go back to part 9

MS. CARLUCCI: "Would you want to know about electrolytes." MR. WEINBERG: Your last question was electrolytes.

MR. DANDAR: He answered that question; right?




Q All right. Those type of things of seeing the New Port Richey records or seeing blood gasses or temperature or electrolytes and things like that, are those some of the circumstances that you are looking for before you can come up with a manner or cause of death?

A Only in a very limited and partial way.

Q Okay. you note in the autopsy report that Lisa's eyes were open. Is there any significance to that?

A It's on my check list.

Q Okay. But does it matter that her eyes were open?

A Probably not. Probably something I can eliminate in the future; come right down to it.

MS. CARLUCCI: Assuming those were your words; correct, Doctor?

THE WITNESS: Yeah, if they were my words.


Q Now you said before that the finding of an embolus may be a red herring. Could you explain that?

A I think we went through, to an extent, to a fairly large extent the fact that an embolus may or may not me an immediate cause of death, number one; number two, that an embolus may be present in a person who could be even asymptomatic, in other words, with no symptoms and/or have symptoms, but is still certainly alive.

Q Based upon what you know now, are you able to say or not say that the embolus was the cause of death for Lisa McPherson?

A Well, first of all, I didn't say that, okay? This was signed by somebody else --

Q Correct.

A -- okay? Secondly -- so to me, I think I would ask that person that.

Q Okay.

A But, no, I don't think I can.

Q Okay. You talked about the director of the lab. Were you talking about the director of the lab at the Wuesthoff Hospital or the medical examiner's office?

A I don't know in the context of what the question is. I mean, what was the rest -- what was the rest of the question?

Q We were talking about vitreous fluid and talking about how you extract it from the eyes and then there was some conversation about the director of the lab.

A Oh, okay. Of necessity, since this would be a situation in which both our office -- when I say "our", I'm referring to District Six, at that point in time -- to the extent that that was involved and the extent that Wuesthoff was involved, it would be -- and in the interest of really looking at true quality control, you would have to include the directors of both labs, and they would do their own appropriate things in their own labs and you follow it through with that null hypothesis; and then once you've gone through that, with everything you've gone through, you know, you disprove everything, then -- then your finding takes on more significance.

Q Do you know who the director of the lab was at -- is there a director of the lab at the examiner's office?

A I believe, yeah, Dr. Wood is. Q Dr. Wood is?

A Yeah.

Q Okay.

A I mean, Dr. Wood supervises an individual -- again, I'm going back to what I recall from May 10th -- okay -- so I don't know if things have changed; however, as of that time, there was a fellow, I believe, who had a master's degree, and -- but Dr. Wood was the head of the lab.

Q Is there any reason why -MR. DANDAR: Strike that.


Q In December of '95 --

A I'm sorry, '95.

Q In December of '95, did the District Six office send all of their vitreous fluid and urine samples out to the Wuesthoff Hospital?


Q If you know.

A What?

Q Back in December of '95 --

A Yeah.

Q -- did all of the lab samples, all of the vitreous fluid samples from the cadavers, victims, that you did autopsies on, go out to the Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital lab for testing, or only special cases?

MR. WEINBERG: As opposed to any other lab; is that what you're saying?


Q As opposed to any other lab or in-house.

A Well, I can tell you there was no -- there was no vitreous done in-house -Q Okay.

A -- okay? -- and you would have to check with them with regard to that,

but I don't -- I can't think of why you'd split those.

Q Right. I don't know.

A So --

Q I'm just --

A I just don't know. You're going to have to check with them

Q Did District Six, as far as you know, back then, use any other laboratories besides Wuesthoff?

A You mean for -- well --

Q Vitreous --

A Not that I know of.

Q Okay. Do you know if the vitreous fluid back in February of '96 was rechecked the same day or was it rechecked several weeks later?

MS. CARLUCCI: If you know. THE WITNESS: I don't know. MR. DANDAR: Okay.


Q Is it within your -- and if I already asked you this, I'm sorry -- but is it within your area of expertise to tell us what can affect the level reading of vitreous -- in vitreous fluid of urea nitrogen?

A There's a whole variety of different things, but, once again, I think experts on vitreous would be perhaps more encyclopedic in their answers and then find there's something that's left out.

Q Was the Protocol in Lisa McPherson's case any different than any other case where you extract vitreous fluid, as far as you know?

A No.

Q Was her vitreous fluid refrigerate within what time frame after it was extracted?


Q If you know.

A I don't know.

Q What would be the customary practice back then?

A I don't know -- I don't know for certain. I would certainly say by the -MS. CARLUCCI: If you don't know --

THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't know for certain.


Q Okay. Was it longer than -- if you know, was it linger than three hours? A I don't know.

Q Okay.

MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me one second. Can we go off the record for one second? (WHEREUPON there was an off-the-record discussion)


MR. DANDAR: All right?


Q As you sit here today, you don't recall anything unusual happening with the way the vitreous was extracted, stored and picked up and returned by

the Wuesthoff Hospital laboratory.

A I don't recall anything.

Q All right. Now in reference to this embolus, you said that it was rather significant and you did not it that there was no total occlusion.

A Hmm-hmm.

Q That means the blood kept flowing.

A Or flowed around it.

Q All right. So if the blood kept flowing, that would not be a cause of sudden death, would it?

A That's not necessarily true.

Q For what reason?

A You'll also notice it was multifocal, which means to say that it was present in more than one area, okay?

If the combined effect of the decrease of the flow as a result of say -like, say, a series of dams on the river -- okay? -- if the net result of that is that it slows down to a trickle -- okay? -- then, sure, it can

cause death.

Q Any evidence of that?

