Intruder probability more, less, or same?

[Holdontoyourhat]

RIGHT! A new injury on top of an old one.

WRONG! Abrasion is the visual description, epithelial erosion is microscopic description.

Where do you get this stuff?

 

[BBB167893]

WRONG! Abrasion is the visual description, epithelial erosion is microscopic description.

Where do you get this stuff?

From the experts who examined those microscopic tissue slides. You're not doing yourself any favors.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

An abrasion CAN happen in an instant. But not an erosion.

You're misinformed.

Abrasion was the coroner's visual description of the 7 o'clock area. He later took a sample of that area for microscopic examination, and described epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. This is how an abrasion is described when looking at it under a microscope.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

From the experts who examined those microscopic tissue slides. You're not doing yourself any favors.

I can't wait to see this!

 

[BOESP]

I suggest rereading the autopsy final diagnosis, where there are MANY injuries listed to JBR's front, back, top, and bottom, yet NONE are listed as prior.

That would be beyond strange if the doctor thought prior injury was significant but never listed a single prior injury, doncha think?

I believe we were discussing vaginal erosion and abrasions. Your post didn't address the injuries in total, or at least so it seemed. If you want to discuss the entire autopsy, point by point, maybe we should start a new thread.

 

[BBB167893]

I can't wait to see this!

You might be sorry you said that. In PMPT, the experts (David Jones, John McCann, James Monteleone and Werner Spitz) examined the microscopic slides of tissue taken from JB's vagina and they agreed that she had been the victim of prior injury.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

You might be sorry you said that. In PMPT, the experts (David Jones, John McCann, James Monteleone and Werner Spitz) examined the microscopic slides of tissue taken from JB's vagina and they agreed that she had been the victim of prior injury.

Thats fine. They're entitled to their opinions.

This doesn't change the fact that abrasion and epithelial erosion are one and the same. Epithelial erosion cannot be inferred from the autopsy report alone as being a prior injury. If it could, then the coroner would've noted prior injury in the final diagnosis, which he didn't.

If a panel of doctors wants to get together, before the facts are in as to what happened that night to JBR, without first hand observation, and exclusive of Dr. Meyer decide that JBR was previously abused based on microscopic slides, thats their option.

RDI is way better off quoting these doctors, instead of off-handedly claiming an 'abrasion' isn't 'epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion' when viewed under a microscope.

 

[nobull]

I suggest rereading the autopsy final diagnosis, where there are MANY injuries listed to JBR's front, back, top, and bottom, yet NONE are listed as prior.

That would be beyond strange if the doctor thought prior injury was significant but never listed a single prior injury, doncha think?

He wouldn't need to use the word "prior injury". He would simply describe what he is seeing. For example, a "hematoma, yellow in color" would indicate prior injury of > 5 days without him having to spell it out as "prior injury". Any licensed health care provider (MD, RN, Coroner etc.) would be well aware of stages of bruising, in the U.S. it is part of these curriculums. Just like the word "erosion" and "abrasion" have two completely different meanings to coroners.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Just like the word "erosion" and "abrasion" have two completely different meanings to coroners.

Abrasion was the visual description of an acute injury at 7 o'clock. Epithelial erosion was the subsequent microscopic description of the same acute injury.

Don't take my word for it, read the autopsy.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

He wouldn't need to use the word "prior injury". He would simply describe what he is seeing. For example, a "hematoma, yellow in color" would indicate prior injury of > 5 days without him having to spell it out as "prior injury".

Yeah, too bad for RDI there was no such description.

I suggest reading the autopsy final diagnosis page, which describes nothing like that.

 

[nobull]

Abrasion was the visual description of an acute injury at 7 o'clock. Epithelial erosion was the subsequent microscopic description of the same acute injury.

You just answered your own question. :innocent:

Abrasion and erosion are mutually exclusive, it can't be an "acute" injury, erosions occur over time.

 

[DeeDee249]

Yeah, too bad for RDI there was no such description.

I suggest reading the autopsy final diagnosis page, which describes nothing like that.

The final diagnosis (I assume you mean cause of death)- would not mention it because it wasn't the final diagnosis. The vaginal injuries were not part of the cause of death.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

You just answered your own question. :innocent:

And you're making no sense.

