4 ms·

From the Wikipedia page > In June 2005, the Chief Coroner of Ontario ordered a review of 44 autopsies carried out by Smith. Thirteen of these cases had resulte

by yarcob 6y ago

From the Wikipedia page > In June 2005, the Chief Coroner of Ontario ordered a review of 44 autopsies carried out by Smith. Thirteen of these cases had resulted in criminal charges and convictions. The report was released in April 2007, indicating that there were substantial problems with 20 of the autopsies. That sounds more like 45% to me. Also this bit from the article about a baby that allegedly had a skull fracture: > Later exhumation of the child and examination of the skull have shown that there was no skull fracture. It is thought Dr. Smith confused the normal gap between the baby's skull plates for an injury. Holy shit that is bad. Even as a lay person I know about these gaps.

dathinab 6y ago
> there are gaps between skull plates. Between Baby skull plates, not adult ones ;-) They grow together at some point.
- yarcob 6y ago
  I edited my post to make it clear I don't think skulls have gaps in general.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
> Holy shit that is bad. Even as a lay person I know that there are gaps between skull plates. Sure, but can you tell them apart from a fracture caused by injury? Presumably someone knowledgeable in medicine should be able to, but maybe it is one of those things that isn't as obvious as we, the uneducated outsider, might think.
- R0b0t1 6y ago
  That's an extremely flawed argument. If you can't explain it to a layman then you don't understand it. If you can't tell whether it's a gap or a fracture -- you can't get a conviction. "It just looks like it" is not a valid reason.
  - AS37 6y ago
    Interestingly there's an area of psychology called Naturalistic Decision Making which studies how experts make decisions that they can't explain. (Example: a firefighter may be able to pinpoint where a fire is before they enter a house and see it.)
    - R0b0t1 6y ago
      I know, but that is reason for suspicion, not evidence for a conviction.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    It is possible that they could have well supported their assessment with evidence and still been wrong.

by yarcob 6y ago

dathinab 6y ago

> there are gaps between skull plates. Between Baby skull plates, not adult ones ;-) They grow together at some point.

yarcob 6y ago
I edited my post to make it clear I don't think skulls have gaps in general.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

> Holy shit that is bad. Even as a lay person I know that there are gaps between skull plates. Sure, but can you tell them apart from a fracture caused by injury? Presumably someone knowledgeable in medicine should be able to, but maybe it is one of those things that isn't as obvious as we, the uneducated outsider, might think.

R0b0t1 6y ago
That's an extremely flawed argument. If you can't explain it to a layman then you don't understand it. If you can't tell whether it's a gap or a fracture -- you can't get a conviction. "It just looks like it" is not a valid reason.
- AS37 6y ago
  Interestingly there's an area of psychology called Naturalistic Decision Making which studies how experts make decisions that they can't explain. (Example: a firefighter may be able to pinpoint where a fire is before they enter a house and see it.)
  - R0b0t1 6y ago
    I know, but that is reason for suspicion, not evidence for a conviction.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  It is possible that they could have well supported their assessment with evidence and still been wrong.