3 ms·
Sorry, I had omitted sourcing in my original comment but here: > Dr. Jonathan Arden, the former Chief Medical Examiner of the District of Columbia was hired by
by munk-a 4y ago
Sorry, I had omitted sourcing in my original comment but here:
> Dr. Jonathan Arden, the former Chief Medical Examiner of the District of Columbia was hired by Smith's widow as part of her lawsuit to have her husband's suicide ruled "in the line of duty". His report stated that the "acute, precipitating event that caused the death of Officer Smith was his occupational exposure to the traumatic events he suffered on January 6, 2021".[1]
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jeffrey_L._Smith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jeffrey_L._Smith
- jtbayly 4y ago
- weakfish 4y agoEr… that’s quite a large jump in reasoning
- happytoexplain 4y agoWhat is outrageous about investigating a person's motivations/psychology, and why does it become more outrageous if that person is deceased at the time of the investigation? You may disagree with the conclusion for some reason, but it seems like standard practice.
- vuln 4y agoShe hired an expert to get the ruling “line of duty” because it changes and increases his life insurance payouts. It also gives her access to survivors benefits and a slew of other things like part of his pension.
- munk-a 4y agoYes, it was a precedent breaking ruling - which tend not to be given out lightly. That is a strong indicator that during this motion all of the evidence was under even higher scrutiny.