Zimmerman

[jtpr312]

Did I say people in the community couldn't use the roads, retard? Do you understand the difference between private property and public property?
The roads, the grass etc are private property but are for communal use.
The grass between buildings is not the owner if the town houses private property it is the property of the development, and for communal use.

Ask yourself this moron, does the government own the development? Nope, therefore they are private roads for the homeowners use.

I had no idea that would be so hard to understand?

Now I see the problem, you lack even basic vocabulary skills.
Public-
1a : exposed to general view : open b : well-known, prominent c : perceptible, material
2a : of, relating to, or affecting all the people or the whole area of a nation or state <public law> b : of or relating to a government c : of, relating to, or being in the service of the community or nation
3a : of or relating to people in general : universal b : general, popular
4: of or relating to business or community interests as opposed to private affairs : social
5: devoted to the general or national welfare : humanitarian
6a : accessible to or shared by all members of the community b : capitalized in shares that can be freely traded on the open market —often used with go
7: supported by public funds and private contributions rather than by income from commercials <public radio> <public television>


Public meaning it is allowed for all THE RESIDENTS OF THE GATED COMMUNITY to use, such as roads, parks, streets, etc, the gated community does not own your yard, or the grass around your home, therefore it is PRIVATE property that even other residents in the gated community are not allowed to tresspass on. By your asinine logic, anyone in the gated community can use your living room.

Hey fuck tard, stop being retarded.

"public property n. property owned by the government or one of its agencies, divisions, or entities. Commonly a reference to parks, playgrounds, streets, sidewalks, schools, libraries and other property regularly used by the general public"
public property legal definition of public property. public property synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.


Do I have to draw it for you so it is easier to understand?
The roads, the community is owned by private owners, therefore private property owned by something other than the government. That is why it says PRIVATE PROPERTY when you enter a gated community. You claimed they were public roads to begin, they were not. They are private roads that people in the community can use, just like the grass areas. And their are multiple townhouses in a building, therefore it would be easy to assume that between each building is not owned by the townhouse owner.
And retard, they own a patio that looks out onto a community green area with a side walk. Do you understand how these communities work? Obviously not. You buy the townhouse and that is it, that is all you own.
The rest is owned my a PRIVATE company.
Here is a picture for better understanding, smart one.
https://www.google.com/search?q=the...&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#miuv=0


God you are retarded.

You're a dumbass plain and simple. When I said the streets/sidewalks were for public use, I meant exactly that, ALL residents can use them, ALL the people within the community, nothing to do with those not in the community, PUBLIC-6a : accessible to or shared by all members of the community, as opposed to PRIVATE, which would be your house and your yard. There are sidewalks for public use, not yards, the yards belong to those that own the homes, meaning they are private.

 

[jtpr312]

All this speculation and arguing is a waste of time. Twelve people will decide the fate of Zimmerman, and out of those twelve, there will be AT LEAST one white juror who is not some white guilt filled scumbag liberal, that will vote not guilty. I can't even begin to see the prosectuion presenting a case good and stong enough to remove reasonable doubt from all 12 jurors. They will try to argue it was a race based shooting, and I have confidence that at least one juror won't be a race baiting, scumbag democrat. I'd take bets on him not being convicted of killing the thug.

 

[WorldWatcher]

THE "CHILD" WAS A THUG and died like one. He could have easily avoided a confrontation (something non-thugs commonly do) and be alive today. That is unless, of course, Zimmerman called the police and then killed him in cold blood. I know there are people here who are bat shit crazy enough to believe that.

As a counter-point you note that non-thugs would commonly avoid confrontation. Looking at the events that night Martin attempted TWICE to avoid confrontation once by walking away from the clubhouse area and Zimmerman followed him in the truck, the second time Martin avoid confrontation by running away from the truck in an attempt to break contact. On the other hand Zimmerman promoted confrontation by first following in the truck and then again by exiting the truck and pursuing on foot.

If a non-thug is defined as someone that commonly avoids confrontation then your description applies more to Martin as the non-thug and Zimmerman as the thug.



>>>>

How do we know what Martin did that night?
How do we know he was running away?

There are Zimmerman's description of him leaving the clubhouse area and Zimmerman following in the truck, then there is Zimmerman's description of Martin running away from the truck.

For some they believe Zimmerman when Zimmerman says Martin attacked him, doesn't that mean we should believe Zimmerman when he says Martin attempted to depart the area twice?

Following in his truck is not confrontation.

Didn't say it was, I said Martin attempted to depart the area twice to avoid confrontation.

If Martin had a right to be there, and he did, so does Zimmerman.
They both did.

Very true, no disagreement there. But neither had the right to initiate hostilities. The problem is to figure out who initiated hostilities. On one hand the person with one version is dead. On the other hand the person that is alive has shown a willingness to lie to the court and there are questions to be explored based on the physical and forensic evidence which may (I say may, because we will have to see what the experts say at trial) prove inconsistent with the various stories told by the person that survived the encounter.

Nothing to do with this case. The same thing, and I agree 100% with you, the fact Martin was a thug has nothing to do with what happened that night.

Thank you sir, I know we disagree on specifics sometimes, but I think your heart is in the right place and I hope you think mine is. I truly think that you and I simply want the chance for the jury to be able to examine the evidence, the prosecution to present their information and the defense to present their case. At the end of the day it will be the jury's call and I will respect that.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Hey, does anyone know anything about the Gun Shot Residue evidence in this case?

It would seem to follow- logically- that if Zimmerman was struggling with Martin when the gun went off, Martin's body would be covered with GSR.

If they were a few feet apart, it wouldn't. Case closed.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor


The Autopsy Report can be read here along with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement forensic reports.


1. Martin GSR: Yes there was GSR on Martin's hoodie indicating close proximity of the end of the muzzle to the hoodie at the time the weapon was discharged. The close proximity discharge resulted in both GSR on the hoodie and a burn pattern consistent with a close discharge. GSR on Martin is indicative of the muzzles position, placing Zimmerman from chest to chest like he described or up to arms length away.

2. Zimmerman GSR: Zimmerman and Martin were supposed to be in close proximity and the gun discharged between their chests, there was no GSR on the front of Zimmerman's jacket chest or sleeves. There was GSR on his hand.

3. DNA: Zimmerman claims Martin punched him over a dozen times in the fact with the first blow to the nose, knocking him ground and resulting in the bloodied face shown in the on scene police photograph from that night. However the autopsy reports external examination of the body made no note of blood on Martins hands and only one small abrasion on the left fourth finger, because the abrasion is noted we know the Medical Examiner examined the hands. DNA examination of material from Martins hands and the cuffs of his hoodie returned negative for the presence of Zimmerman's DNA - which seems like it would have been there if Martin had placed his hands over Zimmerman's bloody nose and mouth as Zimmerman claimed.



>>>>

The body is wiped of all bodily fluids before autopsy. Martin was shot with a gun. There was blood all over his body before autopsy from a pistol shot. All wiped clean. Concerning DNA, that means nothing. What is relevant is why didn't the prosecution test Zimmerman THAT NIGHT for Martin's DNA ON HIM? The lack of it on Martin means absolutely nothing as the defendant has no burden to prove anything. However, the prosecution and the police chain of custody should have done that and did not. If the DNA is relevant then why did they ignore Zimmerman.
The likely answer will be that "we believed the version of events that George Zimmerman stated that night" as they let him go.
The police ARE going to stick with that.

I'm sorry, the purpose of the autopsy is to determine the cause of death and preserve evidence in the case of a homicide. If the prosecution notices the inconsistency of Zimmerman stating that he covered the bloody nose with his hands, then you can bet they will check into the ME's procedures. Whether evidence was washed away by a flunky or if the ME conducts an external examination of the body as it is received and the identification of trace evidence and it's preservation for law enforcement will something they will want to know.

The "PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR FLORIDA MEDICAL EXAMINERS" states:

Collection of Specimens of Evidence, Examination of Clothing, and Photography

Article 13. Collection of Trace Specimens and Evidence.

(1) Trace evidence from the clothing or body should be:

(a) collected in labeled containers.

(b) Stored in a secure area if not immediately released to law enforcement or a crime scene laboratory.

