it is to me just a matter of semantics, they should have declared it "undetermined" cause since the evidence is not convincing.
here's a quote from a newspaper:
Some prominent forensic pathologists have come forward to offer their services to discredit the San Diego ME's findings, and support a petition to re-open the investigation, and reverse the initial findings.
One noted pathologist, Cyril Wecht, in speaking to KFMB-TV, saw a great deal of questions which need to be further explored. Some of his remarks have been transcribed from an audio feed, and given below in bold print.
"I see no reason why she should have laceration of the scalp or fracture of the calvaria (skullcap) enough to produce hemorrhages, clearly indicative of some form of blunt force trauma. Her head would not have struck anything to produce that. There are also unexplained abrasions, scratches, and contusions of her legs and hands.
For someone to say that there is no evidence of a struggle is not correct. As to the tape marks on her calf, I don't have an explanation for that. Why would you bind your feet? Binding one's hands is not a sophisticated piece of knowledge. People don't think about it, or know about it. How would she know that she would want to bind her hands.
When you put all of this together, it is bothersome. As a medical examiner, in my opinion, the manner of death should have been left as undetermined. Sometimes we can't be sure because more investigation has to be conducted. I would not have been in a big hurry to sign this out as a suicide. I would like to ask these people when have they ever seen a suicide like this?"
