[bsa_pro_ad_space id=1]

Crime & PunishmentGeneralLiberia news

Highly nonsensical’

–Liberian Forensic Scientist challenges Charloe Musu’s preliminary autopsy report

A Liberian Forensic Scientist, Dr. Rockefeller F. Cooper, II, says the autopsy performed on Charloe Musu’s remains is bound to present an array of doubts so much that the final report would be deemed ‘highly nonsensical.’

Dr. Cooper argued that Charloe’s preliminary autopsy report has basically concluded the cause of death and has the propensity to suppress the outcome of “true justice.”

Police authorities in Monrovia last week released a provisional autopsy report surrounding Charloe Musu’s brutal murder, blaming extensive bleeding caused by multiple stabbings.

The late Charloe, daughter of Liberia’s former Chief Justice Cllr. Gloria Musu Scott, was gruesomely murdered when alleged armed criminals invaded their Brewerville residence on 22 February 2023.

The authorities said the post-mortem examination was done in autopsies, and toxicology samples were taken from the body of the 24-year-old to be analysed to fully establish the actual cause of her death.

Dr. Benedict B. Kolee, the pathologist who performed the postmortem examination told the NewDawn newspaper that the autopsy carried out on the late Charloe’s remains revealed that she died of severe exsanguination or a massive loss of blood.

He also cited secondary to severe hemothorax chest trauma, which is associated with a collapse in the left lung, after excess blood clotting defects.

Dr. Kolee explained that the deceased suffered chest abdominal, intercostal artery, and massive left hemothoraces.

[bsa_pro_ad_space id=1]

“She drained most of her blood out, and that bleeding came mostly below the rib, [which] caused the blood inside the chest,” he added.

“You know she was stabbed multiple times, and so much blood inside the chest, caused the death,” he continued.

“That is [what] we have gathered from the preliminary results of the autopsy, with all of the needed evidence we need,” Dr. Kolee added.

But Dr. Cooper disagreed, raising further concerns that the investigation in its totality stands a chance of being derailed.

See full text of analysis below:

An Analysis of the Charloe Musu’s Autopsy Preliminary Finding Part I-Another Blind Walk into the Wilderness

By Rockefeller F. Cooper II, MD, Msc., MsP, Cert-FDI, F-IACME

As a Forensic Medicolegal Death Investigator (FMDI) with vast experience in Forensic Postmortem Examinations (FPE), commonly referred to as autopsies, but, a Liberian, first and foremost, this publication is in response to Dr. Benedict Kolee’s “preliminary” autopsy finding regarding the CAUSE-of DEATH of the late Charloe Musu.

Dwelling on the press statement and interview held at the St. Moses Funeral Parlor, followed by a publication of Dr. Kolee’s conversation with journalists after the said autopsy which was conducted on March 21, 2023, where he presented his findings, I would like to raise a series of “red flags” which clearly supports the fact that the autopsy performed is bound to present an array of doubts and a misrepresentation of the crime, so much so that a “reasonable fact finder” would deem the final report of this case as highly nonsensical.

As a result of this autopsy, like others performed in the past by the same Dr. Kolee whose ability to conduct “forensic” autopsies is highly questionable, can we argue the expectancy of another botched result based on his focus on the “particular” and “fatal” stab wound which led to the death of Ms. Charloe Musu, an act which was judgmental and bias? Additionally, the preliminary autopsy report which has basically concluded the cause of death, has the propensity to suppress the outcome of “true justice” as the investigation in its totality stands a chance of being derailed.

Given my experience in investigating complex death cases as a Forensic Scientist and a fellow medical doctor (MD) as Dr. Kolee, it must be stated that he has once again prematurely misled the Liberian public; irrespective of his proclamation that his autopsy finding was a “so-called” preliminary finding, as he awaits the arrival of other scientific facts from specimens sent out of the country to present a final report. To understand where I, as a professional am coming from, the following statements made or implied by the said doctor (Kolee) must be focused upon:

The body of Charloe will be examined from “head” to “toe”, which includes the opening of the body, and examination of every organ in order to ensure a thorough exam in addition to reviewing the police report and information obtained from family members.

The process, in the interest of being transparent, would be an “open autopsy” for all those willing to attend, including individuals who were accused in the matter. The only caveat was that (1) Questions should be asked during the autopsy to make any clarifications needed, rather than misinterpreting observations which could lead to the dissemination of misinformation since the media was a part of those in attendance, and (2) Both videography and photography were disallowed.

The autopsy would be done scientifically and is subjectable to yield the same results if the autopsy was done anywhere in the world.

The aim of the autopsy is to establish the exact and scientific cause of death. Though they were informed by the police report that Charloe was stabbed “multiple” times, the interest is to establish the “particular” stab wound which took away her life in addition to the gathering of information that would help in prosecuting her murder case such as determining the time interval of the stabbing to the time of her death.

To satisfy the eagerness of the public, Dr. Kolee’s “provisional cause of death” as reported by the Independent Probe media outlet was due to excessive hemorrhaging from a damaged blood vessel (artery) into the left side of the chest cavity due to a piercing (stabbing) injury. The doctor went on to state further, that as a result of blood filling the chest, the left lug collapsed as it lost its ability to function properly.

Having stated all the above the following issues are of concern and must be looked at critically in order to appreciate the mishaps that have occurred thus far. Beginning with the “provisional report”, I would like for Dr. Benedict Kolee to take note of the following:

Your findings, as to the cause of death, as mentioned above; are incorrect. Given the undisputed facts in this case, there can be no correlation between the said autopsy report and the investigative facts due to the lack of both medical and forensic merits.

As you have already given a cause of death with a semi-pathophysiological summary in reference to the left lung collapsing due to arterial injury caused by a stab wound, what other scientific evidence do you expect to find, now that you have spoken prematurely, about a cause of death?

Are you sure that indeed the autopsy was performed based on the standards of forensic autopsies? 

Your assumption that your cause of death, in this case, will be the same cause derived from another examination conducted by a qualified individual or if the body was sent elsewhere would give the same result is false and misleading. Hopefully, after reading this paper, you will appreciate your own misconception. This is because a proper forensic examination was not done by you. Arguments will be presented later after you have submitted a final report.

As stated in your statement before the autopsy, did you actually consider the police report prior to and during the autopsy before deriving a cause of death?

As I agree with you granting access to the entire world to watch you perform the autopsy in the interest of “transparency”, it must be stated that your intention served no purpose as the masses would not have known the “pertinent” questions to ask in such a complex case.

You address the aim of the autopsy as if you were not cognizant of the fact that Charloe was indeed stabbed multiple times. Yet, your preconceived notion was to establish a “single” stab wound leading to her death.

In conclusion, I recommend that you read this document carefully, especially the above seven (7) points. I have not gone into details since your current finding is “provisional” and therefore, it is only professional that I await your final report. As stated in the subtitle of this document, this is Part 1 and you can rest assured that more critical information shall be released, pending discrepancies in your final autopsy report.

References: 

1. https://fb.watch/jqSx3dZO3e/?mibextid=YCRy0i 

2. Pathologist Kolee Announces ‘Provisional Cause of Death’ of Charloe Musu – Independent Probe Newspaper 

Contact: 

Email: rcooper@3rdeyeforensics.com or rockefellercooper@gmail.com

[bsa_pro_ad_space id=1] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=2] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=3] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=4] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=5] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=6]
Back to top button