Here come’s the good stuff…  breaking down forensics for all sorts of normal sorts like the jury, you and me. Did you know the original Law an Order is in its twenty something year? Caught an old episode the other day, big hair, big shoulder pads, power suits. Wow.

All the big tv police procedural shows rely on our fascination with forensic science – CSI: name the city , NCIS name the city, a dozen versions of Law and Order… the only thing better is criminal profiling. Unless you can combine profiling with forensic science. Of course in the tv version, the evidence is collected, analyzed, and used to solve the case real-time. In court, the evidence comes in slowly. In carefully explained fragments. With a little help from the attorneys in opening and summation, the jurors are left to tie all the facts together. This case seemed on the surface to be fairly simple. Look out, it just got interesting.

George Huguely, V May 2010 booking photo

Let’s review the case a bit. George’s account the morning of his arrest was that he went over to Love’s apartment to talk about their relationship.  He had been drinking all day and night “about 20 drinks” and he wanted to “just talk”. When he arrived the door was unlocked but (later in the same statement) he might of punched a whole in it to open the door. Maybe he kicked it he can’t remember.  She wasn’t happy to see him and he kept saying he wanted to talk, he might of shook her “a little” and she might have fallen.

When he left he had done nothing that might cause her death, maybe a bloody nose but that’s all.

Today’s testimony in Charlottesville began with a lesson in brain anatomy and injuries. (cue Marg Helgenberger’s character re enacting a scene, he strikes here — her head moves this way…) Dr. Christine Fuller, a neuropathologist from Virginia Commonwealth University is a specialist who was asked to consult by the Medical Examiner’s office.

Interestingly, the forensics don’t quite match George’s description of events.

Here in The Hook is a detailed description of the testimony I will be quoting.

Likening Love’s injuries to those that might be sustained in an automobile accident, Dr. Fuller said that torque or sudden deceleration can cause the soft brain tissue to bang against the bony interior surfaces of the skull.

Like whiplash? Could it be from a fall?  – Why, yes if from a significant height.

How about CPR, could CPR cause the injuries? Not likely.

Here are some likely defense theories that have been on preview from the opening statements and some of the cross examination questions of prosecution witnesses.

• she could have fallen (from her bed to the floor I guess)
• she could have fallen asleep on her face and died of positional asphyxia
• she had an unexplained, out of nowhere heart arrhythmia that happened to happen after having a rough argument (that happens sometimes)
• the CPR caused “reperfusion” where when the blood flows back into tissue after a stop and causes damage

Really?

That last one is my favorite, it isn’t George’s fault she died. He beat her up but the paramedics must have killed her when they were treating her for the injuries he might have caused.

There are other pieces of information that don’t jive with George’s account. Yeardley Love  had lots of bruises, her head, neck, arms, back…  yet no damage to her nose. Bruises that bring to mind strangulation or smothering. In particular a contusion in the area of the carotid sinus – also from The Hook, Monday testimony:

Virginia Assistant Chief Medical Examiner Bill Gormley described his observations from the May 4, 2010 autopsy he performed including, in particular, bruising to an area of the neck called the “carotid body,” which, among other things, regulates heart rate. When pressure is applied, as in strangulation, Gormley explained to jurors, the body’s effort to reduce blood pressure in the brain can cause the heart rate to plummet. Enough pressure to the neck can, in just 15 to 30 seconds, cause a loss of consciousness; if the heart slows or stops, Gormley testified, it may not restart.

 

Of course, what mighta coulda happened in a strange universe and what really happened on May 3, 2010 are puzzles for the jury to unravel.  They have an alarming array of choices because of the way the case was charged. They have a mountain of circumstantial evidence and forensic details to sift through. And they will be charged with figuring out what happened to these two young people.

Meanwhile, I have questions, I’m wondering:

• With the facts in this case, how did this not end in a plea agreement?
• For defense attorneys, where is the line between vigorous defense for your client and laughable fantasy?
• Will the jury see this as an issue of intent or will they get lost in some of  the defense posturing?
• speaking of intent? what does that mean in the Commonwealth, anyway?

Expect the defense case to muddy the waters a bit more, we might even see the Charlottesville version of “if the glove don’t fit…” the ultimate jury nullification.

George Huguely, V – easily the character in Styxx  Fooling Yourself (Angry Young Man)  Your future (once) looks(ed) quite bright to me. Except, the song was released in 1978. On a 45″ record with The Grand Finale on the B side. Just saying.

Follows @DailyJustice140  @wpjenna #huguely