1
00:00:05,921 --> 00:00:07,281
Speaker 1: Approache Production.

2
00:00:15,201 --> 00:00:16,481
Speaker 2: Welcome back to our little Ladie.

3
00:00:16,640 --> 00:00:19,041
Speaker 3: It's been a while since we've recorded our last episode,

4
00:00:19,041 --> 00:00:22,001
Speaker 3: but that doesn't mean that Eden has been forgotten all

5
00:00:22,121 --> 00:00:26,041
Speaker 3: the work has stopped. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

6
00:00:26,601 --> 00:00:30,161
Speaker 3: In the last months, a lot has happened. There is

7
00:00:30,281 --> 00:00:33,361
Speaker 3: more and more for Jason and Amanda, their family, and

8
00:00:33,400 --> 00:00:36,201
Speaker 3: the millions of supporters that have listened to this podcast

9
00:00:36,281 --> 00:00:39,881
Speaker 3: to be hopeful for. So over the next few weeks,

10
00:00:39,961 --> 00:00:42,040
Speaker 3: you're going to hear from Jason and Amanda with some

11
00:00:42,400 --> 00:00:46,281
Speaker 3: big bits of news. But in this episode, we're going

12
00:00:46,321 --> 00:00:50,321
Speaker 3: to speak to an expert in forensic pathology about an

13
00:00:50,361 --> 00:00:54,441
Speaker 3: interim report that he's just completed for the Westbrooks.

14
00:00:56,521 --> 00:00:59,921
Speaker 4: My name is doctor Richard Byron Collins. I'm a consultant

15
00:00:59,961 --> 00:01:04,961
Speaker 4: forensic pathologist in private practice, and I've been practicing forensic

16
00:01:05,081 --> 00:01:10,680
Speaker 4: pathology and pathology for approximately fifty years. During that time,

17
00:01:10,761 --> 00:01:14,881
Speaker 4: I've worked largely for the defense. That's because I'm in

18
00:01:14,920 --> 00:01:19,201
Speaker 4: private practice as opposed to being a salaried forensic pathologist

19
00:01:19,560 --> 00:01:23,881
Speaker 4: with a forensic institute in any of the States. During

20
00:01:23,881 --> 00:01:27,521
Speaker 4: that period of time, I've been a lecturer in forensic

21
00:01:27,521 --> 00:01:33,241
Speaker 4: pathology at Monation Melbourne, universities and carried out approximately ten

22
00:01:33,321 --> 00:01:38,641
Speaker 4: thousand post mortem examinations on all types of deaths, largely

23
00:01:38,961 --> 00:01:41,121
Speaker 4: under the jurisdiction of the coroner.

24
00:01:41,601 --> 00:01:44,720
Speaker 1: And I've been involved in giving evidence in.

25
00:01:45,081 --> 00:01:51,121
Speaker 4: Suppose almost all courts throughout Australia and in some courts overseas.

26
00:01:51,441 --> 00:01:53,641
Speaker 2: How did you hear about the Eden Westbrook case?

27
00:01:56,041 --> 00:02:00,401
Speaker 1: I form memory, which is not all that good these days.

28
00:02:00,721 --> 00:02:04,841
Speaker 4: I think I was approached by Channel nine originally and

29
00:02:05,241 --> 00:02:09,481
Speaker 4: got involved through a number of journalists and the family themselves.

30
00:02:10,081 --> 00:02:13,281
Speaker 2: So as part of that work that you've been doing

31
00:02:13,321 --> 00:02:18,681
Speaker 2: with the family, you've just recently handed down a preliminary

32
00:02:18,721 --> 00:02:21,240
Speaker 2: finding on your investigation. Is that right?

33
00:02:21,641 --> 00:02:22,201
Speaker 1: Yes, I have.

34
00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:26,161
Speaker 4: I've headed it really preliminary comments because I didn't have

35
00:02:26,281 --> 00:02:30,000
Speaker 4: all the materials which I would normally have to properly

36
00:02:30,041 --> 00:02:34,401
Speaker 4: review a case where the cause of death and the

37
00:02:34,441 --> 00:02:38,961
Speaker 4: circumstances of the death have come into question, either by

38
00:02:39,561 --> 00:02:44,120
Speaker 4: a family member or a legal firm or the coronial

39
00:02:44,201 --> 00:02:45,321
Speaker 4: system itself.

40
00:02:46,081 --> 00:02:48,681
Speaker 2: We have spoken before, But what was missing? What would

41
00:02:48,721 --> 00:02:49,681
Speaker 2: you have hoped to have seen?

42
00:02:50,401 --> 00:02:55,321
Speaker 4: There were basically three exercises which I as yet have

43
00:02:55,441 --> 00:03:00,321
Speaker 4: been unable to carry out and therefore unable to provide

44
00:03:00,361 --> 00:03:04,881
Speaker 4: a final report, most important of which were the collection

45
00:03:05,321 --> 00:03:10,161
Speaker 4: of autopsy photographs taken during the performance of the post

46
00:03:10,161 --> 00:03:15,001
Speaker 4: mortem examination, which should have shown any abnormalities which were

47
00:03:15,041 --> 00:03:19,680
Speaker 4: present and identified by the pathologist. I haven't as yet

48
00:03:19,721 --> 00:03:25,240
Speaker 4: looked at the light microscope slides, which are made from

49
00:03:25,561 --> 00:03:28,601
Speaker 4: small pieces of tissue which are harvested at the time

50
00:03:28,601 --> 00:03:32,960
Speaker 4: of the autopsy and processed so that each major organ

51
00:03:33,161 --> 00:03:35,561
Speaker 4: can be looked at under the microscope, or a sample

52
00:03:35,601 --> 00:03:39,321
Speaker 4: of each organ can be looked at under the microscope,

53
00:03:39,601 --> 00:03:44,601
Speaker 4: in order to identify any disease processes which might be

54
00:03:44,681 --> 00:03:48,281
Speaker 4: present and may or may not have contributed to the death.

55
00:03:49,281 --> 00:03:53,841
Speaker 4: And where a death is difficult, or whether circumstances are

56
00:03:53,881 --> 00:03:58,161
Speaker 4: difficult to ascertain, and the contents of the autopsy report

57
00:03:58,681 --> 00:04:02,401
Speaker 4: may be difficult to understand. And I'm not necessarily saying

58
00:04:02,441 --> 00:04:05,681
Speaker 4: that that's so in this case, but that's my common

59
00:04:05,681 --> 00:04:09,721
Speaker 4: practice to speak with the pathologist in order to clarify

60
00:04:09,881 --> 00:04:13,121
Speaker 4: some issues that might arise out of the autopsy report.

61
00:04:13,561 --> 00:04:16,841
Speaker 4: And this has certainly been so in this particular case.

62
00:04:18,041 --> 00:04:20,601
Speaker 3: You've heard doctor Collins before in this podcast. He came

63
00:04:20,641 --> 00:04:22,840
Speaker 3: on about a year or so ago to talk about

64
00:04:23,121 --> 00:04:26,200
Speaker 3: how astounded he was that he was unable to access

65
00:04:26,241 --> 00:04:30,721
Speaker 3: photographs of the autopsy. As a forensic pathology expert.

66
00:04:31,521 --> 00:04:32,320
Speaker 2: He said it was.

67
00:04:32,401 --> 00:04:36,401
Speaker 3: Highly unusual and not providing these photographs was hindering the

68
00:04:36,440 --> 00:04:42,001
Speaker 3: family's opportunity for closure. To date, doctor Collins still hasn't

69
00:04:42,041 --> 00:04:45,161
Speaker 3: seen those photographs, and that's why this is only a

70
00:04:45,241 --> 00:04:50,041
Speaker 3: preliminary finding because without those photos it's hard to finalize

71
00:04:50,041 --> 00:04:50,961
Speaker 3: his report.

72
00:04:51,961 --> 00:04:55,841
Speaker 4: Well, I'm fervently hoping, and it may be that I'm

73
00:04:55,880 --> 00:05:00,161
Speaker 4: hoping that pigs might fly, But in reality, if I

74
00:05:00,440 --> 00:05:04,440
Speaker 4: have access to the photographs and am able to speak

75
00:05:04,440 --> 00:05:07,561
Speaker 4: to theol just to clarify some issues and look at

76
00:05:07,561 --> 00:05:13,080
Speaker 4: the microscope slides, then I'm prepared to provide a further document.

77
00:05:13,801 --> 00:05:16,801
Speaker 4: It may or may not alter from what I've said

78
00:05:16,961 --> 00:05:21,481
Speaker 4: in my preliminary statement. And also I would hopefully have

79
00:05:21,681 --> 00:05:27,200
Speaker 4: access to any police investigations which hopefully again had been

80
00:05:27,281 --> 00:05:31,961
Speaker 4: carried out on any items of clothing or the rope

81
00:05:32,161 --> 00:05:34,481
Speaker 4: or the scene at the time of the event.

82
00:05:35,401 --> 00:05:39,761
Speaker 2: You stated in your comments that you are not prepared

83
00:05:39,761 --> 00:05:43,521
Speaker 2: to accept the cause of death as is as fixial.

84
00:05:43,641 --> 00:05:46,760
Speaker 4: Is that he say yes the term in the autops

85
00:05:46,801 --> 00:05:50,441
Speaker 4: of report, which is not one that I would commonly use,

86
00:05:50,481 --> 00:05:53,601
Speaker 4: although I'm not saying that it's not necessarily correct. It

87
00:05:53,641 --> 00:05:57,801
Speaker 4: is really difficult to sort out the mechanism of the

88
00:05:57,801 --> 00:06:00,921
Speaker 4: cause of death in somebody who has been found hanging.

89
00:06:02,081 --> 00:06:05,561
Speaker 4: It's not necessarily due to asphixiator. There are other factors

90
00:06:05,561 --> 00:06:08,880
Speaker 4: which may occur once the neck has been constricted, and

91
00:06:08,961 --> 00:06:12,321
Speaker 4: so I would prefer to if I were happy with

92
00:06:12,401 --> 00:06:16,440
Speaker 4: the circumstances and the findings to give a cause of

93
00:06:16,481 --> 00:06:20,481
Speaker 4: death as hanging. It might be in this case that

94
00:06:20,561 --> 00:06:23,880
Speaker 4: if I'm not happy with the circumstances and the findings

95
00:06:23,880 --> 00:06:27,841
Speaker 4: in the additional materials that I hopefully obtain, then I

96
00:06:27,921 --> 00:06:30,841
Speaker 4: will provide the cause of death as I have already

97
00:06:30,961 --> 00:06:32,281
Speaker 4: as undetermined.

98
00:06:32,961 --> 00:06:36,321
Speaker 2: You mentioned that the location of a fracture I'm guessing

99
00:06:36,361 --> 00:06:38,720
Speaker 2: around the neck I think, in your words, said should

100
00:06:38,721 --> 00:06:41,041
Speaker 2: have rung alarm bells. Can you tell me about what

101
00:06:41,161 --> 00:06:41,601
Speaker 2: you found?

102
00:06:42,761 --> 00:06:46,161
Speaker 4: Yes, Look, I have to be fairly careful at the

103
00:06:46,201 --> 00:06:51,401
Speaker 4: moment inasmuch that I don't divulge too much anatomical information,

104
00:06:51,521 --> 00:06:54,640
Speaker 4: and that's why I might be appearing rather vague. But

105
00:06:55,401 --> 00:06:59,561
Speaker 4: suffice it to say that the ligature in this case

106
00:07:00,281 --> 00:07:02,601
Speaker 4: was found around the upper part of the neck in

107
00:07:02,681 --> 00:07:05,841
Speaker 4: other words, beneath the angle of the you, which is

108
00:07:05,880 --> 00:07:09,601
Speaker 4: not an uncommon place to find a ligature in somebody

109
00:07:09,601 --> 00:07:14,201
Speaker 4: who's died or has been found hanging. So there was that,

110
00:07:15,001 --> 00:07:19,001
Speaker 4: and then there was a fracture in a structure, a

111
00:07:19,041 --> 00:07:23,721
Speaker 4: cartilaginous structure in the voice box, which was well away

112
00:07:23,921 --> 00:07:27,161
Speaker 4: from the actual location of the ligature.

