Kathleen Savio's Death #1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay so now that we have this whole forum, I'm going to ask and hopefully you'll all forgive me if it's been asked and answered before: I've read the coroner's report but don't quite understand it, is there really enough evidence in there to support a drowning? What about all the other things that were listed, like marks on ankles etc.?
 
6lobyq8.jpg
 
I may have found a partial answer to the question about the blanching.
It is about halfway down this page, under the heading livor mortis.

"(postmortem lividity) is a reddish, purplish-blue discoloration of the skin due to settling of blood, by gravity, in the vessels of the dependent areas of the body. In dependant areas pressed against a hard surface, the vessels are mechanically compressed by the pressure and blood cannot settle in them. This gives these areas a pale coloration"

"Livor mortis usually becomes apparent within a half hour of death. In individuals dying of cardiac failure, livor mortis may actually begin to develop prior to death."

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Nebula/9337/deathtime.html

So if this site is correct, someone/something was putting pressure on those areas during the time that lividity was being established.

There is a period of time after death that livor can shift if the body position is moved.
 
I may have found a partial answer to the question about the blanching.
It is about halfway down this page, under the heading livor mortis.

So if this site is correct, someone/something was putting pressure on those areas during the time that lividity was being established.

There is a period of time after death that livor can shift if the body position is moved.

Was she found sitting up? I can't remember. I wondered earlier if she hadn't been laying on her left side at one point. If she indeed had hand or fingerprints on her upper body, it could have been her own hand squished under her body. Not sure how that explains markings on her legs though. I wish we had a drawing like we did for Michelle Young. (Although it was sad to see at first.)
 
I believe the autopsy said the lividity was found on the anterior (front) of her body. Which would indicate that she was face down.

The part that has me puzzled is the way the coroner worded it as "fingerprint" blanching.

medial= pertaining to the middle
 
Is Drew right-handed? He would inflict injuries mostly to her left side if he is right-handed.

Injuries on her arms and hands could be defensive wounds.

Dorsum medically means back or posterior side (her finger).
 
I thought from the autopsy report that the purple contusions in her mid shins would probably be consistent with a strong hit for the baton. I could be wrong .........


You are probably right. I was thinking of the fingerprint blanching left on her body in different areas. I have to go back and look where those were now! lol My pc is SO slow...argh.
 
I believe the autopsy said the lividity was found on the anterior (front) of her body. Which would indicate that she was face down.

The part that has me puzzled is the way the coroner worded it as "fingerprint" blanching.

medial= pertaining to the middle

Taking what mysteriew posted: "So if this site is correct, someone/something was putting pressure on those areas during the time that lividity was being established," I took it to mean that pale finger marks (prints) were made on her body soon after she died. In other words, someone picked her up and moved her.
 
Taking what mysteriew posted: "So if this site is correct, someone/something was putting pressure on those areas during the time that lividity was being established," I took it to mean that pale finger marks (prints) were made on her body soon after she died. In other words, someone picked her up and moved her.

And after a period of time after death (the time period varies) lividity becomes fixed and won't move even if position is changed. So it doesn't sound like something they did when they moved her to the body bag.
 
And after a period of time after death (the time period varies) lividity becomes fixed and won't move even if position is changed. So it doesn't sound like something they did when they moved her to the body bag.

Right. So, gee, I wonder who could have left fingerprint blanching on her?
 
Right. So, gee, I wonder who could have left fingerprint blanching on her?
I think it means that the fingers while she was alive were pressed hard against something. -OR- it might mean that the fingers were wrinkled, like what happens when you have your hands in water for awhile.
 
I can't see the report right now, but does anyone remember if it was just her left fingers that were wrinkled?
 
You know, my thing about the blanching could be wrong. I just read that in order to determine the time of death, the examiner will press the area discolored by pooled blood inside the body with his finger. If it blanches (turns lighter), then the blood is not clotted yet. But then the discoloration returns. If pushing with his finger doesn't cause blanching, he will try something harder, like forceps. Again, the discoloration will return.

So, by fingerprint blanching, he may have meant that when he performed the test, she had not been dead long enough for him to have to use anything harder than a finger to produce blanching. Or, since bruised areas look similar to pooled blood areas but do not blanch, he may have been discovering which discolorations were due to bruises and which to natural processes, and he just wanted to disclose that he had used his finger.
 
Transcription from the autopsy

The body is cold to the touch. Rigor mortis is absent. Postmortem lividity is purple and fixed over the anterior surfaces of the body. There is fingerprint blanching noted over the right medial breast and blanching over the areola and central portion of the left breast, the left thign, and calf.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb202/toshroger/1194825593.gif
And yes, it only mentions the wrinkling of the fingers and palmer surfaces of the left hand.
 
Transcription from the autopsy


And yes, it only mentions the wrinkling of the fingers and palmer surfaces of the left hand.

To me that sounds like it would have happened being picked up and put into the tub.
 
You know, my thing about the blanching could be wrong. I just read that in order to determine the time of death, the examiner will press the area discolored by pooled blood inside the body with his finger. If it blanches (turns lighter), then the blood is not clotted yet. But then the discoloration returns. If pushing with his finger doesn't cause blanching, he will try something harder, like forceps. Again, the discoloration will return.

So, by fingerprint blanching, he may have meant that when he performed the test, she had not been dead long enough for him to have to use anything harder than a finger to produce blanching. Or, since bruised areas look similar to pooled blood areas but do not blanch, he may have been discovering which discolorations were due to bruises and which to natural processes, and he just wanted to disclose that he had used his finger.

shh...(you know we are doing this discussion wrong, this is the searcdh for SP thread)

But the impression I am getting (and I could be wrong) is that once lividity is fixed, it doesn't move. I would think that means that it wouldn't blanch once it is fixed. Am I wrong on that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
916
Total visitors
995

Forum statistics

Threads
589,923
Messages
17,927,708
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top