Max's Search Warrants Released!!!! Discuss Max's Death here #2

greenpalm · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
Constant, quickening motion is needed to speed up a fall. Slowing down a fall by using arms or legs lessens the velocity. That's why an unconscious person would have greater velocity in going over a railing than a conscious person would.

That may be true but I don't think it matters. What damaged his spinal cord, and ultimately killed him was landing on his face. Thats what whipped his head back. He must have grabbed out at the chandelier, because he pulled it down. That would certainly require him to be conscious. His face may have hit the opposite railing, or possibly the floor itself. I'm willing to consider that he was up on the railing reaching out to the chandelier when he fell, possibly trying to use the scooter to reach the chandelier.

While I don't find your murder theory plausible, I do understand it. What's the motive?

CDS22 said:
As far as MS riding a scooter goes, he would not have been able to get that scooter over the railing no matter how quickly he was going because a scooter can't leap up into the air and over a railing no matter how quickly you ride it. Remember, LE says he was found on his back with a scooter on his leg.

We are in complete agreement here, no way did that scooter go over the railing, even if he held on tight to the scooter, he would have possibly flipped over the railing, but the scooter would have stayed behind.

Morag · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
Respectfully, the bottom of a pool is a different surface than a carpeted landing.

The floor on which Max landed was carpet over concrete/cement.

jjenny · Sep 24, 2011

greenpalm said:
That may be true but I don't think it matters. What damaged his spinal cord, and ultimately killed him was landing on his face. Thats what whipped his head back. He must have grabbed out at the chandelier, because he pulled it down. That would certainly require him to be conscious. His face may have hit the opposite railing, or possibly the floor itself. I'm willing to consider that he was up on the railing reaching out to the chandelier when he fell, possibly trying to use the scooter to reach the chandelier.

While I don't find your murder theory plausible, I do understand it. What's the motive?

We are in complete agreement here, no way did that scooter go over the railing, even if he held on tight to the scooter, he would have possibly flipped over the railing, but the scooter would have stayed behind.

The scooter is very light. About 7lb. What makes you think it would be impossible for the scooter to go over the railing if the child was holding it?

SunnieRN · Sep 24, 2011

Iwannaknow did a wonderful explanation as to how it was possible for the scooter to go over with/at the same time. as Max. There is one part of the bannister/railing, going from the second floor landing (the highest landing), down to the first step, that is lower than a normal bannister/railing at that point.

At this point, if Max was riding the scooter, he could have fallen over something, or fallen toward the lower part of the bannister/railing, and the handle of the scooter could have acted like a catapult. I am not sure I am explaining this correctly.

I hope she will provide a link to the post she did, as it was fantastic and helped me realize that it was possible, even though it has not been proven, no one having seen the accident occur.

greenpalm · Sep 24, 2011

jjenny said:
The scooter is very light. About 7lb. What makes you think it would be impossible for the scooter to go over the railing if the child was holding it?

Well, what I'm picturing, is Max, zooming down the upstairs hall on the scooter. He zips along at a good clip, and then: BAM, he hits the railing. The front wheel of the scooter is stopped by the railing, but the impact jerks Zmax forward. Honestly, the scoters got a low center of gravity, like a skate board, it's down near the floor. I think he'd let go of it instinctively to 1. Try to stop his fall, and 2. He wouldn't be able to hold on to it because he would be propelled forward while the railing itself would halt the scooter. The scooters main weight would actually have to be elevated up and over the railing, whereas max himself already has his center of gravity higher up. (honestly, I don't think even max would go over the railing under these circumstances)

defense101 · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
Respectfully, the bottom of a pool is a different surface than a carpeted landing.

Respectfully, the floor is most likely concrete and even if wood its not the velocity its how the head hits and the action that occurs afterwards. ie land on the right top front and have your feet land behind you, my point is its not velocity its how you hit your head and the action of the body afterward.

jjenny · Sep 24, 2011

greenpalm said:
Well, what I'm picturing, is Max, zooming down the upstairs hall on the scooter. He zips along at a good clip, and then: BAM, he hits the railing. The front wheel of the scooter is stopped by the railing, but the impact jerks Zmax forward. Honestly, the scoters got a low center of gravity, like a skate board, it's down near the floor. I think he'd let go of it instinctively to 1. Try to stop his fall, and 2. He wouldn't be able to hold on to it because he would be propelled forward while the railing itself would halt the scooter. The scooters main weight would actually have to be elevated up and over the railing, whereas max himself already has his center of gravity higher up. (honestly, I don't think even max would go over the railing under these circumstances)

Since the scooter was found next to Max, it either went down with him or was already down there. I think because it's so light it could have gone over the railing with him.

greenpalm · Sep 24, 2011

jjenny said:
Since the scooter was found next to Max, it either went down with him or was already down there. I think because it's so light it could have gone over the railing with him.

Yeah, I just always figured it was already down there, but I suppose it could have happened either way. Regardless, honestly, I think there are a number of possible explanations, but they all say "accident" to me. We'll never really know.

branwynbreeze · Sep 24, 2011

I found this article interesting, just passing it along.

Emergency Evaluation Of The Pediatric Cervical Spine

http://www.ebmedicine.net/topics.php?paction=showTopicSeg&topic_id=147&seg_id=2921

JBean · Sep 24, 2011

defense101 said:
Respectfully, the floor is most likely concrete and even if wood its not the velocity its how the head hits and the action that occurs afterwards. ie land on the right top front and have your feet land behind you, my point is its not velocity its how you hit your head and the action of the body afterward.

Personally, I think this is it in a nutshell.A situation where one person could stand up and walk away,may kill another due to the angle and the subsequent response by the body.

I knew one child that died from a seemingly inconsequential bump to the head, when he fell off his little scooter;much like Natsha Richardson.
Sometimes it is just the right spot(s) the right way under the right circumstances.

CDS22 · Sep 24, 2011

branwynbreeze said:
I found this article interesting, just passing it along.

Emergency Evaluation Of The Pediatric Cervical Spine

http://www.ebmedicine.net/topics.php?paction=showTopicSeg&topic_id=147&seg_id=2921

Thank you for this link. It proves that Max's spinal cord injury was visible through diagnostic tools, like MRI's.

This paragraph was particularly interesting:

CSIs related to child abuse are most commonly SCIWORA type injuries. Hadley et al found that, in 6 patients on whom autopsy was performed who had presented with classic findings of non-accidental trauma from shaking (profound neurological impairment, seizures, retinal hemorrhages, and intracranial subarachnoid and/or subdural hemorrhages), 5 also had injuries at the cervicomedullary junction consisting of subdural or epidural hematomas of the cervical spinal cord with proximal spinal cord contusions.64 MRI findings in the subset of child abuse patients evaluated by Brown et al included diffuse edema and hemorrhage of the cervical spinal cord.5 Abuse can also be associated with hangmans fracture secondary to the hyperflexion and hyperextension that occurs with shaking. While fortunately not a common injury, several case reports have described infants with hangmans fracture secondary to abuse.65,66 Rooks et al described 2 twins who sustained fracture-dislocation injuries of the cervical spine along with numerous other fractures in the axial and appendicular skeleton.

http://www.ebmedicine.net/topics.php?paction=showTopicSeg&topic_id=147&seg_id=2921

CDS22 · Sep 24, 2011

JBean said:
Personally, I think this is it in a nutshell.A situation where one person could stand up and walk away,may kill another due to the angle and the subsequent response by the body.

I knew one child that died from a seemingly inconsequential bump to the head, when he fell off his little scooter;much like Natsha Richardson.
Sometimes it is just the right spot(s) the right way under the right circumstances.

Respectfully, Natasha Richardson had an epidural hematoma, which is quite different from Max's spinal cord contusion. I think Dr. Peterson would have been less suspcious of Max's injuries had an epidural hematoma been present.

I know what you're saying about a fraction of a difference in an accident making all the difference between one case and another, but in this case, we're looking at a type of contusion that doesn't make sense with any kind of household injury.

CDS22 · Sep 24, 2011

jjenny said:
Since the scooter was found next to Max, it either went down with him or was already down there. I think because it's so light it could have gone over the railing with him.

Or someone put it there.

Because it's light, it would have flown out from him if he fell with impact on the ground. Remember, a scooter is on wheels. His hands were not found on the scooter's handlebars, nor was he found on his back by the LE the way he presumably fell (his injuries were on the front of his face, not his back).

