Pathologist testifies at trial

Getting someone to testify about Masumi's injuries as described by Lankford is ridiculous. Lankford got rid of the body and destroyed any "evidence" that might support his ludicrous tale. He's trying to find validation for his fairy tale. So-called experts paid by defense attorneys like Wilkerson are "hired guns". The expert gets paid well for his biased "independent" opinion. Gives us a break!

These "medical experts" get paid very well and will stretch the truth on to the side that pays the most money. The doctor should be investigated!!!

What was the specialist again, A pathologicalliarologist or a patheticologist!

manini_fish wrote:

... The doctor should be investigated!!!

Agreed. Dr. James Navin is notorious in Hawaii medicolegal circles for his willingness to give misleading "expert" opinions -- all for a price, of course.

Navin's qualifications were also misstated in Nelson Daranciang's article. Navin is NOT a forensic pathologist; his certifications are in general Anatomic and Clinical Pathology and in Cytopathology. In contrast, the City and County medical examiner, Dr. Kanthi De Alwis, is fully board-certified in Forensic Pathology. Her qualifications and professional integrity are well established. Navin doesn't even begin to approach her skill level in the forensic arena.

Dr. Navin should stick to reading Pap smears; that's an area where he has documented expertise. He has no business trying to pass himself off as a forensic pathologist.

Attorney Wilkerson could have consulted with any number of REAL forensic pathologists to see whether any of them would agree to serve as his client's expert witness.(My hunch is that he probably did, but they refused to go along with the defense theory.) It's pathetic that he has stooped to offering testimony from a paid whore like Navin. We can only hope that the jury will see through this deception.

Oh here we go again with the village idiots.

Listen folks, yes, expert witnesses get paid a lot of money, relatively speaking. Yes, I am sure some (maybe even many) expert witnesses are paid under the table to give testimony in support of a case even though that means giving a faulty opinion. I would guess that this happens most often with huge corporations that have the kind of money it takes to buy a witness than in relatively low key local cases involving people that just don't have that kind of money.

Now, you have quickly jumped to the conclusion that this expert is a "hired gun". But, what has this expert said?

"Dr. James Navin said yesterday that Lankford's description of Watanabe after the impact indicates she was dead.

"She is clinically dead (in the) absence of a heartbeat and absence of breathing," he said.

Navin said Lankford described Watanabe's head as misshapen and with a hole in it. He said such an injury is consistent with a head hitting a 125-pound boulder at 40 mph, as described by Wilkerson."

What he did was define what "clinically dead" means and simply state that the injuries Lankford claims the woman sustained are consistent with the type of accident he claims happened. He is not saying the accident happened as described nor that Masumi sustained those injuries. There is no truth being stretched here, folks.

Windwardguy wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed. Dr. James Navin is notorious in Hawaii medicolegal circles for his willingness to give misleading "expert" opinions -- all for a price, of course.
Navin's qualifications were also misstated in Nelson Daranciang's article. Navin is NOT a forensic pathologist; his certifications are in general Anatomic and Clinical Pathology and in Cytopathology. In contrast, the City and County medical examiner, Dr. Kanthi De Alwis, is fully board-certified in Forensic Pathology. Her qualifications and professional integrity are well established. Navin doesn't even begin to approach her skill level in the forensic arena.
Dr. Navin should stick to reading Pap smears; that's an area where he has documented expertise. He has no business trying to pass himself off as a forensic pathologist.
Attorney Wilkerson could have consulted with any number of REAL forensic pathologists to see whether any of them would agree to serve as his client's expert witness.(My hunch is that he probably did, but they refused to go along with the defense theory.) It's pathetic that he has stooped to offering testimony from a paid whore like Navin. We can only hope that the jury will see through this deception.

This is interesting, and if true the prosecution should dig up some evidence that substantiates your claims to discredit the witness.

Any expert testimony given in this trial as to the injuries Masumi sustained are based on hearsay. No one knows what the injuries really were! All the expert does for Lankford is give his story a little credibility. Is anyone even looking for the body?

W*F says "Is anyone even looking for the body?".

The detective testified that they are still continuing to look for her body as well as interested members of the public, as evidenced by the three individuals digging in the spot where Lankford was seen digging the day the jurors went to the site.

Another thing, so the doctor says in the absence of a heartbeat and breathing a person is clinically dead. No $hit Sherlock!

As for the misshapen head with a hole, a claw hammer along wielded by Lankford (or any other instrument) including a rock held in Lankford's hand could have caused the same damage.

Lankford is guilty of MURDER!

Interesting. The post is being edited making it non-sensible.

The above was edited and not typos.

Anyway, W*F, because the sane people believe Lankford's story is lame and he is guilty, that doesn't make us the village idiots.

You're one of the bleeding heart few that are falling for Lankford's lies.

Disgruntled Kamaiana wrote:

W*F says "Is anyone even looking for the body?".
The detective testified that they are still continuing to look for her body as well as interested members of the public, as evidenced by the three individuals digging in the spot where Lankford was seen digging the day the jurors went to the site.
Another thing, so the doctor says in the absence of a heartbeat and breathing a person is clinically dead. No $hit Sherlock!
As for the misshapen head with a hole, a claw hammer along wielded by Lankford (or any other instrument) including a rock held in Lankford's hand could have caused the same damage.
Lankford is guilty of MURDER!

Umm no. You guys are bashing the expert witness saying his testimony was paid off. He didn't give any testimony that I would pay under the table for, is my point. Um, Lankford testified the body was never buried. Sure it might be useful to dig around in the ground, but isn't it equally as useful to send some divers out by Chinaman's Hat? The doctor defines "clinically dead", and you get pissy and worked up over how obvious it should be? Do you have any idea how the court system works? If you don't state in for the record, the jury can't take it into consideration. It needs to be said. Relatively obvious or not, it is unwise to make assumptions. Yes, the supposed injuries could be caused a number of ways but that is irrelevant here. The point of the expert witness's testimony is to state that it is physically possible for the supposed injuries to occur as a result of the supposed cause (as described by the defense).

Disgruntled Kamaiana wrote:

Interesting. The post is being edited making it non-sensible.
The above was edited and not typos.
Anyway, W*F, because the sane people believe Lankford's story is lame and he is guilty, that doesn't make us the village idiots.
You're one of the bleeding heart few that are falling for Lankford's lies.

I am not falling for Lankford's lies. I am merely objectively looking at the FACTS rather than getting caught up in emotion. It is unethical to jump to conclusions before all the evidence is out and the closing arguments have been made, regardless of how you FEEL about it.

W*F says "Is anyone even looking for the body?"

Since Lankford's has consistently not told the truth since the beginning, we now know one very important thing, Masumi is not in the ocean.

In Lankford's Hauoli Pest Control truck, on the right side compartment in the enclosed bed was a metal hammer with a rubber grip.

His own story condems him. Lets say he did accidentally hit her.He says himself he was worried about losing his job with out even a care for this young women. He also was suposedly helping her look for her house sure he was at 40 miles and hour plus
most people looking for anything drive a tiny bit slower. So if she did jump she probably figured out this guy was up to no good or maybe she was pushed and scratched his hands trying to hold on for dear life either way this guy is bad news and needs to be gone.

My opinion is that one key would be to address Lankford's claim that he walked hundreds of yard on the reef, at night during high tide and I believe without a light at night (don't know what moon phase was, but probably not enough illumination to see holes & coral head irregularities). He did this while holding on to the bag that weighed about 125 pounds, of course not real weight with the water supporting it.

As I said yesterday if you have ever been torching at night you can understand the difficulty that Lankford needed to overcome to do what he claimed. Torching is done at low tide with a light source for a reason. Reefs have many holes, rock/coral formations that you need to avoid when walking. High tide there would have been waist high or higher with a current.

Imagine walking all that distance on an uneven surface at night, through waist high water with a current lugging a body. Prosecution needs to check this out by trying to find a day when the tide, wind & current can match the night "fairy tail man" went out. Also find out what shoes he had on and test for salt water.

WTF wrote:

Oh here we go again with the village idiots....

Now, you have quickly jumped to the conclusion that this expert [Navin] is a "hired gun". But, what has this expert said?...

He is not saying the accident happened as described nor that Masumi sustained those injuries. There is no truth being stretched here, folks.

WTF, you must not have read the first part of Daranciang's article. It said that Navin would "rebut the suggestion that missing Japanese tourist Masumi Watanabe clawed [Lankford] with her fingernails." That is Navin's anticipated "expert" rebuttal to earlier testimony by the official Medical Examiner, Dr. Kanthi De Alwis.(De Alwis had reviewed photographs of Lankford's hands. She concluded that they showed injuries consistent with his having been clawed defensively.)

I saw those photos yesterday on television, and they clearly support the Medical Examiner's testimony; only a true "village idiot" (or a paid professional prostitute) would say otherwise.

Yes, Lone Wolf, let's ignore the possibility that he could be telling the truth this time and not look in the water. What has anyone got to lose at this point?

In response to CSI Wannabe:

The reported tide (thanks to "An Observer" on another post) on April 12, 2007 at 11:37 p.m. was 2.2 feet on Windward Oahu. Lankford had an Energizer Hardcase Professional flashlight purchased at Home Depot that night. The flashlight (model#TUF2AAPE) is weatherproof, not waterproof. Windward Tide table: http://www.co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/get_prediction...

Windwardguy wrote:

<quoted text>
WTF, you must not have read the first part of Daranciang's article. It said that Navin would "rebut the suggestion that missing Japanese tourist Masumi Watanabe clawed [Lankford] with her fingernails." That is Navin's anticipated "expert" rebuttal to earlier testimony by the official Medical Examiner, Dr. Kanthi De Alwis.(De Alwis had reviewed photographs of Lankford's hands. She concluded that they showed injuries consistent with his having been clawed defensively.)
I saw those photos yesterday on television, and they clearly support the Medical Examiner's testimony; only a true "village idiot" (or a paid professional prostitute) would say otherwise.

Right, and I will believe you because you have decades of experience as a forensic pathologist? Do you? If not, then you don't have the expertise to make that statement.

By the way, I love your use of 'professional prostitution'. I coined that phrase (perhaps on this message board, I'm not sure) a while back out of disgust for certain politicians.

WTF wrote:

Yes, Lone Wolf, let's ignore the possibility that he could be telling the truth this time and not look in the water. What has anyone got to lose at this point?

Your response confirms my gut feeling. Thank you.

Lankford: it happened in Pupukea and you passed by Kahuku hospital, that's very intentional.

Alan, from Kailua: I agree with you. You took the words right out of my mouth. I think Lankford is a liar. There is no way that you would be driving that fast while trying to look for someone’s house. If you ask me I think he just condemned himself. He was up to no good, and she probably knew it. his testimony only add's more question's not answers.