Inquest Hears Body Left in Room for 3 Days

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 01:01 PM

The Coroner’s inquest into the shooting death of Ian Bush has been told the body of the 22 year old was not moved from the interview room where he had been shot to death for a full three days.

RCMP Sergeant Chuck Duncan, a forensic expert with the RCMP says he turned down the heat in the room where the body of Ian Bush remained for three days in the police office in Houston, because it was too hot.

“I turned the heat down on the second day” said Duncan, “when I saw that the temperature in that room was 20 degrees” testified Duncan. Bush’s body was then moved so an autopsy could be conducted.

The Coroner’s inquest was told that the shooting came after Bush and Constable Paul Koester had a fight in which Bush got Koester in such a position in the interview room that , Koester, fearing for his life, pulled his gun and just as he was about to pass out, shot Bush in the back of the head.

Questioned by Howard Rubin, the legal Counsel for the family asked “How difficult is it to get your service revolver out of the holster?” Duncan replied, “There are two safety measures required before you can pull the gun and then fire it.”

Ruben then asked if it was easier for an officer to get their mace off their belt and Duncan replied, “Yes.”

Photos entered for exhibits show bruises on both Koester’s face and on Bush.

One bruise on Bush’s body is near his groin, and, according to the testimony, measures 3 by 6 inches.

Constable Koester is expected to testify later this afternoon.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, May 22, 2007 01:01 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: snappi on May 22 2007 3:10 PM

Brutality??? Sounds to me like Mr. Bush
may have been defending himself. I don't believe for one second that this young man deserved to die. Was the room sound proof??? Why weren't the cameras on???
It all sounds a bit to hinky for me.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on May 22 2007 3:20 PM

The body was left in the room for 3 days?
3 DAYS ???
Would that not be classified as an indignity to a human body??
This case is just too weird!
Something is very,very, wrong here.

Posted by: snappi on May 22 2007 4:41 PM

You're right about that Andy and yes I certainly think it should be classified as such. Why did it take so long to process the crime scene?
Something is very wrong here all around.

Posted by: owl on May 22 2007 5:03 PM

Houston is far from everything. There are limited number of RCMP forensic experts available who would likely have had to view the scene with as little disturbance as possible. There used to be one in PG who was transferred. I understood that he was extremely busy. Not sure whether there has been a replacement.

Posted by: thereasonableman on May 22 2007 6:09 PM

"Houston is far from everything."

Owl, if you were holding a gun to the head of the OIC of that detachment, they would have a sniper there in an hour no matter where he or she had to come from. Period.
-------------------------------------
I still can't believe the things I'm hearing. I have NEVER seen a body lay for three days after ANY kind of death.

And then I read this in another story:

"Members of the family only recently learned that a bruise on Ian�s groin was not examined by the pathologist, who said it may have been an infection. "

OK, a 3"x6" bootmark,... er, I mean bruise in the groin gets passed off by a qualified medical professional as "maybe an infection".

Then, it appears the officer had his gun out during the alleged altercation, striking Bush in the head with it, before any purported headlock occurred.

Wow, I'm shocked at just how dirty this story gets. I think it sets a new standard for corruption. I'm going to email this to Mexico and tell the officials there to pull up their socks. They're starting to look bad compared to our officials.

I'll tell you what a body laying for 3 days at the scene is, it's called time to think.
It's called, "How do we bury this and make it go away ?"

I don't care how the inquest turns out, I am personally appalled at the actions of all involved. So much for having a system we can have faith in.

Posted by: metalman on May 22 2007 6:33 PM

The plot thickens.
metalman.

Posted by: snappi on May 22 2007 7:19 PM

Very well said thereasonableman!!

Posted by: Andyfreeze on May 22 2007 9:38 PM

I agree "thereasonableman",but what scares the hell out me, is that I really think this is going to get buried in the end.
And I'm not actually saying the officer in question is totally at fault.
There is a whole bunch of people at fault here!
We all need to pay attention to this case.It is a classic example of all that is wrong with the system!

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on May 22 2007 11:36 PM

Was Ian a hockey player or a groupie? Was his bruises from his hockey or the RCMP arrest? There is a culture of not backing down from anything if you want to stay on top in hockey. Was Ian the kind to back down? Anyone on here know of a hockey player that would take much pushing? Not likely I'd say.

I think the officer made a mistake and ended up fighting for what he thought was his life. The officer should have just let Ian kick the shit out of him instead of killing Ian. That's what happens when you push around the hockey boys. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don't do so good. The RCMP just found out the hard way is all.

Posted by: heidi1555 on May 23 2007 9:54 AM

I would like to see a doctors opinion on how old the bruise was. We've all been bruised before and know a fresh bruise is reddish pink and an old bruise has different shades of green and purple with yellow surrounding it. Here is a link I found about bruising:
http://health.allrefer.com/pictures-images/bruise-healing-series-3.html
The 3 stages of a bruise. Start at indications. What we need to know is the exact time it takes from someone to be hit for the bruise to turn into the colour of the bruise Ian had in his groin.

Posted by: heidi1555 on May 23 2007 10:37 AM

"The positioning of bruising is often significant, in that a multiple row of spherical/ disc shaped bruises may be seen when an attempt is made to strangle someone with bare hands. The bruises are caused by the attacker's fingertips pressing into the skin."

"Bruises change colour over time, because of the degradation of haemoglobin in the blood. However, the timescale of this degradation is not fixed, and it is therefore possible only to give a rough estimation of the age of the bruise. Colour changes are,

dark blue/ purple (fresh)
blue
brown
green
yellow " from website: http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/bruises.htm

Plus YamaDooPolCat if Ian was a hockey player and not just a spectator(like that night) his groin would be protected by his hockey pants. If we were to combine both bruising articles we would put the extemely fresh bruise as being the reddish pink then dark blue and so on. Plus the officer said he was being choked into unconsciousness but yet he had no bruising on the neck. That would take extreme force so maybe his neck is one big callous????

Posted by: thereasonableman on May 23 2007 6:38 PM

It would be one thing to examine the bruise and call it a "dated injury" or "previous injury", due to whatever. To say "maybe it was an infection" is the same as saying "maybe it was a third eye sprouting up", or a space alien. We don't know what it was or what it was from, because it was never properly examined, documented and investigated.

What did I say before about doing a crappy job of investigating as a means of thwarting the system ?

Posted by: thereasonableman on May 23 2007 6:52 PM

Lastly, I picked this out of the story right away. Wondering if anybody else noticed ?

> RCMP Sergeant Chuck Duncan, a forensic expert with the RCMP says he turned down the heat in the room....because it was too hot.

�I turned the heat down on the second day� said Duncan, �when I saw that the temperature in that room was 20 degrees� testified Duncan. Bush�s body was then moved so an autopsy could be conducted. <

It is an old trick to leave a deceased body in a very warm area to speed up the decomposition process, it makes it more difficult to pinpoint the time of death, among other things.

As I read it, they left the body there in a warm area for several days (what's the reason ??).

There was an RCMP Forensic Expert on scene at the time (Sgt. Duncan, the guy that turned down the heat). (how long had HE been there ?)

Once the heat was turned down, the body was removed for an autopsy.

Maybe they didn't have faith in the medical officials at the time, and were trying to thwart their investigation, in case they took a position against the police ?

In any event, as it turns out, the medical officials co-operated fully with police, performing the autopsy via the drive-thru window.