Monrovia — Prosecution rebuttal witness, Dr. Benedict Kolee, has refuted defense witness, Dr. Matthias I. Okoye's autopsy report, declaring that the evidence by the Nigerian-born defendant-hired pathologist is erroneous and designed to distort scientific principles.
Taking the rebuttal witness stands Monday, December 18, Dr. Kolee said there is some factual evidence presented, but most of the quotations in the report lack scientific proof.
Defense Pathologist Okore, in the Charloe Musu Murder case, has said that a Male DNA was found in the middle left-hand fingernail of the deceased Charloe Musu.
Dr. Okoye is from the Nebraska Institute of Institute of Forensic Sciences, Lincoln USA, a Forensic Pathologist, Scientist Pathologist, Clinical Pathologist, and an Attorney.
Among several outcomes from his autopsy conducted, Dr. Okore noted that the victim, Charloe Musu died of blunt force trauma as a result of multiple stabbing wounds and that the stabbings were caused by an instrument which is not a knife. Also, he said the stabbings were caused or done by a muscular male and none of the defendants can cause these wounds.
Additionally, Dr. Okore said there was a foreign DNA of a male found in the middle fingernail of the left hand of the victim, adding that all DNA profiles from the victim exclude all the defendants.
Dr. Okoye is a member of the American Board of Medicine and has conducted over twenty thousand autopsies in the USA and Africa including four in Liberia (Angel Togba) he is also a Lawyer and has practiced and taught Medicine for over 42 years.
However, the Prosecution Rebuttal Witness, Dr. Benedict Kolee, taking the witness stand noted that despite the autopsy might have figured out a make DNA, the late Charloe Musu came in contact with many people who touched her and backed her, and in the process, many parts of her body, including her extremities, (left, right hands foot) came into contact, potentially, leading to the exchange of DNA on parts of her body.
He also noted that a first autopsy was performed by him, during which he had a lot of male and female attendants, and during then, the body was being packaged and placed in a fridge and all the attendants came in contact with the deceased.
Under normal medical practice, during the conduct of laboratory examination or autopsy, it is medically adequate or professional for those within the premise of the examination to have on their Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) including medical examination hand gloves.
However, Dr. Kolee did not state whether he and others who conducted said autopsy, were professionally attired in their PPE, as a normal practice, owing to Dr. Kolee's statement that the body might have come in contact with those on the scene, which contaminated the body.
When quizzed about a male DNA found in the middle left-hand fingernail of the deceased, Dr. Kolee noted that the body portion in question has a minor discovery on the left hand, and as such, the contamination occurred after the deceased hand may have come in contact with a male person who might have been carrying her from the house during the period of the incident.
According to Dr. Kolee, a statement by Dr. Okore that a total of 14 samples were said to have been taken, nine from the crime scene and five reference samples from deceased and prime suspects is intended to generate a particular report against the principle of science.
Dr. Kolee, who has practiced as a pathologist for four years discerns Dr. Okoree's report which declared that there was a minor contributor in a sample that he described as "contaminated," as erroneous, unfair, and against the principle of science.
However, he agreed with Dr. Okoree on the report that stated that if a male committed a crime and is unwilling to show up for testing, his father or paternal family member can be tested.
Dr. Kolee concurred saying, "IN that instance, there is a 99.9 percent sense in it."
Nevertheless, Dr. Kolee said the report is erroneous and contains a mixture and omission of facts.
According to him, a laceration, as indicated by Dr. Okoree, is a full-thickness cut of the skin and added that the stab wound on the deceased was not caused by steel as a result of heavy blunt force, as indicated.
Further responding to Dr. Okoyer's report that there were multiple traumatic injuries on the body of Charloe Musu and a cut of about Six Inches as a result of multiple blunt force, and multiple shocked forces, Dr. Kolee said the presentation by the defense witness was false and misleading as well as a misrepresentation of the facts.
Dr. Okeyee said on the thigh of the deceased, there is a deep laceration caused by a sharp knife, however, Dr. Kolee noted that the injury was not a blunt-force injury, but an injury caused by a sharp edge like a knife, as testified by the defendant Gertrude Newton.
He said that Dr. Okoyee's statement that his report has a reasonable medical specific is measurable and vague.
He said there is no evidence of blunt-force trauma at the head and neck and that the witness introduced a falsehood to mislead the court.
Dr. Okoyee during his testimony told the court that there were intrusions into the home of Defendant Glorious Musu Scott as a result of forensic examination from the Scene, window, and back, front, and side when the steel bar was cut and assessing the compound, there was evidence from the wall along with one of the witnesses testimony that she suffer counter injury
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Even though he agreed that it was possible to determine a DNA of either of the suspects, since they all lived in the same house, Dr. Kolee on the other hand contradicted himself self saying that it was not scientifically possible for Dr. Okoree to conclude that there were intruders.
He further maintained that the mixed DNA in his report on the fingernail was minor and had no potential to contribute to the case.
Even though he said the mixed DNA on the fingernails was minor and had no potential to contribute to the case, Dr. Kolee has however previously informed the court that the fingernails of the deceased show mixed chromosomes of XX (Female) and XY (Male) under the nails of the deceased.
Meanwhile, Dr. Kolee informed the court that he did not conduct the autopsy as a government hired pathologist, but collected samples and turned over to the Liberia National Police who conducted the examination.
Meanwhile, despite Dr. Kolee's discrediting Dr. Okoree's autopsy report, as being erroneous, he little admitted to the court that two scientists could investigate the same crime scene, but with different results.
