Scientology's FLAG vs Medical Examiner Joan Wood

Day one Wood depostion 11 February 1997 // pages 77-145



 2          Q      Doctor Wood, did you obtain permission from 

 3     FDLE to use their offices for the Inside Edition 

 4     interview?

 5          A      Yes.

 6          Q      And from whom at FDLE did you get that 

 7     permission?

 8          A      Darrell McLaughlin.

 9          Q      And who is that?

10                 MS. ANDERSON:  What's his job, you mean?

11                 MR. WEINBERG:  Yeah.  Who is it?

12                 THE WITNESS:  Well, there's Tim and Bob and 

13          Jerry and Darrell are the higher-ups, Tim being the 

14          boss.  And Tim and Bob weren't there that day, so I 

15          went to Darrell.  And I think he's -- what do I want 

16          to say?  He's their liaison with legislature, but he 

17          was the highest-ranking individual in the building 

18          that day.


20          Q      And did you tell him what the purpose of 

21     the interview was?

22          A      Yes, that I was here in Tallahassee for a 

23     meeting and happened to need to do an interview about a 

24     case in my jurisdiction, and was it all right if I used 

25     one of their generic conference rooms, and he said yes.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      And did you tell him that FDLE was involved 

 2     in that investigation?

 3          A      No.  I didn't even think about it.  Yeah, I 

 4     probably did mention it.

 5          Q      And did FDLE have any objection to you 

 6     doing the interview at their headquarters?

 7          A      No.  It was strictly under the 

 8     understanding that I just happened to be in 

 9     Tallahassee, and were I not in Tallahassee, it would 

10     have been done somewhere else.

11          Q      Now, what, if anything, did you review in 

12     the way of files or records prior to the Inside Edition 

13     interview?

14          A      The autopsy report and all files that were 

15     within my office.

16          Q      And what did those files include?

17          A      Everything I've indicated to you.

18          Q      And so that would include lab results, 

19     photos, stains, hospital records and the like?

20          A      Yes.

21          Q      Were you paid for the interview?

22          A      No.

23          Q      Was any kind of remuneration made on your 

24     behalf as a result of the interview?

25          A      No.  And I didn't go out for dinner or for 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     drinks or anything thereafter.  I didn't get one penny. 

 2                 And I must comment that I may not have 

 3     reviewed the slides prior to that interview.  I had 

 4     reviewed them.  Doctor Davis, the pathologist actually 

 5     doing the autopsy, had asked to see them, and it's 

 6     possible that I had sent them to him immediately before 

 7     that.  So it may have been a more remote review of the 

 8     slides, but I had seen them.

 9          Q      Okay.  Did anyone from law enforcement, 

10     FDLE, the state attorney, tell you, prior to the 

11     interview, that they were concerned that you might be 

12     compromising the investigation into the death of Lisa 

13     McPherson by doing the interview?

14          A      No.

15                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 3 so marked by the 

16          reporter.)


18          Q      Let me show you what I've had marked as 

19     Exhibit 3.  Did you watch the show that aired?

20          A      Yes.

21          Q      And do you have a pretty good recollection, 

22     of that which aired, of your comments from the 

23     hour-and-fifteen-minute interview?

24          A      Yes.

25          Q      Well, let me review with you this 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     transcript, which is Exhibit 3.  And, you know, if you 

 2     have a problem with it, we have the tape here and we 

 3     can listen to it, but I believe the transcript, you 

 4     know, fairly accurately sets forth what you were asked 

 5     and what you said.

 6          A      From a quick look, that appears correct.

 7          Q      Okay.  If you go to Page Number 4, if you 

 8     just -- here, let me see that just for a second.

 9          A      Uh-huh.

10          Q      Right -- yeah, right here (indicating).

11          A      Uh-huh.

12          Q      You state, quote, "This is the most severe 

13     case of dehydration I've ever seen."  And that -- you 

14     said something to that effect during the interview, is 

15     that right?

16          A      Yes.

17          Q      What public records did you base that 

18     statement on?

19          A      Laboratory tests of vitreous fluids.

20          Q      Anything else?

21          A      Appearance of her body.

22          Q      That's from the photos?

23          A      No.  As I told you, I saw her body.

24          Q      Any particular part?  You mean the skin, is 

25     that what you're talking about?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      All of her body, the dried mucous 

 2     membranes, the consistency of her skin, the laboratory 

 3     values, considering particularly that this was a 

 4     previously healthy thirty-six-year-old female.

 5          Q      What public records exist that support this 

 6     conclusion that you stated on Inside Edition?

 7                 MS. ANDERSON:  Asked and answered.

 8                 MR. WEINBERG:  No, that's a different 

 9          question, Pat.  I asked her what she based it on, but 

10          I'm also asking her what, if anything, is in the 

11          file, her public file, that supports that conclusion.

12                 THE WITNESS:  Same answer.


14          Q      But the photographs as well, correct?

15          A      The photographs aren't necessary.

16          Q      I didn't ask you what's necessary.  What 

17     else exists as to what her body looks like today?  What 

18     exists in your file that would show us what that body 

19     appeared like, other than the photographs?

20          A      The entire description of the autopsy 

21     protocol and the laboratory test results.

22          Q      Right.  But assuming that someone wanted to 

23     test the validity of that description, one could look 

24     at the photographs, is that right, and the lab results?

25          A      Yes.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Now, if you -- is there any reference 

 2     anywhere in your public files that this is the most 

 3     severe case of dehydration you've ever seen?

 4          A      No.

 5          Q      Is "dried mucous membranes" in the autopsy 

 6     report?

 7                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; the autopsy report 

 8          speaks for itself.

 9                 MR. WEINBERG:  What I'm asking you is, you 

10          described the condition of her skin and the dried 

11          mucous membranes.  And the question is:  Is that set 

12          forth in the protocol?

13                 THE WITNESS:  Crusted brown dried material is 

14          present within the mouth, on the lips.


16          Q      Anywhere else, or is that it?

17          A      Crusted blood within the nares.

18          Q      The what?

19          A      Crusted blood within the nares, crusted 

20     brown dried material within the mouth, on the lips.  

21     That's:  Within the mouth, comma, on the lips, 

22     semicolon, crusted, parentheses, dried, end 

23     parentheses, material is present on the eyelids.

24          Q      Okay.  Now, did you discuss the conclusions 

25     that you put on the first page of your autopsy report, 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     as to severe dehydration and bed rest, with Doctor 

 2     Davis prior to issuing it?

 3          A      Not immediately prior to issuing it, but 

 4     prior to his leaving our office, yes.

 5          Q      Is there anything -- is there any document 

 6     in your file that was generated by Doctor Davis or 

 7     anyone other than you that would be -- that would 

 8     indicate some disagreement as to the cause of death, 

 9     the proximate cause of death?

10          A      No.

11          Q      Now, at the time that you gave this 

12     interview on January, I think you said, 13th, 1997, had 

13     the additional testing been done?

14          A      No.

15          Q      When was that testing done?

16          A      I would have to look at the file.

17          Q      I mean, the 13th wasn't that long ago.  So 

18     somewhere in the last month, is that what you're 

19     saying?

20          A      Yes.  Probably within a week after that.

21          Q      At the time you talked to the St. Pete 

22     Times and the Tampa Tribune, following the Inside 

23     Edition story, had this additional testing been done?

24          A      No.

25          Q      Is there a draft of the autopsy report and 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     protocol in the file that is different from this final 

 2     Report of Autopsy?

 3                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; asked and answered.

 4                 MR. WEINBERG:  Just go ahead and answer.

 5                 THE WITNESS:  I'd have to go back and review 

 6          the file, but not that I recall.  The only thing that 

 7          would be different would be that Doctor Davis 

 8          probably did a provisional anatomic diagnoses, which 

 9          I then changed to final.  Or he did a final and I 

10          changed it to put it out under my signature, 

11          whichever.


13          Q      Did you change his protocol in any way?

14          A      No.  That is his wording.

15          Q      Okay.  If you go to -- further down on Page 

16     4 -- strike that.  

17                 Was there an anatomy chart that was done by 

18     either you or Doctor Davis with regard to the autopsy?

19          A      He may have.  I did not.

20          Q      Is that in the file?

21          A      It would be if he did one, yes.

22          Q      Is there some sort of a questionnaire that 

23     is done, or was done by Doctor Davis in this case, with 

24     regard to the autopsy?

25          A      I don't specifically recall.  He sometimes 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     did a kind of check-off list, and also an anatomic 

 2     diagram.  I don't recall whether he did in this case or 

 3     not.

 4          Q      If he did, would it still be in the file?

 5          A      Yes.

 6          Q      Were all notes maintained in the file?

 7          A      Yes.

 8          Q      You don't have any policy of throwing stuff 

 9     away?

10          A      No.

11          Q      With regard to Doctor Davis' file, is there 

12     anything in his personnel file that was withheld from 

13     us in our Public Records Act Request?

14          A      No.

15          Q      Nothing that you assert any kind of 

16     privilege as to?

17          A      No.

18          Q      If you go to right below, on Page 4 of 

19     Exhibit 3, where you said, "This is the most severe 

20     case of dehydration I've ever seen," the reporter says, 

21     "Doctor Joan Wood, the Pinellas medical examiner, spoke 

22     to us after we interviewed Mr. Abelson.  Doctor Wood 

23     says while dying of a blood clot is a natural cause, 

24     what led up to it, Lisa's severe dehydration, was not."

25                 Did you say that to him -- 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      Yes.

 2          Q      -- during your interview?

 3          A      Yes.

 4          Q      Did you tell him during the interview with 

 5     him that you had concluded that she had died of 

 6     unnatural causes?

 7          A      Undetermined.

 8          Q      Well, I'm asking you "unnatural."

 9          A      I used the term "undetermined."

10          Q      It goes on to say, "She says tests 

11     performed during the autopsy indicate Lisa McPherson 

12     went at least five days without liquids." 

13                 And then he asked you, "Five days you think 

14     she went without liquids?" 

15                 And you said, "I think five to ten is 

16     reasonable.  It may have been seventeen."  

17                 Did you say that?

18          A      Yes.

19          Q      What public records did you base that 

20     statement on that she went five to ten, maybe 

21     seventeen, without water?

22                 MS. ANDERSON:  Asked and answered.

23                 MR. WEINBERG:  Go ahead.

24                 THE WITNESS: The laboratory test results.


                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      You're talking about the vitreous fluids?

 2          A      Yes.

 3          Q      Any other public record that exists that 

 4     supports that conclusion?

 5          A      No.

 6          Q      And, you know, when I say "public record," 

 7     I mean record in your file, setting aside any issue as 

 8     to exemption.  Do you understand that?

 9          A      No.

10          Q      Well, then I'm going to ask the questions 

11     again.  What I'm asking you is:  Do you agree that your 

12     files are public records?

13          A      When they are not part of an active 

14     criminal investigation, yes.

15          Q      Well, they're public records, and then the 

16     question is whether or not there's an exemption that 

17     allows you to delay making them available, correct?

18          A      Yes.

19          Q      Okay.  Now, with regard to the issue from 

20     your statements as to severe dehydration and five to 

21     ten days, up to seventeen without water, my question 

22     is:  What records from your file, putting aside any 

23     exemption, did you base that statement on?

24          A      The records you have.

25          Q      The vitreous fluids?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      Yes.

 2          Q      And what public records exist, what records 

 3     exist from your file that would support that 

 4     conclusion?

