Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EEGator
She didn’t “ban” anything. She spoke to the US Marshalls, and Scalia’s personal physician.

Sorry, my mistake. I should have said she used her judicial powers to waive, and thereby violate, Texas Criminal Code 49.04.(6) which requires an autopsy for an unattended death, as mentioned at post #18 above. In that sense, she made a ruling that banned the application of that statute.

Better?

29 posted on 02/15/2016 4:21:00 PM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: EEGator

Inquest, not autopsy, sorry. But the inquest would determine if an autopsy was required.


32 posted on 02/15/2016 4:24:12 PM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: Talisker

No, it isn’t any better. 49.04(6) requires an Inquest, not an Autopsy.


39 posted on 02/15/2016 4:33:35 PM PST by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson