Part A
Using a picture to determine cause of death is not reliable for a forensic pathologist. A photograph could show external injuries and the environment where the body was found but a forensic pathologist cannot properly identify how the victim died from a photo. There could be indications of a specific cause of death but forensic pathologists have to be able to touch and analyse the body for a concrete answer. A number of analyses are completed on a deceased body, including blood work and autopsies to determine cause of death. Through examinations like autopsies, internal organs can be examined for unusual features that could prove natural or unnatural cause of death. Forensic pathologists take into consideration the location, state of clothes and injuries to identify any suspicious behaviour or oddities. It is not proper to hypothesize a cause of death just from a photograph because no speculation about the cause of death is allowed within a legal case. A forensic pathologist uses multiple examinations to completely rule out any other possible types of death and conclude a solid reason.
Part B
Case 1
The victim is aged 37. The victim does look overweight …show more content…
The location is in a small motorboat, which is still tied to the pier. This suggests the victim most likely had not started the activity he was partaking in, but was healthy enough to partake, suggesting no knowledge of ongoing diseases such as cancer or influenza. There is no sign of trauma externally, he is not wet and the victim is wearing a lifejacket, this information excludes drowning as a cause of death. Due to the older age and the fact that no other injuries are present in the photo, it is assumed that internal problems were the cause of death. Most likely cause of death would be a Coronary Heart Disease, which is a high risk in Scotland for people aged 55 to 64 (Townsend, Williams, Bhatnagar, Wickramasinghe & Rayner,
Using a picture to determine cause of death is not reliable for a forensic pathologist. A photograph could show external injuries and the environment where the body was found but a forensic pathologist cannot properly identify how the victim died from a photo. There could be indications of a specific cause of death but forensic pathologists have to be able to touch and analyse the body for a concrete answer. A number of analyses are completed on a deceased body, including blood work and autopsies to determine cause of death. Through examinations like autopsies, internal organs can be examined for unusual features that could prove natural or unnatural cause of death. Forensic pathologists take into consideration the location, state of clothes and injuries to identify any suspicious behaviour or oddities. It is not proper to hypothesize a cause of death just from a photograph because no speculation about the cause of death is allowed within a legal case. A forensic pathologist uses multiple examinations to completely rule out any other possible types of death and conclude a solid reason.
Part B
Case 1
The victim is aged 37. The victim does look overweight …show more content…
The location is in a small motorboat, which is still tied to the pier. This suggests the victim most likely had not started the activity he was partaking in, but was healthy enough to partake, suggesting no knowledge of ongoing diseases such as cancer or influenza. There is no sign of trauma externally, he is not wet and the victim is wearing a lifejacket, this information excludes drowning as a cause of death. Due to the older age and the fact that no other injuries are present in the photo, it is assumed that internal problems were the cause of death. Most likely cause of death would be a Coronary Heart Disease, which is a high risk in Scotland for people aged 55 to 64 (Townsend, Williams, Bhatnagar, Wickramasinghe & Rayner,