Travis County Commissioners Court
November 9, 2004
Item 15
Number 15, the main part of that is at the discretion and judgment of the
medical examiner as indicated in the proposed resolution, what we are approving
at my suggestion, because both of them have a fiscal impact on Travis County,
basically is a sort of moratorium on out of county contracts for the time
being and our move toward accreditation. We don't say when, but what's clear
is that on number 2 we need to start moving in that direction and [indiscernible]
dr. Bayardo's decision to move in that direction, by approving this item we
yeah agree to do just that. Also, not suggesting -- in one year, we basically
take a look at the two items that we are approving to see what the situation
is. If you look at his letter, it addresses the homicide versus accidental
death, while in custody or after being restrained in some way. The resolution
doesn't address that part. It only addresses the moratorium on additional
contracts, but also move toward accreditation.
>> right. But I guess in the sense of the ruling homicide,
looking at his letter, apparently what the general consensus and by the --
pathologist, is that ruling now will -- will be supported by the medical examiner?
That's my interpretation of it, that --
>> he is saying that --
>> versus the way it used to be now whereas if the -- you
know whatever it is, one person getting in a squabble with another of course
the death result in that, is he supporting what the general consensus had
been for the other forensic pathologist in that regard? Because that I think
was part of the -- even though it's not in the resolution, but it is something
that -- that is -- is -- as far as rulings are concerned.
>> he says in the third paragraph of this letter that it
is his opinion that he should join the other medical exercise's trend which
-- medical examiner's trend which is to declare or rule deaths while being
retrained by law enforcement official as homicide.
>> exactly. I think that is very key to -- to some things
that have been raised by the community whereas it was not at this position
before and I guess I’m just joining the other --
>> that's what he says.
>> right.
>> well, we approved two other things --
>> exactly. With the accurate digs, things of this nature.
>> he's already taken steps. [indiscernible]
>> as a case by case determination anyway.
>> right.
>> but we have these coming up once or twice a year.
>> did he ever suggest anywhere, judge, next year's budget,
approximately how much that was going to take to actually look at the full
accreditation which in his particular shop, never has -- look forward as far
as the budget --
>> we are doing the lab because that's required by state
law. So we are -- we might actually get some direction from the state legislature.
It's quite likely they might give direction as to what it is that we need
to do.
>> okay.
>> that seems to be how we should go, though.
>> it's going to happen anyway.
>> yeah.
>> with that I move approval of 15.
>> seconded.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 3:18 PM