Description

The presentation considers the purposes of a forensic autopsy or case review, focusing on cases in which the original forensic pathologist medical examiner or other expert made a non-evidence-based diagnosis without scientific foundation, thereby catalyzing criminal charges or medical malpractice lawsuits. In many of these cases, simple searches of readily-available forensic literature, much of it in well-known book or journal form on most death investigators’ shelves, could have prevented the defendant’s travails. The presentation will extrapolate from these cases to touch upon commonly encountered errors, confirmation biases, the logical fallacy of _post hoc ergo proper hoc_, as well as basic medical and forensic ethical principles to which all forensic physicians and scientists should adhere and be examined upon in criminal or civil proceedings. To quote Saukko and Knight: “over-interpretation […] regrettably still leads to instances of miscarriage of justice.”

After the presentation, the attendees will:
· Identify some possible “overreaches” of forensic pathology interpretation
· Be aware of some limitations of the autopsy gross and microscopic examination
· Know common errors of interpretation of toxicology by medical examiners
· Discuss basic competencies vis-à-vis a medical examiner’s ability to interpret observations during death investigation and autopsy

Presenter: Dr. Greg Davis