 5          A      Additional tests which corroborate it.

 6          Q      These are the ones that were done recently?

 7          A      Yes.

 8          Q      Okay.  If you go to Page 5, in the middle, 

 9     Mr. Meagher says, "You don't deteriorate the way Lisa 

10     McPherson did in a day or two, do you?" 

11                 And you say, "No, absolutely not."  

12                 Did you say that?

13          A      That's correct.

14          Q      What public records, in other words, 

15     records from your file, did you base that on or exist 

16     that would support that statement?

17          A      The autopsy protocol, the cause of death, 

18     and all the laboratory tests that were performed.

19          Q      And that would be tests beyond just the 

20     vitreous fluids, is that right?

21          A      The vitreous fluids in and of themselves 

22     would answer that, but yes, in addition, additional 

23     other tests.

24          Q      What deterioration were you talking about?

25          A      From normal to dead.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Well, I mean, are you talking about weight, 

 2     are you talking about appearance?  I mean, what do you 

 3     mean?

 4          A      I'm talking about from normal to death.

 5          Q      Well, I mean, I could die right now, right?

 6          A      But you wouldn't have Lisa McPherson's body 

 7     chemistries were you to die right this second, unless 

 8     you are a profoundly ill individual unconscious, and 

 9     I'm not sensing that, unless you're a better lawyer 

10     than I thought you were.

11                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, hopefully I'm better than 

12          you think I am, but I'm not unconscious.

13                 MS. ANDERSON:  I don't sense any 

14          unconciousness either, Sandy.


16          Q      But when you talk in terms of dehydration, 

17     you're talking about -- I mean, in terms of 

18     deterioration, you're talking about things like 

19     dehydration?

20          A      Yes.

21          Q      Things like loss of body weight?

22          A      Yes.

23          Q      What other sorts of things are you talking 

24     about?

25          A      Aberrations of mental function from 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     confusion to disorientation to loss of consciousness, 

 2     excessive thirst, low urine output, a craving for 

 3     liquids.  She's got some significant bruises on her 

 4     that probably, probably came about from falling about.  

 5     Mr. Abelson says she was hitting the wall with her 

 6     fists.  That's not exactly normal.  

 7                 But we have a woman who has to go from 

 8     walking, talking, driving a vehicle, having a minor 

 9     motor vehicle accident, following which she's seen at a 

10     hospital, examined and found to be physically fit, to 

11     dead in seventeen days.  And this doesn't happen, based 

12     on the chemistries and the findings in her body, in the 

13     one day before her death.

14          Q      If you go to Page 6 of the -- of Exhibit 3, 

15     toward the bottom, you say, "I spend some time in 

16     court, as you can imagine --"

17          A      You're not on six.

18          Q      I just moved to six.  In other words, I 

19     told you to go to Page 6.

20          A      I'm on six.

21                 MR. WEINBERG:  Oh, I see.  I got it up here.  

22          My copy is -- Page 8 of the exhibit.

23                 MS. ANDERSON:  What is it, eight? 

24                 MR. WEINBERG:  Yeah.


                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      "I spend some time in court, as you can 

 2     imagine, and so I'm very careful with my wording, and 

 3     my wording would be this:  From the time that Lisa 

 4     McPherson died, backward twenty-four to forty-eight 

 5     hours, she was unconcious."

 6                 The reporter, "Comatose unconscious?"  

 7                 You, "Yes."  

 8                 Is that what you said?

 9          A      Yes.

10          Q      Now, what public records did you base that 

11     on and what public records exist, in other words, 

12     records in your file, to support that conclusion?

13          A      Vitreous chemistries.

14          Q      And were you being careful with your 

15     wording there?

16          A      Yes.

17          Q      And why were you being careful with your 

18     wording?

19          A      The reporter had just said to me at that 

20     point, having previously asked me how long I thought 

21     Lisa had been unconscious, with my having given a reply 

22     of twenty-four to forty-eight hours, a question along 

23     the lines of, "So, for the forty-eight hours before 

24     Lisa got to the hospital, she was unconscious?"  And I 

25     said, "I spend some time in court, as you can imagine, 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     and so I am very careful with my wording, and my 

 2     wording would be this:  From the time that Lisa 

 3     McPherson died, backward twenty-four to forty-eight 

 4     hours, she was unconscious."

 5          Q      And when you said "unconscious," you meant 

 6     comatose unconscious?

 7          A      There's no other definition.

 8          Q      Okay.  So "unconscious," to a layman like 

 9     me, means that you are essentially what would amount to 

10     being asleep; you're not responding to anything?

11          A      Well, or staring at the ceiling with your 

12     eyes wide open breathing heavily; unresponsive to 

13     anyone passing a hand over your eyes, for instance.

14          Q      Okay.  If you go further down on that page, 

15     the reporter says, "After she was pronounced dead, 

16     Doctor Minkoff, the emergency room physician, who's 

17     also a member of the church, drew blood from Lisa and 

18     had it tested.  The test results show a staph infection 

19     which church officials say could explain Lisa's rapid 

20     deterioration and her death." 

21                 And you say, "She did not die of an 

22     overwhelming staph infection." 

23                 And he says, "Did a staph infection 

24     contribute or cause the blood clot?" 

25                 And you say, "No, no."  

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                 Is that what you said?

 2          A      Yes.

 3          Q      Now, what public records did you base that 

 4     statement on and what public records exist, in other 

 5     words, records from your file exist to support your 

 6     statement that the staph infection neither caused nor 

 7     contributed to the death of Lisa McPherson?

 8          A      She didn't have a catastrophic decline.  

 9     She didn't have a rapid deterioration.  That's based 

10     from the lab tests.  And she has no nidus of infection 

11     to have caused her to have a staph infection.

12          Q      What do you mean, no rapid deterioration 

13     based on the lab test?  What's that mean?

14          A      Well, if you've got someone who is a 

15     specialist, they will explain to you that those 

16     laboratory values are not consistent with someone who 

17     crashed and died in twelve hours or twenty-four hours.

18          Q      You're talking about the vitreous fluids?

19          A      Yes.

20          Q      And what is the nidus?

21          A      Site.

22          Q      Site of infection?

23          A      (Nodding affirmatively.)

24          Q      In other words, some organ that would 

25     indicate an infection?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      Right.

 2          Q      All right.  Did -- during the autopsy, was 

 3     the heart opened up and looked into for infection, do 

 4     you know?

 5          A      Yes.

 6          Q      And is that in the autopsy report?

 7          A      The heart was examined, as every heart in 

 8     every autopsy we do is examined.

 9          Q      But does the autopsy report indicate that 

10     the heart was examined for infection, do you know?

11          A      We examined the heart.  We look at sections 

12     of the heart under the microscope.  Infection of the 

13     heart, of the valves of the heart is something visible 

14     to the naked eye.  Infection of the muscle, the heart 

15     is visible under the microscope.  Neither site showed 

16     infection.

17          Q      Do you continue to have sections from all 

18     the organs?

19          A      Yes.

20          Q      And those are sections that could be looked 

21     at by our experts?

22          A      Yes --

23          Q      Is there any --

24          A      -- when the public records issue is 

25     resolved.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Right.  Are there any organs, major organs 

 2     that were not sectioned and preserved?

 3          A      Maybe not pancreas.  I'd have to go back 

 4     and look.

 5          Q      Would the autopsy report audit indicate 

 6     what was sectioned?

 7          A      No.  We don't normally do that.  We retain 

 8     sections of major organs:  heart, lungs, kidneys, 

 9     brain, liver.  I always take spleen.  It just depends 

10     upon the pathologist.

11          Q      How about the intestines, the stomach?

12          A      No.  We don't retain or take sections of 

13     those.

14          Q      Now, you also -- right after that statement 

15     I just read, Mr. Meagher says, "Doctor Wood says she 

16     can't explain the cuts and bruises on Lisa's body.  

17     They may have been from falls before she was comatose."

18                 Now, you do recall talking to him about the 

19     cuts and bruises?

20          A      Yeah.

21          Q      And what public records, what records did 

22     you base your statements on, and what in the file 

23     exists as to those cuts and bruises?

24                 MS. ANDERSON:  Which statements, Sandy? 

25                 MR. WEINBERG:  The statement -- well, you 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          weren't here, but she went through a long dialogue 

 2          about her recollection of what is outside this 

 3          transcript of what she talked to Mr. Meagher about. 

 4                 What I'm asking you:  With regard to your 

 5          conversation with Mr. Meagher about the cuts and 

 6          bruises, what records did you base your statements on 

 7          and what records exist as to document those cuts and 

 8          bruises in your file?

 9                 THE WITNESS:  The written autopsy protocol, 

10          the photographs, and some microscopic sections.


12          Q      And the microscopic sections still exist?

13          A      Yes.  And I think they're of various 

14     injuries on the body.  I didn't go back and catalog 

15     them in my mind to specifically say exactly which skin 

16     abnormalities were kept as tissue blocks, but there are 

17     some.

18          Q      Okay.  Were there any tissue blocks done of 

19     the so-called bites, insect bites?

20          A      I believe so, yes.

21          Q      And those still exist?

22          A      Yes.

23          Q      And are there photos that exist of the 

24     so-called insect bites?

25          A      Yes.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      And those still exist?

 2          A      Yes.

 3          Q      Now, if you go to the next page, which 

 4     would be the last page, at the top of it there is a 

 5     statement from Mr. Abelson about insect bites, and then 

 6     you're quoted as saying, "No, they're not mosquito 

 7     bites.  They appear to me to be cockroach bites."  

 8                 And then you were asked, "How could Lisa 

 9     McPherson sit there and let cockroaches bite her while 

10     she's laying in bed?" 

11                 The answer is, "If she's comatose it can 

12     happen and she doesn't know it and doesn't react to 

13     it."

14                 Were you asked those things and are those 

15     your statements?

16          A      Yes.

17          Q      What public records did you rely on in 

18     making those statements, and what public records exist, 

19     in other words, records from your file exist with 

20     regard to what you have described as cockroach bites?

21          A      Descriptions in the autopsy protocol, and 

22     photographs.

23          Q      What about the sections from the bites?

24          A      I'm hesitant to be specific with regard to 

25     the sections.  I know there are sections of skin 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     abnormalities.  I believe at least one of those is of 

 2     one of these bite regions, but I didn't check those 

 3     before I came here today.

 4          Q      Does someone have to be comatose or dead in 

 5     order to be bit by a cockroach?

 6          A      No.  There are well-documented cases of 

 7     infants and small children being bitten by cockroaches.

 8          Q      And is there a particular journal or 

 9     article that documents this?

10          A      Well, I'm sure there's documentation in the 

11     journals.  I would suggest a forensic entomologist.

12          Q      Was there any that you relied on in drawing 

13     the conclusion, based on looking at the body and 

14     looking at the photographs, that these were likely 

15     cockroach bites?

16          A      No.  I have a forensic entomologist with 

17     whom I work, but he is in Indiana and he's never seen 

18     these photographs.

19          Q      What's his name?

20          A      Neil Haskell (phonetic).

21          Q      And is he in some medical examiner office 

22     or --

23          A       No.  He's a forensic entomologist who does 

24     some -- I think some teaching at Michigan State, and is 

25     on a doctoral fellowship for a fellow at the University 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     of Florida, but who does forensic entomology.

 2          Q      Now, has he participated at all in the 

 3     autopsy?

 4          A      No.

 5          Q      Now, were you talking about premortem or 

 6     postmortem cockroach bites when you addressed this with 

 7     the Inside Edition?

