Posted on 12/30/2007 2:50:55 PM PST by bjs1779
30 Dec 2007 ISLAMABAD: The decision not to conduct an autopsy on slain ex-premier Benazir Bhutto's body was taken by the Rawalpindi police chief even though a medico-legal report based on a mandatory post-mortem examination is a must in a murder case under Pakistani laws.
"Even if the family of a murder victim refuses to allow the autopsy, no investigation can be completed if doctors do not perform the autopsy and conclusively find the cause of death," said Athar Minallah, a top lawyer and a member of the board of management of Rawalpindi General Hospital where Bhutto was taken after the attack on her on Thursday.
He said doctors, who treated Bhutto, had told him that they wanted to conduct the autopsy but the Rawalpindi Police chief had not agreed to this.
"The doctors were worried that their initial report, which did not determine the definite cause of death, is being politically twisted," he told The News .
Minallah's statement runs contrary to the contention of Interior Ministry spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema, who had said on Friday that the autopsy was not done at the request of Bhutto's husband Asif Ali Zardari.
Cheema said the doctors had performed only an "external post-mortem" using X-rays while Minallah argued that avoiding the mandatory autopsy on the body of Bhutto "was a violation of the Criminal Procedure Code."
The Times of India twists it?
No surprise.
No, the Pakistan government said that.
I am not medical doctor, but my guess is her death has something to do with a gunshot wound.
They should have consulted the Clintons on how to do it.
That is a reasonable statement to make. That government, however, said every shot missed, and they aren't medical doctors either.
Really? Okay give me the direct quotes form Rawalpindi Police Chief.
I'll wait.
Would it be okay with you if I quoted someone who is in higher authority than the police chief? Apparently, you haven't followed this very close.
Zapruder film at 11.
Yes, maybe we could send her to Bethesda to get a real autopsy done on her. After all, they do have one under their belt.
Would it be okay with you if I quoted someone who is in higher authority than the police chief? Apparently, you haven't followed this very close.
Any direct quote that proves your point is fine. The floor is yours.
Isn't it a moot point, because the suicide bomber then blew everything up? I guess I'm not seeing the significance of which came first. It was still an assassination.
Don't worry, I will find it for you. It should be obvious, however, that they didn't perform an autopsy on her as required by law. That, by itself, means it was not necessary according to the government. Of course, you could show me the law that Pakistan does not require an autopsy in a suspicious death in the meantime? That way we both get to work : )
And everybody knows how they died, right?
It's obvious that they didn't perform an autopsy??
You do realize that many autopsies involve only "external post-mortem", right?
All of which makes the following Times of India line from the article, double-talk.
You are absoulty right. What did have to wait, something like 20 years before the Kennedy murder film came out?
Yes, whether she died from the assassin's bullets or from the force of the assassin's blast smashing her head into the car's hardware, it's still an assassination.
This all sounds like Hillary muddle to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.