minneapolis courtroom. derek chauvin's defense time ready to cool another witness. they're trying to say that he died from drugs and health conditions and not from a knee on his next. and a decision that health officials say will come sooner rather than later. >> i don't want to get ahead of the advisory committee. . >> i'm hallie jackson. good morning to you. morgan, let me start with you as we wait for a decision on potential charges. you're there, you have seen what is unfolding on the ground. where is this going next now that that officer has resigned. >> a lot of people are wonder rg potential charges against kim potter at some point today or a decision from the country attorney, they anticipate to make that decision within the next 24 hours. we have seen for three rights now massive protests here out in front of the police station in brooklyn center. still with the high fence. we know there was nearly 60 arrests last night following another night of protests. some of property testers staying well past that curfew that has been in place for several days, and they used tear gas, in some cases rubber bullets. we anticipate another arrival of protests later today that could be impacted by what that decision is from the county attorney when it comes to kim potter who is set to have made that fatal mistake, choosing to pull her firearm when she thought it was a taser. take a listen. >> i'm really just hurt for my son. i feel like they just stole him away and i feel like that's not fair to my son. especially being a black young son, he needs his dad. >> of course potter submitted her letter of resignation. the police chief of this very police statement has also resigned. the mayor is now the one overseeing the operation, not the city manager who was let go earlier this week, hallie? >> thank you for that. gabe, let me go to you. we're getting breaking developments involving maurice hall. he was in the car. he was planning to plead the 5th. this, i believe, is maurice hall's attorney. and hall apparently is in court. this had been an issue between the defense and the prosecution whether or not he could testify, what's going on right now? >> it is really important to notice here as we look at these pictures, that's maurice hall on live television. it's important to note that the jury right now is not in the courtroom. right now they are debating whether or not he should be called before the jury. he planned to plead the 5th amendment because he did not want to answer questions that could potentially incriminate him in any future charges. now this is the first time that he is in the courtroom and that debate is happening right now. there is a discussion that the defense submitted questions, the judge wanted more clarity and now they're bringing him to the court outside of the presence of the jury to ask what questions which he be asked in front of that jury, hallie. >> let me listen in, stay here for a second. >> no, i'm not. >> why would you not answer those. >> imfearful of criminal charges going forward. i have open charges that are not settled yet of personal stuff. >> so basically you're invoking your fifth amendment right? >> yes, sir. >> thank you, sir, you can have a seat. >> any parties that wish to be heard on this issue? all right, i'm going to advise both sides to file your proposed questions as essentially an offer of proof. i earlier said that possibly he could talk about how he looked in the car, but council's argument is persuasive that that could provide a link. it would not just incriminate a person but also provide a link to incriminating evidence, i find that this is valid and i will quash the subpoena. anything else? okay, thank you. we'll see if the jury is here. and if they are here by 9:15, we'll start. >> check to see if my witnesses have arrived yet? >> sure. >> all right, so this is another twist in a story that we have been watching now for the last week and a half. whether or not maurice hal would be able to testify in front of the jury. we are hall in court. he said he would be fearful that he would be charged if he were to testify. the defense wants him to answer questions, right? this is where it all comes from. the prosecution is saying wait a second, not so fast, gabe. >> yeah, that's exactly right. you just heard the judge there saying he was going to quash the subpoena. the question was did s he brought before the court in front of the jury to essentially invoke his fifth amendment in person. there was fear that that could be prejudicial. could the jury take something away from ta. so he was trying to balance the need for the defense to mount what they see as an adequate defense, and i want to mention one more thing. this is not the first thang happened today. there was a motions hearing before that where the defense submitted a motion of e quital. the judge said the prosecution did not meat their burden so the case should be shown out. what they were arguing is that some of the prosecutions witnesses were inconsistent in their testimony about use of force. they said there was six or seven conflicting opinions, the use of force was used differently and that it was reasonable at different points, so he was trying to make the argument that the prosecution did not meat it's burz. the judge said no, i deny that motion, the case should move forward, but the breaking news we saw live there is maurice hall in what could be seen as a blow to the defense. his subpoena has now been quashed. >> charles, i believe you're with us now, how significant is this and do you view it as a blow to the defense? >> i think it is significant, but not a surprise. i know when the defense filed this motion, with the subpoena, they knew it was a long shot, they had to know especially once he announced his right for fifth amendment protection. this was, as the previous reporter said a strategic move to try to get them to say this on the stand. to try to get it out in front of the jury so the jury might make it's own inferences. the fact that the southbound has been quaked should not be a surprise, so they have to continue with the case they have. >> i want to bring in