 8          A      Premortem.

 9          Q      Now, following the Inside Edition 

10     interview, you did do interviews with both the St. Pete 

11     Times and the Tampa Tribune, is that right?

12          A      Yes.

13          Q      And where did those interviews take place?

14          A      One by telephone, Tampa Tribune; the other 

15     in my library, St. Pete Times.

16          Q      Well, let's take the St. Pete Times first.  

17     Who was present for that interview?

18          A      Tom Tobin and I.

19          Q      Any other person?

20          A      No.

21          Q      Did you talk to Wayne Andrews, Mr. -- Agent 

22     Strope or anybody from the State Attorney's Office 

23     before doing the Tom Tobin interview?

24          A      No.

25          Q      So you didn't ask their permission?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      No.

 2          Q      Did you get any reaction from Wayne Andrews 

 3     to your Inside Edition appearance after it aired?

 4          A      Not that I recall.

 5          Q      Did anybody from the state attorney or from 

 6     the Clearwater Police Department or FDLE instruct you, 

 7     after seeing those interviews, not to do any further 

 8     interviews?

 9          A      No.

10          Q      Did there come a time when you quit doing 

11     interviews with regard to this case?

12          A      Yes.

13          Q      When was that?

14          A      After the interviews to the St. Pete Times 

15     and the Tampa Tribune.

16          Q      And why did you quit doing interviews?

17          A      At the request of the State Attorney's 

18     Office.

19          Q      Who from the State Attorney's Office?

20          A      Doug Crow.

21          Q      And when did that request come 

22     specifically, do you remember?

23          A      The day after the -- or the day the Tribune 

24     and Times articles aired.

25          Q      Was this by phone or in person?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      By phone.

 2          Q      And was there a letter that followed it up?

 3          A      No.

 4          Q      And what --

 5          A      Not that I've seen, anyway.

 6          Q      And did he give a reason why he didn't want 

 7     you to give any more interviews?

 8          A      My interpretation, just that further 

 9     publicity might have an adverse effect upon the 

10     investigation.

11          Q      And did he tell you that, or is that what 

12     you --

13          A      That's -- I don't remember his exact words.

14          Q      Well, did you tell him that you were your 

15     own independent person and that you thought that the 

16     public had a right to know the truth about this?  Did 

17     you tell him that?

18          A      No.  I started the conversation by saying 

19     that I was not planning to do any more interviews.  

20     That was my statement to him when he called or I called 

21     him back, whatever it was.  I said, "I just wanted you 

22     to know I do not plan to do any more interviews."  

23                 And my best recollection, he said, "Well, 

24     good, because I think it might cause problems."  I 

25     don't know.  Something like that.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Okay.  Did -- when you got the Public 

 2     Records Act Request from us -- do you recall getting 

 3     that request?

 4          A      Yes.

 5          Q      Who participated in the decision whether to 

 6     produce or not produce records?

 7          A      I did.

 8          Q      That was your decision?

 9          A      Yes.

10          Q      Why did you not give us access to the 

11     autopsy report?

12          A      Error on my part.

13          Q      What do you mean by that?

14          A      It was simply an error on my part in 

15     communicating to my staff.  I can't remember the exact 

16     words.  It was just one of those cross-communications.

17          Q      So you should have given us the autopsy 

18     report?

19          A      Yes.  The autopsy report, as of October 

20     30th, should have been given to you.

21          Q      And why should it have been given to us as 

22     of October 30th, 1996?

23          A      Because it had been made public, and it was 

24     that which was ready to be mailed to you when you filed 

25     suit.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                 MR. WEINBERG:  If you would mark this as 

 2          exhibit -- the next exhibit, Exhibit 4.

 3                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 4 so marked by the 

 4          reporter.)

 5                 MS. ANDERSON:  Sandy, are you going to go much 

 6          further?  Because Mr. Bedore is upstairs.  

 7                 MR. WEINBERG:  Yes.

 8                 MS. ANDERSON:  I think you had him set for 

 9          3:30.

10                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, you know, we had him set 

11          for whenever we got through with Doctor Wood, but --

12                 THE WITNESS:  Well, he's my ride, so it 

13          doesn't make any difference.

14                 MR. RAHDERT:  How long do you want to go 

15          today? 

16                 MR. WEINBERG:  As long as you'll go.

17                 THE WITNESS:  Well, if you're anticipating 

18          being -- I mean, I have a bad back.  I just simply 

19          can't sit for --

20                 MR. WEINBERG:  All right.  Well, why don't we 

21          go until five, and then if we're not done, we'll 

22          finish tommorrow. 

23                 THE WITNESS:  Okay.

24                 (Off the record discussion.)


                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Do you recognize Exhibit 4 as the Public 

 2     Records Request that we made?

 3          A      Yeah, I guess.

 4          Q      And then --

 5          A      You better ask Mr. Bedore.

 6                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, let me just show you 

 7          Exhibit 5.  You can mark this.

 8                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 5 so marked by the 

 9          reporter.)


11          Q      Do you recognize Exhibit 5 as your letter, 

12     your response to me signed by you in response to my 

13     January 9th request?

14          A      Right.

15          Q      And if you look at that, in your response 

16     you say, "Regarding all materials relating to the case 

17     of Lisa McPherson, including access to review and 

18     reanalyze any physical specimens, you are welcome to 

19     inspect or copy any of that material at a mutually 

20     agreeable date on or after such time when the case is 

21     no longer considered to be an active criminal 

22     investigation."

23                 That's what you said, right?

24          A      Right.

25          Q      And so at that time, you did not give us 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     anything from your file other than the personnel file 

 2     of Doctor Davis, is that right?

 3          A      That's correct.  And as I've indicated to 

 4     you, that was an error.  And the second letter was 

 5     coming to you with a copy of the autopsy report.

 6          Q      All right.  Now, this second letter, who 

 7     dictated -- when was this second letter dictated?

 8                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; vague.  What second 

 9          letter?

10                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, I mean, you want to mark 

11          this?  

12                 MS. ANDERSON:  Which exhibit?

13                 MR. WEINBERG:  First of all, let the record 

14          make very clear that I haven't received any second 

15          letter.  

16                 And did you send me another letter?

17                 THE WITNESS:  No, because of the lawsuit.

18                 MR. WEINBERG:  All right.  Well, let's mark 

19          this as Exhibit 6.

20                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 6 so marked by the 

21          reporter.)


23          Q      That was handed to me by your attorney 

24     today.  That is a letter that you dictated but never 

25     sent?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      That is correct.  And that was written on 

 2     Tuesday, January 28th.  Pat had told us to hold --

 3                 MS. ANDERSON:  Wait, wait, wait.

 4                 THE WITNESS:  Oh, excuse me.  Okay.  We were 

 5          going to wait and file the -- respond on Wednesday 

 6          the 29th.  We were going to include a copy of the 

 7          autopsy report, but the lawsuit was filed.


 9          Q      Now, why were you going to send this 

10     letter?

11          A      May I see the letter again?

12          Q      Yeah.

13          A      Number one, to include the autopsy report; 

14     and number two, to let you know that certain items you 

15     were requesting fell within the purview of physical 

16     evidence.

17          Q      What do you mean by that?

18          A      Vitreous fluid, blood, body tissues, the 

19     toxicology specimens are physical evidence.

20          Q      Okay.  Where in here does it say you're 

21     sending me the autopsy report?  Could you tell me that?

22          A      It doesn't, but I am telling you it was to 

23     be included with it.

24          Q      Well, there's nothing on here that has an 

25     enclosure, right?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      (Nodding affirmatively.)

 2          Q      Is that right?

 3          A      Yes.  But we had clearly decided at that 

 4     point that you were entitled to the autopsy report.  I 

 5     had spoken with my attorneys.  It was to be taken care 

 6     of.

 7          Q      Is there any particular reason why, in the 

 8     answer that y'all filed, there's no indication that 

 9     you're going to turn over the autopsy report?

10          A      It's the drafting of my attorney.  I didn't 

11     read it carefully.

12          Q      Did you read it before it was filed?

13          A      I'm sorry?

14          Q      Did you read it before it was filed?

15          A      Before what was filed?

16          Q      Did you read the answer in the pleadings 

17     that are contained in Exhibit 2 before they were filed?

18          A      Yes.

19          Q      So you approved them?

20          A      Yes.

21                 MR. WEINBERG:  And let me show you the -- what 

22          we'll have marked as the next exhibit, which is 

23          seven.

24                 (Whereupon, Exhibit No. 7 so marked by the 

25          reporter.)

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      



 2          Q      Do you recognize Exhibit 7 as a letter that 

 3     I sent to you on January 22nd, 1997?

 4          A      Yeah.

 5          Q      And did you review that letter?

 6          A      Yeah.

 7          Q      Did you discuss that letter with somebody 

 8     from the State Attorney's Office?

 9          A      No.  Other than Marie King.

10          Q      And what was the nature of that discussion?

11          A      To let Marie know what the nature of my 

12     very specific rules had been with regard to the media, 

13     Inside Edition, St. Pete Times and Tampa Tribune.

14          Q      Did anyone from the State Attorney's Office 

15     instruct you or advise you not to release records 

16     pursuant to our Public Records Act Request, which is 

17     contained in Exhibit 4, my January 9th, 1997 letter?

18          A      I got the same letter you did from them.

19          Q      Well, do you interpret the letter the way I 

20     do, that it didn't instruct you as to how to respond to 

21     my request?

22          A      That's the way I interpret it.

23          Q      So the decision that you made with regard 

24     to asserting a law enforcement exemption was your own 

25     decision, not influenced by anything that was said to 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     you by Wayne Andrews, Clearwater PD, FDLE, or the State 

 2     Attorney's Office, is that right?

 3          A      No.  It was uninfluenced by anything said 

 4     to me by -- or written by the State Attorney's Office.

 5          Q      Did Wayne Andrews from the Clearwater 

 6     Police Department tell you not to turn over any files 

 7     to us?

 8          A      Wayne Andrews of the Clearwater Police 

 9     Department and Special Agent Lee Strope of the 

10     Clearwater -- of the Florida Department of Law 

11     Enforcement both told me this was an ongoing criminal 

12     investigation with subpoenas to be cut.

13          Q      Well, did they make a statement as to 

14     whether or not you should or should not release public 

15     records from your files regarding the autopsy?

16          A      We seem to have a communication problem 

17     here.  You asked me what they said.  I told you what 

18     they said.  They didn't tell me not to release it; they 

19     didn't tell me to release it.  They told me there was 

20     an ongoing criminal investigation.  I heard that both 

21     from Sergeant Andrews and from Special Agent Strope.

22          Q      But you had heard that almost a month 

23     before when you released the autopsy report, correct?

24          A      No, I did not hear that.  You 

25     misunderstand.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Well, let's make it clear then.  How long 

 2     after the autopsy report was issued did either Sergeant 

 3     Andrews or Agent Strope talk to you about there being 

 4     an ongoing criminal investigation?

 5          A      Neither spoke with me.  Sergeant Andrews 

 6     spoke with Mr. Bedore.

 7          Q      How long after it was released --

 8          A      You'll have to ask Mr. Bedore.  I don't 

 9     have the date.

10          Q      Well, you are aware, are you not, that both 

11     Sergeant Andrews and Wayne Shelor from the Clearwater 

12     Police Department also have talked to the press with 

13     regard to this so-called ongoing investigation, 

14     correct?

15          A      Yes.  And it's not so-called; it's ongoing.  

16     I'm involved in it.

17          Q      All right.

18          A      I believe it was around the first part of 

19     December, but I can't give you a date.  Mr. Bedore 

20     perhaps can.

