that is circumscribed and well defined

Unlike you, the autopsist failed to say what he thought the cause was.

You have also conveniently ignored the things I said should have made it warrant a forensic autopsy: The notes - maybe suicidal - maybe not - but regardless, the work of a depressed mind. The timing - in the middle of being investigated for the crime of the century - the bottle of Proloid - highly dangerous for a hypertensive.

No, you have ignored that Ferrie was indeed given an honest-to-G_d forensic autopsy. A 100%, red-blooded, American made (accept no cheap, foreign, non-union imitations, friends!) forensic autopsy! The Coroner's office knew about the Proloid -- that's how Garrison, by way of Alcock, found out about it, and knew about the suicide notes.

It was not called a forensic autopsy at the only time it counts - when it was done.

A standard set of toxicology tests were run, which came back positive for caffeine and nothing else. A second, rigorous battery of tests were run. Again, the results were negative for everything except caffeine. Examination of stomach contents revealed no partially digested pills or capsules or any similar evidence that medication was forced down Ferrie's throat.

Not everything was tested for. Just the "standard" tests were done. Routine. Nothing special or "extra" done above what you'd expect from this type of autopsy.

Again, here's an except of the NBC Chetta interview:
"Q. Was there any indication of drugs in his body after he [sic] you performed the autopsy?"
"A. We did a preliminary study first, and this was released, in which we ran all of the common type of drugs, and then we did a more thorough examination and which we ran for just about every known type of drug, and they were all negative except for one thing. We found a small trace of caffeine in Ferrie's blood, and this indicated, or tied in with the story that he had had an interview late one evening or early morning with one of the newspaper reporters, who stated he sat and had a cup of coffee with Ferrie, that he drank coffee and Ferrie drank coffee. And the amount that we found was just about the amount that you would find if someone had consumed a cup of coffee. This was the only positive chemical we found, or drug, if you want to use that
expression."

Which confirms what I said - not all drugs were tested for.

The autopsy revealed a ruptured berry aneurysm in the circle of Willis, a ring-shaped vascular structure that functions as a distribution point for blood to the brain. The area in and around the aneurisms contained two clots. One is described as "a firm blood clot adherent to [the aneurysm]," as well as "a much larger fresh blood clot lying between the frontal lobes communicating with the area of the aneurysm."

You've done your homework. So have I. What's most revealing is what you DON'T say: small bleeds such as noted above can often go un-noticed with no symptoms. They also can often heal themselves especially if blood pressure is lowered. Larger bleeds which do cause problems are characterised as producing headaches so severe, the sufferer could not possibly go without seeking treatment. Ferrie sought no such treatment. His doctor advised he was treating Ferrie only for hypertension. This leads me to believe he was faking or at least - exaggerating his symptoms. He showed no sign of them with Lardner... and the last thing you want to do with constant headaches is drink coffee. Perhaps Lardner was already sympathetic to him, and therefore no need for the act?

Perhaps. Ferrie seems to have been a fairly melodramatic personality, if not a hypochondriac.

A candid admission like this is certainly a refreshing change.

According to Lambert's False Witness, Ferrie's complaints and observed symptoms included severe headaches, weakness, and nausea. These are all symptoms of a bleeed. Granted, they are also symptoms of other problems, like gastritis (a commonly stress-induced condition), but the combination of these syptoms with the "firm clot" raises a considerable possibility of at least one earlier bleed had occurred before Ferrie died.

Not disputing the possibility of an earlier bleed. But you have not addressed the fact that not all bleeds cause symptoms, nor the fact that the evidence of those symptoms comes down to Ferrie's say so. I'd challenge you to produce the evidence that he sought treatment for these symptoms - but we both no there is none... which brings us back to the (apparent) lack of symptoms displayed in front of Lardner. Something doesn't add up in all that.

The Coroner determined the time of death to be about an hour after reporter George Lardner left Ferrie's apartment. Ferrie said nothing to Lardner that would indicate that he'd been "visited" by goons or otherwise molested before Lardner's visit.

You only have Lardner's word for what said between them. In any case, I never said he was "visited by goons" previous to Lardner being there.

What, you think Lardner was in on the 'hit'?

Chetta claims "Ferrie had been dead approximately 7 hours when discovered at 11 am that morning." Lardner claims to have have left at 4am - 7 hours prior. Convenient timing doesn't get any better. Either Lardner lied about the time he left, Chetta got the time of death wrong (not all that unusual - there are any number of factors which can make it difficult to ascertain).... or... Lardner was there at the time of death. I wouldn't rule any of those out.

Given this, the murderers would have to have entered Ferrie's apartment within an hour after Lardner left, shoved a lot (and I mean a lot) of Proloid down Ferrie's throat, and then restrained him until he died.

The number of Proloid needed - length of time to kill - as you describe - applies only to someone with normal or low metabolism. Fewer pills and a lot less time for someone like Ferrie. His own doctor said as much... and I have confirmed it with two local doctors.

Ferrie had high blood pressure, not hyperthyroidism. The latter may have the former as a symptom, but this relationship between the two are not reflexive. The vast majority of hypertension cases are not associated with hyperthyroidism.

You seem to have been confused by the use of the word "metabolism". It is affected by hypertension as well as hyperthyroidism. In regard to the latter, all I've ever said is that if he had a thyroid condition - it was far more likely to have been hyper - not hypo.

Interestingly, the autopsy report mentions finding that "the thyroid gland is nodular on both sides and weighs 35 grams. There is one large nodule in the left lobe of the thyroid measuring 1 cm in diameter. It is firm and gray-white in color and appears poorly encapsulated." A nodular thyroid implies a small number of things, with cancer of the thyroid, iodine deficiency (with attendant hypothyroidism), and/or generalized hypo-thyroidism being the main contenders. Another term for non-cancerous/non-cystic nodulous thyroid is "goiter". We both know what that implies...

Thyroid nodules are found in 50% of all autopsies. More than 90% are benign. You are half right when you say it may imply an inability to absord iodine for the production of thyroid (hypothyroidism). The half you missed was that the opposite could also be the case: the nodule is causing an OVER-production (hyperthyroidism). Goiters and nodules are not the same thing. As to what it DID mean: a simple x-ray would have shown that.

[The goons killed Ferrie]All without leaving any evidence of a struggle, either on Ferrie's body or in his apartment. Then, the supremely crafty and sophisticated murderers ran off, but left the bottle of Proloid --the murder weapon!-- in Ferrie's apartment to tip everyone off. Oopsie!

Gee. Maybe he was asleep, and was awakened to find a gun at his head? As for leaving the Proloid there... Proloid was far from the only pill bottle lying around. The death scene should have resembled a suicide given that fact alone.

Ferrie is just going to sit there quitely while someone shoves a bottleful of pills down his throat, and remain so for the next hour or so, until he dies painfully? That doesn't sound like Ferrie.

Watcha gonna do with a gun at your head?

Even then, it has yet to be established that Proloid could cause an aneurysm to burst within an hour after being orally administered, much less cause the aneurysm in the first place.

Wrong. For someone with high metabolism, an OD of Proloid would couse a massive heart attack or a brain haemorrhage.

No one has established that a Proloid OD would cause any life-threatening problems. Or that Ferrie was already hyperthyroid, for that matter.

The first part is simply not true - it is a LN myth. The second part is really not that important to my hypothosis - though I do believe there is a reasonable case for saying he WAS hyper.