someone that has been watching not just this case, but the case that we have talked about which is ben crump, a civil rights attorney respecting the families of dante wright and george floyd, thank you for being on our show. let me start with the developing news, as you heard, i hope, judge cahill in the case of derek chauvin and his trial quashing his subpoena for maurice hall who was with mr. floyd before his death. what do you think of that? >> i agree with the attorney. it is significant, but they had to anticipate that this was a long shot. the fact that hal does have a constitutional right to fifth amendment privileges far self incrimination. the video tells us from day one that derek chauvin killed george floyd and should be generally liable. anything else is just a distraction or an attempt to make us look away and not focus on that video that over 50 million people have viewed on the effort alone. it is the most witnessed murder by a police officer of a suicide unjustly. >> you are at the center of two of the biggest stories in the country right now. you represent both of the families involved. let me ask you about dante wright. how confidence are you that they may announce charges against her? >> the family doesn't think it is stair that she could claim it was a mistake that i killed him and should be able to retire and have all of her points and pensions and ride off into the sunset. when they think about this and when our legal team thinks about this, this is a 26-year-old veteran training young officers. knee knows her duty gun is on her dominant hand and her taze is on her nondominant side. the gun is 2.6 pounds, the taser is 8 ounces. the gun is all black. the tazer has bright yellow on it. at some point you to say you intended to pull this young man over. you intended to do the most, which they often do with marginalized minorities especially with black men, and especially when you consider what is happening with the lieutenant in georgia. they could have given him a ticket and told him to get the tag rez stered. they could have given him a notice to appear for the demeanor warn. and just like george floyd, they could have given him a sixty for the bill, but when the is black people, they seem to engage in the most use of force possible it ends up with deadly consequences. so the family is not gratified that she resigns and gets to keep her pension and benefits if is not fair. >> so what do you want to see? what is justice in that case? >> it is her being held accountable to the full extent of the law, we believe she should be charged with manslaughter of some kind. the fact that dante was trying to get away from them. they try to run from the police because bad things happen when the police engage them. he lives in minneapolis. can you imagine what every black person thinks thousand? isz specially in minneapolis. i'm outraged at the fact that this could happen ten miles from where they're having the court for derek chauvin trial regarding the killing of george floyd. and that you would expect every police officer to use the greatest standard of care. that they would do their best to deescalate. >> do you plan to pursue a civil case? >> we will explore every avenue possible. we know that the general justice system often fails black people, and it just plays out over and over again. they can deescalate just fine when it is a white american citizen, like what we saw at the insurrection on january 6th, 2021, but when it is an unarmed black kid trying to run away from them, they see that as a threat where they will use some measure of force when they had his tag, they knew the car, they did not are have to use this kind of force. it's just black people in america that are just frustrated and outraged that this would happen within ten miles of what i believe is the most consequential civil rights police use of force case in the history of mark. >> we talked about how you represent not just the family of dante wright, but george floyd this afternoon. you're expecting to make an announcement. can you give us an expectation of what you're going to present? >> it will be a update on both cases. i'm here with reverend al sharpton and karen bass. and we know they're contemplating whether or not to charge the officer or not. i believe that decision will be announced at some point and we will give a reaction to whatever the county district attorney decided. >> very quickly do you anticipate what is happening could have an impact? do you think it will have an impact in the trial of derek chauvin? and the jury will deliberate? >> you know, i know that people are tending to believe that jurors don't follow the law, but they do. but it just infuriates me that when a white person kills a black person, especially a police officer, everyone says will they get a fair trial? i have never seen in my professional life when a black person is accused of killing anybody that people are concerned whether or not they will get a fair trial or not. it seems as if we go out of our way when white people kill black people to be the most sensitive, compassionate people. and you look at that video there was no compassion, no humanity extended to this unarmed black man that was face down in handcuffs. >> are you saying you believe the jury is perhaps being persuaded by the arguments right now? >> i don't take it for granted at all, hallie that a police officer be con sixtied for killing a black person. i have been a civil rights lawyer all of my professional career, but i have been black all of my life, and what history has shown sus there is not the same value given for black live in america that is extended to our white brothers and sisters. history taught us that. a while narn kills a minority in america is always given the greatest consideration. we pray that when we're accused of crimes that we can get equal consideration so we won't have so many black men wrongfully convicted sitting in prison for decades before they're proven innocent. >> thank you very much for being with us, benjamin crump. witness testimony is set to start at any minute. we're going to bring that to you live once it