LaVoy Finicum's Autopsy

Props to Xuenchen for finding this! I think it deserves its own thread!

Harney County Medical Examiner's Office
Lab No. 16M-000184
Agency Case 16-0092

Autopsy Preformed by: Clifford C. Nelson, MD
On Thursday, January 28, 2016 - 9:15am
At: 13309 SE 84th Avenue, suite 100, clackamas, Oregon 97015

CAUSE OF DEATH: Gunshot Wounds of the back, abdomen, and chest.
MANNER OF DEATH: HOMICIDE!!!

Homicide definition: the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder.

It continues and is 13 pages long.



media.oregonlive.com...

a reply to: tensetek

You didn't know he had been shot??

www.theguardian.com...

a reply to: swanne

I indeed did know sir, just thought the autopsy should be posted in it's own thread. Also the language used is from the autopsy. Furthermore I didn't want any miss interpretations of the word Homicide which is used in the autopsy report.

Just from what I've read so far, seems the shots all entered his back. And has anyone else found where he had any type of gun holster on him?

Or would they take that off, before examination for some reason?

a reply to: tensetek

Oh, I see, you are actually focusing on the definition of "homicide" and hoping that it proves that law enforcement officers have "unlawfully" put down Finicum.

I believe here "homicide" is a legal term used to indicate the fact that the man (the prefix homo-) had simply been killed (thus the suffix -cide) by another man, regardless of lawfully or not, and as opposed to dying of natural death.

a reply to: tensetek

The definition of "homicide" for an autopsy simply indicates that another person caused the death. It doesn't have anything to do with the legal definition carrying criminal liability.

I do happen to think criminal charges are in order as well -- not against those OSP officers who shot the weapons... but against those who created that death trap and put those officers in that position.

a reply to: tensetek

Does it not state entrance and exit wounds ?

Be good to know if he was shot from different directions which would mean more than 1 shooter or just 1 shooter

It lines up with 3 shots we hear in the background on cox's video though

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Just from what I've read so far, seems the shots all entered his back.

Yes, with two exiting on the left front, one above and below the nipple area if I remember correctly.

And has anyone else found where he had any type of gun holster on him?
Or would they take that off, before examination for some reason?

As I understand it, his body and everything on it is supposed to be transported to the ME intact. I would assume that would include a holster.

a reply to: Boadicea

That's what I figured, since he still had cuffs on. But I don't see a mention of a holster, which I found interesting.

The autopsy report states, "Gunshot wound to the right lower back, abdomen, and chest". It also states, "perforation of the posterior right 10th intercostal space". That intercostal space is consistent to where one would reach for a weapon if right handed, which Finicum was.

That lends credence to the train of thought that he was reaching for a gunshot wound...

originally posted by: chiefsmom
a reply to: Boadicea

But I don't see a mention of a holster, which I found interesting.

Me too. I can understand LaVoy not wanting to wear a hip holster while driving, and would expect him to wear his shoulder holster -- but not carry in the pocket. A holster is designed for safely carrying and ease of access. I don't know why LaVoy would skip his shoulder holster to carry in the pocket.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but if you go down to page 6, where it describes the gunshot wounds, it sounds like they all entered from the back.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, first time reading an autopsy.


Oh, read yours wrong, thought it said reaching for a gun, which made me question how they would really know, if it is true he was shot in the back.

a reply to: chiefsmom

Keep reading through all the damage the bullet did in that area. From shredding a kidney, perforating the intercostal space, lower right lobe of the lung, colon, liver, diaphragm, etc. That entire area was torn up. It would be really hard, if not impossible, for him to localize just where he were hit.

The mess just gets stinkier.....
The killer cops had orders to rub Fincum out because he was the soul of the protest and possible future trouble...

a reply to: chiefsmom

yes in the back. which brings up another point. If he was shot in the back. the officer was behind him when he/they pulled the trigger. so how did they see if he was reaching for anything at all? i know i can't see your hand go to your chest if your back is to me so how can they?

a reply to: roaland

It's a back, not an invisibility cloak.

Hands are usually connected to arms. The angle of the arm can give a big clue as to the location of the hand.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Well the guy behind him couldn't see what the hell he was doing because of line of sight.

That guy just dove in all cowboy(pun) and started unloading clips GTA style like a criminal.

a reply to: swanne

try it on a family member once. have them stand 20 yards away from you then turn their back to you. then have them put their hand over their heart and tell me you can see exactly what the hand is doing?

So I have to ask, If he WAS reaching for a gun, wouldn't you think someone in front of him would have shot him?

a reply to: roaland

"What the hand was doing"? I think it's pretty clear what LaVoy's hands were reaching for, right in the middle of a confrontation: a weapon. You think he was reaching for what, for a chocolate bar?