Otto Warmbier

[Pea-n-Me]

I am a little torn about the autopsy piece. I have seen one in progress and afterward sworn that it was not something I would needlessly put one of my loved ones through if given the choice. When my own father died it was determined by the medical examiner to be of natural causes and no autopsy was needed. When my BIL died he was young and by law he had to have one; there was no choice. When a death occurs in the hospital when someone's sick, the vast majority of times people choose no autopsy if given the choice. So I can absolutely respect that if it's for religious reasons, especially, that they would choose no autopsy, and I'm not sure what the laws are in their state or how they would apply given the circumstances of his demise. I'm also not sure it would yield the information everyone wants, ie a smoking gun. Lots of tests were done on his body in the six days he was home so those will give a lot of information when they're pieced together. I suppose there is a chance they could've found a smoking gun with an autopsy, but the chance may have been quite small. That would be my guess. Because perhaps if the chance was large, they may have done it despite the religious implications, idk. I did read that there were no bruises, fractures, or other signs of torture anywhere on his body; that basically all areas of his brain showed tissue death, so it's pretty clear what he died from. The question is, how did that happen? Three of the possibilities were pneumonia, a blood clot, or a heart attack. I'm sure they would've checked for evidence of those while he was alive. What scares me is what I know about torture in the North Korean camps, and how they go a little "soft" on foreigners. One of the methods they are known to use is drowning and near-drowning. If that were the case, perhaps the family didn't want to know.

 

[pryncess527]

We know NK tortured him. we know that caused his death. I fail to see how additional details about the exact type of torture or cause of death will move us forward. According to doctors, it already seems pretty clear it was near-drowning based on the type of brain injury/coma. What benefit is derived by giving the public more detail?

 

[bcla]

Yeah, but there is also this little thing called freedom. We are free to make whatever decisions we want regarding our loved ones bodies when they die.

If the coroner ordered an autopsy, the family couldn't decline. This was a clear case where an autopsy could have been ordered, which was that foul play was suspected. However, this coroner gave the family the option.

There have been a lot of cases where an autopsy was performed against family wishes. Liberace's death was one case.

 

[pryncess527]

If the coroner ordered an autopsy, the family couldn't decline. This was a clear case where an autopsy could have been ordered, which was that foul play was suspected. However, this coroner gave the family the option.

There have been a lot of cases where an autopsy was performed against family wishes. Liberace's death was one case.

I was being cheeky, but thanks for the education

 

[cabanafrau]

We know NK tortured him. we know that caused his death. I fail to see how additional details about the exact type of torture or cause of death will move us forward. According to doctors, it already seems pretty clear it was near-drowning based on the type of brain injury/coma. What benefit is derived by giving the public more detail?

It's not as if there can be any legal matters coming out of his death, so at this point why put the family through more grief and heartache?

 

[bcla]

It's not as if there can be any legal matters coming out of his death, so at this point why put the family through more grief and heartache?

One rationale is for a proper determination of death. It's standard operating procedure if the cause of death is indeterminate. I mentioned Liberace. Or Michael Jackson. Someone dying young typically gets an autopsy around here.

 

[cabanafrau]

One rationale is for a proper determination of death. It's standard operating procedure if the cause of death is indeterminate. I mentioned Liberace. Or Michael Jackson. Someone dying young typically gets an autopsy around here.

Actually an autopsy is intended to cover both cause and manner of death, which are not the same thing. I am rather familiar with the protocol. You may notice that both deaths you mention involved litigation. My question in this case was in the rhetorical vein, as there will clearly be no litigation stemming from this death, no matter the age of the decedent.

 

[bcla]

Actually an autopsy is intended to cover both cause and manner of death, which are not the same thing. I am rather familiar with the protocol. You may notice that both deaths you mention involved litigation. My question in this case was in the rhetorical vein, as there will clearly be no litigation stemming from this death, no matter the age of the decedent.

Even so, if the coroner had ordered it, the family might have sued to stop it, but it's not as if they were likely to succeed.

 

[cabanafrau]

Even so, if the coroner had ordered it, the family might have sued to stop it, but it's not as if they were likely to succeed.

There is simply no rationale for the medical examiner to have ordered it, none. There's no point to even speculating beyond that IMO.

 

[DizBelle]

Without an autopsy, we're all going to have to be satisfied with his death was a result of some natural medical event that lead to the state he was in.

Without an autopsy, it's only speculation that NK did something to cause his condition.

 

[cabanafrau]

Without an autopsy, we're all going to have to be satisfied with his death was a result of some natural medical event that lead to the state he was in.

Without an autopsy, it's only speculation that NK did something to cause his condition.

Well it is pretty common at that age.

 

[pigletto]

I am so sorry that this family is dealing with criticism. AS a parent I would not want to know the full picture of what my child endured and what horrors I was powerless to stop, so I doubt I could authorize an autopsy either. I have to ask who would want to be scrutinized under these circumstances, and if those who are critical could stand up under a microscope? I know I could not, and hope I never place pressure on anyone who must.

I completely agree.
There's also nothing to prove that his family doesn't already know more than they are releasing to the public. Maybe they don't want it to be common knowledge, maybe they don't want to give NK more power and media exposure by being vocal about what they did to their son.. maybe they had to agree to certain things to get him back.... who knows? What's clear with all the gaps in this story is that for whatever reason.. the public is not to know.
And honestly.. too bad if it's touching all of us. We have no right to the gory details of their sons death. Maybe they feel that is the best way to preserve his dignity. We can sympathize, but it's none of our business.

 

[Julie's Haircut]

The actual cause of death was likely a removal of a feeding tube or other device. If the parents wanted to know more, they'd have authorized an autopsy. Their decision, the public has no right to know the details.

The funeral service was held this morning.

 

[DizBelle]

Well it is pretty common at that age.

I don't think it is common at all. But it certainly is possible. Especially for someone in a foreign and stressful environment. We just don't know. And we never will.

It's possible that an autopsy wouldn't reveal anything new.

But we'll never know.

 

[cabanafrau]

I don't think it is common at all. But it certainly is possible. Especially for someone in a foreign and stressful environment. We just don't know. And we never will.

It's possible that an autopsy wouldn't reveal anything new.

But we'll never know.

I'm sure analyzing it logically it's far more likely he died of natural causes than as the result of anything happening to him while he was in captivity. That would fit within the norms of those in his age range after all.

 

[DizBelle]

I'm sure analyzing it logically it's far more likely he died of natural causes than as the result of anything happening to him while he was in captivity. That would fit within the norms of those in his age range after all.

Why do you think it is more likely that he died as a result of some natural causes? Do you have any facts or evidence to prove that?

Unfortunately, I don't think we have any facts or evidence of anything except that he had brain damage and died.

I think it is very likely that his death is a result of something that they did to him while in captivity. But we have no evidence of anything.

 

[earfulofmagic]

Why do you think it is more likely that he died as a result of some natural causes? Do you have any facts or evidence to prove that?

Unfortunately, I don't think we have any facts or evidence of anything except that he had brain damage and died.

I think it is very likely that his death is a result of something that they did to him while in captivity. But we have no evidence of anything.

It's sarcasm. He was 22. The likelihood of his traumatic brain injury and tissue death occurring naturally one month into his imprisonment, and then dying from natural causes, is about as rare as the likelihood of North Korea respecting human rights.

 

[DizBelle]

It's sarcasm. He was 22. The likelihood of his traumatic brain injury and tissue death occurring naturally one month into his imprisonment, and then dying from natural causes, is about as rare as the likelihood of North Korea respecting human rights.

Agreed. But we have no evidence of it.

 

[sunshinehighway]

Agreed. But we have no evidence of it.

You really should stop. I get it, you think you are being analytical and logical. You aren't.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

We may not have direct evidence of what happened to him while he was in their custody, but one thing we can say for sure is that when he went into their custody, he was fine.

Without an autopsy, we're all going to have to be satisfied with his death was a result of some natural medical event that lead to the state he was in.

Without an autopsy, it's only speculation that NK did something to cause his condition.

An autopsy isn't the only way of getting information. There were many tests performed on him in the six days he was home. Those will yield good information, too, even if only to say there "wasn't" something, like fractures, a blood clot, a heart attack, etc.

We also do know about torture methods they use in NK prisons. Drowning or near-drowning being one of them.

Medical authorities here have said his anoxic brain injury was longstanding, and therefore information gathered from an autopsy may not have been helpful at all since the body heals and changes over time. One neurologist I saw quoted called doing an autopsy on him "futile".

The actual cause of death was likely a removal of a feeding tube or other device. If the parents wanted to know more, they'd have authorized an autopsy. Their decision, the public has no right to know the details.

I would think the cause of death would be anoxic brain injury. The feeding tube was just keeping him alive artificially. I also wouldn't be surprised to learn he was on a ventilator just prior to his being put on a plane to come home, either. I think there's a lot about this story we haven't learned or heard yet.

I guess there is a question, too, whether the public here does have a right to know, not so much his medical details, but what was done to him, if anything, in NK, seeing it is now part of an "international incident", human rights issues notwithstanding.