21          Q      Do you recall that after that conversation 

22     between Clearwater police and your department about 

23     there being an ongoing investigation, more or less 

24     probably at the beginning of December, do you recall 

25     that after that time both Sergeant Andrews and Mr. 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     Shelor from the Clearwater Police Department talked to 

 2     the press with regard to this investigation?

 3          A      I don't recall.  It makes me no never mind.

 4                 MR. WEINBERG:  And let me have marked as a -- 

 5          this is -- oh, I see the way this is.  Let me just 

 6          have this marked as a composite exhibit.

 7                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 8 so marked by the 

 8          reporter.)


10          Q      Now, what I've shown you is a series of 

11     articles that are marked as Exhibit 8.  And without 

12     belaboring the articles, I think if you look at them, 

13     you'll see that throughout the articles, there are 

14     quotations from the Clearwater Police Department.  For 

15     example, on the first article, which is the Tampa 

16     Tribune article, which is the first article on this 

17     December 15th, 1996, at the bottom of the first page, 

18     the headline page --

19          A      Wait, what's the headline?

20          Q      Tampa Tribune, "Mystery Surrounds 

21     Scientologist's Death."

22          A      Okay.

23          Q      At the bottom of the first page it says, 

24     "An autopsy by the --" by your office, "showed 

25     McPherson's five-foot-nine, one-hundred-and-eight-pound 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     body was severely dehydrated.  Her arms and legs were 

 2     bruised.  Her skin was cracked and scaling.  Her left 

 3     pulmonary artery was blocked by a fatal blood clot 

 4     brought on by dehydration and bed rest.  The Clearwater 

 5     Police Department doesn't think she died of natural 

 6     causes said spokesman Wayne Shelor."  

 7                 And then further down in the article, 

 8     Sergeant Andrews talks about witnesses and how he 

 9     thinks that one's in Switzerland and one's in Germany.  

10     And then on the last page of the article, Larry Bedore 

11     is quoted, from your office, as saying that he was 

12     quote, "not aware of any blood tests being done or even 

13     McPherson's blood being drawn at the hospital."  That's 

14     with regard to the staph infection.  I take it he was 

15     just incorrect when he said that?

16          A      Well, he's the director of operations.  I 

17     mean, the fact that he doesn't know what's going on 

18     within the inner workings of a given case isn't 

19     surprising.

20          Q      All right.  Then if you go to the one, I 

21     guess, that's on the front of yours, which is the St. 

22     Pete Times for December 17th, 1996, again at the 

23     beginning of it, the third paragraph, "Police point to 

24     an autopsy by," your office, "which says," and it 

25     describes the autopsy and describes your findings.  And 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014  


 1     then at the bottom it again quotes Sergeant Andrews and 

 2     it goes on to some length about that.  

 3                 And then if you go to the next document, 

 4     which is a Channel 8 news document, you'll see that 

 5     Wayne Shelor appeared on a newscast and is quoted in 

 6     the fifth paragraph there, "Wayne Shelor, Clearwater 

 7     investigators have worked closely with Pinellas-Pasco 

 8     Medical Examiner's Office and it is their belief that 

 9     Lisa McPherson did not die of natural causes."  

10                 And my question to you is:  Did you 

11     understand that to be that that was your belief or the 

12     cops' belief?

13          A      What?

14          Q      Do you know what Wayne Shelor was talking 

15     about? 

16                 MS. ANDERSON:  Where are you, Sandy?  I'm 

17          confused.

18                 MR. WEINBERG:  I think Doctor Wood knows where 

19          I am, the Channel 8 news.

20                 THE WITNESS:  Clearwater Police Department has 

21          been told by us at this point in time that the death 

22          of Lisa McPherson is wholely unexplained by the 

23          information that's been provided to us thus far.  Her 

24          death is at this point undetermined, may well be 

25          ruled a homicide, that she is -- this woman should 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          not be dead and that an incredible amount of work 

 2          needs to be done to investigate this death.


 4          Q      All right.  If you go to the last document 

 5     in that exhibit, which is a transcript of a December 

 6     17th, 1996 WFLA show which Mr. Shelor, the police 

 7     person, appeared on, if you look at the second page of 

 8     it, Mr. Shelor says, quote, "Well, when she showed up 

 9     in another county, having been taken from Clearwater to 

10     another county and she was pronounced dead on arrival, 

11     there are certain methods and investigations that are 

12     prompted because of the circumstances.  This began as 

13     an unattended death.  The Pinellas-Pasco Medical 

14     Examiner's Office determined a number of things which 

15     conclude essentially that this young lady did not die 

16     of natural causes."  

17                 And then he goes on in the next paragraph, 

18     "Ah, one of the attorneys says that strep infection 

19     caused it.  The Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner's 

20     Office is familiar with that and says no, that didn't 

21     cause her death at all, that she died as a result of 

22     pulmonary embolism brought on by severe dehydration as 

23     a result of bed rest."  

24                 My question to you is:  Did -- was there 

25     any discussion with Mr. Shelor, Sergeant Andrews, or 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     Mr. Strope as to an agreement or a strategy amongst 

 2     y'all to generate press starting in December 1996 with 

 3     regard to this ongoing investigation?

 4          A      No.

 5          Q      Now back to the St. Pete Times.  Mr. Tobin 

 6     did an interview and he did it in the library of your 

 7     offices, is that right?

 8          A      Yes.

 9          Q      How many sessions did you have with him?

10          A      One.

11          Q      And was -- I can't remember if you answered 

12     this or not.  I apologize, but was anybody else there 

13     other than you?

14          A      No, he and I.

15          Q      So there was no other witness to the 

16     interview?

17          A      No.

18          Q      Did he take notes?

19          A      Yes.

20          Q      Did you take notes?

21          A      No.

22          Q      What did he ask you and what did you say to 

23     him?

24          A      I have a great deal more difficulty 

25     recalling that conversation than I do the one with Matt 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     Meagher.  His interview that was in the newspaper was 

 2     accurate.  Beyond that, with any specificity, he asked 

 3     me if five to ten days was reasonable; I said it was 

 4     defensible.  

 5                 I'm sorry, I just don't remember.

 6          Q      How long did the interview last 

 7     approximately?

 8          A      Thirty minutes maybe, maybe forty-five.

 9          Q      And when he called you up, what did he tell 

10     you that he wanted to talk about?

11          A      The death of Lisa McPherson.

12          Q      Did he say that he had seen the Inside 

13     Edition show?

14          A      I don't recall.

15          Q      And did you put any restrictions on the 

16     interview?

17          A      I told him to bring the autopsy report with 

18     him.  I wasn't going to give him a copy.

19          Q      And why is that, since it was a public 

20     record?

21          A      Just abundance of caution.  And that he 

22     couldn't see any other records.  And I don't -- I'm 

23     very able to set restrictions as we go along in the 

24     discussion, so --

25          Q      Well, the one thing I really -- if you 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     could explain to me, what -- why did you need an 

 2     abundance of caution as to whether or not to produce 

 3     what you say is a public record?

 4          A      Nothing more than that, abundance of 

 5     caution.

 6          Q      And when did the interview with him take 

 7     place, what day?

 8          A      What day did the newspaper article air?

 9          Q      It aired on the 23rd.

10          A      The 22nd.

11          Q      Well, that is two weeks after I made my 

12     first -- I made my request for public documents, 

13     correct?  I made a request on January 9th, 1997, for 

14     your records, right?

15          A      Right.

16          Q      And you sent me a response on January 10th, 

17     right?

18          A      Right.

19          Q      And this interview didn't take place until 

20     January 22nd?

21          A      Right.

22          Q      But you've said that you intended to 

23     produce to me, and it was just an error, the autopsy 

24     report, right?

25          A      I have told you that included with the last 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     communication to you would have been a copy of the 

 2     autopsy report, because we had looked more carefully at 

 3     the public records law and realized that we had in fact 

 4     made an error in not giving it to you sooner and you 

 5     were in fact entitled to it.

 6          Q      All right.  So in other words, it was not 

 7     an inadvertance that caused you not to produce the 

 8     autopsy report to us pursuant to my January 9th 

 9     request?

10          A      It was an error.

11                 MS. ANDERSON:  Mr. Weinberg, you said that the 

12          Times story ran on the 22nd of January? 

13                 MR. WEINBERG:  No, I said the 23rd.  She said 

14          she talked to him on the 22nd.

15                 MS. ANDERSON:  Well, the copy of the story 

16          that you have provided as an exhibit shows a date of 

17          December 17th.

18                 MR. WEINBERG:  I know, because we're talking 

19          about a different story, Pat.

20                 MS. ANDERSON:  That you don't have a copy of?

21                 MR. WEINBERG:  I haven't shown her a copy of 

22          it, but I think she understands that we're talking 

23          about two different times and stories.

24                 MS. ANDERSON:  Well, I didn't.

25                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, maybe you're not paying 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          attention, but I think she does.  She said that -- 

 2          and she's made it clear that after the Inside Edition 

 3          story ran, she did interviews with the St. Pete Times 

 4          and the Tampa Tribune.  The Inside Edition story did 

 5          not run until January of 1997.  Those articles that 

 6          you're looking at are articles that were in 1996.  

 7          And I think we all understand that.  

 8                 MS. ANDERSON:  Uh-huh.

 9                 MR. WEINBERG:  Do you understand that, Doctor 

10          Wood? 

11                 THE WITNESS:  Yes.

12                 MS. ANDERSON:  How are you doing, Doctor Wood?

13                 THE WITNESS:  Fine.  I need to take a break in 

14          a minute, but --

15                 MR. WEINBERG:  Okay.  Well, let's see if I can 

16          get through these stories.

17                 THE WITNESS:  If we're going to go another 

18          half hour, I better take a break now.  

19                 (Whereupon, a recess was taken from 4:26 to 

20          4:40 p.m.)

21                 (Whereupon, Exhibit No. 9 so marked by the 

22          reporter.)


24          Q      I've put in front of you Exhibit 9, which 

25     is a composite exhibit of the St. Pete Times January 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     23rd, 1997 article and the Tampa Tribune January 23rd, 

 2     1997 article, and those are two articles that you are 

 3     quoted somewhat extensively.  And if you go to the St. 

 4     Pete Times article, which is the second article, you're 

 5     quoted more extensively in that and that's what we're 

 6     talking about now.  

 7                 Going back now to Tom Tobin, did he give 

 8     you a list of questions before he interviewed you?

 9          A      No.

10          Q      And did he tape the interview?

11          A      Tape?

12          Q      Tape, you know, tape record the interview?

13          A      No, not that I recall.

14          Q      Did you refuse to answer any of his 

15     questions?

16          A      No.

17          Q      Did he have any records with him?

18          A      No, other than the autopsy report.

19          Q      He had the hospital records with him?

20          A      No.

21          Q      Now, why did you do the interview with Tom 

22     Tobin and the Tampa Tribune?  Well, let me ask the 

23     question a little bit differently.  

24                 In light of the fact that there was an 

25     ongoing active criminal investigation, why did you do 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     an interview with the two local newspapers in which you 

 2     discussed your autopsy findings and conclusions 

 3     regarding this case?

 4          A      Again, because I spoke for Lisa McPherson.  

 5     I felt the time had come for those circumstances, which 

 6     could be determined from her autopsy protocol, to be 

 7     made public in the hope that what had happened over the 

 8     last days of her life might be better explained.

 9          Q      And who is that for the benefit of?

10          A      The general public.

11          Q      Might it benefit the general public for 

12     others outside your office to test the validity of your 

13     scientific results that are set forth in your autopsy?

