Post mortems on certain deaths - why?

RMCF

Registered User
Messages
1,432
I just heard on the news today that the latest gangland member (or scumbag) who was murdered was receiving a post-mortem.

Is it a stupid question to ask why?

I heard he was fired at 11 times (assuming most hit him) and was hit in the head.

Now I'm no expert but surely the cause of death would be 'bullet to head'.

Why is a post-mortem needed?
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

I suppose it's pretty standard.
And if it ever goes to court then the report will be produced.
And if you RMCF were walking the area and got killed in the crossfire, then you'd have a post-mortum too.

I'm no expert either but they guy could have been dead before being hit in the head.
Not that it makes much difference
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

I appreciate that its probably all done for legal reasons, but if a guy wearing a bullet proof vest gets shot in the head I'm sure it doesn't need a post-mortem to decide he died from bullet wounds.

Ah way, end of question. Thanks.
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

PM's are done in a range of circumstances to identify the exact cause of death. In all cases of questionable, suspicious or unexplained deaths ie. murder/manslaughter/road traffic accidents they are automatically done to identify the cause of death. There would also be an evidence component to a PM - as this is necessary for criminal prosecutions, coroners courts and for death certificates. PM's are automatically conducted in sudden death cases where the death occurs within 24 hours of admission (I think thats the period) - also where the deceased was not attended to by a doctor prior to admission and becoming deceased. In these type of incidents the deceased body becomes the property of the state - and what this means in that the state has the right to conduct a PM without seeking the permission of the family or next of kin. GP's can also request PM's prior to signing death certificates on cause of deaths in the community. Doctors frequently request PM's to get answers - where for instance the progression of the disease was rapid and aggressive - permission of the family is generally obtained in these instances.
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

What where a post mortem would be offensive to their religious beliefs?
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

PM's would be done under the circumstances as outlined above.
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

I am sure there are some religions that prohibit it. The state would have to take notice of that.
 
In the cases identified above, they may need to recover the bullets as forensic evidence. Likewise, they'd need to establish that he was shot whilst still alive (potentially murder) and that he didn't drop dead of a heart attack from running or shock (potentially manslaughter/assault) and was shot afterwards
 
Re: Post mortem's on certain deaths - why?

I am sure there are some religions that prohibit it. The state would have to take notice of that.

The simple answer is No... if a death occurs in the circumstances as I outlined above your body for purposes of carrying out a PM becomes the property of the state... In carrying out the last rites like in deaths that are unsuspicious - these rites are normally conducted with respect to the deceased persons religious beliefs - however PM's have different purposes which in some obvious circumstances over-ride religion.
 
Did ye ever notice, on radio reports especially, they often say that somebody "perished" in a house fire?

I always thought that that was an unfortunate choice of word.