4 ms·
Not exactly the same, but in Ohio the only person not from the state with the authority to arrest the county sheriff is the county coroner (how did that come ab
by xxpor 14y ago
Not exactly the same, but in Ohio the only person not from the state with the authority to arrest the county sheriff is the county coroner (how did that come about?).
- voidlogic 14y agoIt seems strange, but this policy seems pretty pragmatic to me: Here you have two elected county-level officials who often work together and thus are familiar with each-others business, but are not subordinates to one another. Basically peers.
- scarmig 14y agoIt makes some sense: the coroner is an elected official (why the hell do we elect coroners?) who has some independence from the sheriff. Other officials who are ostensibly higher level than the sheriff probably depend on his good graces as much as the sheriff does on them.
- xxpor 14y ago>why the hell do we elect coroners? I've wondered that as well. What are even the issues in a coroner election? Seems like a pretty objective job to me. The other poster makes the point about the coroner and sheriff being peers. That makes sense.
- Turing_Machine 14y agoThe coroner and the medical examiner have different functions in most modern jurisdictions. The coroner is in charge of the legal stuff, the medical examiner is in charge of stuff like determining the actual cause of death. There's a "coroner's jury" in some jurisdictions that hears evidence and decides whether the death was criminal, accidental, natural causes, etc. The medical examiner would (e.g.) determine that the person died from a gunshot wound. The coroner (or coroner's jury) would decide whether a crime was involved (rather than suicide, accident, lawfully shot by the cops or in self-defense by someone else).
- Evbn 14y agoIn the UK the coroner performs the inquest in a suspicious death.
- tomjen3 14y agoMakes sense, actually. If the county sheriff abused his authority to commit murder, the coroner would know about it.