The Chemist's Shop

by Richard Brumer

  “Mr. Ross appeared dazed. I handcuffed him, read him his rights, and a patrol car escorted him to the police station for questioning.”

  “What happened next?”

  “A police photographer took photos. Then I sealed off the scene and put up barriers.”

  “Were there any observations or thoughts that you had relating to this crime scene?”

  “Just one. I was surprised to see Mr. Ross at the scene. Something didn’t belong. He was well-known and held in high regard in the community.”

  Weisman clenched his lips and appeared disappointed in his response.

  “Thank you, Officer Baker. Your witness, counselor.”

  ***

  Brenda Coleman approached the witness and asked, “Officer Baker, how long have you been a police officer?”

  “About six months, ma’am.”

  “So, you’re relatively new to the job.”

  “I am.”

  “Is this your first murder investigation?”

  “No, ma’am, but this is the first time I’m testifying.”

  Brenda Coleman smiled at Weisman, who gave her a resigned shake of his head.

  “Thank you for your candidness, officer. Were there any designations or serial numbers on the handcuffs you removed from the victim?”

  “Yes, there were. The handcuffs were imprinted with the name Smith and Wesson along with a number, and I noted that information on the evidence bag.”

  Brenda took a few steps away from the witness stand, walked toward the jury, then turned and asked the witness, “Officer Baker, did you make any other arrests that day, other than Michael Ross?”

  “Yes, ma’am, one other arrest.”

  “And what were the circumstances involved?”

  “I arrested a prostitute on Chestnut Street and brought her to the station house.”

  “Did you handcuff her?”

  “Yes, it’s a requirement when you take anyone into custody.”

  “Officer Baker, were the handcuffs used in this arrest different in any way from those used on the deceased?”

  “No, they were also Smith and Wesson.”

  “They were exactly the same brand, I see. And were you able to use your standard key to open the handcuffs you used to arrest this woman?”

  “Yes, I was,” Baker answered.

  “And these handcuffs were also secured in the same manner as the handcuffs you described that were worn by Harry Sanders.”

  “Yes, ma’am.”

  “Were both evidence bags kept together at any time?”

  “No, the evidence bag containing the handcuffs worn by Mr. Sanders were already transferred earlier.”

  “Thank you, officer. The defense accepts the handcuffs submitted by Mr. Weisman in evidence.”

  ***

  After a break for lunch, the prosecution called the medical examiner, Dr. William Warther, to the stand. He was sworn.

  Weisman began the questioning. “Good morning, Dr. Warther. Were you the medical examiner in this case involving the death of Harry Sanders?”

  “I was,” Warther replied.

  “Doctor, could you briefly update the court with respect to your background and credentials?”

  “Absolutely. I received my medical degree at Yale School of Medicine and I’m licensed to practice in the states of New York and Connecticut.”

  “Thank you. When did you arrive at the scene?”

  “I believe it was about 7:45 p.m., fifteen minutes after the first responders. I examined the body after the firemen left. I don’t remember the time.”

  “Can you describe the state of the body?”

  “The deceased sat slouched on the garage floor.”

  “I see, and after you examined him, what were your preliminary findings?”

  “Harry Sanders had been dead approximately a half hour to forty five minutes and died as a result of carbon monoxide asphyxiation.”

  “Was your finding consistent with the events that occurred at the crime scene the night of August sixteenth?”

  “Yes. I concluded it was a reasonable assessment that Mr. Sanders died when he inhaled copious amounts of carbon monoxide which filled the closed garage from a running car. Nothing else could have caused his death.”

  “Your witness, Ms. Coleman

  ***

  “Good afternoon, Dr. Warther. Your report states that you were the medical examiner on the night of August 16, 1970, that you are a licensed physician in the state of New York, and you examined one, Harry Sanders. Is that correct?”

  “It is,” Warther replied.

  “And you are the coroner as well?

  “Yes, I am.”

  “Dr. Warther, what was your primary purpose for being at Professor Ross’s home the night of August sixteenth?”

  “It was to examine the victim and determine his cause of death.”

  “And what was your conclusion with respect to the deceased’s cause of death?”

  “It was carbon monoxide asphyxiation.”

  “I see. Did you check to determine if your diagnosis was conclusive and no other condition might have caused the victim’s death, such as a severe heart condition?”

  Weisman stood up and objected.

  “Your Honor, The People called this expert witness to determine the cause of death and nothing else. He has already stated that Harry Sanders died as a result of carbon monoxide asphyxiation.”

  “Overruled, Mr. Weisman,” the judge said. “The witness may answer the question.”

  “Mr. Sanders’s death was caused by carbon monoxide asphyxiation. It’s in the report I submitted to the court and there were no other medical issues that could have contributed to his demise. After my evaluation as to the cause of death, the body was placed on a stretcher and taken to the morgue.”

  “I understand, Dr. Warther, that you are here as an expert witness and a medical authority. Because of your expertise, did you at least examine the victim for other factors that may have caused his death, such as a heart attack, stroke, congestive heart failure, or a condition related to heart disease?”

  “I did not. My diagnosis coincided with the circumstances, and it was obvious the deceased was exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide.”

  “Would you tell the jury how you came to your specific conclusion?”

  “As I said, Mr. Sanders had been exposed to large quantities of carbon monoxide gas. I cannot express it in a different way. I examined his body, which showed he inhaled the noxious fumes to the degree that it caused his death.”

  “What physical signs led you to that conclusion?”

  “Physical? His skin showed a slight redness, but it had no significance.”

  “Have you ever been a witness in a criminal case involving carbon monoxide poisoning?”

  “No, ma’am, I have not.”

  “Doctor, were you asked to come to your conclusions about the cause of death so it would help the prosecution and not the defense?”

  Mr. Weisman stood and objected. “Question is argumentative. Counsel for the Defense is trying to impugn the integrity of the prosecution’s case.”

  Judge Jordon looked at Brenda. “Ms. Coleman, you know that question is inappropriate.”

  “Your Honor, I withdraw the question and apologize. My intention was in no way to call into question the integrity of the prosecution but merely to ascertain that the witnesses’ testimony was free of any influence.”

  Judge Jordan nodded. “The jury will disregard the question. Go on, Ms. Coleman.”

  “Doctor, what were the symptoms and signs that led you to find that Mr. Sanders died only as a result of carbon monoxide asphyxiation, exclusive of any other diagnosis?”

  Dr. Warther leaned forward.

  “Symptoms are sometimes variable and nonspecific. However, I took a sample of his blood and sent it to the lab. The results showed that his red blood cells contained thirty-two percent carbon monoxide as carboxyhemoglobin and that caused his death.”


  “Do you have scientific evidence to support your claim that carbon monoxide asphyxiation alone was the singular cause of death?”

  Warther catched Weisman’s eye before answering. “No, but in my opinion, it could be nothing else. He was in a closed garage with a car engine running. What else could it be?”

  “So, you ruled out other possible causes for Mr. Sanders’s death and stated that no other cause contributed toward it?”

  “Yes, no other cause was possible.”

  “Why do you say that?”

  “The circumstances surrounding Harry Sanders’s death and the lab results strongly suggest that he died as a result of carbon monoxide asphyxiation. It was obvious.”

  Brenda walked closer to the witness stand and looked Warther straight in the eye.

  “A man is on trial for his life, Dr. Warther, and you are relying on circumstances that suggest his death was caused only by carbon monoxide without scientific facts to support your conclusion? You have already told the jury that your diagnosis was made exclusively by what the circumstances suggested—being in a garage with a car running. You have produced no scientific proof to support your diagnosis except for the questionable value of a lab test. Would you say that is a true statement?”

  “Yes, well…”

  “Dr. Warther, let’s get to that lab report. You stated that Sanders’s blood levels showed thirty-two percent carbon monoxide. Do you agree that if the deceased suffered cardiac arrest, the amount of carbon monoxide in his blood would be irrelevant?”

  Warther remained silent and turned away.

  “Answer the question,” the judge said.

  Warther shrugged. “There is no way I could make that evaluation.”

  “Let me make this clear for the jury. Based on your testimony, Mr. Sanders’s lab test showed that his blood contained thirty-two percent carbon monoxide, an amount you say was the singular cause of his death. You alluded to the fact that the circumstances surrounding the victim’s death was central to your decision, specifically that Mr. Sanders was found in a closed garage with a car engine running. That one aspect alone led you to conclude it was the singular cause of death. In other words, doctor, your final determination on cause of death is based on circumstances rather than scientific evidence. Is that true?”

  “Yes, but the overwhelming circumstances were strong enough to substantiate my diagnosis, to establish the cause of death.” Warther shifted in his seat, tapping his fingertips together.

  “Even though his blood showed carbon monoxide levels that would not necessarily support your assumption?”

  “Ms. Coleman, it’s true that the percentages of carbon monoxide in Mr. Sanders’s blood does not conclusively prove that it was the cause of his death, but from my experience as a physician combined with the obvious circumstances, carbon monoxide was the singular cause of his death.”

  “Dr. Warther, are you a board certified pathologist?”

  “No, I’m not.”

  “Do you have training in pathology?”

  “Yes, of course.”

  “But, you are not a board certified pathologist. Is that correct?”

  “It is, but it’s not a New York State requirement. I have accreditation in pathology.”

  “Does accreditation require extensive training?”

  “You just have to substantiate that you know the basics of pathology.”

  “So, you do not have a degree in pathology, per se, just a certificate of accreditation?”

  “That is correct.” Sweat beaded on Warther’s face.

  “I understand you are a coroner as well. Is that accurate?”

  “It is,” Warther replied.

  “Doctor, educate me. What special training does a coroner have?”

  “Sometimes, very little. I’m not sure of the qualifications required in the various states.”

  “To the best of your knowledge, is it true that many funeral directors act as coroners?”

  “Yes.”

  “Are there cases where coroners are elected or appointed based on who they know?”

  “Yes, that’s true.”

  “Were you appointed to your position as coroner?”

  “Yes, I was.”

  “Were there any qualifications required?”

  “Well, the only requirement is citizenship and residence.”

  “And, in some instances, no medical training is required?”

  “That is correct, but a coroner who is not a licensed physician will not be the primary examiner of a body. His role would be to determine a cause of death from information collected from the physician, law enforcement agencies, and laboratory tests.”

  “I see. It appears that a coroner has several roles. Dr. Warther, are you qualified to examine corpses for unusual causes of death using forensic methods? Can you act as a pathologist and do autopsies?”

  “No. I’m just a regular medical doctor. If I find it necessary, I request a pathologist to examine the deceased, and I can order an autopsy to show cause of death, along with other factors relating to the deceased’s physical and medical condition while alive.”

  Brenda paced in front of the witness stand. “Did you bring in a pathologist to verify Harry Sanders cause of death?”

  “No, I did not.”

  “Why not, doctor? I’m interested.”

  “It was apparent, under the circumstances, that the cause of death was carbon monoxide asphyxiation and nothing else. I am convinced of it. There’s evidence that enough of the gas was found in his red blood cells to confirm that diagnosis.”

  “Didn’t previous testimony call the lab test into question as the definitive cause of death?”

  “It called it into question, but I’m here as an expert witness and, as such, can express my opinion relating to cause of death.”

  “Did you review all aspects of your report that was handed into evidence?”

  “Not all aspects. I only looked at the lab results, which supported my suspicion that Mr. Sanders died from carbon monoxide inhalation.”

  “Your suspicion? I see, and nothing else?”

  “No. The lab tests, in my opinion, were reasonably conclusive.”

  “Would someone who solely specializes in pathology—in other words, someone using forensics, with more training—possibly arrive at a different conclusion with respect to the cause of death in this case?”

  “Objection! Argumentative,” Weisman cried out. Judge Jordan looked at the court reporter, shook his head, and disallowed the question.

  “Please rephrase your question, counselor.”

  “That’s all right, Your Honor. I’ll ask something else. Was an autopsy performed in the case of Harry Sanders?”

  “No, it wasn’t.”

  “Was there a reason no autopsy was performed?”

  “Medical examiners and coroners commonly determine cause and manner of death without an autopsy.”

  “Would you normally call in a pathologist to determine the cause of death?

  “Not necessarily. I felt my observations were accurate in this case, and there was no need for an autopsy.”

  “You felt they were. Is that what you said? You felt they were?”

  “Yes,” Dr. Warther said weakly.

  “Is it possible that a death certificate, without an autopsy, may show an incorrect cause of death?”

  “Of course it’s possible. Pathology is not an exact science.”

  “And, as a result, some people may be convicted of crimes they didn’t commit as a result of incorrect information on a death certificate. Is that an accurate statement?”

  “Yes, it is. It’s highly unlikely, but possible.”

  “I see, possible. Dr. Warther, I ask you one last time. Did you rule out heart disease as a possible cause of death?”

  “Yes, even though his record showed he was being treated for heart disease and his labs showed the presence of Digoxin, a heart medication. I still say inhalation of toxic amounts of carbon monoxide gas was the ac
cepted cause of his death.”

  “Accepted? By who? You?” Brenda said, pointing at him. “You say Mr. Sanders’s labs showed that he was actively taking his heart medication. Doesn’t that conclusively show that he was concerned about his heart condition to the degree that he was diligent in taking his medications up until his death, and isn’t it possible that his heart issues, combined with the depression caused by his wife’s death, could have caused his death?”

  “No, it could not,” Warther replied adamantly.

  Brenda didn’t give up. “Why not?” she demanded. “Was it because you felt you arrived at the correct conclusion and refused to look at other possibilities?”

  Weisman cried out his objection. “Badgering the witness.”

  “Sustained,” the judge said. “Ms. Coleman, you should know better.”

  “I’m sorry, Your Honor. Dr. Warther, I understand that the evidence is compelling for you. Was your presumed cause of death indicated on the death certificate?”

  “Yes, it was.”

  “Dr. Warther, based on the deceased’s medical history, documented medical records, and laboratory findings related to his severe heart condition, which was diagnosed by cardiologists, is there any way that information could be connected to a different cause of death?”

  “Actually, I have not been apprised of the deceased medical history. I only had his labs.”

  Brenda’s eyes widened. “Oh, that’s difficult for me to believe. So, you did not review the deceased’s complete medical records before you came to your decision?”

  “No, I came to what I believed was a reasonable conclusion.”

  “Did you ask for a medical history?”

  “No, I examined his lab report and was aware he was taking heart medications but did not know about the specific diagnosis. I did not review any other records. Perhaps I should have looked further, but I had to make a decision with respect to his cause of death only, and carbon monoxide was the immediate cause, overriding any alternative finding. Breathing in carbon monoxide in this case was too obvious. I didn’t have to search the medical records.”

  Brenda persevered. “Maybe it was obvious to you, sir, but it may not be true. If you had known the deceased’s medical history, would you have examined him for other issues relating to his cause of death?”