113
00:07:28,481 --> 00:07:30,201
Speaker 1: Now, it's not all.

114
00:07:30,041 --> 00:07:34,881
Speaker 4: That uncommon to find fractures in the voice box in

115
00:07:34,921 --> 00:07:39,681
Speaker 4: somebody who has died by hanging, but in this particular situation,

116
00:07:40,081 --> 00:07:45,001
Speaker 4: it is very uncommon for the fracture to be located

117
00:07:45,201 --> 00:07:48,081
Speaker 4: in the particular part of the voice box as it

118
00:07:48,201 --> 00:07:51,321
Speaker 4: was in this manner. So that's why I think that,

119
00:07:52,561 --> 00:07:55,561
Speaker 4: And this is really no reflection on the pathologist. It's

120
00:07:55,641 --> 00:07:58,921
Speaker 4: just a general comment that if there is a fracture

121
00:07:59,241 --> 00:08:04,921
Speaker 4: in an unusual place, then that should prompt further investigation

122
00:08:05,521 --> 00:08:07,601
Speaker 4: by the investigating officers.

123
00:08:08,081 --> 00:08:12,001
Speaker 2: Are there any alternative explanations on how that injury might

124
00:08:12,041 --> 00:08:16,361
Speaker 2: have been sustained or have you seen it in previous cases.

125
00:08:16,921 --> 00:08:22,241
Speaker 4: I suppose a fracture is occasioned by blunt force trauma,

126
00:08:23,081 --> 00:08:26,601
Speaker 4: and that may have been as a result of compression

127
00:08:26,641 --> 00:08:31,241
Speaker 4: of the neck by another mechanism as opposed to the

128
00:08:31,361 --> 00:08:35,521
Speaker 4: ligature around the neck. Now, there's no evidence that the

129
00:08:35,601 --> 00:08:39,321
Speaker 4: ligature was initially applied lower in the neck. That would

130
00:08:39,441 --> 00:08:42,121
Speaker 4: make me feel much more comfortable about the fracture in

131
00:08:42,121 --> 00:08:48,401
Speaker 4: this particular cartilage. So it says to me that there

132
00:08:48,441 --> 00:08:53,241
Speaker 4: has been some localized pressure by whatever means to that

133
00:08:53,281 --> 00:09:00,201
Speaker 4: particular area, rather than transmitted pressure from a ligature higher

134
00:09:00,321 --> 00:09:03,161
Speaker 4: up in the neck. If there's going to be transmitted

135
00:09:03,201 --> 00:09:07,841
Speaker 4: pressure in the tissue within the neck itself, that usually

136
00:09:08,481 --> 00:09:11,441
Speaker 4: results in fractures in a totally different location.

137
00:09:12,921 --> 00:09:15,001
Speaker 2: Can I pose a question and you may or may

138
00:09:15,001 --> 00:09:16,681
Speaker 2: not be able to answer it, but I guess I'm

139
00:09:16,801 --> 00:09:21,161
Speaker 2: asking this question for the audience. Would it be fair

140
00:09:21,241 --> 00:09:24,561
Speaker 2: to say that an injury to that part of the

141
00:09:24,601 --> 00:09:27,721
Speaker 2: neck might be caused by someone strangling somewhat?

142
00:09:28,801 --> 00:09:31,121
Speaker 4: Well, it might be, and then we'll get into the

143
00:09:32,081 --> 00:09:34,921
Speaker 4: argument of and this is a three day lecture on

144
00:09:35,441 --> 00:09:39,601
Speaker 4: what are the signs of manual strangulation or ligature strangulation?

145
00:09:40,401 --> 00:09:43,961
Speaker 4: And sometimes there is basically nothing on the surface of

146
00:09:44,001 --> 00:09:47,321
Speaker 4: the skin, whereas there may be some damage in the

147
00:09:47,401 --> 00:09:51,241
Speaker 4: underlying tissues. Now, the only surface damage in this case

148
00:09:51,521 --> 00:09:56,521
Speaker 4: that I could identify was an area of bruising below

149
00:09:56,561 --> 00:09:59,641
Speaker 4: the ligature mark on the left side of the neck,

150
00:10:00,281 --> 00:10:03,521
Speaker 4: and this was well away from the actual fracture in

151
00:10:03,561 --> 00:10:08,761
Speaker 4: the cartilage. So that's one of the reasons why I

152
00:10:08,841 --> 00:10:14,201
Speaker 4: am extremely keen to hand the autopsy photographs, because there

153
00:10:14,201 --> 00:10:18,361
Speaker 4: may be something that shows up on the photograph which

154
00:10:18,401 --> 00:10:22,721
Speaker 4: has for whatever reason, been omitted in the post mortem

155
00:10:22,761 --> 00:10:26,241
Speaker 4: examination report. And I would have to say that, you know,

156
00:10:26,321 --> 00:10:29,841
Speaker 4: it's not impossible for a pathologist, and I'm just speaking

157
00:10:29,921 --> 00:10:34,441
Speaker 4: generally here and not referring to this particular pathologist, where

158
00:10:34,841 --> 00:10:37,281
Speaker 4: when you're dictating your notes or writing your notes, you

159
00:10:37,361 --> 00:10:41,041
Speaker 4: might put down the wrong side or you might for

160
00:10:41,121 --> 00:10:46,321
Speaker 4: whatever reason, omit to write down a particular injury or finding.

161
00:10:47,281 --> 00:10:53,801
Speaker 4: And that's why it's mandatory basically to have photographs for comparison.