Also, how would a scooter fall explain the injuries down the length of his back?

Diagram:

http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/shacknai, max_report.pdf

branwynbreeze · Sep 24, 2011

2 quotes from as article:

While children of all ages have similar rates of CSI related to MVA injury, children under the age of 10 are more likely to sustain CSIs from falls and pedestrian accidents. In contrast, children above age 10 have a higher incidence of sports and bicycle related injuries.1

Although unusual, child abuse is another unfortunate cause of pediatric CSI. While most reports in the literature detail only isolated cases of CSI associated with shaken impact syndrome, Brown et al reported a 3% incidence of child-abuse-related CSI at a level 1 pediatric trauma center.5

I could be wrong, but think they are speaking more of shaken child syndrome in most cases.

JBean · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
Respectfully, Natasha Richardson had an epidural hematoma, which is quite different from Max's spinal cord contusion. I think Dr. Peterson would have been less suspcious of Max's injuries had an epidural hematoma been present.

I know what you're saying about a fraction of a difference in an accident making all the difference between one case and another, but in this case, we're looking at a type of contusion that doesn't make sense with any kind of household injury.

LOL, obviously they are different. I am only drawing a comparison to the fact that certain injuries produce different results based on the details of the injury. no more no less.
A child going over a railing and onto the floor below could certainly be a household injury. The way he may have landed is everything.

elementry · Sep 24, 2011

jjenny said:
The scooter is very light. About 7lb. What makes you think it would be impossible for the scooter to go over the railing if the child was holding it?

I would think something hard and somewhat of long, right-angled proportions such as a scooter, being pulled over a railing, would leave some marks or chips on the banister. So it would have had to clear the banister without once touching if there were no marks.

CDS22 · Sep 24, 2011

JBean said:
LOL, obviously they are different. I am only drawing a comparison to the fact that certain injuries produce different results based on the details of the injury. no more no less.
A child going over a railing and onto the floor below could certainly be a household injury. The way he may have landed is everything.

I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that a household injury (a fall over a stair railing onto a carpeted surface) couldn't produce the velocity needed to cause a fatal spinal cord contusion. An epidural hematoma would be the more likely result of a household injury, but that's not what happened.

greenpalm · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
Or someone put it there.

Because it's light, it would have flown out from him if he fell with impact on the ground. Remember, a scooter is on wheels. His hands were not found on the scooter's handlebars, nor was he found on his back by the LE the way he presumably fell (his injuries were on the front of his face, not his back).

Also, how would a scooter fall explain the injuries down the length of his back?

Diagram:

http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/shacknai, max_report.pdf

The sheriffs drawings show him hitting his face on the opposite bannister. If he did that, it would also explain why he didn't try to catch himself, he may have lost consciousness upon that impact.

CDS22 · Sep 24, 2011

greenpalm said:
The sheriffs drawings show him hitting his face on the opposite bannister. If he did that, it would also explain why he didn't try to catch himself, he may have lost consciousness upon that impact.

Respectfully, I don't believe a hit from the railing to that bannister could produce a sufficient enough blow to cause a fatal spinal cord contusion. I also believe that if he were conscious when he first hit the bannister, he still would have had injuries on his arms from trying to break his fall.

How do you explain the long series of abrasions down the back of his spine? These are my words and my words only (and my opinion), but I believe those to be rug burn abrasions from being dragged, unconscious, down the stairs to place him "just so" and stage the scooter, soccer ball scenario. My opinion, but it is mine.

JBean · Sep 24, 2011

CDS22 said:
I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that a household injury (a fall over a stair railing onto a carpeted surface) couldn't produce the velocity needed to cause a fatal spinal cord contusion. An epidural hematoma would be the more likely result of a household injury, but that's not what happened.

I can't even imagine how you came to that conclusion.Doesn't make sense to me.

Max's Search Warrants Released!!!! Discuss Max's Death here #2

I don't say much unless I've really thought it thr

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

I don't say much unless I've really thought it thr

New Member

Well-Known Member

I don't say much unless I've really thought it thr

Well-Known Member

Retired WS Administrator

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Retired WS Administrator

New Member

New Member

I don't say much unless I've really thought it thr

New Member

Retired WS Administrator

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics