No, the bone scan was not brought into evidence at the trial.
But, it wasn't necessary.
1. It would not have contradicted or accounted for the collection of her other symptoms and diagnosis. In fact, it fits with it (see below)
2. It wouldn't have explained how she lost O2 to her brain, (unless her hyoid bone was broken too, but then you still have to explain her other problems that such a strangling or even suffocation wouldn't have caused)
3. She lacked the signs they'd have seen had she been so assaulted. Occams razor.
If anything, it just supports the diagnosis.
Women with eating disorders can lose up to 30% of their bone mass in a year. Her tests showed her as low in calcium and undernourished.
Most of the things on that bone scan are compression/hairline fractures, non-specific irregularities, or bruising (The radiologist clearly said her femur was NOT broken, it was *bruised*.)
My sister is in her 30s, and also has compression fractures in her back top to bottom - and she was never even bulimic or frank anorexic - she just has osteoporosis because she has abused laxatives and diuretics and undereaten. No other reason - the trauma was just daily knocks and dings. She and I both have herniated disks.
Terri's ribs were actually fractured as they commonly are when someone is given CPR.
I haven't commented on this before, because I don't want to be flamed, lol. And I really don't want to get into a big debate over it.
I just personally see nothing of value in it, I think it is really bad to keep exaggerating what the actual report says, and most of all, I think we detract from the best arguments when we go in that direction.
Thanks.
I can accept what you say as valid. About bone bruising, etc.
What I find hard to swallow, is why Michael got on the phone with her brother for an hour before calling the paramedics.
Why he stated when this first occurred (in reference to her possibly not recovering any further) "I don't know what to do, Terri and I never discussed anything like this".
The moment he got the INSURANCE PROCEEDS, he stated that "Terri said if she ever got like this, she would want to die".
Why he refuses to divorce Terri, why he is living with another woman, why that woman has her own INSURANCE COMPANY, and is there a policy on TERRI under that company?
Why he refuses to let her have rehabilitative therapy, and has refused so ever since he got the INSURANCE PROCEEDS. Why he refuses to allow the parents to videotape her, anyone to videotape her.
Why Terri often undergoes the symptoms of INSULIN OVERDOSE after each of Michael's 'private' visits?
Why nurses who 'discuss' Terri's responsive actions are FIRED.
Answer these questions, and I'll have a much better feeling about the analysis you give.