Replies

I have read the entire deposition. The Doctor was very clear in his statement that "if" a trauma was the cause of the injuries - they could not have been older than 12 - 18 months.

He also "admitted" that it would be typical to advance "alternative" possibilities so that the attending physician can make a sound decision.

It was not his role to make a diagnosis, nor to determine cause. Instead, to interpret what the images show and make a report of those findings.

Earlier, you stated that the Doctor did not sign the report & that he did not know who did. This is partially true. The report itself is unsigned. It is initialed as reviewed by another doctor.

Furthermore, the statements of the two doctors regarding the "fractures" are out of context. The first claimed he saw "no evidence of fracture" (or words to that effect). This much is true. However, that statement is in regards to one of Terri's ARMS. The other referred to one of her knees. Neither one of them addresses the spinal compression fracture.

Just out of curiosity - were the two attending physicians / the other radiologists (??) deposed / otherwise give testimony? I ask because the "defense" exhibits where all affidavits, meaning there was no "cross examination" of them before this deposition was taken.

All of the above is simply for "completeness". I would truly be interested if you had any links for further reading.

And the additions for completeness are worthy. Thanks.

I don't think the depositions of other doctors are available. I wonder why? Perhaps the parents or their supporters are only "leaking" court papers that serve their purpose? Don't know.

As you rightly point out he was only commenting on what he saw and not making a diagnosis. However, this is not an end all to an understanding as what may or may not be there. It is only ONE tool used for assessment and not Gospel so to speak.

I find it peculiar that people are willing to put so much weight on a single bone scan, while at the same time insisting that a single CT-scan shouldn't be used to assess her PVS state and that other test should have been conducted for a more complete assessment. Can't have it both ways. :-)