A What's that?

Q Is there any evidence that it slowed down to a trickle?

A Well, "trickle" is a bad word, perhaps. There was evidence that the blood was able to get around these areas.

Q You note in your records the left arm had crusted drying areas. What's the significance of that?

MR. WEINBERG: Where is that in the report?

MR. DANDAR: It's on his Extremities section where all the crustiness is noted.

MR. WEINBERG: Oh, you mean where it says "crusted confluent dark brown lesions"?

MR. DANDAR: Right.

THE WITNESS: Okay. On this report, that I didn't sign, that could be --

that could be a combination of contusions and/or animal activity or it

could -- it could be an abrasion.


Q What's the significance of saying it's crusted?

A Crusted -- well, crusting can be seen in drying areas -- okay? -- in an area that appears dry.

Q Is it crusted because it's -- is it made up of dried blood or is it made

up of something else?

A A lot of times a, quote, crust, unquote, is expressed, what they call serous material, and that's sort of like -- okay, if your blood clots, the stuff that sits on the top, okay?

MR. WEINBERG: Is that like a scab? I'm sorry to interrupt --

THE WITNESS: Yeah, it can be stuff that's expressed; sort of watery stuff that's expressed and then can dry. But I mean, I'm not positive, exactly,

the nature of those lesions and that's the reason I used the word



Q Now you said, on direct examination, that when you used the word insect "slash" animal bites, that may also mean abrasions or contusions?

A Yea. Ordinarily -- yes.

Q Well, why would you use those words "insects/animal bites", and then

also, in the same paragraph, use abrasions and contusions; isn't there some difference to your terminology?

A Sometimes you can see -- well, for instance, the things on the chin --

okay -- to me, were abrasions. They didn't look anything like possible

animal or insect bites or anything like it.

Q Okay.

A And so just because something's in a differential, doesn't mean that everything has to include that differential.

Q Assuming that you used the word to mean what you saw, insect "slash"

animal bites, do you normally find that on someone who's been -- who died suddenly or someone's who's been dead for awhile?

MR. WEINBERG: Objection to the form of the question --

THE WITNESS: You know --

MR. WEINBERG: -- as to any assumptions.

THE WITNESS: -- I guess that would depend on where the person is, the

nature of the insects, how hungry they were -- a whole bunch of different variables. I don't know the answer to your question.


Q A right. And am I correct in saying that, as you sit here today, you do

not have an opinion, based on reasonable medical probability, that Lisa McPherson died from sudden death.

A From "sudden" death.

Q Right.

MS. CARLUCCI: Doctor, you've not formulated any opinions --

THE WITNESS: Yeah, see, I don't have -- I don't have all of the circumstances. MR. DANDAR: All right. I just wanted to clear that up.


Q Doctor, if -- can an emboli or embolus develop if someone is in bed and

is just physically unable to get out of bed?

A Sure.

Q And over a period of -- what? -- several days?

A Yes, and/or it can be spontaneous as we were describing before.

Q Do you know of any studies on the effects of significant dehydration in reference to a person's ability to walk and communicate?

MS. CARLUCCI: Is that out of your area of expertise, Doctor?

THE WITNESS: It really is and the word -- also the word "significant" is open-ended.



Q Now we discussed, on direct examination, your understanding of why Dr.

Wood would call you twice and then send you, either before or after those calls, these thirty page of faxed documents in December of '96.

A Hmm-hmm.

Q Which -- did Dr. Wood express at all or imply at all that she wanted you

to be up-to-date and prepared on all aspects of the autopsy in the even

that you were either deposed or interviewed?

A Dr. Wood did not, no.

Q Did Mr. Bedore?

A He alluded to it. He alluded to the fact that I was -- I had been

involved in the autopsy and that was what he said.

Q Okay. So in that conversation, did you get the feeling that they wanted

to make sure that you knew all the lab reports and diagnoses or findings of the autopsy so that you would -- in the event that you were deposed or interviewed, you would know what the results were?

MS. CARLUCCI: Don't speculate. THE WITNESS: No.


Q Okay.

A I mean, first of all, it was never said. Q Okay.

A Okay?

Q Well --

A Yeah.

Q My exact words, maybe not, but that's why I said -A Right.

Q -- your understanding or impression.

A Okay.

Q You didn't have that understanding or impression; correct? A I don't know. I wasn't comfortable with the whole thing.

Q Okay. Has anyone threatened you?

A No.

Q Has anyone called you at home or your office and given you any type of feeling that you need to be concerned about this case?

A No. No.

Q Has anyone been following you?

A Oh, God, I don't know. I don't look around for people to follow me.

Q Okay.

A I mean, you know, if I see somebody that's a nice -- well, forget it --

but --

MS. CARLUCCI: You're going to get yourself in trouble. You better stop there. THE WITNESS: I better shut up.

MR. WEINBERG: One can only hope; right?


THE WITNESS: I don't know.


Q Okay, so no one's called you to discuss this --

A No.

Q -- except -- except the time that Dr. Wood or Mr. Bedore called you back

in '96.

A That's right. I discussed it -- yes, that's correct.

MS. CARLUCCI: Let me correct you. It was in '97. It was this year. MR. DANDAR: Oh, okay.


Q So the telephone calls are in '97 and the documents were faxed to you in '96?

A That's -- I mean, she's my attorney and she's been through this.

MS. CARLUCCI: As I recall, Ken, just to clarify, he wasn't sure when the calls came, but I want to refer you to the rest of the package which corroborates some telephone calls that took place in, I think, January and February of this year, so I don't want you to think it's just in '96. That package will corroborate other phone calls.

go to part 11

return to Lisa page