162
00:10:55,681 --> 00:10:58,041
Speaker 3: You may remember across our reporting of this case that

163
00:10:58,201 --> 00:11:01,841
Speaker 3: Eden Westbrook's post mortem was carried out by a pathologist,

164
00:11:02,041 --> 00:11:06,721
Speaker 3: not a forensic pathologist like doctor Collins. I know, across

165
00:11:06,761 --> 00:11:08,961
Speaker 3: the years this has been a question that Jason and

166
00:11:09,001 --> 00:11:13,081
Speaker 3: Amanda have asked, why did an expert in forensics carry

167
00:11:13,081 --> 00:11:16,481
Speaker 3: out in z autopsy and not just a pathologist.

168
00:11:17,801 --> 00:11:20,481
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that I like the term just a pathologist.

169
00:11:21,001 --> 00:11:24,601
Speaker 4: We're all fellows of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia,

170
00:11:24,961 --> 00:11:29,601
Speaker 4: with varying degrees of training. Now it's my understanding, and

171
00:11:29,641 --> 00:11:32,761
Speaker 4: I could be wrong that the particular pathologist in this

172
00:11:32,881 --> 00:11:37,681
Speaker 4: case was a well trained anatomical pathologist and not necessarily

173
00:11:37,881 --> 00:11:42,321
Speaker 4: a forensic pathologist, but would have some forensic pathology skills,

174
00:11:42,681 --> 00:11:45,521
Speaker 4: because as part of the training of an anatomic pathologist

175
00:11:45,921 --> 00:11:49,161
Speaker 4: you need to have performed a number of post mortem examinations.

176
00:11:50,081 --> 00:11:56,521
Speaker 4: But an anatomical pathologist may not necessarily appreciate the subtleties

177
00:11:56,681 --> 00:12:01,321
Speaker 4: of something abnormal or the subtleties of something normal in

178
00:12:01,401 --> 00:12:05,561
Speaker 4: a particular post mortem examination. I understan and where you're

179
00:12:05,561 --> 00:12:08,321
Speaker 4: coming from, And it's quite a reasonable question, and I

180
00:12:08,401 --> 00:12:11,961
Speaker 4: must say that I have to couch all my comments

181
00:12:12,321 --> 00:12:16,881
Speaker 4: with the caveat that I haven't yet spoken to this pathologist, and.

182
00:12:16,881 --> 00:12:21,761
Speaker 2: The conversation with the pathologist would help you deliver a

183
00:12:21,921 --> 00:12:25,521
Speaker 2: more comprehensive if you like finding Yes.

184
00:12:25,601 --> 00:12:28,481
Speaker 4: You're quite right there. Look, it's not only a matter

185
00:12:28,521 --> 00:12:33,041
Speaker 4: of courtesy to notify another pathologist that you are involved

186
00:12:33,081 --> 00:12:36,161
Speaker 4: in a particular case and assessing their work. The assessment

187
00:12:36,241 --> 00:12:38,681
Speaker 4: might be less than helpful in the long run, but

188
00:12:39,041 --> 00:12:42,321
Speaker 4: it is common courtesy to do so. But it also

189
00:12:42,561 --> 00:12:46,441
Speaker 4: and I found this personally over the years, very important

190
00:12:46,921 --> 00:12:50,721
Speaker 4: and very useful to to the fat with the pathologist

191
00:12:50,841 --> 00:12:54,641
Speaker 4: in relation to the findings that have been documented and

192
00:12:54,921 --> 00:12:57,521
Speaker 4: which may not have been documented but are obvious on

193
00:12:57,561 --> 00:13:01,441
Speaker 4: the photographs. And similarly, that applies to the microscope slides.

194
00:13:01,681 --> 00:13:05,521
Speaker 4: Perhaps a little less relevant in a case where death

195
00:13:05,561 --> 00:13:09,041
Speaker 4: has been due to trauma, as is supposed to be

196
00:13:09,121 --> 00:13:11,881
Speaker 4: in this case, but I've been involved in a number

197
00:13:11,921 --> 00:13:14,921
Speaker 4: of cases where I've requested to look at the light

198
00:13:15,001 --> 00:13:20,481
Speaker 4: microscope slides and found disease conditions which weren't obvious to

199
00:13:20,481 --> 00:13:23,321
Speaker 4: the naked eye. And that is not uncommon to have

200
00:13:23,881 --> 00:13:27,401
Speaker 4: a diseased organ that looks normal macroscopically or to the

201
00:13:27,481 --> 00:13:31,801
Speaker 4: naked eye, and these conditions, it was argued, could have

202
00:13:31,841 --> 00:13:36,201
Speaker 4: played a significant role in the demise of a particular individual.

203
00:13:37,121 --> 00:13:38,641
Speaker 4: And so again that's why I want to look at

204
00:13:38,641 --> 00:13:42,041
Speaker 4: the slides. And it's really a process of dotting the

205
00:13:42,081 --> 00:13:46,721
Speaker 4: eyes and crossing the t's when you're examining something, examining

206
00:13:46,721 --> 00:13:49,201
Speaker 4: a case, it needs to be complete. As far as

207
00:13:49,201 --> 00:13:52,841
Speaker 4: I'm concerned, otherwise it's a waste of time really as

208
00:13:52,841 --> 00:13:53,641
Speaker 4: an exercise.

209
00:13:54,601 --> 00:13:57,001
Speaker 3: Doctor Barron Collins also had some other things that he

210
00:13:57,081 --> 00:14:00,721
Speaker 3: found were unusual in this case. In particular, it was

211
00:14:00,761 --> 00:14:02,841
Speaker 3: some of the things that were not done in his

212
00:14:03,041 --> 00:14:07,761
Speaker 3: expert opinion as a forensic pathologists. For instance, there was

213
00:14:07,841 --> 00:14:10,241
Speaker 3: never any genital swaps done on Eden.

214
00:14:11,521 --> 00:14:11,721
Speaker 2: Well.

