< Complete Webinar and Seminar Info at www.PrivateInvestigations.org>

In 1987 Forensic Pathologist Don Harper Mills, MD, presented this story of a bizarre death: 

On March 23,1994, the medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a shotgun wound to the head. Mr. Opus had jumped from the top of a ten-story building intending to commit suicide. He left a note to the effect indicating his despondency. As he fell past the ninth floor, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast passing through a window, which killed him instantly.

Neither the shooter nor the deceased was aware that a safety net had been installed just below the eighth floor level to protect some building workers and that Ronald Opus would not have been able to complete his suicide the way he had planned.  The room on the ninth floor, where the shotgun blast emanated, was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. They were arguing vigorously and he was threatening her with a shotgun! The man was so upset that when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife, and the pellets went through the window, striking Mr. Opus.

When one intends to kill subject 'A' but kills subject 'B' in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject 'B.'  When confronted with the murder charge, the old man and his wife were both adamant, and both said that they thought the shotgun was not loaded. The old man said it was a long-standing habit to threaten his wife with the unloaded shotgun. He had no intention to murder her. Therefore the killing of Mr. Opus appeared to be an accident; that is, assuming the gun had been accidentally loaded.

The continuing investigation turned up a witness who saw the old couple's son loading the shotgun about six weeks prior to the fatal accident. It transpired that the old lady had cut off her son's financial support and the son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that his father would shoot his mother.

Since the loader of the gun was aware of this, he was guilty of the murder even though he didn't actually pull the trigger. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.

Now comes the exquisite twist...

Further investigation revealed that the son was, in fact, Ronald Opus.
He had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to engineer his mother's murder. This led him to jump off the ten-story building on March 23rd, only to be killed by a shotgun blast passing through the ninth story window.

Although fictional, there are stranger accidents and deaths that have occurred.  Dr. Mills presented this fictional scenario to demonstrate how a few facts could alter the both the medicolegal investigation, and the legal consequences, which may not be the same. 

What would you certify as the Cause and Manner of Death?

Next month we will tell you how Dr. Mills would have ruled this death and we will provide an investigative explanation of the process, including the medical opinion by Stephen Cina, MD, our consulting forensic Pathologist. 

Karen S. Beers, BSW

I recently had the opportunity to speak at the Southeast Super Conference, hosted by the Florida Association of Licensed Investigators (FALI).  After that I was involved in several discussions with fellow investigators and CLIs on topics ranging from the Casey Anthony murder trial to the Natalie Holloway disappearance.  I had previously been a guest speaker at a regional FALI meeting while in Florida for the Mid Winter Conference of the National Association of Legal Investigators this past February.  Great people and a great conference.  My thanks to good friend and fellow CLI, Rory McMahon, for inviting me.  Rory will be at the PPIAC conference speaking about federal criminal defense cases; please consider attending! 

Back in February, Brandon Perron and his brother Brad invited me to give a full one-day seminar on the Basics of Medicolegal Death Investigation.  I gave this seminar just prior to going across the Florida coast to the FALI conference.  This was primarily to public defender investigators and interns, as well as private investigators.  It was part of the curriculum to obtain the Certified Criminal Defense Investigator (CCDI) professional designation.  This was a great time, far too short to share information and visit with friends - I am certainly looking forward to returning for future seminars.

Karen and I are developing plans to implement a Bodily Injury and Death Investigation seminar series for civil and criminal trial attorneys, investigators, paralegals and interns.  The seminar is planned for two days - one day of practical and one day of application and case studies.  If you are interested, please email our office.  As plans develop, we will keep you informed.  We are also available for customized presentations and seminars for your group or association, on a variety of legal investigative topics. 

Our seminars are developed around the protocols from my book - Prepare, Inquire, Analyze, Document and Report.  I am honored that this protocol has been adapted by City College of Florida and the Associate Degree in Private Investigation and Private Investigation Diploma program. 

Dean A. Beers, CLI

Some of the latest news of interest... 

< See the timeline presented by the Fort Collins Coloradoan >

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theInvestigators - open networking for all private sector investigators!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PracticalMethodsForLegalInvestigations - official book website is www.PracticalMethodsForLegalInvestigations.com 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProfessionalLocateInvestigations - official book website is www.ProfessionalLocateInvestigations.com 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MedicoLegalDeathInvestigations - continuing education for private investigators, criminal justice and investigative-legal professionals.  Direct link to course information is www.MedicoLegalDeathInvestigations.com 

< See the complete review >

< See the complete review >

In the latest review, from Bob Wall of the Professional Private Investigators Association of Colorado, he says "Very few investigative procedure books are more than "how to."  As investigators, we should go beyond the "How," and appreciate the "Whys" of the work we do. This book well-serves that inquisitive quality that good investigators should possess.  Our cases do not exist in a vacuum; not only does Locard's Principle of "something taken, something left" apply to physical evidence, but to our investigative experiences as well. This book does well to crystalize the whys and wherefores of the investigator's experience, not only in building the case itself, but in building the investigator's experience and knowledge, based on critical thinking between cases."

< See the complete review >

The client has a girl, a daughter and wants to prove Mr "A" is the father. Would the DNA of the son of Mr. "A" have enough similarities as the daughter, if they are in fact both fathered by Mr. "A", to strongly suggest or prove the paternity of the daughter?

The underlying complication is the sibling relationship being male-female.  In this case, Short Tandem Repeat Analysis testing is the key.  STR Analysis is used to compare specific genetic markers (loci) on DNA from two or more samples (what we commonly see in the legal arena for testing evidence against known persons and suspects, missing persons and identifications).  In those instances you are looking for a conclusive match.   

A brother and sister test cannot be conclusive because they will not have identical DNA (even fraternal twins will be as different as non-twin DNA).  STR analyzes a number of different genetic markers (known as loci) in the persons tested. Full siblings have more DNA in common than half siblings and logically, half siblings have more DNA in common than unrelated individuals. A sibling test examines the amount of DNA shared in order to establish the probability of relationship.  This test will provide a Probability of Relationship - a result that is best interpreted as 'more likely than not' (or preponderance) of a relationship.  Logic would tell us that two siblings would share 50% of common DNA, and scientists would like to have that as a guide.  Using that as a key, under 50% it would be unlikely there is a sibling relationship, and over 50% it would be likely.  But, research and literature have shown that there can be cases where full siblings have hardly any DNA in common; therefore, the result of the sibling test would be inconclusive despite the people tested being full siblings.  Similarly, siblings can have so much common DNA that it may show as high as 95% or higher; therefor, the siblings test would clearly show the people tested are siblings.  Many labs will use a scale of roughly 75% or greater, and 25% or less, for inclusion and exclusion of a sibling relationship.  I have not found any literature that explains this range or similar probabilities; however, I am sure there is.

As an alternative, there is also grandparent testing - to determine if siblings share the same grandparents.

On a different but interesting note, cousins whose parents are identical twins will share very similar DNA, as identical twins have the same DNA (but different fingerprints).