(c) documented by photographs and notes.​

It's kind of hard to collect and preserve trace evidence from the clothing and the body if the clothes are stripped and the body is washed before the ME begins their investigation.

Now I'm not saying the body is not washed. Of course it is. I'm saying I doubt the body is taken from the crime scene and washed in a homicide case without any external examination. The Guidelines also call for the bagging of hands and feet if they are likely to have evidence that needs to be preserved.


http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content...0a9b28e/Practice-Guidelines-2009-Adopted.aspx


>>>>

 

[Ravi]

The body is wiped of all bodily fluids before autopsy.

This right here tells me how stupid you are. Bodily fluids are EVIDENCE. Sheesh. The point of the fucking autopsy is to gather evidence.

You'll never convince me you are who you say you are with all the ridiculous comments I see you make.

Martin was shot with a gun. There was blood all over his body before autopsy from a pistol shot

No there wasn't blood all over his body.

Jesuschrist, did you even once look at the discovery dumps?

The part about wiping the body, this was already pointed out to him as being incorrect. But he continues to claim it.

I can't even begin to imagine why this guy is a private detective or who would hire him. His trials must all end in miscarriage.

 

[JoeB131]

All this speculation and arguing is a waste of time. Twelve people will decide the fate of Zimmerman, and out of those twelve, there will be AT LEAST one white juror who is not some white guilt filled scumbag liberal, that will vote not guilty. I can't even begin to see the prosectuion presenting a case good and stong enough to remove reasonable doubt from all 12 jurors. They will try to argue it was a race based shooting, and I have confidence that at least one juror won't be a race baiting, scumbag democrat. I'd take bets on him not being convicted of killing the thug.

You might have one racist asshole on the jury, but the thing about racists is that most of you are cowards. You get into a room of minorities and decent minded white folks, you pretty much shut up pretty quickly. Now you all hide on the internet, the last refuge of the racist.

 

[JoeB131]

The part about wiping the body, this was already pointed out to him as being incorrect. But he continues to claim it.

I can't even begin to imagine why this guy is a private detective or who would hire him. His trials must all end in miscarriage.

Thinks he's...

but he's more like...

 

[Gadawg73]

The part about wiping the body, this was already pointed out to him as being incorrect. But he continues to claim it.

I can't even begin to imagine why this guy is a private detective or who would hire him. His trials must all end in miscarriage.

Thinks he's...

but he's more like...

Model Protocol for Autopsies

Videography

Phase 1: Clothes, etc. should be individually photographed with focus on stains, cuts or holes on relevant materials.
Phase II:
Front view on the autopsy table should be individually videographed BEFORE WIPING AND AFTER WIPING THE BODY. Same process should be repeated on the back of the body.

This is the VERY FIRST THING they do, at the start.

Typical Joe, the know it all.
You folks are dumb as a box of rocks. Believe what they see on TV and read in media.
You are a Low Information Citizen Joe.

 

[Ravi]

The part about wiping the body, this was already pointed out to him as being incorrect. But he continues to claim it.

I can't even begin to imagine why this guy is a private detective or who would hire him. His trials must all end in miscarriage.

Thinks he's...

but he's more like...

Model Protocol for Autopsies

Videography

Phase 1: Clothes, etc. should be individually photographed with focus on stains, cuts or holes on relevant materials.
Phase II:
Front view on the autopsy table should be individually videographed BEFORE WIPING AND AFTER WIPING THE BODY. Same process should be repeated on the back of the body.

This is the VERY FIRST THING they do, at the start.

Typical Joe, the know it all.
You folks are dumb as a box of rocks. Believe what they see on TV and read in media.
You are a Low Information Citizen Joe.

You implied the body was wiped before it got to autopsy.

You're an idiot.

 

[Gadawg73]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

 

[Gadawg73]

Thinks he's...

but he's more like...

Model Protocol for Autopsies

Videography

Phase 1: Clothes, etc. should be individually photographed with focus on stains, cuts or holes on relevant materials.
Phase II:
Front view on the autopsy table should be individually videographed BEFORE WIPING AND AFTER WIPING THE BODY. Same process should be repeated on the back of the body.

