|
May 27, 2009 Medical examiner familiar to In Session viewersPosted: 12:15 PM ET
CAPE MAY COURT HOUSE, New Jersey–To loyal In Session court watchers, if the name of forensic pathologist Charles Siebert Jr., M.D. seems familiar, it is because he has played a major role in one of our live trials in the last few years..
Dr. Charles Siebert on the witness stand Siebert was the medical examiner at the center of our 2007 live trial in Florida involving Martin Lee Anderson, better known as the "Boot Camp" trial out of Panama City, Florida. Anderson, 14, was serving time at one of Florida’s boot camps because of his problems with the law. On the first day of camp, as Anderson was running around the track, he started to collapse. Prosecutors in the case said that guards at the camp, thinking he was faking it, pushed him to keep going and forced the young man to keep him running. Anderson eventually collapsed on the field, and died at a local hospital. In that case, Siebert, who performed the initial autopsy on the young man, found much internal bleeding and a sickling of red blood cells. He determined the cause of death of 14-year-old Anderson, who was African American, as a natural death caused by complications from sickle cell trait. Prosecutors made a rare move and brought in another medical examiner who countered Siebert’s conclusions, saying it was the guards and nurse on duty who caused Anderson’s death, by recklessly disregarding a risk of death or seriously bodily injury to Anderson. The second medical examiner, however, could not determine an official cause of death. Renowned forensic pathologist Michael Baden observed the second autopsy on behalf of Anderson's parents and agreed with the new conclusion that the death was a homicide. The case went to trial with the defense relying on Dr. Siebert's autopsy report and the prosecution relying on the second autopsy report. The defendant guards at the boot camp were ultimately acquitted of aggravated manslaughter of a child. Many believed it was because of Siebert’s findings, along with the lack of an official cause of death in the state's case. Following the trial, Siebert’s conclusions, although viewed as extremely controversial by people outside of the medical community, were upheld by other forensic pathologists in this country. –Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent Filed under: Uncategorized |
Contact us
Recent Posts
In Session Team
Archive
Categories
|
Loading weather data ...