starts as the defense continues to try to make it's case. how safe is the johnson and johnson vaccine. a member of that committee will join me next. what he thinks you should know regarding some per spective. plus, president biden set to release data about the withdrawal of troops. capitol police told to hold back on their response to rioters on january 6th. we have another bit of reporting, our team has their hands on a scathing new report from the inspector general. more after the break. from the il more after the break the journey is why they ride. when the road is all you need, there is no destination. uh, i-i'm actually just going to get an iced coffee. well, she may have a destination this one time, but usually -- no, i-i usually have a destination. yeah, but most of the time, her destination is freedom. nope, just the coffee shop. announcer: no matter why you ride, progressive has you covered with protection starting at $79 a year. voiceover: 'cause she's a biker... please don't follow me in. start your day with crest 3d white and from mochaccinos to merlot, voiceover: 'cause she's a biker... your smile will always be brilliant. crest 3d white brilliance. 100% stain removal, 24 hour stain resistance to lock in your whitest smile. crest. the #1 toothpaste brand in america. i'm jayson tatum check out my subway sub with delicious turkey and crispy bacon. it will help you hit shots from anywhere, unlike those other subs. my sub has steak. wait, what did he say? steak! choose better be better and now save when you order in the app. subway eat fresh. hey xfinity, show me disney plus... i'm here on business. i need your help. and now save when you order in the app. i've been quested to bring this one back to its kind. now you can access exclusive disney originals... we are an unusual couple. oh i don't think that was ever in question. ...and stream must-see disney new releases! people need this symbol. where do we start? find the best in entertainment all in one place, with disney plus now on xfinity! a way better way to watch. in just about three hours from now, a meeting to talk about the johnson and johnson covid vaccine after that because for all 50 states recommended. they are looking for more investigation about the reports. that is less than one case per million. here is dr. anthony fauci talking about what people who got the j&j vaccine should know. >> don't worry very much. the bracket of time was between six and 13 days. >> just out this morning from moderna more news as well. new data on the vaccine effectiveness, six months after the second dose. it stays more than 90% effective. it could be one step closer to full u.s. approval. i want to go to harry bernstein. thank you for being on the show. >>. >> good morning, thank you for having me. >> of course. are we going to get parameters for what might need to happen before this pause is lifted? >> well certainly it is important for us to review the data. and at the acip committee, but also the liaisons around the table. so we will make appropriate recommendations and management decisions going forward. >> what is your understanding of what they will be looking into and what health officials want to see see during the pause? >> you get blood clots and low plalt lets. it is an extrot fairly rare event. but we need to look at the difference is individuals that had it. this is a problem that j&j that uses the viral vector vaccine platform. and astrazeneca also in europe, seen similar cases were recently published in the new england journal of medicine around cases in germany and austria and in norway. so we need to look closely at these six cases and see what specific steps, if any, are changing recommendations miegtt be indicated. >> we're so glad to have your exper cease on this show. please come back and tell us more about this prow access. we would love to have you. we want to turn back to what is happening now. the trial of dr. david fowler, a retired doctor, looking at forensics. >> location and background? >> certainly i graduated from the university of capetown in south africa in 1983. i did a year of internship in general surgery. and followed that with a year of training in pediatric pathology in cape town. and completing that year i entered a full-time five-year training program at the university of capetown in forensic pathology. >> are you board certified? >> i am. and so the system in south africa is that you graduate with a master of medicine in your discipline. so i ended up with a master of medicine in forensic pathology that qualifies you to be what they call a special cyst, which in this country is the same as an attending physician. but that is equivalent to board certification here. when i came to the united states i felt it was very important to get an american qualitification if i was going to work in this country full-time. so i went back and the american board of pathology demands that all pathology training is done in the united states or canada. so if i wanted to do that and be eligible for their channel nation process, i had to then go back and retrain. so i went to the university of mards for two years to complete additional anatomic pathology training to qualify me for that portion of the examination process. and two years of forensic pathology training at the office of the chief medical channeler i -- chamber. and passed those exams. >> okay, great, how did your career progress after you received all of that education? >> so at about the time i finished my training i was rekrused into the office of the chief medical examiner. >> where was that? >> i would have to look at my cd to be absolute, '95 or '96. >> are you licensed in the united states. >> you were educated largely in south africa but also here in the united states. are there differences between the degrees or are they the same? >> they're different letters after your name, but if you go through the system which is derived from the british examination process, you end up with a chb and some of them have different letters that mean you have two different degrees. it's sixth year training, not four year training like they have in