It is quite obvious that they took out her organs because then no one can challenge that she did not take drugs. The whole case is based on accusing her of taking drugs and then being murdered.
Obviously by putting the drugs angle to it they are able to prove that scarlette somehow was in bad company .
I suspect the Goa CM's / drug maia link in this and it will not surprise me if the organs are disposed off quietly.
In a way we Indians deserver this kind of police because we frequently wink at fake encounters , tortue and use of 3rd degree mehtods of our police force which today is now coming back to bite us.
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by Anand YNI on Apr 16, 2008 09:21 AM Permalink
Dear VS,
You need a crash course on how the autopsies are conducted and why do they remove several organs at the time of autopsy. Remember this case has assumed international importance and the doctors will not take it lightly. Otherwise, you (& all others like you) will be as ignorant as ever.
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by DingDong on Apr 16, 2008 10:23 AM Permalink
Even if the Organs are taken during autopsy, the body has to be reconstituted. Without the permission of the family, no organ can be removed
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by Sid Justice on Apr 16, 2008 10:21 AM Permalink
Dear Anand,
I am sure you are the expert on autopsy's.. So please clarify some doubts.. Isn't it logical to document the whole process of the autopsy? Then how come some important facts like removal or missing organ parts were left out? Besides.. does it warrent a 3rd. autopsy outside the country, to prove that our cops and authorities have screwed up majorly? Please enlighten us..
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by Anand YNI on Apr 16, 2008 03:23 PM Permalink
Hi Sid,
Thanks for the comments & queries.
You are right. The entire process of autopsy is documented. The person who performs the autopsy keeps dictating what he finds & what he does and another person takes down the details. The authorised form is filled up. Required organs, either part or full, are removed. Normally complete stomach is removed. Other organs like the kidney may be removed partly. Complete uterus was removed in this case, since there was allegation of rape. No consent of the relatives is needed for this purpose since these are preserved elsewhere for future chemical or microscopic examination & are available on demand by the competant authorities/court.
II autopsy may be needed if it is felt that the autopsy was incomplete by the court.
Instances of III autopsies are uncommon. In this specific instance, since the person was a British national & a lot of noise was raised, they preferred to do another autopsy in England. However, I am unable to understand as to why their authorities made so much noise since, everything has been done in accordance with the legal procedures, that are common almost universally.
I hope I have clarified to some extent. Kindly ask more questions, if you have. For your info, I am NOT an expert on autopsies but a practicing doctor.
Lastly, you have been very polite, kind & nice. Special thanks for the same.
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by Asheesh Sinha on Apr 16, 2008 09:40 AM Permalink
dude.. Even if doctors give Pain Killers/Paracetamol to Patients, they document it, which is forwarded to the next doctor. Here its a case of murder, and they conveniently "forgot" to mention that in any report, as if it was mentioned, UK doctors wouldnt have been fool to raise the issue of missing organs..
RE:They took out organs so that drug accusations could not be questioned.
by DingDong on Apr 16, 2008 10:15 AM Permalink
Anand, only a piece of each organ during autopsy is sufficient for analysis....no need to remove the whole organ.