215
00:14:11,801 --> 00:14:14,921
Speaker 4: I suppose it's just that it's out of abundance of caution,

216
00:14:15,521 --> 00:14:20,601
Speaker 4: particularly in the circumstances such as this particular case where

217
00:14:20,641 --> 00:14:24,361
Speaker 4: you've got a young teenage girl. One never knows what

218
00:14:24,481 --> 00:14:28,121
Speaker 4: might have happened. And it's quite obvious that the police

219
00:14:28,401 --> 00:14:33,961
Speaker 4: have made no comment in relation to any abnormal finding

220
00:14:34,041 --> 00:14:37,641
Speaker 4: or suspicion of some event that might have occurred. But

221
00:14:38,121 --> 00:14:40,801
Speaker 4: it's too late, after the horse has bolted and you've

222
00:14:40,801 --> 00:14:43,401
Speaker 4: done the autopsy and the bodies being buried or cremated

223
00:14:43,841 --> 00:14:46,121
Speaker 4: to think, oh, for goodness sake, I should have taken

224
00:14:46,161 --> 00:14:49,321
Speaker 4: some genital swaps. It would be out of an abundance

225
00:14:49,361 --> 00:14:52,681
Speaker 4: of caution. But you never know what you're going to find.

226
00:14:52,961 --> 00:14:56,481
Speaker 4: As I say, particularly in the circumstances as these are.

227
00:14:57,401 --> 00:14:59,281
Speaker 2: Is that standard forensic procedure.

228
00:15:00,041 --> 00:15:06,081
Speaker 4: No, it's not, And there are no detail guidelines as

229
00:15:06,081 --> 00:15:09,441
Speaker 4: far as I'm aware from the College as to what

230
00:15:09,521 --> 00:15:14,001
Speaker 4: you must do in a post mortem examination. It's left

231
00:15:14,201 --> 00:15:18,081
Speaker 4: up to the pathologist to decide what the extent of

232
00:15:18,121 --> 00:15:20,961
Speaker 4: the investigation, whether it's only going to be an external

233
00:15:21,001 --> 00:15:25,241
Speaker 4: examination or an external and internal with a number of

234
00:15:25,401 --> 00:15:32,281
Speaker 4: ancillary investigations which would include normally histology and possibly toxicology

235
00:15:32,321 --> 00:15:36,921
Speaker 4: and perhaps biochemistry and microbiology, and then the sampling of

236
00:15:37,001 --> 00:15:41,921
Speaker 4: forensic material. But that's up to the pathologists generally to

237
00:15:42,201 --> 00:15:45,321
Speaker 4: decide what he or she wants to do. That decision

238
00:15:45,401 --> 00:15:48,761
Speaker 4: may or may not be prompted by comments from the

239
00:15:49,121 --> 00:15:52,281
Speaker 4: or information from the investigating police officers.

240
00:15:53,041 --> 00:15:54,161
Speaker 1: Not so in this case.

241
00:15:54,321 --> 00:15:57,721
Speaker 4: It seems to me sadly that for whatever reason, the

242
00:15:57,761 --> 00:16:02,241
Speaker 4: investigating officers at the scene decided that it was basically

243
00:16:02,361 --> 00:16:04,561
Speaker 4: a simple suicide by hanging.

244
00:16:05,121 --> 00:16:05,561
Speaker 1: And that was.

245
00:16:16,881 --> 00:16:19,721
Speaker 3: Welcome back to our in depth chat with doctor Barron Collins,

246
00:16:19,721 --> 00:16:23,121
Speaker 3: who's a forensic pathologist who's working pro bono for the

247
00:16:23,121 --> 00:16:26,361
Speaker 3: Westbrook family to try and find an answer to what

248
00:16:26,481 --> 00:16:30,961
Speaker 3: happened to their little ed. Doctor Collins has undertaken up

249
00:16:30,961 --> 00:16:34,561
Speaker 3: perliminary report for the family after examining some of the

250
00:16:34,601 --> 00:16:38,241
Speaker 3: materials that he's been given he can't complete his work

251
00:16:38,281 --> 00:16:41,801
Speaker 3: because the Corners so far has refused to allow him

252
00:16:41,961 --> 00:16:45,521
Speaker 3: or the family access to the autopsy photos.

253
00:16:46,481 --> 00:16:50,521
Speaker 4: As far as I'm concerned, the credibility of this investigation

254
00:16:51,001 --> 00:16:57,041
Speaker 4: is severely in question, and it's lacking in the totality

255
00:16:57,281 --> 00:17:01,201
Speaker 4: of what, as I understand it at the moment, were

256
00:17:01,241 --> 00:17:05,401
Speaker 4: the investigations by the forensic officers. One never knows what's

257
00:17:05,441 --> 00:17:08,441
Speaker 4: going to turn up, and as I said before, it's

258
00:17:08,481 --> 00:17:11,680
Speaker 4: too late once the body's gone and the materials have gone,

259
00:17:12,120 --> 00:17:14,961
Speaker 4: to say, of christsake, we should have looked at that

260
00:17:15,001 --> 00:17:18,880
Speaker 4: particular aspect. I might have to eat humble pie in

261
00:17:18,961 --> 00:17:22,680
Speaker 4: this particular case, because, as with some other bits and

262
00:17:22,721 --> 00:17:26,281
Speaker 4: pieces in it, I have not been provided with any

263
00:17:26,321 --> 00:17:31,281
Speaker 4: of the results of investigations of the forensic officers, which

264
00:17:31,481 --> 00:17:32,600
Speaker 4: may or may not have been.

265
00:17:32,481 --> 00:17:34,481
Speaker 1: Carried out at the laboratory.

266
00:17:34,840 --> 00:17:37,680
Speaker 4: There may be some results, and there may have been investigations,

267
00:17:38,321 --> 00:17:41,360
Speaker 4: and then I'll be, as I've said, just eating the

268
00:17:41,441 --> 00:17:45,201
Speaker 4: humble pie. But at the moment, my impression and understanding

269
00:17:45,400 --> 00:17:48,321
Speaker 4: is that there was nothing that was taken away from

270
00:17:48,400 --> 00:17:53,760
Speaker 4: the scene which was then examined which could have provided

271
00:17:54,080 --> 00:17:57,640
Speaker 4: evidence of perhaps of a third party involvement.