14                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; argumentative.

15                 MR. WEINBERG:  Go ahead.

16                 THE WITNESS:  The test results performed by my 

17          office were done in a fully qualified laboratory with 

18          appropriate quality control and with double testing 

19          of abnormal results.  There is no reason to think 

20          that they are other than a correct reflection of the 

21          state of Lisa McPherson.  And in my opinion there is 

22          no need for further testing of those specimens.


24          Q      Well, do you agree that there may be some 

25     expert out there that might well disagree with the 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     conclusions that you reached from that scientific 

 2     evidence concerning the cause of death, the proximate 

 3     cause of death?

 4                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; irrelevant, 

 5          immaterial.

 6                 MR. WEINBERG:  Do you understand the question? 

 7                 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  I am well aware that there 

 8          are experts for hire who will say black is white, if 

 9          paid adequate amounts to say so; however, reputable 

10          individuals reviewing the findings in Lisa 

11          McPherson's death will, in my opinion, arrive at the 

12          same conclusions at which I arrived.


14          Q      Well, given that, Doctor Wood, and given 

15     the fact -- strike that.

16                 You have -- the conclusions you've reached 

17     are final, is that right?

18          A      Yes.

19          Q      Given the fact that you've reached these 

20     final conclusions and that you've discussed them 

21     publicly, is there a reason why you will not allow our 

22     experts to look at the same scientific information to 

23     determine whether or not they agree or disagree with 

24     your conclusions?

25          A      First of all, some of what you're asking 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     for is covered under active criminal investigation.  

 2     Secondly, much of what your experts would need to form 

 3     an opinion is available to them within the autopsy 

 4     protocol that has already been provided to you.

 5          Q      Well, you say some is covered under active 

 6     criminal investigation.  What isn't covered under 

 7     active criminal investigation?

 8          A      The autopsy protocol.

 9          Q      Well, you know, with all respect to your 

10     office, do you understand why a responsible and 

11     reputable expert would want to look at the autopsy 

12     photos, autopsy slides, and autopsy sections before 

13     rendering a responsible opinion as to the cause of her 

14     death?

15          A      As to the cause of her death, no.

16          Q      Excuse me?

17          A      As to the cause of her death, no.

18          Q      Well, would the release of -- to the public 

19     of the lab results, the photos, the slides, and the 

20     other materials, you know, that are referred to in the 

21     autopsy protocol in any way compromise the ongoing 

22     investigation?

23          A      Absolutely.

24          Q      How?

25          A      They compromise the ongoing investigation 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     because there are multiple individuals who have never 

 2     been interviewed who cared for Lisa whose descriptions 

 3     of her condition at various times are of extreme 

 4     importance to us, and the dissemination of the autopsy 

 5     photographs showing her condition at the time of death 

 6     could interfere with that search for the truth.

 7          Q      Well, what about the release of the 

 8     vitreous fluids test data, would that in any way -- in 

 9     light of the fact that you've already made a final 

10     conclusion, would that compromise the ongoing 

11     investigation in any way?

12          A      First of all, you have the test data.

13          Q      No.  I have what your report says the test 

14     data is.  I do not have a lab report.  I do not have 

15     anything in writing from an independent lab which sets 

16     forth what happened and what the data shows.  I also 

17     don't have the vitreous fluids that I might want to 

18     test.

19          A      Well, there probably aren't any, because 

20     there's such a small amount from each eye that there's 

21     probably no more for testing.  I have no problem 

22     letting you know that that is a reputable laboratory 

23     that falls under state guidelines and does its tests 

24     under the kinds of appropriate controls that any person 

25     would want those tests to be performed under.  And at 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     this point in time, quite frankly, that should be 

 2     adequate for you.

 3          Q      Well, let's just say for the moment that 

 4     it's not.  My question is:  Can you explain to me and 

 5     the court how the release of the underlying information 

 6     with regard to the vitreous fluid test, which you've 

 7     already analyzed and you've already drawn your final 

 8     conclusion of, can in any way compromise the 

 9     investigation?

10          A      It seems --

11                 MS. ANDERSON:  I'm going to object on the 

12          grounds that this has been asked and answered.

13                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, believe me it hasn't been 

14          answered and it hasn't been asked.  If you do the 

15          research, this is the vital question that determines 

16          whether or not there is a valid law enforcement 

17          exemption.

18                 MS. ANDERSON:  Well, of course you're dealing 

19          with forensic evidence here.

20                 MR. WEINBERG:  I don't care what I'm dealing 

21          with, Pat.

22                 MS. ANDERSON:  To the extent that you can 

23          articulate why it is that your office doesn't deal 

24          out forensic evidence before a charge is filed, do 

25          it.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, that isn't my question.  

 2          My question is:  Explain how the release of 

 3          specifically the data that relates to the vitreous 

 4          fluids, in light of the fact you've already reached 

 5          -- you've already had them tested and you've already 

 6          reached a final conclusion, could in any way 

 7          compromise the investigation?

 8                 THE WITNESS:  I feel at a disadvantage in 

 9          giving this answer, not being an attorney, but I can 

10          tell you that even if I were to waive active criminal 

11          investigation and provide to you a laboratory slip, 

12          you would have one more piece of paper that says 

13          exactly what the piece of paper you've got from us 

14          already says, and it gets you no farther along a path 

15          of anything.


17          Q      But, you know, that's my problem.  Your 

18     problem is is that you're a public official who has 

19     spoken publicly about an autopsy --

20          A      Which is my right to do.

21          Q      Let me finish.  I didn't say you didn't 

22     have the right -- who has released an autopsy report, 

23     who has gone on national tabloid television and talked 

24     about all your conclusions from it.  And my question 

25     is:  Given that, given those actions by your office, 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     how is it that you are claiming an exemption as to 

 2     things like what is in your file concerning vitreous 

 3     fluids, what is in your file concerning slides?

 4          A      Because what I am telling you, and have 

 5     told you repeatedly today, if you deal with any 

 6     forensic expert with a modicum of forensic experience, 

 7     all that individual needs is this autopsy protocol.  He 

 8     does not need to know the laboratory who did the test.  

 9     He does not need to know what is -- more than what is 

10     contained upon these pages to reach those conclusions. 

11                 Now, you could tell me that you want 

12     ballistics testings done on this case, despite the fact 

13     that there's no bullet wound here --

14          Q      Every --

15          A      -- but I am telling you that any forensic 

16     pathologist worth his salt in the United States today 

17     can look at this autopsy protocol with these laboratory 

18     values and accepting that these laboratory values, upon 

19     my guarantee, are being run in a laboratory that meets 

20     all criteria of acceptable clinical laboratory in this 

21     country, can reach the conclusions I have reached.

22          Q      And I'm telling you that we are talking to 

23     the most eminent experts in this area of medicine and 

24     forensic pathology in the country, and every one of 

25     them has told us just the opposite, that no responsible 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     forensic pathologist would base on the autopsy report, 

 2     without looking at the underlying slides, without 

 3     looking at the underlying samples, without looking at 

 4     the photos, without looking at the various other 

 5     materials from the scientific autopsy that was done, 

 6     reach any final conclusions, that it would be 

 7     irresponsible to do that.  So that's what they're 

 8     telling us.  

 9                 So what I'm asking you is:  As a person 

10     that you've said many times looking for the truth, why 

11     not make available to our experts, under your 

12     supervision and control, slides, lab data, you know, 

13     sections, so that they can do their own examination, 

14     you know, and test that against your conclusions that 

15     you've already publicly discussed and are in your 

16     autopsy report?  Why not allow that, if you want to get 

17     at the truth?

18                 MS. ANDERSON:  I will object to that on the 

19          grounds that it is argumentative.

20                 MR. WEINBERG:  It's not meant to be 

21          argumentative, Pat.  It's a question.

22                 MS. ANDERSON:  It's kind of a long run-on 

23          question.

24                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, can you answer that 

25          question, ma'am? 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                 THE WITNESS:  First of all, the questions 

 2          regarding the degree of deprivation of fluids and the 

 3          chronicity of the dehydration in this case are easily 

 4          answered by individuals without need for a great deal 

 5          more information.  Down the road sometime, when there 

 6          is a -- if there is a criminal arrest in this case, 

 7          then the individuals such as you are naming have 

 8          every right to review all of those materials in an 

 9          attempt to determine whether we have been correct or 

10          incorrect in our diagnoses, but in my opinion, not at 

11          this stage of the situation.


13          Q      And my question is:  Can you look me in the 

14     eye and tell me that the release of the underlying data 

15     with regard to the vitreous fluids and the slides and 

16     the sections to our experts would in any way compromise 

17     an ongoing criminal investigation?

18                 MS. ANDERSON:  Asked and answered.

19                 MR. WEINBERG:  No, it hasn't been answered.

20                 MS. ANDERSON:  And argumentative.

21                 MR. WEINBERG:  It's not argumentative.  

22                 Can you answer that question, please, Doctor 

23          Wood?

24                 THE WITNESS:  It is asked and answered.

25                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, will you answer the 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          question, please?

 2                 THE WITNESS:  First of all, as I told you, the 

 3          vitreous may not be available.  It may have been used 

 4          up.  

 5                 Second of all, we would have to have a special 

 6          master assigned.  We would have to set up very 

 7          special circumstances under which the viewing of 

 8          these tissues could be -- could take place.  There is 

 9          no way that I could allow the splitting of specimens 

10          from my office to go elsewhere other than in the 

11          presence of a special master.

12                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, I understood that, and 

13          that's what we want to do.  We want to do it the way 

14          that you want to do it. 

15                 THE WITNESS:  And I don't understand why.  No 

16          one has been accused of anything at this point.

17                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, but see, that's not the 

18          issue in a public records request.  The issue is is 

19          whether your files are public and there is a valid 

20          law enforcement exemption.

21                 THE WITNESS:  And --

22                 MR. WEINBERG:  Let me finish.  And as to those 

23          portions of the file for which there is no legitimate 

24          argument that can be made, that it would -- it would 

25          interfere or compromise an ongoing investigation, our 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          position is there is no law enforcement exemptions.  


 3          Q      And so what I'm asking you is, as you look 

 4     at me and we go through this deposition, is there -- 

 5     can you -- are you saying that the release of the data 

 6     from slides, you know, sections, vitreous fluids, all 

 7     the underlying data in your file, that that release, 

 8     under whatever terms you want to release it to us, 

 9     could in any way compromise the investigation, when 

10     you've already examined them, released an autopsy 

11     report and spoken about them publicly?

12          A      I see them as under the umbrella of an 

13     active criminal investigation and I am not willing to 

14     waive that.

15          Q      That's not my question.  My question is -- 

16          A      Well, you can ask your question a million 

17     ways.  What I'm telling you is, you have the autopsy 

18     report.  Anything else that's in my possession, until I 

19     am told otherwise, is part of an active criminal 

20     investigation and I will not surrender that to anyone 

21     until so ordered by a judge in competent jurisdiction.

22          Q      So it doesn't really -- so as far as you're 

23     concerned, it doesn't matter whether or not the release 

24     would or would not compromise an investigation; as long 

25     as there's an investigation, you're not going to 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     release until ordered by a judge, is that right?

 2          A      My understanding is that information which 

 3     is under active criminal investigation does not come to 

 4     me to make a judgment as to whether I think this piece 

 5     might or might not hamper the investigation.  It has 

 6     simply to do with the fact that there is a blanket 

 7     statement that it is part of an active criminal 

 8     investigation.

 9          Q      Right.  And you can just say that without 

10     any review by anybody?

11          A      I am saying that as the medical examiner 

12     for this circuit, in concert with -- not in concert 

13     with, but in consultation with the Clearwater Police 

14     Department and the Florida Department of Law 

15     Enforcement.

16          Q      All right.  Now, can you articulate how, if 

17     at all, the release, under the circumstances that you 

18     dictate, to our experts of the lab tests, slides and 

19     the sections, could or would compromise this ongoing 

20     investigation?  Can you articulate any way that it 

21     could?

22                 MS. ANDERSON:  By "our," you mean the Church 

23          of Scientology?

24                 MR. WEINBERG:  Anybody.  I mean, you know, it 

25          doesn't matter who the member of the public is.  To 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          the public.

 2                 MS. ANDERSON:  Regardless of the ultimate 

 3          impact on the defendant, if there is ever going to be 

 4          a defendant? 

 5                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, what difference does it 

 6          make?  That doesn't have any difference as far as the 

 7          public records are concerned, Pat.

 8                 Could you read that question back, please?

 9                 (The requested portion of the record was read 

10          back by the reporter.) 

11                 THE WITNESS:  (Conferring with counsel.)

12                 Having no knowledge as to whom these materials 

13          might be made available were I to release them, and 

14          having no knowledge as to the integrity, ability, 

15          expertise of the individual, I can imagine any result 

16          coming from an independent review, that review might 

17          mirror mine and might be one hundred eighty degrees 

18          opposite, and that might be through expertise or for 

19          some other reason; and therefore, I think that the 

20          potential is that the criminal investigation could 

21          suffer grave harm.


23          Q      Because somebody might disagree with you?

24          A      Not because someone might, who is an 

25     expert, genuinely disagree with me, but because some 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     people are of greater integrity than others.

 2          Q      Well, that assumes yourself as well, right?

 3          A      Yes.

 4          Q      All right.  Now, do you believe that the 

 5     Church of Scientology is not a legitimate church?

 6          A      I don't know anything about the Church of 

 7     Scientology.

 8          Q      Well, take a look at your answer.  Do you 

 9     have that in front of you?  And particularly, go to 

10     actually the motion.  Here, if I can just come over 

11     there for a second.  

12                 You filed a motion for a judgment on the 

13     pleadings.  And if you refer to Paragraph 5 of that 

14     motion, you say in the motion, "The filing of this 

15     lawsuit is a blatant attempt on the part of the Church 

16     of Scientology to abort a legitimate criminal 

17     investigation into the circumstances of Lisa 

18     McPherson's death while under the church's care in the 

19     final days of her life.  Doctor Wood is under no 

20     obligation to cooperate with such an attempt by the 

21     so-called church," and you have "church" in quotes.  

22                 Now, does that -- by that, do you mean that 

23     you don't believe, you, the medical examiner of 

24     Pasco-Pinellas, you don't believe that the Church of 

25     Scientology is a legitimate church by putting it in 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     quotes or by saying "so-called church"?

 2          A      They are called a church.  I don't know 

 3     what that means.

 4          Q      Well, what did you mean when you authorized 

 5     your lawyer to call it a "so-called church" in quotes?

 6          A      I just explained to you, they are called a 

 7     church.  I don't know what that means.  They are not 

 8     the episcopal church, the catholic church, the 

 9     Presbyterian church.  I know they call themselves a 

10     church.  I don't know what they believe in.  I don't 

11     know if they're a church or not.  So "so-called 

12     church," perhaps they are.

13          Q      Well, would it bother you if somebody 

14     referred to your religion as a so-called church in 

15     quotes as a public official?

16                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection; that has nothing to 

17          do in connection with the case.

18                 MR. WEINBERG:  Oh, it has everything to do 

19          with it, her bias, Pat, because it may well be that 

20          Doctor Wood has taken the position that she's taken 

21          because she's biased and she dislikes --

22                 THE WITNESS:  -- you know -- 

23                 MR. WEINBERG:  -- let the record reflect --

24                 THE WITNESS:  -- we are about -- 

25                 MR. WEINBERG:  -- that Doctor Wood is standing 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          up and screaming at me now.

 2                 THE WITNESS:  I am not screaming at you.

 3                 MS. ANDERSON:  That is not true, Mr. Weinberg.

 4                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, she --

 5                 THE WITNESS:  Mr. Weinberg, I am a member --

 6                 MR. WEINBERG:  She's standing up, is that 

 7          true? 

 8                 MS. ANDERSON:  She stood up.

 9                 THE WITNESS:  I am very angered at you, yes.

10                 MR. WEINBERG:  Why?

11                 THE WITNESS:  I am a member of the Episcopal 

12          Church.  

13                 MR. WEINNERG:  And I'm a member of the 

14          Unitarian Church.

15                 THE WITNESS:  It has been a church in this 

16          country for many, many years, and in England before 

17          it.  

18                 If the Church of Scientology wishes to become 

19          a church as of 1950, and espouse Godly views or those 

20          views which are held by large numbers of people, then 

21          that's fine.  If they don't believe in God, that's 

22          fine.  If they believe in God on Mars, that's fine. 

23                 I take offense at your suggestion and your 

24          words that I would be biased against any 

25          organization, be they Scientology, Moslem, Buddhist, 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Jewish, or whatever.  I don't care.


 3          Q      Well, then, Doctor Wood, why did you file a 

 4     pleading in which you referred to the Church of 

 5     Scientology as a so-called, quote, "church," unquote?  

 6     Why did you do that if you were so fair and unbiased as 

 7     to the Church of Scientology?

 8          A      I've not seen anything that proves that 

 9     they are a church.

10          Q      Well, do you think the fact that the IRS 

11     has determined that they're a tax exempt religious 

12     organization, would that indicate to you that they 

13     might be a church?

14                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection.

15                 MR. WEINBERG:  Or that there are eight and a 

16          half million people in the world that are 

17          Scientologists?  But more importantly, what does it 

18          have to do with the Public Records Act Request that 

19          this organization made?  What does whether or not 

20          they're a church have anything to do with that?  What 

21          does it have to do with it?

22                 THE WITNESS:  It has to do with the fact that 

23          they are the entity, whatever they may be, that is 

24          seeking the records.  And that's all, from my point 

25          of view.

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      



 2          Q      Why did you put in quotes, "church"?  Does 

 3     that suggest that you don't think that they are 

 4     legitimate?

 5          A      I don't know that they are.  Maybe they 

 6     are.

 7          Q      And what difference does it make to you as 

 8     a public official, who has an obligation to produce 

 9     public documents, as to whether or not you think that 

10     they are or not a church?  What difference does it 

11     make?

12          A      It makes absolutely no difference to me 

13     whether they are a church or not a church.  The 

14     difference it makes to me as an individual who spends 

15     her life attempting to deal with truth and who knows 

16     that Lisa McPherson should not be dead, that an 

17     organization has systematically blocked our attempt to 

18     talk to those individuals who cared for her, to those 

19     individuals who knew what was happening to her for 

20     those last seventeen days of her life, who have told to 

21     the police, who have related to me, stories of what was 

22     going on with Lisa that are impossible based on her 

23     medical files.

24          Q      For example?

25          A      That she was talking that day and making a 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     choice to go to HCA New Port Richey, when I know that 

 2     with a sodium of a hundred and eighty, she couldn't 

 3     possibly have had that conversation.

 4          Q      What else?

 5          A      When their --

 6                 MS. ANDERSON:  Excuse me.  That question is 

 7          meaningless.

 8                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, that objection is 

 9          meaningless.  What kind of objection is that?  

10                 MS. ANDERSON:  Well, that question has no 

11          factual predicate.  It is vague.  It is not 

12          answerable.

13                 MR. WEINBERG:  What we're doing is talking 

14          about what I perceive as some deep -- and not to 

15          offend you, Doctor Wood, but what I perceive, 

16          representing the Church of Scientology, as some very 

17          deep bias that I think plays -- has played a 

18          significant role in her decision whether or not to 

19          produce public documents.  And what you were 

20          describing to me is an animus that you apparently 

21          have with regard to the church.

22                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection.

23                 THE WITNESS:  No, no, no, no.

24                 MS. ANDERSON:  Objection. 

25                 MR. WEINBERG:  Well, what is it then?  You 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          just said that they have blocked every attempt by you 

 2          to do interviews.  What were you talking about?

 3                 MS. ANDERSON:  That question you can answer.

 4                 THE WITNESS:  Okay.  If this was Smith Nursing 

 5          Home in Largo and I had the death of a patient there 

 6          and I couldn't get any cooperation from anyone in 

 7          that nursing home, I couldn't get factual statements 

 8          that the body of the deceased told me were events 

 9          that had to have been happening, if I perceived that 

10          everyone who should be able to give us good 

11          information to allow us to put together a picture of 

12          the last few days of Mrs. X's life was either not 

13          telling us the truth, not talking to us, giving us 

14          information that was totally unfitting the 

15          circumstances, who fled the country rather than to 

16          speak to us --


18          Q      Fled the country?

19          A      Well, I believe that some of the people in 

20     this case are gone, are they not?

21          Q      Well, "fled the country" has a connotation 

22     to it, like they intentionally left to avoid getting 

23     interviewed by law enforcement officers.  

24          A      I -- 

25          Q      Is that what you're suggesting?

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          A      No.  I'm saying they are no longer in the 

 2     United States or they're no longer available for us to 

 3     interview, and so we are left with this mish-mash of 

 4     information.  And what we have been given is 

 5     information in total contradistinction to what Mrs. X's 

 6     body tells us --

 7          Q      Tells you?

 8          A      Tells us in my office -- then I have a 

 9     problem with Smith Nursing Home in Largo.

10          Q      All right.

11          A      I have absolutely no different problem in 

12     this circumstance with the Church of Scientology than I 

13     have with Smith Nursing Home.  All I want is the truth.  

14     Give me the people who cared for her, tell me what 

15     happened to her, tell me how she acted, and I'm 

16     finished.

17          Q      And if they say something that you don't 

18     think is -- that doesn't fit with the conclusions that 

19     you've drawn, then your conclusion is that they're 

20     lying to you?

21          A      Well, let me put it to you this way:  If I 

22     tell you that the woman sitting next to you --

23          Q      Laura.

24          A      -- has just suffered a gunshot wound that 

25     went through both halves of her brain and I ask you how 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1     she's doing, and you say, "Well, I heard a noise, but 

 2     following that she was sitting there for ten, fifteen, 

 3     twenty minutes, we had a perfectly rational 

 4     conversation, she seemed to be fine, she got up, she 

 5     walked out the door, she didn't have any trail of blood 

 6     behind her, went out to the street and walked down the 

 7     street," and yet the bullet is in that wall and there's 

 8     a pile of blood on the chair, pool of blood on that 

 9     chair, don't you think I'm going to wonder if you told 

10     me the truth or not?

11          Q      The same way that I will wonder, until our 

12     experts have an opportunity to look at your work, and 

13     it may be good, it may not be good, as to whether -- 

14     because I don't know you from a hole in the ground, 

15     Doctor Wood -- whether or not what you were doing -- 

16     what you have concluded is correct or incorrect.  And 

17     what we are also -- I am also, as a lawyer who 

18     represents a client, attempting to get at the truth, 

19     all right?

20          A      And who's your client?

21          Q      My client is the Church of Scientology.

22          A      Who hasn't been charged with anything.

23          Q      Well, you've just, in essence, accused 

24     them.

