A few weeks ago we found my father's body suspended in an apparent suicide in a lot he owns and stores equipment on. His family and everyone who knew him knows he wouldn't have committed suicide and there were several questionable things going in his life which makes us suspect foul play. No details that we've provided will make the police investigate. The chula vista police department took no fingerprints or trace evidence because there wasn't a mark on the body or signs of a fight around his body. It was a gravel lot however and they simply came and took his body away. The autopsy did not show signs of a fight and the preliminary tox screens haven't shown anything yet.

My dad was in an excellent frame of mind in the days prior to his death. We have phone records indicating he was busy working and making plans for more work till a few hours before the estimated time of death. He was planning a trip to Europe the day before. He wasn't sick or financially desperate. His business had a dozen active contracts. He was highly regarded by the people he subcontracted for. There was no note.

The chula vista polica department detective we spoke to gave us little hope that they would do anything because of the lack of evidence of trauma on the body. They made it clear they don't even take fingerprints around the body's vicinity unless they see trauma. He died on the 13th and no one has been questioned by the police although the lot had a tarecaker present in the outer area of the lot during the entire window the medical examiner estimated as time of death.

We've been ignored by the detective assigned to the case beyond taking a few statements from me and my sisters. We've started leaving more messages to others in the department. A PI we consulted suggested we appeal to the detective's supervisor but we can only get through to voicemail. Is there any legal statute I can quote to push for a real investigation? And even though it has been weeks - collection of forensic evidence -though it's likely contaminated.

I'd appreciate any legal advice might be able to use as leverage with the police. We are not sure we can afford a lawyer and a PI.

I am sorry for your loss. You can try to go to the police department and speak with someone in person or speak with the District Attorney. He or she is really the one to decide whether or not to charge someone with a crime. Have you browsed through the information in LawInfo's Free Legal Resource Center to learn more about your issue yet? See: http://www.lawinfo.com/consumer.html and http://resources.lawinfo.com/en/index.html. You can certainly try to speak to a lawyer to determine what legal options may be available. In the meantime, you may be able to learn more on your own. Search the "Free Legal Resources" tab, or browse the Consumer Resources. Good luck.

The issue for law enforcement is that unless the medical examiner can give them anything OTHER than apparant suicide, and there is a lack of any physical evidence on or around the body to indicate foul play, then no matter what they uncover via interviews or circumstantial evidence, the state has nothing with which to present a case. The burden is on the state to PROVE things like homicide, manslaughter, etc. and the key to such cases is the "manner and cause of death" - which is determined soley by the M.E. Even if a private investigator can come up with 100 people who wished him ill, or even made threats against him, there STILL needs to be something to tie a particular person or persons to the actual death itself, and THAT is the element that appears to be lacking.

__________________
While pointers can be helpful, ultimately the number one lesson in any legal action is: don't take legal advice from books, family, friends, co-workers, police officers, grocery clerks, web sites, or people on legal message boards. The only person who can give YOU legal advice is YOUR attorney.

http://www.aardvarc.org

Well we are doing whatever we can. We hired a forensics expert local to our community and they looked for evidence and will be reviewing the reports from the police and the medical examiners. In the meantime the standard tox screen didn't find anything but we've been told they don't screen for very much. We've gotten more runaround from the police. They basically haven't done anything beyond the first day's work and have done no interviews.

I do have a legal question. A family member has information they feel is pertinent and wishes to make a statement to the police. When i met with the detective i got more runaround and he implied that maybe they wouldn't talk to her. Can the police legally refuse to take a statement from someone?
thanks.

Yes, police have complete discretion in whom to interview, and to what extent. If they found no suspicious evidence at the scene, and the M.E. found nothing remarkeable that would suggest foul play then harsh reality is that the case is only going to move forward if one of two things happens: either (a) someone confesses, or (b) other evidence, BEYOND circumstantial evidence, is uncovered, property documented, and discovered in such a way that the prosecutor can use it in court (it's that last part that is usually the problem). It sounds like you're on the right track getting an independent evaluation of the case and particularly the medical examiner's report - because unless the M.E. has some way to get on the stand and tell a jury that "x action by a person or persons other than the decedant, caused or contributed to the death", then the case STILL won't go anywhere. Remember, we're talking about the burden of PROOF, beyond a reasonable doubt, as the standard for conviction. If the prosecutor doesn't feel they can bring a case at that level, even an immaculate police investigation goes nowhere.

You are absolutely correct that most medical examiners screen for "the usuals". In theory, there are tens of thousands of substances, alone or in combination, that can be deadly, and as the average adult has a little over 9 pints of blood (not all of which can be accessed for testing), there's no way to test for every possible substance. Medical examiners start with the basics, and then add additional tests as circumstances suggest. For example, if there is evidence of choking or vomiting, then drugs that suppress breathing or irritate the stomach might get looked for (again, understanding that there are hundreds of possibilities), whereas evidence of bruising in certain configurations might suggest seizures prior to death, and this might point to a different type of drug/chemical to look for. But unless there is something to point to a SPECIFIC possibility (ie something found on the scene that may have been administered by the victim or a perpetrator, some unique odor, or discoloration of the body, or other identifiable means to point in a direction of what chemical signatures to test for, there are simply too many possibilities to reasonably test for (and not all things have specific tests, some things have to be deduced from the specific damage caused or how it related to the manner of death).