272
00:17:58,201 --> 00:18:01,600
Speaker 2: You also noted that there's no reliable evidence to determine

273
00:18:01,640 --> 00:18:05,121
Speaker 2: the exact day of death. Can you tell me about that.

274
00:18:06,521 --> 00:18:09,600
Speaker 4: I see in the coroner's finding that it was decided

275
00:18:09,681 --> 00:18:12,680
Speaker 4: that the death occurred on the seventeenth and the body

276
00:18:12,721 --> 00:18:15,801
Speaker 4: was found on the eighteenth. Now, I have no idea

277
00:18:16,360 --> 00:18:21,001
Speaker 4: what the reasoning behind that is, because it's just absolutely unfounded.

278
00:18:21,041 --> 00:18:25,321
Speaker 4: Whatever the reasoning is or unreliable. The determination of the

279
00:18:25,360 --> 00:18:29,120
Speaker 4: time of death is fraught with difficulty, and in the

280
00:18:29,160 --> 00:18:32,600
Speaker 4: old days it used to be based on the presence

281
00:18:32,640 --> 00:18:36,761
Speaker 4: of post mortem changes such as the presence of rigamortis

282
00:18:36,801 --> 00:18:42,240
Speaker 4: and post modern abidity and body temperature. Now there have

283
00:18:42,360 --> 00:18:45,841
Speaker 4: been some monumental stuff ups over the years by so

284
00:18:45,961 --> 00:18:51,041
Speaker 4: called expert pathologists who have pontificated about the time of

285
00:18:51,080 --> 00:18:57,201
Speaker 4: death and caused considerable concern in the courts and wrongful convictions.

286
00:18:58,360 --> 00:19:02,001
Speaker 4: So it is a difficult aspect to look at. The

287
00:19:02,080 --> 00:19:05,400
Speaker 4: most appropriate way to do it, and this is not

288
00:19:05,521 --> 00:19:11,081
Speaker 4: always practicable, is for a pathologist or somebody suitably qualified

289
00:19:11,681 --> 00:19:16,201
Speaker 4: to examine the body, insite you and look for those findings,

290
00:19:16,801 --> 00:19:21,240
Speaker 4: but more particularly pay some reliance on what might be

291
00:19:21,400 --> 00:19:26,400
Speaker 4: the core body temperature. But even that will only give

292
00:19:26,441 --> 00:19:30,001
Speaker 4: you a window of time, and it's certainly not quite

293
00:19:30,041 --> 00:19:33,521
Speaker 4: as easy as it seems when the good doctor in

294
00:19:33,600 --> 00:19:38,321
Speaker 4: Midsummer Murders gives you down to the house, minute, second

295
00:19:38,321 --> 00:19:42,361
Speaker 4: and nanosecond basically of when somebody died. It's all very

296
00:19:42,400 --> 00:19:46,080
Speaker 4: well in a TV series because the time's helpful sorting

297
00:19:46,120 --> 00:19:49,840
Speaker 4: out your witnesses. It's not that simple in real life.

298
00:19:50,640 --> 00:19:54,400
Speaker 4: My view is always that to say that the time

299
00:19:54,441 --> 00:19:57,600
Speaker 4: of death will be a guestimate and from the pathologist,

300
00:19:58,201 --> 00:20:02,721
Speaker 4: and if you have a reliable lay witness or anybody

301
00:20:02,801 --> 00:20:07,001
Speaker 4: else who is reliable, then that evidence should be accepted

302
00:20:07,321 --> 00:20:11,160
Speaker 4: basically over what the pathologist says in a general sense.

303
00:20:11,721 --> 00:20:14,120
Speaker 4: But in this particular case, we've got a couple of

304
00:20:14,120 --> 00:20:18,401
Speaker 4: policemen who talk about rigor mortis and post mortem libidity,

305
00:20:19,001 --> 00:20:24,200
Speaker 4: and that information is less than helpful, of little probity value,

306
00:20:24,400 --> 00:20:26,041
Speaker 4: and in my view, useless.

307
00:20:27,481 --> 00:20:31,360
Speaker 2: What are the most critical failures in your mind in

308
00:20:31,400 --> 00:20:33,961
Speaker 2: this investigation so far, well.

309
00:20:33,880 --> 00:20:35,321
Speaker 1: I think they're twofold.

310
00:20:35,400 --> 00:20:39,400
Speaker 4: One is, again, as I understand it, the lack of

311
00:20:39,521 --> 00:20:43,761
Speaker 4: detailed examination of the crime scene and the harvesting of

312
00:20:43,801 --> 00:20:50,280
Speaker 4: appropriate samples for further investigation. And the apparent incompleteness of

313
00:20:50,321 --> 00:20:56,281
Speaker 4: the post mortem examination. But again I'm not directly criticizing

314
00:20:56,521 --> 00:21:00,561
Speaker 4: the pathologist. I'm quite sure that it was done to

315
00:21:00,640 --> 00:21:04,680
Speaker 4: the extent that was at the time deemed appropriate and

316
00:21:04,761 --> 00:21:08,881
Speaker 4: necess except for what I said before that I am

317
00:21:09,041 --> 00:21:13,000
Speaker 4: concerned that if the fracture in the voice box is

318
00:21:13,041 --> 00:21:17,001
Speaker 4: actually located where it's been described, then that should have

319
00:21:17,080 --> 00:21:20,841
Speaker 4: rung some alarm bells. I need to comment in relation

320
00:21:20,961 --> 00:21:24,640
Speaker 4: to the presence of the fracture. All this may be

321
00:21:24,640 --> 00:21:28,400
Speaker 4: a crock of garbage that I'm talking about and unnecessarily

322
00:21:28,600 --> 00:21:33,880
Speaker 4: worry if it is found that the fracture was in

323
00:21:33,921 --> 00:21:37,400
Speaker 4: a different site and that is a typo in the report.