This is the VERY FIRST THING they do, at the start.

Typical Joe, the know it all.
You folks are dumb as a box of rocks. Believe what they see on TV and read in media.
You are a Low Information Citizen Joe.

You implied the body was wiped before it got to autopsy.

You're an idiot.

That is before autopsy. BEFORE THE AUTOPSY IS CONDUCTED the body is wiped.
But since you are a liar and too weak to admit you are wrong, as I knew you would do this because you are such a fool, all medical emergency personnel are REQUIRED TO WIPE THE BODY OF ALL LEAKING BODILY FLUIDS AND BLOOD before transport.
Guess why you fool? Aids and other infectious diseases.
I would expect an apology but not from a pig like you.
The body is wiped BEFORE autopsy is what I always stated, as it is fact to those of us that do not make up lies to fit their ideology.

Admit you were wrong and move on. A body that is leaking bodily fluids or blood is always wiped and then wiped again BEFORE AUTOPSY BEGINS.
Just admit it, you were wrong.
Once again.

 

[Gadawg73]

BEFORE AUTOPSY the body is wiped clean in ALL autopsies as standard American protocol.

Note "before autopsy" in ALL medical journals.

Fools, you folks are about as milk weak stupid as they come.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

Gadawg, your previous posts indicated that the first thing that was done was the body was washed. That did not seem logical.


Please note the blue and green text from above which occur prior to the washing. I think that is all we were saying and I apologize if it's just a difference in terminology that may have been the problem in communication. As you note above, bringing the body in, stripping it of clothing, and then washing it is not the first thing that happens to the body when it is received by the Medical Examiner's office. First they collect trace/forensic evidence, photograph the as it was received. Then the body is stripped and second set of photographs are taken. Only then is the body washed for what would probably be more correctly termed the beginning of the "autopsy". If I contributed to that then again I regret that.


However the first thing done is not the "washing/wiping" of the body when the ME's office receives the body. Before that are photographs and trace/forensic evidence collection.


Thanks for clearing that up.


WW



>>>>

 

[Ravi]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

It's part of the autopsy, you idiot. My gawd Gilligan you are a flipping retard.

 

[Gadawg73]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

Gadawg, your previous posts indicated that the first thing that was done was the body was washed. That did not seem logical.


Please note the blue and green text from above which occur prior to the washing. I think that is all we were saying and I apologize if it's just a difference in terminology that may have been the problem in communication. As you note above, bringing the body in, stripping it of clothing, and then washing it is not the first thing that happens to the body when it is received by the Medical Examiner's office. First they collect trace/forensic evidence, photograph the as it was received. Then the body is stripped and second set of photographs are taken. Only then is the body washed for what would probably be more correctly termed the beginning of the "autopsy". If I contributed to that then again I regret that.


However the first thing done is not the "washing/wiping" of the body when the ME's office receives the body. Before that are photographs and trace/forensic evidence collection.


Thanks for clearing that up.


WW



>>>>

It is the first thing done.
Done BEFORE transport.
The first thing done BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED FROM THE BODY, THE BODY, NOT CLOTHES OR PHOTOS is wiping the body.
And that is exactly what I stated.
They said the body WAS NOT WIPED before autopsy and you stand with them?
You still believe that the body IS NOT wiped BEFORE autopsy?
Which is it when I have shown you PROOF the body is wiped FIRST before transport.
And their argument ALWAYS was "they never wipe the body because that is evidence" and now you have proof that is bogus and you still stand with them.
So which is it?
A. The body is wiped clean BEFORE transport which they denied.

OR:

B. The body IS WIPED BEFORE TRANSPORT AND AUTOPSY which is true IN ALL homicides.

Which is it? A or B.
I do not believe you to be the type to slant, distort, twist, side step an easy question so which is it?

 

[Gadawg73]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

Gadawg, your previous posts indicated that the first thing that was done was the body was washed. That did not seem logical.


Please note the blue and green text from above which occur prior to the washing. I think that is all we were saying and I apologize if it's just a difference in terminology that may have been the problem in communication. As you note above, bringing the body in, stripping it of clothing, and then washing it is not the first thing that happens to the body when it is received by the Medical Examiner's office. First they collect trace/forensic evidence, photograph the as it was received. Then the body is stripped and second set of photographs are taken. Only then is the body washed for what would probably be more correctly termed the beginning of the "autopsy". If I contributed to that then again I regret that.


However the first thing done is not the "washing/wiping" of the body when the ME's office receives the body. Before that are photographs and trace/forensic evidence collection.


Thanks for clearing that up.


WW



>>>>

I stated verbatim, correctly "The body is wiped of all bodily fluids before autopsy".
"what you implied" is BS. Go by WHAT I STATED VERBATIM.
I never implied a damn thing. I STATED FACT.
Please show me where I stated trace evidence was not collected.
Please show where I stated that the body was wiped BEFORE trace evidence was collected.
Trace evidence is collected AT THE SCENE, NOT during the autopsy. Trace evidence is the responsibility of the arriving police criminal investigation BEFORE transport.
Where did I claim that none of that was ever done?
ALL I stated was the body is wiped clean of all bodily fluids before autopsy.
That was all so whatever YOU and others added into that FACT is your twist to it.
I am very surprised you bought into their BS. What I stated is 100% fact.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

Gadawg, your previous posts indicated that the first thing that was done was the body was washed. That did not seem logical.


Please note the blue and green text from above which occur prior to the washing. I think that is all we were saying and I apologize if it's just a difference in terminology that may have been the problem in communication. As you note above, bringing the body in, stripping it of clothing, and then washing it is not the first thing that happens to the body when it is received by the Medical Examiner's office. First they collect trace/forensic evidence, photograph the as it was received. Then the body is stripped and second set of photographs are taken. Only then is the body washed for what would probably be more correctly termed the beginning of the "autopsy". If I contributed to that then again I regret that.


However the first thing done is not the "washing/wiping" of the body when the ME's office receives the body. Before that are photographs and trace/forensic evidence collection.


Thanks for clearing that up.


WW



>>>>

It is the first thing done.
Done BEFORE transport.
The first thing done BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED FROM THE BODY, THE BODY, NOT CLOTHES OR PHOTOS is wiping the body.
And that is exactly what I stated.
They said the body WAS NOT WIPED before autopsy and you stand with them?
You still believe that the body IS NOT wiped BEFORE autopsy?
Which is it when I have shown you PROOF the body is wiped FIRST before transport.
And their argument ALWAYS was "they never wipe the body because that is evidence" and now you have proof that is bogus and you still stand with them.
So which is it?
A. The body is wiped clean BEFORE transport which they denied.

OR:

B. The body IS WIPED BEFORE TRANSPORT AND AUTOPSY which is true IN ALL homicides.

Which is it? A or B.
I do not believe you to be the type to slant, distort, twist, side step an easy question so which is it?

I'm in line with what you posted above highlighted in red and green, I think our misunderstanding was in terminology. You claimed the body was wiped clean prior to the autopsy, I said that makes no sense as part of the purpose of the autopsy is to work with law enforcement to ensure that forensic & trace evidence present on the body and in the clothing is preserved (as per the Florida State Medical Examiner Guidelines I linked to earlier).

The information you provided above satisfies what I understood. Trace and forensic evidence **IS** collected, the body is photographed, the clothing is removed, and the body is photographed again. After that is done, from what you noted above, the body is cleaned for another external examination and then the follow on internal examination.

Again it may have been a difference in terminology if you consider the "autopsy" not to have started until after the photography and collection of other evidence from the body based on the condition received at the ME's office.



I'm not the type to get into pissing contests and I think you know that. At the end of the day it doesn't make a difference, the body is received and evidence is collected in homicide cases.


>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

"Implied" is to suggest something indirectly. "not to state something but to indirectly associate it"

I STATED the facts, never implied it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Gadawg, your previous posts indicated that the first thing that was done was the body was washed. That did not seem logical.