25          A      (Gesturing.)

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1          Q      Look, Doctor Wood, I'm not stupid.  By 

 2     sitting here and giving the statement you just made, 

 3     there is no other explanation, based on what you say, 

 4     for all of this to have happened, other than something 

 5     bad, because that's what you've just said.

 6          A      Something bad did happen, but I don't know 

 7     who's responsible.

 8          Q      Let's not be disingenuous.

 9          A      I am not being disingenuous.

10          Q      With all due respect, the suggestion that 

11     your public statements did not --

12          A      Excuse me, this just ceased.

13                 (The witness left the deposition room.)

14                 MR. WEINBERG:  I don't think you can do that.

15                 What time do you want to start tomorrow 

16          morning?  You want to do it at 10:00?

17                 MS. ANDERSON:  That's fine.  On the record I 

18          want to give you a copy of the autopsy report.

19                 MR. WEINBERG:  Can you just mark this as what 

20          she just gave me.  Mark this as the next exhibit.  It 

21          would be ten. 

22                 (Whereupon, Exhibit Number 10 so marked by the 

23          reporter.)

24                 (Whereupon, the deposition was adjouned at 

25          5:15 p.m.) 

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                      S T I P U L A T I O N
                        _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 2              It was stipulated and agreed by and between 

 3     respective counsel present and the witness that reading 

 4     and signing of the deposition by the witness is not 

 5     waived.





















                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


       ____    ____      ______________________________
              I have read the foregoing pages and,
17            except for any corrections or
              amendments I have indicated above, 
18            my testimony reads as given in the 
              foregoing transcript.
20            _________________________________
              (Signature of Deponent)

22            (Date)
23            _________________________________
              (WITNESS TO SIGNATURE)

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      


 1                     CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
 3     STATE OF FLORIDA       :
                I, Thea J. Nichols, Court Reporter and Notary 
 6     Public in and for the State of Florida at Large:
                DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I reported in shorthand 
 8     the foregoing proceedings at the time and place therein 
       designated; that my shorthand notes were thereafter 
 9     reduced to typewriting under my supervision; and the 
       foregoing pages, numbered 4 through ~, are a true and 
10     correct, verbatim record of the aforesaid proceedings.
                I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not a relative, 
12     employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, 
       nor relative or employee of such attorney or counsel, 
13     or financially interested in the foregoing action.
15     February, 1997, IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, COUNTY OF 
                                      THEA J. NICHOLS,
21                                    Court Reporter,
                                      Notary Public, State of
22                                    Florida at Large.

23                                    My Commission Expires:
                                      October 6, 1997

                    TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS 229-0014      

Day two Wood depostion - 12 February 1997 // pages 147-200





 5   ______________________________/
 6   FLAG SERVICE ORG., INC.,                    

 7           Plaintiff,              Case No. 97-688-CI-07

 8   vs.                             

     MEDICAL EXAMINER'S OFFICE,                                   
12   ______________________________/

                                DAY TWO
14                         (pages 147 - 200)

16             DEPOSITION OF:      JOAN E. WOOD, M.D.

17             TAKEN:              Pursuant to Notice by 
                                   Counsel for the 
18                                 Plaintiff

19             DATE:               February 11, 1997

20             TIME:               10:10 a.m. - 11:15 a.m.

21             LOCATION:           Rahdert, Anderson, McGowan
                                    & Steele, P.A.

22                                 535 Central Avenue
                                   St. Petersburg, Florida
               BEFORE:             Jill M. Giles-Saenz
24                                 Court Reporter
                                   Notary Public
25                                 State of Florida at Large.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                            APPEARANCES

     On Behalf of the Plaintiff, Church of Scientology Flag
 3   Service Org., Inc.:

 4                   MORRIS WEINBERG, JR., ESQUIRE
 5                   LAURA L. VAUGHN, ESQUIRE
                     ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER, TAYLOR & EVANS
 6                   401 East Jackson Street
                     Suite 2525
 7                   Tampa, Florida  33602

 8                   LEE FUGATE, ESQUIRE
                     108 Icot Center
 9                   13630 - 58th Street North
                     Clearwater, Florida 34720-3437

11   On Behalf of the Defendants, Joan E. Wood, M.D., Medical
     Examiner District Six Pinellas/Pasco County Medical
12   Examiner's Office:

                     RAHDERT, ANDERSON MCGOWAN
14                    & STEELE, P.A.
                     535 Central Avenue
15                   St. Petersburg, Florida  33701

     Also Present: 
                     ED PARKIN







            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                             I N D E X

 2                                                           Page

 3             Direct Examination by Mr. Weinberg             150
               Stipulations                                   197
 4             Certificate of Reporter                        198
               Read and Sign Page                             199
 5             Errata Sheet                                   200





















            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                       P R O C E E D I N G S

 2                  The deposition of JOAN E. WOOD, M.D., Day

 3        Two, taken pursuant to Notice by Counsel for Plaintiff,

 4        Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc., at 535

 5        Central Avenue, St. Petersburg, Florida, February 11,

 6        1997, beginning at 10:10 a.m., before Jill M. Giles-

 7        Saenz, Court Reporter, Notary Public, State of Florida

 8        at Large.

 9   Thereupon,

10                        JOAN E. WOOD, M.D.,

11   having previously been duly sworn to speak the truth, the

12   whole truth, and nothing but the truth, was examined and

13   testified as follows:

14                        DIRECT EXAMINATION


16        Q    This is a continuation of your deposition and

17   you're still under oath, Dr. Wood.  

18             Yesterday -- I'll show you Exhibit 9.  (Tendering

19   documents.)  It's the "St. Pete Times" and "The Tampa

20   Tribune" articles of January 1997.  And we had talked to you

21   about your conversation with Tom Tobin.  Now I want to go

22   over the article with you and ask you a few questions about

23   it.  

24             Specifically, if you go to the first paragraph of

25   the "St. Pete Times" article on January 23rd, Exhibit 9, it

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   says, "Laboratory tests indicate that a 36-year-old member

 2   of the Church of Scientology went without fluids for five to

 3   10 days and was unconscious for up to two days before her

 4   unexplained death in 1995.  Those conclusions by Joan Wood,"

 5   and then it goes on.  

 6             My question to you, Dr. Wood, is:  What public

 7   records did you base those conclusions on?

 8        A    The autopsy results.

 9        Q    The autopsy results?  Are you talking about the

10   vitreous fluid lab data?

11        A    Yes.

12        Q    And what public records exist in the file to

13   support that conclusion?

14        A    Laboratory tests.

15        Q    If you go further on in the article, the bottom of

16   the third column, it begins, "However, Wood said Wednesday

17   that McPherson's health declined slowly over several days

18   and was far from sudden.  She said it's `impossible' that a

19   staph infection led to McPherson's death."  

20             Now, with regard to the statement -- first of all,

21   did you make that statement that her health declined slowly

22   over several days and was far from sudden?

23        A    Yes.

24        Q    And did you make the statement that it's

25   impossible, quote, unquote, that a staph infection led to

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   McPherson's death?

 2        A    My recollection is I said that the laboratory

 3   tests do not -- do not indicate that she died of a staph

 4   infection.

 5        Q    So you don't remember using the word "impossible"

 6   even though it's put in quotes there?

 7        A    No, I don't.

 8        Q    What public records did you base the conclusion

 9   that her health declined slowly over several days and was

10   far from sudden?

11        A    Laboratory test results.

12        Q    Which results were those?

13        A    Same ones.

14        Q    The vitreous fluids?

15        A    Yes.

16        Q    Any others?

17        A    No.

18        Q    What public records exist to support that

19   conclusion that her health declined slowly over several days

20   and was far from sudden?

21        A    Autopsy results with laboratory studies.

22        Q    Any laboratory studies outside of vitreous fluids?

23        A    There are additional laboratory tests of urine

24   which are in support of that.  But the vitreous fluids allow

25   the conclusion and don't require the additional tests.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    The additional laboratory tests of urine, are

 2   those referred to specifically in the autopsy protocol that

 3   is Exhibit 1?

 4        A    No.  They are part of an active criminal

 5   investigation.

 6        Q    I couldn't hear what you just said.

 7        A    No.  They are part of an active criminal

 8   investigation.

 9        Q    When were those tests done?

10        A    Relatively recently.

11        Q    Well, this article is relatively recently.  When

12   specifically were the tests done?

13        A    I couldn't tell you without looking at the file.

14        Q    Would the file indicate whether they were done

15   before or after January 23rd, 1997?

16        A    Yes.

17        Q    And do you know as you sit here whether they were

18   done before or after January 23rd, 1997?

19        A    No.

20        Q    Is that the additional testing that you were

21   referring to yesterday?

22        A    I believe so, yes.

23        Q    I may have misunderstood what you said yesterday. 

24   Let me ask the question:  Was there additional testing of

25   the vitreous fluids recently?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    No.

 2        Q    If you go back to that article, the fourth column,

 3   the last -- the second -- well, the first full paragraph,

 4   the article says, "The lab results, quote, are consistent

 5   with a chronic process and inconsistent with an event such

 6   as a bloodstream infection that occurred within a period of

 7   hours, Wood said.  She wasn't fine one day and dead the

 8   next."  Did you say that?

 9        A    Yes.

10        Q    Now, what lab results specifically were you

11   referring to that indicated -- that are quote, consistent

12   with the chronic process and inconsistent with an event such

13   as a bloodstream infection?

14        A    They are not consistent of -- with their

15   diagnostic of a chronic process, and they are those

16   chemistries about which we already spoke.

17        Q    Which ones are those specifically?

18        A    Vitreous.

19        Q    Does this include the urine test as well?

20        A    If it had, I would have said urine and vitreous. 

21   My answer was vitreous.

22        Q    Now, it goes on to say in the next paragraph,

23   "Wood also concluded that McPherson had been bitten by ants

24   or roaches."  Did you say that?

25        A    Yes.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    And what public records did you base that

 2   statement on?

 3        A    The photographs, understanding of course that I

 4   saw her body while it was there for the autopsy.

 5        Q    Did you also base that statement on any of the

 6   specimens done from the areas of the skin?

 7        A    No.

 8        Q    Going back to the paragraph before, you told me

 9   what you based the statement on, that it was a chronic

10   process inconsistent with a bloodstream infection.  But I

11   also asked you:  What public records exist in your file that

12   would support that conclusion?

13        A    Laboratory results that are reflected in the

14   autopsy protocol.

15        Q    Which is the same that you relied on in making

16   that statement?

17        A    Yes.

18        Q    If you go to the next page, the second column,

19   fourth paragraph, it says, "But Wood said there are

20   documented cases in which" -- I think it means "there have

21   been" -- oh, "they have," that means roaches -- "have bitten

22   humans who are dead or unconscious."  Did you make that

23   statement?

24                  MS. ANDERSON:  Where are you?

25                  THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  Are you at the

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        bottom of the column that starts, "Liar.  Liar.  Liar. 

 2        Liar.  Liar.  Hateful liar.  That's what she is"?  Is

 3        that the column to which you're referring?


 5        Q    Yeah.  And what I said was the fourth paragraph. 

 6             And my question is:  Where it says, "Wood said

 7   there are documented cases in which they" -- and by "they"

 8   it means roaches -- "have bitten humans who are dead or

 9   unconscious," did you make that statement or a statement

10   like that?

11        A    Yes.

12        Q    And what did you base that statement on?

13        A    Conversation with Neil Haskell.

14        Q    This is the fellow that you referred to yesterday

15   from either Indiana or Illinois?

16        A    Illinois.

17        Q    Illinois.  Okay.  

18             Are there any notes with regard to that

19   conversation in the file?