324
00:21:38,160 --> 00:21:41,160
Speaker 4: Now I can conceive that that occurs. It's occurred to

325
00:21:41,321 --> 00:21:45,361
Speaker 4: every pathologist that's ever written a report that's been typed

326
00:21:45,921 --> 00:21:49,681
Speaker 4: by a well meaning typist, either from notes or from

327
00:21:50,041 --> 00:21:53,561
Speaker 4: a voice machine. So it could simply be a typo,

328
00:21:53,681 --> 00:21:56,961
Speaker 4: and if it is, then some of the concerns fall away.

329
00:21:57,400 --> 00:22:00,041
Speaker 1: But if it's not a typo, there is a real problem.

330
00:22:00,761 --> 00:22:02,801
Speaker 2: And the only way for you to see if that's

331
00:22:02,801 --> 00:22:06,721
Speaker 2: a typo or actually real is those photos.

332
00:22:07,360 --> 00:22:10,680
Speaker 4: Yes, hopefully there'll be some photographs taken of the next structures,

333
00:22:10,801 --> 00:22:13,600
Speaker 4: and yes, that would be of assistance, and also talking

334
00:22:13,600 --> 00:22:17,601
Speaker 4: to the pathologist that may well clarify this aspect that

335
00:22:17,721 --> 00:22:20,400
Speaker 4: I've placed a lot of store in at the moment

336
00:22:20,761 --> 00:22:22,120
Speaker 4: may fade away at some stage.

337
00:22:24,360 --> 00:22:29,001
Speaker 3: Over and over again, experts, family members and anyone with

338
00:22:29,041 --> 00:22:31,561
Speaker 3: a wide view of this case believe that it should

339
00:22:31,561 --> 00:22:35,321
Speaker 3: be reinvestigated so that the family can finally get peace.

340
00:22:35,921 --> 00:22:38,481
Speaker 2: And it's something that doctor Collins also believes.

341
00:22:39,681 --> 00:22:43,080
Speaker 4: Yes, I do, even if it's simply just by the

342
00:22:43,120 --> 00:22:46,201
Speaker 4: measures that I want to do as a forensic pathologist.

343
00:22:46,281 --> 00:22:49,840
Speaker 4: But I think that what the police have done or

344
00:22:49,840 --> 00:22:51,840
Speaker 4: a peer to have done at the moment should be

345
00:22:51,921 --> 00:22:56,281
Speaker 4: questioned and if there's any more information, it should be provided,

346
00:22:56,921 --> 00:22:59,441
Speaker 4: and if there isn't, well then it's been pathetic.

347
00:23:00,761 --> 00:23:03,321
Speaker 2: Are you hopeful that you'll get to see those photos

348
00:23:03,561 --> 00:23:04,640
Speaker 2: on behalf of the family.

349
00:23:05,321 --> 00:23:06,400
Speaker 1: I am hopeful, you know.

350
00:23:06,561 --> 00:23:09,960
Speaker 4: Look I have said in my report, it beggars belief

351
00:23:10,481 --> 00:23:15,160
Speaker 4: why the photographs haven't been provided, particularly to somebody like

352
00:23:15,281 --> 00:23:18,721
Speaker 4: myself who is an expert in the area and who's

353
00:23:18,761 --> 00:23:23,001
Speaker 4: been engaged by the family, who have a desperate interest

354
00:23:23,201 --> 00:23:26,161
Speaker 4: in the accuracy of the autopsier report.

355
00:23:26,360 --> 00:23:27,481
Speaker 1: And the findings.

356
00:23:28,400 --> 00:23:32,801
Speaker 4: I just can't understand why they haven't been sent to

357
00:23:32,840 --> 00:23:35,281
Speaker 4: me with the proviso that I won't show them to

358
00:23:35,321 --> 00:23:39,400
Speaker 4: anybody or talk in detail about them. The reasoning that

359
00:23:39,441 --> 00:23:42,680
Speaker 4: the coroner has provided seems to me to be meaningless,

360
00:23:43,120 --> 00:23:47,241
Speaker 4: and it appears that there is no real understanding by

361
00:23:47,281 --> 00:23:51,840
Speaker 4: the cranial system as to how valuable these photographs are.

362
00:23:52,321 --> 00:23:58,080
Speaker 4: Firstly to me to verify the autopsier report, and secondly

363
00:23:58,840 --> 00:24:02,521
Speaker 4: to be able to answer the questions or the concerns

364
00:24:02,521 --> 00:24:06,160
Speaker 4: that have been expressed by the family in relation to

365
00:24:06,241 --> 00:24:10,880
Speaker 4: the presence or otherwise of facial injuries. Now, there are

366
00:24:10,921 --> 00:24:13,640
Speaker 4: certainly some pictures that were taken at the scene, but

367
00:24:13,681 --> 00:24:17,321
Speaker 4: these are not of sufficient quality for me to properly

368
00:24:17,600 --> 00:24:21,441
Speaker 4: interpret at least the facial features in relation to injuries.

369
00:24:21,961 --> 00:24:26,521
Speaker 4: And secondly, they're certainly not the extent that one would

370
00:24:26,561 --> 00:24:28,761
Speaker 4: have in a post mortem examination set.

371
00:24:29,801 --> 00:24:32,521
Speaker 2: I want to ask a personal question here, and feel

372
00:24:32,600 --> 00:24:34,600
Speaker 2: free not to answer it if you don't want to.

373
00:24:35,160 --> 00:24:39,721
Speaker 2: But you're not being paid by anyone to ask these questions,

374
00:24:40,201 --> 00:24:43,281
Speaker 2: So what drives you to find an answer here? Dr Colin?

375
00:24:44,001 --> 00:24:47,001
Speaker 1: The answer to your question is no, I'm not being paid.