Please note the blue and green text from above which occur prior to the washing. I think that is all we were saying and I apologize if it's just a difference in terminology that may have been the problem in communication. As you note above, bringing the body in, stripping it of clothing, and then washing it is not the first thing that happens to the body when it is received by the Medical Examiner's office. First they collect trace/forensic evidence, photograph the as it was received. Then the body is stripped and second set of photographs are taken. Only then is the body washed for what would probably be more correctly termed the beginning of the "autopsy". If I contributed to that then again I regret that.


However the first thing done is not the "washing/wiping" of the body when the ME's office receives the body. Before that are photographs and trace/forensic evidence collection.


Thanks for clearing that up.


WW



>>>>

It is the first thing done.
Done BEFORE transport.
The first thing done BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED FROM THE BODY, THE BODY, NOT CLOTHES OR PHOTOS is wiping the body.
And that is exactly what I stated.
They said the body WAS NOT WIPED before autopsy and you stand with them?
You still believe that the body IS NOT wiped BEFORE autopsy?
Which is it when I have shown you PROOF the body is wiped FIRST before transport.
And their argument ALWAYS was "they never wipe the body because that is evidence" and now you have proof that is bogus and you still stand with them.
So which is it?
A. The body is wiped clean BEFORE transport which they denied.

OR:

B. The body IS WIPED BEFORE TRANSPORT AND AUTOPSY which is true IN ALL homicides.

Which is it? A or B.
I do not believe you to be the type to slant, distort, twist, side step an easy question so which is it?

I'm in line with what you posted above highlighted in red and green, I think our misunderstanding was in terminology. You claimed the body was wiped clean prior to the autopsy, I said that makes no sense as part of the purpose of the autopsy is to work with law enforcement to ensure that forensic & trace evidence present on the body and in the clothing is preserved (as per the Florida State Medical Examiner Guidelines I link to earlier).

The information you provided above satisfies what I understood. Trance and forensic evidence **IS** collected, the body is photographed, the clothing is removed, and the body is photographed again. After that is done, from what you noted above, the body is cleaned for another external examination and then the follow on internal examination.

Again it may have been a difference in terminology if you consider the "autopsy" not to have started until after the photography and collection of other evidence from the body based on the condition received at the ME's office.



At the end of the day it doesn't make a difference, the body is received and evidence is collected in homicide cases.


>>>>

Fair and reasonable answer. I respect that.
Serious debate is always your first charge.
No problem. But there is no collection of evidence from the body other than the clothes as the trace evidence is collected at the scene. There are always exceptions to that and that is the FPs call.
Ravi and her CSI team denied that.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Postmortem : by Dr. Steven A. Kohler and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht.

"Who Conducts an Autopsy on a Murder Victim:
An autopsy is done by 3 groups of people, autopsy technicians, autopsy photographers and forencisc pathologists. The autopsy technicians prepare the autopsy area and bring the body to the stainless steel examination table. Photos are taken and descriptions of clothing and forensic evidence are collected.
Once this is done the technicians remove the clothing and place it on sheets of paper. a 2nd set of photographs are taken AND THEN THE BODY IS WASHED."

So there you have it in black and white. How many more do I need to post that the facts are, without any doubt, THAT THE BODY IS ALWAYS WASHED, WIPED BEFORE AUTOPSY IN MURDER VICTIM AUTOPSY?

Dumbass fools here. Wonder if any of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.
Hello.
I doubt it. You people are too ignorant to admit you are wrong. Fucking know it alls.

Fair and reasonable answer. I respect that.
Serious debate is always your first charge.
No problem. But there is no collection of evidence from the body other than the clothes as the trace evidence is collected at the scene. There are always exceptions to that and that is the FPs call.
Ravi and her CSI team denied that.

That's not what the first quote above says.

It says Autopsy Technicians prepare the body on a stainless steel examination table, that is not usually present at the scene, that is in the ME's office. Your statement then goes on to say that one of the preliminary steps (after receipt of the body by the ME and it being placed on the stainless steel table) is taking of photographs and "forensic evidence are collected".

Your own statement confirms that in a homicide case that forensic evidence is collected by the ME's office after the body was received. (Not trying to say that "all" forensic evidence is collected at the ME's office, that would be silly as the whole crime scene isn't moved. However what is available on the body is and should be collected in a homicide case.)



>>>>