the united states. just different ways of getting to the same end point. if you want it in the united states you to go through a process that when i went through it was was run by the department of graduates. and these are all universities that are approved by the world health organization as meeting certain standards, once you have been approved, and your university is recognized and then you go through examinations, very similar to graduate from a u.s. university, so now they are known as the usle examinations. so we go through the same process for evaluation and then you can be you can apply for a medical license in the united states. >> thank you for explaining that. in terms of just to clarify you are a licensed physician? >> yes, i am. >> and you have lord certifications in forensic pathology and anatomic pathology, that's correct? >> yes. >> and you worked as a pathologist since about 1995? >> so that is when i qualified, but i was since 1991. i 125r9ed my training in pediatric pathology that was probably back in 1985, but some of that is training, so the question is whether or not that counts as being a pathologist or a trainee. >> what is a pathologist? >> the pathologist that most people do not come across work in a laboratory or a possible. and they are the individuals who run the laboratories, and those laboratoies take the samples from individuals during treatment by the surgeons and clinicians and dot anal suggestion on them. so blood, urine specimens, biopsies, they are all analyzed in the laboratory by a pathologist. >> can you tell the jury about your work with the american medical examiners office? >> having finished my training i was recruited and became an assistant medical examiner. i did that for several years and i was offered the position of deputy chief medical examiner. and one which is in charge of autopsy services, and one that is in charge of statewide services. one in charge of autopsy services focuses most of their work on supersizing the process. statewide services is a individual who looks at investigation that's are going on statewide. and so this is a big jurisdiction here in minneapolis, but in maryland the population is served by the medical examiner's office. so we have a lot of investigators out in the counties doing work and the coordination and super vision of that falls to the deputy chief of statewide services. so having been the deputy chief for several years, they asked mee to take over the statewide services for several years. i was in that position when he suddenly sepulveda passed away. >> and how long did you act as the chief medical examiner? >> i was the acting medical channeler in for about a year. the health expect appointed me when i was a chief medical channel channel examiner. >> so you served in that position for 17 years. >> so what kind of work is done in the statewide versus the autopsies. >> the difference between what is done in the hospital and what is done in the medical examiners officer is in the hospital the pathologists are looking largely at natural decide. there will be some specimens coming from trauma patients, but mostly they look at natural decide. a pathologist that's gone on to do other nonnatural events that threaten life and cause death. so you have a knowledge base of all of the natural decides plus the additional training. plus to evaluate the circumstances. so that is the additional training. that is what is done at an medical examiners office for the sudden and unexpected death. so the way of thinking is a 24 hour medical institution. people die all of the time. it has to be available 24 hours. you need to respond to all of the deaths rapidly and appropriately in a dignified way. a 24 hour emergency medical institution with the one responsibility at the end of the day of making a determination of the cause of death of the individual that has suddenly died. >> in addition to your work at the medical examiners office, did you also do some teaching? >> yes. >> where? >> so i have taught at the university of maryland. i ought at the johns hopkins hospital. i taught at multiple hospitals in the massachusetts and dc area. i taught at the fbi academy. i have been a visiting professor at universities internationally. >> did you also train other forensic pathologists? >> yes. so for a portion of my career while i was an assistant medical examiner i was directly responsible for training forensic pathologists. when a fellow is doing a case, i would be supervising everything they did on that case. so it is almost like an apprenticeship. they do the case but you watch carefully and you evaluate every part of that process as they graul yowlly grow through that learning curve to become a forensic pathologist. so for awhile i was actually hands on teaching at the aupt table. i continued to do that but one of the roles assigned to me was the residency director position. so that was a position where you super vise the residency program. and how that program is accredited and evaluated by an outside agency, so you have to make sure all of those are done. >> were you responsible for recruiting residents and things of that nature? >> recruiting, evaluating, bringing them in, training, and evaluating, and at the end of the process each of the fellows before they can take the board exam they require that the institution complete a declaration that they have met the standards in order to practice and that is before they can take the example. so they are constantly evaluated daily, quarterly, and at the end of the year to ensure that they have met the standards that we can attest to so they are then able to take the example at the american board of psychiatry. >> and you have testified before? >> yes. >> can you estimate how many times you have testified in cases over the course of your career? gosh, over 30 some years, it's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times. >> now, have you ever published any articles or peer reviewed journal type of information? >> publications and presentations i have been involved. it has to be close 100. >> at the office of the chief medical examiners, do you review every policy? >> that was part of the determine nation for all pediatric cases or when they could not determine the cause of death. >> how many homicides did you review? >> typically each year it would vary between 500 and 600. that was the homicides alone, and the other cases added on to that would add an additional load of perhaps 5200 cases. >> so in this capacity, in this case, are you associated with an organization called the forensics panel? >> yes. >> it is a national organization that evaluate -- i don't want to say evaluates, but it looks at cases and does evaluation on cases in the forensic sciences, medical sciences, and behavioral sciences. so it looks at those particular issues. >> what is your role with the forensics panel? >> i'm a forensic pathology consultant. >> in terms of the forensics panel, what is unique about how your organization operations? >> it really started the process of peer review evaluations in order to ensure that the case was diligently evaluated, objectively evaluated, and based in science. so that is the first thing. that has evolved overtime. then is an organization that has many different disciplines recognized, that are recognized working within it. it is a multidisciplinary team. so you have experts in all sorts of medical fields that can be assigned to the case depending on the nature of the case. it's an independent organization. >> is it similar to what is called an m&m conference? >> it is familiar. it happens in the hospital when a patient may have something adverse happen to them, not necessarily fatal. and or it is fatal nanny those circumstances they will present their materials in an evaluation, and they can sit down and critique it, evaluate it, and it is an opportunity for self evaluation. learning for people, and quality assurance for the hospital program. >> how did you end up working in the forensic panel and when? >> about 15 years ago i was approached by the forensic panel that indicated they recommended for the program. >> how does the multidismin fair approach function? >> so depending on the nature of the case, the forensic panel will assign individuals that have skills in areas that the case apparently needs from an evaluation process. >> and you're compensated for your time? >> i am. >> and your hourly rate? >> $350 per hour. >> you at some point became involved in this case, the state of minnesota versus derek chauvin? >> i did. >> how did you get involved? >> i was approached and asked to become part of it and i felt this was such a complex and difficult case that this would better fit working through the forensic panel than trying to handle the case independently. so i refers this case to the presencive panel. >> and when you say approached, you mean approached by me, correct? >> i believe so, yes. >> and you refers me to the forensics panel? >> that's my recollection, yes. >> now in terms of this particular case, how many of these peer reviewers were ultimately review snd. >> there was 13 peer reviewers that were involved in this case. >> how was it useful for you to have those peer reviewers involved? >> well several of the peer reviewers, i believe seven, are forensic pa tholgss. there was additional individuals in behavioral health, pull mononologists. and they were present as part of the evaluation team because they have the detailed knowledge that really helps critique any opinions that i may form and provide their expertise in nuring that anything is looked at. and that it is based in science. >> what's the process that you apply in approaching a case such as this? >> so the primary reviewer in a case will be provided all of the available information that has been given to the forensic panel. they will go through that personal, study it, evaluate it, and then the peer reviewers are given a similar and sometimes slightly onerous package of materials. they will go through it and then i will, as i did in this case, i have been a reviewed pathologist on serl. i will do a presentation to the forensic panel. and during that time they have the opportunity to evaluate and critique my opinion. the question can go back to the forensic panel and through to whatever attorney we have requests for the if that information is available, it is sent back and we have ensured that we have not missed anything. at some point, if there is -- >> your honor, the response, may i approach the bench? >> quick sidebar from the courtroom in minneapolis, judge cahill talking with the defense and prosecution teams as we have been listening to the credentials of the doctor, an expert who testified, as he says, in hundreds of cases around the country during his career. i want to bring many charles coleman and shaq brewster. shaq, i know there had been anticipation regarding the testimony of the doctor today. >> reporter: that's right. if we can just pull out a little bit and provide context. this is the defense presenting their side of the case. we heard last week from some of the prosecution and the state witnesses, talking about and concluding that george floyd died because of the asphyxiation. we heard from the medical examiner on friday. this is the defense shooting back a little bit and presenting their side of it. dr. fowler is going through his credentials. once he gets into his testimony, it is expected that he will provide testimony more favorable to the defense. it's not clear exactly what he is going to say. but it is of note that dr. fowler has testified before in cases like this. he is facing a lawsuit from a family that didn't like his ruling when he was a medical examiner back -- when he was a medical -- chief medical examiner in maryland. that family is suing him saying he did not rule it was asphyxiation and it was a trial or a case that was very similar to what we are seeing here. we can expect that to come up later today. >> mary moriorti is with us. mary, i thought it was interesting, you said that you thought perhaps this doctor, who is on the stand, could be the defense's best witness. >> best witness left, i think, because he is going to talk about george floyd dying of his heart condition and drug overdoeg. >> thank you. we will dip back into the courtroom. >> name is the national association of medical examiners. >> you have held leadership positions? >> i have, yes. >> can you -- let me ask you this. does it have an inspection and accreditation process? >> yes, it does. >> or committee, i should say. >> yes. it has a committee which does that particular part of the organization. >> what is the responsibility of the inspection and accreditation committee in. >> to evaluate offices. it's a voluntary program. they have met certain standards the national association of medical examiner board of directors believe are appropriate for the office to have in order to ensure the safety of both the staff that work in the office and also the community that they serve. >> are you a member of that committee? >> i am now and i was a previous chairman of that committee. >> does it have a standards committee? >> it does. right now they are two separate committees. previously, they were both inspection and standards were under one committee at the time i was the chairperson of that. it has now been separated into two separate ones. >> got you. how are the standards approved? >> the standards are different. as i said, the accreditation process is approved by the board of directors. the standards are a grass-roots process where any member can suggest a standard. that is then put out to the general population of members and then those are discussed and voted on at the annual general meeting in the business meeting. so, therefore, anybody out of the hundreds of pathologists that are present at that meeting can stand up and address and debate those particular standards. and then at some point, a vote is called by the chairman of the standards committee as to whether or not that standard would be included or not. so, therefore, it's approved by the general membership, not by the board of directors. >> one last question before we move on. when were those standards approved? >> the initial standards started out in 2005. then they get updated on a regular basis, because medical knowledge changes. therefore, one needs to keep them appropriate and fresh. >> can you tell me generally what a death investigation is and what it involves? >> yes. a death investigation is very much like any other medical examination. but specifically, looking at individuals, obviously, who have died. so will is gathering of information from the scene of the death. that is somewhat to replace the information that a patient would give to their doctor. when you walk into the examination room, your doctor -- the first question they will ask is, why are you here today? deceased people can't speak. so, therefore, the scene information really replaces some of that information. the gather the scene information. you gather past medical records. you then start gathering information from all sorts of pertinent sources that would be the ambulance or emt run sheets, the hospital information if the person made it to the hospital, the current medical information, the past medical information. there will be witness statements. there will be police reports, videos. everything that is available and pertinent will usually be gathered as part that was process. >> would it include specimens that are collected? >> yes. if a specimen is taken in the hospital, that will be taken. if clothing is available in the hospital and removed from the person during resuscitation, that may well be gathered as well. all and everything that is reasonably available that could potentially define how the case may be evaluated will be gathered as is reasonable. if a person went into surgery and a specimen was removed from them during the surgical procedure, to try and save their life, that would also be requested. there's lots of things that you would try and get. >> is there then ultimately a result in a death certificate? >> there's a long process which goes on before that. >> how long does that process take? >> the process would include an autopsy, which is an external examination of the person, an internal examination of the person. maybe x-rays of the person, ct scans of the person depending on the resources and needs of the case. additional specimens will be taken at time of autopsy to look at under the microscope and send off to a toxicology laboratory. i'm talking generally. every case is different. at the end of that process, you begin the evaluation of the case. in complex cases, certain specimens will be retained. often, sent to an expert in that particular area. some officers have access to a neuropathologyist who specializes in looking at brains and spinal cords. if you have that resource -- it's a case where that may assist in getting additional detail that a specialist only looks at that can provide. you will save that and have them look at it in conjunction with you. that's usually an examination of the two with the extra expertise at the same time. some have access to cardiac pathologists. in many of the complex cases, the heart would be retained and examined by a cardiac pathologist. in fairness, the general forensic pathology has a substantial body of knowledge and is very good at identifying most things. there are cases when somebody who only looks at that one organ is going to have a better eye for detail in that particular area. you can do that. not all offices have access to those resources. if you have, that's a good thing. those all add time to waiting for those examinations to be done and the results to be sent back so they can be you with the into the evaluation matrix, the puzzle of all of the information that you are trying to include. as well as toxicology and microscopic and the glass slides. some cases can take to to three months. there's a requirement that you should complete 90% of your cases within 90 days. otherwise, you cannot be accredited. they prefer you to do it within 60 days. but 90% of cases should be completed within 90 days. that's three months. the 10% of cases that aren't completed, are going to be very complex cases. often the deaths in custody and the pediatric sudden deaths are the ones that fall into that 10%. they offon