View Single Post
Old 07-18-2017, 02:42 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,865

Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well let's recap the discussion.

When I pointed out that Bond's notes were split into two - an in-situ examination and a post-mortem examination - you told me that this was perfectly normal and I should look at Dr Phillips' report in the McKenzie case.
I stand by that.

But the Phillips report in the McKenzie case is broken down into an in-situ examination and a post-mortem examination in the mortuary.
This again is normal, its what we expect in the vast majority of cases.

When I asked you why this was not the case for the Kelly murder you suddenly changed your mind and told me that the Kelly murder was not normal so it will all be different!
That is not a change of mind.
You were suggesting the Kelly case should be conducted 'normally', that your assumption is based upon a normal procedure.
I was saying the circumstances were not normal in that case. Meaning, Dr Bond's 'post mortem' is not the official post mortem, so the circumstances are quite different.
The normal procedure applies to Phillips, not Bond.

My point is that the fact that the notes of Bond's post-mortem examination start on a new page is consistent with it being a different examination conducted at a different time and place.
But it is also consistent with a change in subject, from visual examination to post mortem.
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote