Replies

Thanks. There are a few things in there that are VERY interesting. I’m not a medical person but as I read this autopsy, these things seem to be indicated:

1. The investigator contacted Andrew’s wife by phone about 10:00am the next morning. She claimed that Andrew had been taken to the ER a year before and had congestive heart failure. But the coroner notes that they had the medical records, and by that time Ed Winter, deputy chief coroner, had already reported to the media that Breitbart had not seen a doctor for over a year. So the claims that he had seen a doctor and had congestive heart failure came from his wife mid-morning the following day and was contradicted by the actual medical records.

2. There was no witness to the autopsy.

3. This claims that there were no photos taken of the body when retrieved from the ER. This violates the protocols for the LA County Coroner’s Office, according to an audit of that agency done 3 years ago. If photos were taken of the body according to protocol, they have since been destroyed.

The person who transported the body from the ER - who is the person who should photograph the body - was not named in the autopsy, so Ed Winter would say that Michael Cormier was not associated with the case in any way (since his name was not listed anywhere in the autopsy). So we have no idea who transported the body, whether they photographed the body according to protocols and the photos were subsequently destroyed, or why they didn’t photograph the body if they didn’t photograph it.

The important thing to note is that the only proof of whether a heart attack was artificially induced by a heart attack dart is those photos, and though they are standard protocol in THIS CASE the autopsy claims they were never taken.

4. The maximum level of blockage found in the arteries was 60%. I’m not a medical person, like I said, but this suggests to me that a heart attack was not caused by blockage or anything with the arteries or heart themselves, but rather because of the electrical impulses being “off” - which is the means used in a potassium chloride heart attack assassination dart.

This autopsy thus raises more questions than it answers. There is nothing in here that I can see that rules out a heart attack dart, and the photos that should have documented whether there was a tiny red mark where a dart entered the body were not taken, in violation of standard protocols. The level of blockage in the arteries suggests this heart attack was NOT caused by the condition of the arteries or heart but by the electrical impulses which control the timing of the heartbeats, which is the means whereby a heart attack dart causes a heart attack.

As always, if somebody else has input that clarifies or rebuts anything I’ve said, I hope to hear it.