Keep with your forensics expert. Get another one if you can. If you've got a copy of the M.E. report and police report, you could even get creative (depending on your comfort level) and share the case with a forensics program at a local university (with names and identifying information removed or altered). Sometimes people with just a little training ask the best questions, and the more eyes looking at the issue, the better. Sometimes the most obvious things get overlooked and can make all the difference (not paying attention to whether the victim was right or left handed is one example that investigations training repeats over and over, because it's often overlooked).

__________________
While pointers can be helpful, ultimately the number one lesson in any legal action is: don't take legal advice from books, family, friends, co-workers, police officers, grocery clerks, web sites, or people on legal message boards. The only person who can give YOU legal advice is YOUR attorney.

http://www.aardvarc.org

It's been some time and the police department and the medical examiners office have closed my father's case due to the lack of physical evidence or so it is claimed. Neither office will release the entire report to us with pictures. We sent an independent ME to look at the police report. The medical examiners office won't release the pictures to her however. I wanted to do as suggested in the forum and approach several people about reviewing the findings with the entire reports in hand. But the ME and CVPD won't release the files in their entirety. There are interviews the police did that we cant access. Both offices have closed the case but won't release the files without a court order. So now I have to find a lawyer to get one. Is it even legal to withhold this information once the case is closed? I have to pay for the lawyer myself. I'm on a budget.

Yes, it's legal. It's outlined in California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 129, which says:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no copy,
reproduction, or facsimile of any kind shall be made of any
photograph, negative, or print, including instant photographs and
video recordings, of the body, or any portion of the body, of a
deceased person, taken by or for the coroner at the scene of death or
in the course of a post mortem examination or autopsy made by or
caused to be made by the coroner, except for use in a criminal action
or proceeding in this state that relates to the death of that
person, or except as a court of this state permits, by order after
good cause has been shown and after written notification of the
request for the court order has been served, at least five days
before the order is made, upon the district attorney of the county in
which the post mortem examination or autopsy has been made or caused
to be made. This section shall not apply to the making of such a copy,
reproduction, or facsimile for use in the field of forensic
pathology, for use in medical or scientific education or research, or
for use by any law enforcement agency in this or any other state or
the United States.
This section shall apply to any such copy, reproduction, or
facsimile, and to any such photograph, negative, or print, heretofore
or hereafter made."


Unless you're versed in arguing aspects of "good cause", you'll want an attorney to draft the motion and lay out the elements of "good cause" for release of the photos. If you've got a local law school, many of them will allow students to complete motions like this under the supervision of an instructor/licensed attorney, and that might save you a bundle.


The police interviews face a little different problem. They are generally exempt from the California Public Records Act, which means, in a nutshell, that nothing beyond the actual "police report", made by the initial responding officer, is released until subpoena'd for a civil trial. Mostly this is because things like supplemental investigative reports and interviews cover elements that are specifically exempted under GC 6254, such as:

- Identifying confidential informant information
- Criminal offender record information
- Information that may endanger the safety of a witness or the other person ( **key one** )
- Information that may jeopardize an investigation, related investigation or law enforcement proceeding
- Any portion of the report that reflects analysis, recommendation or conclusion of the investigating officer ( ** key one * )
- Information that may disclose investigative techniques ( ** maybe relevent ** )
- Information that may deprive a person of a fair trial
- Preliminary drafts, notes, or memorandums which are not retained in the ordinary course of business
- Records pertaining to pending litigation to which the city is a party until the litigation is adjudicated or settled

What that means at a FUNCTIONAL level, is that the government doesn't want potential suspects to be revealed to those who might use their appearance in such documents to harass, interrogate, seek revenge, or otherwise interact with those people who only APPEAR, for some reason, in the reports, but whom have NOT been charged with a crime. THIS aspect is going to be MUCH harder to defeat, and a seasoned victim rights bulldog attorney is going to be needed before the police are going to hand over a list of potential people to be investigated privately. If you've already got your own list of suspects, you may find that your time and money are best spent keeping the private investigator on the case and letting them conduct their own interviews (whicih can be much broader and less problematic than police interviews - and with people who may feel less intimidated than speking to police where they are worried that THEY might be facing arrest or charges on the spot if they say the wrong thing).

__________________
While pointers can be helpful, ultimately the number one lesson in any legal action is: don't take legal advice from books, family, friends, co-workers, police officers, grocery clerks, web sites, or people on legal message boards. The only person who can give YOU legal advice is YOUR attorney.

http://www.aardvarc.org