 

[nobull]

And you're making no sense.

I'll try again. On cursory observation it appeared as if it was an abrasion. On further, microscopic study (which you mention above) it was proven to be an epithelial erosion. Erosions occur over time.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The final diagnosis (I assume you mean cause of death)- would not mention it because it wasn't the final diagnosis. The vaginal injuries were not part of the cause of death.

No I don't mean cause of death. The final diagnosis is the place where Dr. Meyer lists his findings. If he was of the opinion that JBR was previously abused because of scar tissue or something that could be dated like that, he would've noted it in the final diagnosis. Instead, this is what it says:

FINAL DIAGNOSIS:

I. Ligature strangulation

A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of neck

B. Abrasions and petechial hemorrhages, neck

C. Petechial hemorrhages, conjunctival surfaces of eyes and skin of face

II. Craniocerebral injuries

A. Scalp contusion

B. Linear, comminuted fracture of right side of skull

C. Linear pattern of contusions of right cerebral hemisphere

D. subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage

E. Small contusions, tips of temporal lobes

III. Abrasion of right cheek

IV. Abrasion/contusion, posterior right shoulder

V. Abrasions of left lower back and posterior left lower leg

VI. Abrasion and vancular congestion of vaginal mucosa

VII. Ligature of right wrist

Toxicologic Studies

blood ethanol - none detected

blood drug screen - no drugs detected

CLINOCOPATHOLIGICAL CORRELATION:

Cause of death of this six year old female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.

John E. Meyer M.D.

Pathologist

jn/12/27/96


During his microscopic examination, he referred to the tissue at 7 o'clock as having 'epithilial erosion'. In his final diagnosis, he referred to the injury at 7 o'clock as an abrasion.

This is an acute injury and has nothing to do with prior injury.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'll try again. On cursory observation it appeared as if it was an abrasion. On further, microscopic study (which you mention above) it was proven to be an epithelial erosion. Erosions occur over time.

And then he went back to abrasion in the final diagnosis? Not hardly.

All you have to do is read the report: He saw the abrasion, took a sample of it, examined it microscopically, and described the tissue as 'epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion'. He then called the injury an abrasion in the final diagnosis.

'Abrasion' and 'epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion' are one and the same. The former describes the injury, the latter the tissue. The capillary congestion means that there is bleeding associated with this specific abrasion--a recent injury.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Hotyh.

http://legacy.revoptom.com/handbook/SECT3F.HTM

Isn't there the inherent distinction, erosion being over time? acute being one instance?

ie the distinction being applied to RCE, corneal erosion,
erosion = repetition

"Recurrent corneal erosion (RCE) is characterized by repeated, spontaneous disruption of the corneal epithelium. In most cases, the malady is preceded by mechanical trauma, such as a corneal abrasion caused by a fingernail"

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hi Hotyh.

http://legacy.revoptom.com/handbook/SECT3F.HTM

Isn't there the inherent distinction, erosion being over time? acute being one instance?

ie the distinction being applied to RCE, corneal erosion,
erosion = repetition

"Recurrent corneal erosion (RCE) is characterized by repeated, spontaneous disruption of the corneal epithelium. In most cases, the malady is preceded by mechanical trauma, such as a corneal abrasion caused by a fingernail"

Erosion over 1 minute is erosion over time.

Epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion is how a new, fresh abrasion is described at the microscopic level. Its worth nothing that the coroner, despite using the term epithelial erosion in describing microscopic tissue, stated this in the final diagnosis:

VI. Abrasion and vancular congestion of vaginal mucosa

Hey I've noticed you're more of a counterpoint poster these days. Given up on the intruder, I suppose? Can't blame you, its a tough road. Not for everybody.

 

[BBB167893]

If a panel of doctors wants to get together, before the facts are in as to what happened that night to JBR, without first hand observation, and exclusive of Dr. Meyer decide that JBR was previously abused based on microscopic slides, thats their option.

What do you mean, "before the facts are in?" They were asked to render an opinion.

RDI is way better off quoting these doctors

I'm never one to turn down good advice when it comes along!

 

[BBB167893]

Given up on the intruder, I suppose? Can't blame you, its a tough road. Not for everybody.

Don't I know it!