Unusual facial markings and lethal mechanisms in a series of gasoline inhalation deaths

A review of deaths associated with hydrocarbon toxicity from gasoline sniffing in South Australia throughout a 10 year period from July 1987 to June 2002 revealed 4 cases. The victims were all Aboriginal people from remote inland communities. Each death had occurred while the victim was lying in bed sniffing gasoline from a can held to the face. Once unconsciousness had occurred, the mouth and nose had been pressed firmly against the can by the weight of the head. In each case, the effects of gasoline toxicity had been exacerbated by hypoxia and hypercapnia from rebreathing into the container once a tight seal had been established between the face and the can. The circular impressions left by the can edges on the faces of each of the victims provided an autopsy marker that assisted in clarifying the details of the fatal episodes. Discouraging solitary gasoline sniffing in bed may reduce the death rate in communities where this behavior is practiced.     

Sometimes What Everybody Thinks They Know Is True

This essay responds to D. Davis and W. C. Follette (2002), who question the value of motive evidence in murder cases. They argue that the evidence that a husband had extramarital affairs, that he heavily insured his wife's life, or that he battered his wife is ordinarily of infinitesimal probative value. We disagree. To be sure, it would be foolish to predict solely on the basis of such evidence that a husband will murder his wife. However, when this kind of evidence is combined with other evidence in a realistic murder case, the evidence can be quite probative. We analyze cases in which it is virtually certain that the victim was murdered but unclear who murdered her, and in which it is uncertain whether the husband murdered the wife or she died by accident. We show that in each case motive evidence, such as a history of battering or of infidelity, can substantially increase the odds of the husband's guilt. We also consider the actual case on which Davis and Follette base their paper. We argue that testimony of Davis on the basis of the analysis presented in their paper was properly excluded, for it would have been misleading and unhelpful.     

Punched with a fist: the etiology of a fatal depressed cranial fracture

We report a case in which a 33-year-old man was discovered unconscious following a fistfight with another man. Emergency neurosurgical efforts to repair a depressed temporoparietal skull fracture and associated brain injuries were unsuccessful. The forensic anthropologist and pathologist worked in tandem to sort out a complex combination of cranial evidence, including healed antemortem trauma, perimortem blunt force trauma, remote and recent neurosurgical intervention, and the craniotomy cut performed at autopsy. The victim had suffered head injuries and a right temporoparietal craniotomy ten years prior to death. The perimortem cranial fractures were centrally located within a surgically repaired roundel of bone involving portions of the right temporal and parietal bones. Reportedly, the victim was punched on the right side of his head as he was lying on the ground with the left side of his head against an asphalt surface. A primary question in the case was whether a blow with a fist could have produced the observed cranial injuries. To adequately answer that question, known data on the minimum amount of force required to fracture the temporoparietal region were compared to data on the amount of force generated by a blow with a fist. A biomechanics expert demonstrated that a single blow with a fist to the rigidly supported head of the victim could generate the required force to produce the observed fractures. The previous medical condition possibly predisposed the victim to the cranial fractures and contributed to the depressed nature of the fractures. Although depressed cranial fractures do not typically result from a blow with a fist, it was determined in this case that the fracture pattern was consistent with a punch to the head.     

Researcher liability for negligence in human subject research: informed consent and researcher malpractice actions

Two sets of federal regulations, the "Common Rule" and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, govern human subject research that is either federally-funded or involves FDA regulated products. These regulations require, inter alia, that: (1) researchers obtain informed consent from human subjects, and (2) that an Institutional Review Board (IRB) independently review and approve the research protocol. Although the federal regulations do not provide an express cause of action against researchers, research subjects should be able to bring informed consent and malpractice actions against researchers by establishing a duty of care and standard of care. Researchers owe human subjects a duty of care analogous to the special relationship between physicians and patients. The federal regulations should provide the minimum standard of care for informed consent in human subject research, and complying with them should be a partial defense. In contrast, expert testimony should establish the standard of care for researcher malpractice, and IRB approval should be a partial defense.     

The New Right in Central Europe II: Poland and Hungary

'The New Right' as it has come to be known, derives from at least two major intellectual sources, free market theory and social conservatism. The question how far these are compatible is frequently raised. The aim of this two-part article is to explore the impact of 'New Right' thinking in East Central Europe (specifically in Czechoslovakia, Poland and Hungary) in order to show that in the conditions of 'real Socialism', free market and social conservative ideas seem to arise naturally from the same root conceptions.
This second section deals with Poland, and examines the new 'market sociology' propagated within universities, together with the metaphysical and political ideas surrounding the Polish Nationalist movement.     

How firms organize for successful innovation in a hostile environment

Managers in a business environment marked by rapid technological change face major challenges when making strategic decisions. A risk-averse, conservative strategy may be a safe route, but might lead to missing marketplace opportunities. This paper investigates whether a hostile business environment adversely affects either a firm's rate of technological innovation or its rate of success with new product launches. It also examines what successful innovating firms do, in terms of strategic posture and organizational structure, to adapt to hostile conditions. A model depicting relationships between environmental conditions, firm responses, innovation rates, and new product success was constructed and tested in an empirical study of 142 U.S. firms involved in technological innovation. The final section discusses managerial implications of the findings.