Citation

Kuma SS, Shweta B. Int. J. Med. Toxicol. Legal Med. 2017; 20(3/4): 55-60.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, India Medico Legal Society)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Autopsy's perception in terms of the cause & the manner of death in bodies found in water run the risk of being incompatible with that of investigation. A retrospective study is undertaken on seven controversial cases in which autopsy opinions had been set aside based on certain evidences and logic. Study has been conducted with the objective exploring how to avoid getting surprises in relation to diagnosis of drowning. This review indicates incorrect exclusion of "drowning" is as embarrassing as overlooking a cause "other than drowning". Deceptive tampered background story, misinterpretations of the artefacts in decomposed bodies, submitting improper body specimens for diatoms test, considering false negatives diatoms test result are observed to be reasons of wrong exclusion of drowning.

FINDINGS of our review would impact autopsy physicians, health administrators, death investigators and the forensic scientists. Our review brings forth the limitation in eliciting signs of inhalation of water to differentiate drowning from non-drowning deaths and how the unfolding of reality of drowning impacts on the autopsy opinion.

Language: en