The Sault Ste. Marie pathologist, who performed the autopsy on 4-year-old Valin and determined a time of death at which only William Mullins-Johnson had exclusive access to his deceased niece persisted in defending his opinion - even after Mullins-Johnson was released on bail pending a ministerial review.
This information is revealed publicly for the first time in an "Overview Report" prepared by Goudge Inquiry staff.
Dr. Bihubendra Rasaiah's opinion as to the time of death had come under attack by Dr. Frederick Jaffe, an expert retained by the defence.
The Overview Report contains a letter from Jaffe to Mullins-Johnson's trial lawyers in which he says: "The Moritz formula which Dr. Rasaiah uses to determine the time of death on the basis of the body temperature was popular in the days of the surrey with the fringe on top, the Keystone cops and the 5 (cent) cigar."
The Overview Report indicates that Dr. Rasaiah informed Crown Counsel Kenneth Campbell in an unsolicited letter dated Sept. 19, 2005, - the first of three unsolicited letters - that, "I am prepared to rebut Dr. Polannen's report in court," and stating that "the investigation into Valin's death was a thorough one and not a quick diagnosis."
"The autopsy was undertaken with the utmost care and he, (himself H.L.) as the pathologist conducting the autopsy was best able to distinguish between a bruise and post-mortem staining (as opposed to a determination based on photographs.)"
Dr. Rasaiah sent a second unsolicited letter to Campbell on Sept. 21, 2005, for the purpose of rebutting an independent report commissioned from Dr. Bernard Knight, in which he said among other matters, that "the possibility of suffocation could not be either confirmed or excluded by Professor Knight."
"(That) there is no evidence, contrary to media reports that the death was due to natural causes," he said.
Mullins-Johnson was granted bail By Superior Court Justice David Watt that same day.
In the third unsolicited letter, dated September 26, 2005, Dr. Rasaiah cited errors allegedly made by both Dr. Pollanen and Dr. Knight, and said he was "disappointed" that the expert reports were released to the public before input by him, particularly "when the accuracy and validity of the consultation reports are in question."
Dr. Rasaiah's unsolicited letters were cited by lawyer James Lockyer - representing the Association in Defence of The Wrongly Convicted - on the issue as to where DNA new tests should be conducted on several items seized during the police investigation.
Lockyer later insisted in a letter to Crown Law Officer Michal Fairburn that the retesting should be conducted outside of Sault Ste. Marie to avoid any perception of bias.
"The impetus for this testing was begun by Inspector Pluss of the Sault. Ste.Marie Police Service," said Lockyer.
"The testing being conducted is so "remote" that it would likely be rejected by the Centre of Forensic Sciences in normal circumstances.
Bearing in mind as well Dr. Rasaiah's unsolicited second, third and fourth opinions on his views of pathology of the case, Mr. Mullins-Johnson has cause for concern that the authorities in Sault Ste. Marie perceive themselves to have a lot at stake in this case.
He, and I, would feel a lot "safer" if the work was done in a place far removed from Sault Ste.Marie by a person who has had no previous association with it."
On April 4, 2007, Crown Law Officer Fairburn sent the following letter to former chief coroner Dr. Barry McLellan.
"I understand that Dr. Rasaiah is no longer on the roster of pathologists used by (the Chief Coroner's Office)" she wrote.
"Is this correct and since when...?"
That same day McLellan replied:
"Dr. Rasaiah is still conducting coroner's autopsies at the Sault area hospital. Criminally suspicious cases and homicides are no longer autopsied in Sault Ste. Marie."
(See previous postings: "Die cast against Mullins- Johnson even before autopsy began" - and "Conduct of other experts scrutinized by Mullins-Johnson's lawyers.")
Harold Levy; hlevy15@gmail.com;