Scalia Death Suspicious "We discovered the judge in bed, a pillow over his head."

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MotherMayEye

And policy is different from law. Just because something is policy doesn't give it the same weight as a law.

Policies express what the intent of the law is. Perhaps not as formal, but none-the-less policies are an expression of how a law shall work.

I find it ridiculous that anyone would argue that a coroner's policy need not be followed because it is not law.

HItman probably did it and left

a reply to: MotherMayEye

And if I violate policy, I'm not going to go to jail. At worst I get fired. If I violate the law, I go to jail. Again, huge difference between policy and law.

It is important to understand the difference between a policy and a law. A policy outlines what a government ministry hopes to achieve and the methods and principles it will use to achieve them. It states the goals of the ministry.

www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/govern/policy.html

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Did you read your own quote?

Autopsy is recommended in the following situations:

12. Death in any case the coroner determines necessary to ascertain cause and manner 
of death, or to collect evidence: Examples:

J. Deaths of famous people or public figures 


KRS 72.025 lists the following for required autopsies:

Coroners shall require a post-mortem examination to be performed in the following
circumstances:
(1) When the death of a human being appears to be caused by homicide or violence;
(2) When the death of a human being appears to be the result of suicide;
(3) When the death of a human being appears to be the result of the presence of drugs
or poisons in the body;
(4) When the death of a human being appears to be the result of a motor vehicle
accident and the operator of the motor vehicle left the scene of the accident or the
body was found in or near a roadway or railroad;
(5) When the death of a human being occurs while the person is in a state mental
institution or mental hospital when there is no previous medical history to explain
the death, or while the person is in police custody, a jail or penal institution;
(6) When the death of a human being occurs in a motor vehicle accident and when an
external examination of the body does not reveal a lethal traumatic injury;
(7) When the death of a human being appears to be the result of a fire or explosion;
(8) When the death of a child appears to indicate child abuse prior to the death;
(9) When the manner of death appears to be other than natural;
(10) When human skeletonized remains are found;
(11) When post-mortem decomposition of a human corpse exists to the extent that
external examination of the corpse cannot rule out injury or where the
circumstances of death cannot rule out the commission of a crime;
(12) When the death of a human being appears to be the result of drowning;
(13) When the death of an infant appears to be caused by sudden infant death syndrome
in that the infant has no previous medical history to explain the death;
(14) When the death of a human being occurs as a result of an accident;
(15) When the death of a human being occurs under the age of forty (40) and there is no
past medical history to explain the death;
(16) When the death of a human being occurs at the work site and there is no apparent
cause of death such as an injury or when industrial toxics may have contributed to
the cause of death;
(17) When the body is to be cremated and there is no past medical history to explain the
death;
(18) When the death of a human being is sudden and unexplained; and
(19) When the death of a human being occurs and the decedent is not receiving treatment
by a licensed physician and there is no ascertainable medical history to indicate the
cause of death.

www.lrc.ky.gov...

I don't see anything requiring an autopsy in the death of a celebrity or famous person in that list.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And I find that to be a completely empty argument.

If you would spend one moment considering all the policies of all the various local, state, and federal government agencies, you would realize that it is in YOUR best interest that they be followed.

Obviously, someone can be fired for violating policy, even if they don't go to jail or are fined. There are repercussions for violating policy.

But if your point is that policy is always open to personal preference...great. I don't think that helps your argument.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You keep skipping the preceding paragraph and are simply relying on a subhead:

KRS 72.025 lists 19 situations where a Coroner is required to perform a Post-Mortem Examination, but it is not helpful in guiding a Coroner in determining when an autopsy is required. While not complete, the following list is a guideline designed to assist a coroner or deputy coroner in making that determination.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I didn't say that it was open to personal preference, but that it isn't the same as law, which is isn't. Policy is how they intend to go about their business, law is how they're required to go about their business. They're not even close to the same thing.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

And you keep skipping the word "recommended".

Here is something I dont get about the whole appointment process now in play since Scalia's death. Obama and his supporters say he has the consitutional right to appoint immediately, and I agree....YET he didnt seem to feel the constitutional impetus to replace the AG of the State Department during the entirety of the Clinton Secratary tour. I call BS

originally posted by: BlueJacket
Here is something I dont get about the whole appointment process now in play since Scalia's death. Obama and his supporters say he has the consitutional right to appoint immediately, and I agree....YET he didnt seem to feel the constitutional impetus to replace the AG of the State Department during the entirety of the Clinton Secratary tour. I call BS

Exactly. And by not appointing that IG, Hillary Clinton got away with who knows what!

a reply to: BlueJacket

It's all about pick & choose as the advantages become apparent isn't it.

Just like The Cinderella autopsy "decision".

Unless somebody higher up is giving them "Der Ordazz"

a reply to: queenofswords

IG...sigh thank you.But totally agree, 6 billion sound familiar?

A little bit on Scalia's doctor Monahan:

Brian Monahan (born in Fairfield, Connecticut) is the Attending Physician of the United States Congress and the United States Supreme Court and holds the rank of Rear Admiral in the United States Navy.

Dr. Monahan was selected by the leadership of the Congress and nominated to the position and rank by United States President Barack Obama in January 2009.

en.wikipedia.org...

Recently, Monahan also gave out Bernie Sanders' medical report:
berniesanders.com...

a reply to: BlueJacket

The Constitutional point is that Obama may immediately nominate someone for the vacancy, but the way the USA's system works, the Senate must hold hearings and then vote to approve or reject the nomination. There is no time frame imposed on the Senate, and in the U.S. Senate structure whoever is Top Dog is "God". For years it was Harry Reid acting as the "God", now Mitch McConnell gets to set the timeline and enjoy being "God".

The Obama crowd and the Democrats can yell, scream, protest, and riot, but none of that can force the hand of the Senate if McConnell says 'no way'.

Also, the more people who come to suspect that Justice Scalia was covertly murdered, the lower the chances go that Obama will be able to nominate even a dog catcher.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I didn't say that it was open to personal preference, but that it isn't the same as law, which is isn't. Policy is how they intend to go about their business, law is how they're required to go about their business. They're not even close to the same thing.

Policy is how the law will be applied to their practices.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MotherMayEye

And you keep skipping the word "recommended".

That word appears in a subhead. It does not appear in the paragraph of intent.

ETA: As in, "It is recommended that an autopsy is required to be performed under the circumstances in the guidelines below."

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Chew on this...

There was an autopsy done on JFK...

And everyone knew EXACTLY HOW he died!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

A policy is the outline for a goal that an institution intends to accomplish. A law is an established procedure or standard that must be followed by members of society. Policies are used to guide the decisions of an organization or institution, while laws are used to implement justice and order. A policy is informal in nature and is typically a document that states the intentions of an institution, while laws are more formal in nature and are used to offer equity in society, as explained by ETU.
In some cases, policy is used to create new laws, according to ETU. However, current policy must always comply with existing laws. Although these two aspects of society are interrelated, each has a distinct function. Laws are enforced by the penalties of the judicial system and help regulate the actions of members in society. There are several types of laws, which include civil law, criminal law and international law.

www.ask.com...

Key difference: A policy is a document that outlines what a government is going to do and what it can achieve for the society as a whole. A law, on the other hand, is a system of rules passed by the government. Laws must be obeyed by all, including private citizens, groups and companies as well as public figures, organizations and institutions.

www.differencebetween.info...

a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you're claiming that 72.025, the actual bill that shows when an autopsy is required is a subhead, and not the actual law? Because that's where the 19 cases requiring an autopsy comes from. Ok, you keep right on believing that they're required to do an autopsy of famous people, even though they're not.

He was old.