376
00:24:47,241 --> 00:24:50,361
Speaker 4: I often get asked this question by the prosecutor when

377
00:24:50,360 --> 00:24:53,601
Speaker 4: I'm giving evidence for the defense in a matter, and

378
00:24:53,721 --> 00:24:57,681
Speaker 4: my simple answer is, yes, I am being paid counsel,

379
00:24:57,761 --> 00:25:00,960
Speaker 4: but so are you look it. I am not a

380
00:25:01,080 --> 00:25:05,360
Speaker 4: hired gun for a particular side. I do do work

381
00:25:05,400 --> 00:25:09,001
Speaker 4: for the prosecution that that's relatively minimal, because, as I

382
00:25:09,080 --> 00:25:12,881
Speaker 4: said before, sitting out in the public domain as an expert,

383
00:25:13,201 --> 00:25:18,080
Speaker 4: it's usually the defense that requests my expertise. I do

384
00:25:18,080 --> 00:25:20,921
Speaker 4: do pro bono work, although not a huge amount, and.

385
00:25:20,840 --> 00:25:21,761
Speaker 1: That's what this is.

386
00:25:21,840 --> 00:25:25,880
Speaker 4: Except I should say that I was paid a small

387
00:25:25,921 --> 00:25:30,561
Speaker 4: amount by Channel nine to provide my initial views, but

388
00:25:30,681 --> 00:25:34,681
Speaker 4: I have not rendered any account at all to the family.

389
00:25:35,201 --> 00:25:39,761
Speaker 4: I am concerned that justice has not been done in

390
00:25:39,761 --> 00:25:43,801
Speaker 4: this case, and I'm happy to assist if I can

391
00:25:44,640 --> 00:25:49,681
Speaker 4: and provide what I think is a detailed and unbiased

392
00:25:50,360 --> 00:25:55,041
Speaker 4: examination of the material. The bottom line is that if

393
00:25:55,080 --> 00:26:00,120
Speaker 4: I'm ever accused of being biased in a report, then

394
00:26:00,360 --> 00:26:03,760
Speaker 4: my credibility goes out the window, and so I have

395
00:26:03,840 --> 00:26:08,121
Speaker 4: to remain down the line so that the court can

396
00:26:08,160 --> 00:26:12,440
Speaker 4: be assisted by what I say, whether it's advantageous or

397
00:26:12,521 --> 00:26:16,401
Speaker 4: useful to the defense or the Crown or whoever employed

398
00:26:16,441 --> 00:26:20,360
Speaker 4: me is irrelevant. And just if you've got time, and

399
00:26:20,400 --> 00:26:22,441
Speaker 4: now you've asked the question, I'll have to tell you.

400
00:26:23,521 --> 00:26:25,400
Speaker 4: There was the case some years ago where I was

401
00:26:25,481 --> 00:26:28,880
Speaker 4: employed by the defense to provide a report at the

402
00:26:28,921 --> 00:26:33,521
Speaker 4: committal hearing for an accused person. I did so, it

403
00:26:33,721 --> 00:26:37,600
Speaker 4: was of no use to the defense. Somehow it got

404
00:26:37,640 --> 00:26:42,840
Speaker 4: tabled and the Crown used it in the trial. So

405
00:26:42,921 --> 00:26:45,200
Speaker 4: I went from one side to the other side with

406
00:26:45,241 --> 00:26:48,120
Speaker 4: the same report. So, in other words, it was down

407
00:26:48,160 --> 00:26:51,041
Speaker 4: the middle, and it was to assist the court, not

408
00:26:51,080 --> 00:26:55,200
Speaker 4: to assist my pecuniary interests or anybody else's, or to

409
00:26:55,241 --> 00:26:58,080
Speaker 4: get somebody off or to convict somebody. It was there

410
00:26:58,120 --> 00:27:00,441
Speaker 4: for the court to look at. So that's a long

411
00:27:00,521 --> 00:27:02,201
Speaker 4: answer to a fairly short question.

412
00:27:02,761 --> 00:27:03,241
Speaker 1: But that's it.

413
00:27:04,041 --> 00:27:07,121
Speaker 2: And finally, you've worked in Tasmania a fair bit. I'm

414
00:27:07,201 --> 00:27:09,840
Speaker 2: aware of some of the cases you've looked at in Tasmania.

415
00:27:10,681 --> 00:27:14,480
Speaker 2: Is there a difference in dealing with the Tasmanian coronial

416
00:27:14,761 --> 00:27:18,401
Speaker 2: process than other parts of Australia. Is it harder or

417
00:27:18,441 --> 00:27:20,961
Speaker 2: is this just the way things are? I think it's

418
00:27:21,001 --> 00:27:22,401
Speaker 2: probably just the way things are.

419
00:27:22,961 --> 00:27:25,920
Speaker 4: I've never found a croner to be quite so recalcitrant

420
00:27:26,201 --> 00:27:30,321
Speaker 4: as in this matter. Generally speaking, I will be provided

421
00:27:30,360 --> 00:27:34,600
Speaker 4: with all the materials I require and request. In a

422
00:27:34,681 --> 00:27:39,680
Speaker 4: case there are differences from state to state. For example,

423
00:27:40,120 --> 00:27:44,360
Speaker 4: Western Australia won't send me the light microscope slides, so

424
00:27:44,600 --> 00:27:48,321
Speaker 4: I have to rely on the pathologist's actual written report

425
00:27:48,721 --> 00:27:50,921
Speaker 4: or go to Western Australia to look at the slides.

426
00:27:51,400 --> 00:27:53,600
Speaker 1: Other states will provide them to me.

427
00:27:54,360 --> 00:27:57,760
Speaker 4: I suppose I have to couch these comments in relation

428
00:27:57,880 --> 00:28:00,920
Speaker 4: to the fact that I'm usually working in a case

429
00:28:01,001 --> 00:28:05,680
Speaker 4: that has legal ramifications, and so the legal problems were

430
00:28:05,721 --> 00:28:09,440
Speaker 4: on foot at that time, and that may well be

431
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:13,840
Speaker 4: why the coroner in Tasmania in this particular case was

432
00:28:13,961 --> 00:28:16,041
Speaker 4: reluctant to provide me with the information.

433
00:28:16,441 --> 00:28:18,720
Speaker 1: But I think if that's the reason, then as ap

434
00:28:18,761 --> 00:28:19,360
Speaker 1: port reason