"Beaten to death". An autopsy series of homicidal blunt force injuries

Although gunshot is by far the most common means of homicide in the United States, significant numbers of homicides are also perpetrated by other means. Blunt-force injuries are produced by a variety of objects, including hands and feet and many different weapons. Some of these objects produce distinctive patterns of injury of potential evidentiary value. This paper presents a series of 20 consecutive blunt-force homicides in adults. Seventy percent (14 cases) of the victims were men. Thirty percent (six cases) followed an argument or altercation. A number of the weapons used were "weapons of opportunity" seized in the course of the incidents. Sixty-nine percent (nine cases) of known assailants were acquainted with their victims. Few characteristic patterned injuries were seen. Not surprisingly, craniocerebral trauma was the most common cause of death. One half (10 cases) the victims survived their assaults for varying periods of time. Homicides due to blunt-force injury still pose a significant challenge for the forensic pathologist, who must obtain a complete and accurate history of the fatal incident, interpret patterns of injury and other findings at autopsy, and correlate all of the findings to make an accurate ruling of the cause and manner of death.     

Circumventing formal structure through commitment: Presidential influence and agenda control

Although the formal institutional structure that defines the temporal order of play in a policy game between the Congress and President ought to provide Congress with agenda power, the President is traditionally treated as the dominant player in this relationship. We show that if the President can make clear-cut commitments, presidential commitment can counter the dominance hierarchy and the complexion of equilibrium outcomes. Thus, the details of political interactions (in particular, the possibilities for commitment) may be as important as the formal specification of institutional structure.We thank Peter Aranson, David Austen-Smith, Ed Campos, Gerry Faulhaber, Art Frank, Ken Koford, William Riker, Janet Pack, the anonymous referees, and seminar participants at the University of Delaware, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Rochester for helpful comments, subject to the usual caveat. We also thank Joel Friedlander and Harold Dichter for research assistance.     

Last rights. In sickness and in health, more people are taking life's biggest decision away from doctors and into their own hands

When dying is all that awaits them, more and more people are choosing certain death now rather than uncertain life on medical support systems. But the decision seldom comes easy, as a Newsweek reporter discovers during three weeks with the doctors, nurses, patients and families in an intensive-care ward. A best-selling guide to suicide fires debate over when it is right to let life go--and who should make that choice when the patient no longer can.     

Money madness. Are private psychiatric hospitals resorting to kidnapping in their quest for paying patients?

In their zeal for lucrative insurance reimbursement, some private psychiatric hospitals seem to have gone over the edge themselves. A number of these institutions, critics charge, use outright coercion to commit and retain patients. Now some formerly abducted "recruits" are fighting back with lawsuits.