20        A    No.

21        Q    Is there any memo with regard to that conversation

22   in that file?

23        A    No.

24        Q    Is there materials Dr. Haskell sent you or Mr.

25   Haskell sent you with regard to roaches or roach bites?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    It is Dr. Haskell.  No.

 2        Q    Is there any research in the file with regard to

 3   roaches or roach bites?

 4        A    No.

 5        Q    Now, it goes on in the next paragraph, "Wood said

 6   she reached her conclusions about McPherson after seeing

 7   test results on McPherson's eye fluids, which can accurately

 8   reflect a body's condition before death."  Did you make that

 9   statement?

10        A    Yes.

11        Q    Now, what records did you base that statement on?

12        A    Laboratory test results.

13        Q    Talking about the vitreous fluid results?

14        A    That's the fluid of the eye, yes.

15        Q    It goes on to say that, "The readings on one test

16   are, quote, so high she had to be unconscious for 24 to 48

17   hours, Wood said."  Did you make that statement?

18        A    Yes.

19        Q    Which tests are you referring to?  Here's the

20   autopsy see report.  (Tendering documents.)  Which test? 

21   There is one, two, three, four, five, six, seven vitreous

22   tests.

23                (Witness and Counsel conferring.)  

24             Dr. Wood?

25                  MS. ANDERSON:  Sandy, I think that you're

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        trying to get at her opinion.

 2                  MR. WEINBERG:  Look, she went onto a local

 3        newspaper, the one you represent, and told the reporter

 4        that she based her conclusions that the woman was dead

 5        for -- or comatose for 24 to 48 hours based on the

 6        readings of a particular test, which I assume she

 7        identified to him.

 8                  THE WITNESS:  I did not identify it to him.


10        Q    Well, which test are you talking about?  You

11   talked about it publicly.

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  How does that relate to a --

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- it's a public record.  What

14        are you talking about?  The test is right -- I assume

15        that the test is referred to somewhere in here, and we

16        want the test.

17                  MS. ANDERSON:  You've got the test results.

18                  MR. WEINBERG:  No, we don't.  No.  What we

19        have is what your -- is what Dr. Wood's office has put

20        on this sheet.  But I don't have the test.  I don't

21        have the lab results.  I don't have any of that stuff.

22                  What I've got is a sheet of paper that has

23        something that your office has typed on it, but I don't

24        have the test protocol that has come back from the lab. 

25        I don't have that.  What I've got is something that --

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- what you have are lab

 2        values right there on the autopsy.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  I don't have what came back

 4        from the lab.

 5                  THE WITNESS:  What comes back from the lab --

 6                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- is that --

 7                  THE WITNESS:  -- is numbers.


 9        Q    Well, and I would like to see what comes back from

10   the lab, Dr. Wood, with all due respect to you and your

11   office.  I have a right to see that.  

12             And I'm asking you what the test was.  I mean,

13   which one is it?  Is it the vitreous urea nitrogen?  Is that

14   the one you're talking about?

15                  MS. ANDERSON:  I'm going to object.  This is

16        way beyond the scope of anything that could be remotely

17        relevant.

18                  MR. WEINBERG:  This is probably the most

19        relevant thing that we have talked about throughout the

20        deposition.  She goes in the newspaper and talks about

21        her tests and talks about her conclusions, and now she

22        wants to hide behind some law enforcement exemption.

23                  I have a right to talk to her about what      

24        she -- she said.  She's the one that made the

25        statement, "The public had a right to know," and that's

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        why she did these articles.

 2                  And so she talks about a test, and now you're

 3        telling me that the test is exempt and you're

 4        instructing her not to answer?  Based on what?

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  I'm not instructing her not to

 6        answer.  What I'm telling you is --

 7                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- oh, well, fine.  State your

 8        objection, and let's go on.

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  My objection is that what you

10        are attempting to do is not seek information related to

11        records as your lawsuit claims.  You're wanting to get

12        inside her head on opinions.

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  And I'm telling you that

14        you're wrong.  But you've stated your objection.


16        Q    Now, please answer my question.  What test are you

17   referring to?  What's the basis of that statement?  Which

18   test?

19                (Witness conferring with Counsel.)

20        A    I'm not answering the question.

21        Q    Based on what?  Your attorney has not instructed

22   you not to answer.  Why are you not answering it?

23        A    I'm not answering because you have the laboratory

24   test results in front of you.  You're attempting to get me

25   to explain to you by subverting the jus -- the discovery

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   process.

 2        Q    And what's wrong -- and what's going to happen if

 3   you tell us what test you were discussing with the "St. Pete

 4   Times" to be published to hundreds of thousands of people in

 5   the Tampa Bay area?  What is going to happen if you tell us

 6   now what test you were referring to?

 7        A    I don't know.

 8        Q    So what's your problem with that?

 9        A    My problem is that you're attempting to get my

10   entire opinion regarding each and every fact that is a

11   physical finding of Lisa McPherson, and this has nothing to

12   do with a public records request.

13        Q    Well, I mean, first of all, you already said that

14   you'd stated all your conclusions as to this, what you

15   talked about in the paper.  

16             But secondly, all I want to do is find out what

17   you were talking to the press about, what document -- what

18   specific document you were relying on when you told the

19   reporter that a particular test, singular, a particular test

20   was so high that she had to be unconscious for 24 to 48

21   hours.  Which particular test?  I have a right.  That's a

22   document.  What is it?

23        A    I'm not sure that that's a correct statement from

24   the attorney.  And the answer is the vitreous fluid test.

25        Q    From the attorney?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    Oh, I'm sorry.  From the reporter.  And the answer

 2   is the vitreous fluid results.

 3        Q    That's the document then, the vitreous fluid

 4   results?

 5        A    Yes.

 6        Q    Okay.  And then it goes on, "And, in terms of eye

 7   fluid results, it is the, quote, worst case of dehydration

 8   I've ever seen, said Wood, who has been Pinellas-Pasco

 9   medical examiner for nearly 15 years."  Did you say that?

10        A    Yes.

11        Q    And I take it that the public records in your file

12   that support that statement is the vitreous fluid results?

13        A    Yes.

14        Q    Now, in the last column there is a -- at the top

15   of the page it says, "Abelson cited language in the report

16   stating McPherson was of average nutritional status.  But

17   Wood said that only means she wasn't abnormally thin."  Is

18   that what you said?

19        A    Yes.

20        Q    And were you referring to the description in the

21   protocol where it talks about average nutritional status? 

22   Is that what you were referring to?

23        A    Yes.

24        Q    And when you said that that means she wasn't

25   abnormally thin, what did you mean by that?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    She wasn't abnormally thin.

 2        Q    You mean she -- there wasn't a malnutrition case;

 3   is that what you're talking about?

 4        A    She was not anorexic.  She was not cachectic.  She

 5   was not abnormally thin.

 6        Q    Okay.  It goes on to say that, "Abelson cited a

 7   passage stating there were 15 cubic centimeters of urine in

 8   her bladder.  But Wood said that's only three teaspoons and

 9   that a person in the throes of dehydration can still produce

10   urine."  Did you say that or words to that effect?

11        A    Not that part about Mr. Abelson.  Yes, the 

12   "Wood" -- "but Wood said."  Yes.

13        Q    What public records did you base that statement

14   on?

15        A    The autopsy protocol.

16        Q    Now, the three teaspoons of urine, is that the

17   urine that you referred to a few minutes ago that was

18   tested?

19        A    Yes.

20        Q    Is there any left for us to test?

21        A    No.

22        Q    And was that testing done sometime after you did

23   the "Inside Edition" story?

24        A    No, not -- not the bulk of the testing.  The 

25   bulk of the testing had already been performed in our drug

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   chem -- in our drug -- our toxicology laboratory.  There was

 2   approximately one-fifth of a teaspoon remaining, and it was

 3   that one-fifth of a teaspoon which I had sent for additional

 4   tests that I felt were relevant.

 5        Q    And that one-fifth of a teaspoon additional test

 6   was done after the "Inside Edition" story?

 7        A    I believe it was in the works at that time, but

 8   I'm not certain of that.

 9        Q    Does your file indicate when that one-fifth of a

10   teaspoon was sent for testing?

11        A    It would, yes.

12        Q    What in the file would indicate that?

13        A    The tracking of the sending out of the specimen

14   from our office.

15        Q    Does the autopsy protocol talk about urine

16   testing?

17        A    Testing?  Yes.

18        Q    Well, whatever -- you said that some testing 

19   had been done by your lab prior to you sending the last 

20   one-fifth of a teaspoon.  So that's the drug screen testing? 

21   (Indicating.)

22        A    Yes.

23        Q    Did you consult with the state attorney's office

24   to advise them that the retesting or additional testing that

25   you were doing would exhaust the sample?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    No.

 2        Q    Was that retesting done after our Public Records

 3   Act request was made on January 9th, 1997?

 4        A    I believe it may have been done after your

 5   request, yes.

 6        Q    Well, let me refer you to your letter to me which

 7   is Exhibit 5 in response to my request.  And you said as to

 8   our request to preserve specimens for testing, that until

 9   that time -- that is, until the time your file is open --

10   that, quote, we will preserve any and all materials related

11   to the case.  

12             Now, can you explain why you exhausted a urine

13   sample after sending a letter to us on January 10th

14   following our request that you preserve all samples for our

15   testing purposes?

16        A    First of all, your letter was a request. 

17             Second of all, in speaking with a medical

18   colleague, he suggested one additional test of great

19   importance, and I made the decision to go forth testing that

20   one-fifth teaspoon of urine because the possibility existed

21   that the individuals caring for her might have been

22   vindicated had the test results come back different from the

23   way they did.

24        Q    Vindicated how?

25        A    By showing a different condition.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    By showing renal failure or no renal failure?  I

 2   mean, what can you -- I mean, what are you talking about?

 3                  MS. ANDERSON:  No.  We're not going to do

 4        this.  You're now into --

 5                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- no, no.  Pat, what has

 6        happened here is that Dr. Wood, after she told us that

 7        she was going to preserve the samples, has exhausted

 8        completely the urine sample.

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  What right do you have to test

10        these specimens any more than I do or the Cult

11        Awareness Network, for example?

12                  MR. WEINBERG:  All I can say, Pat, is --

13                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- you're a member of the

14        public.

15                  MR. WEINBERG:  First of all --

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- there is nothing that

17        distinguishes the Church of Scientology in regard to

18        these specimens, Sandy.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  No.  Except that Dr. Wood sent

20        me a letter, which is Exhibit 5, saying as a public

21        official we will preserve any and all materials related

22        to the case after we made a request that they be

23        preserved so --

24                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- and she did one more test

25        and used up this speck of urine.  Big deal.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MR. WEINBERG:  That's -- big deal?

 2                  MS. ANDERSON:  Yeah, big deal.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  She said it was something that

 4        might vindicate my client.  It sounds like it was a

 5        pretty big deal.  Now, how do I know -- how do I know

 6        that she did the test right?

 7                  MS. ANDERSON:  Your client is not even a

 8        suspect.

 9                  MR. WEINBERG:  And that is one of the most

10        disingenuous things I've ever heard.

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  Watch what you say.

12                  MR. WEINBERG:  It is.

13                  MS. ANDERSON:  Watch your mouth.

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  No, no.  Watch what you say,

15        Pat, because the fact of the matter is we've been told

16        by any number of law enforcement people that that is

17        the case.

18                  MS. ANDERSON:  Let's suppose --

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- and you know that.

20                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- let's suppose --

21                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- that's how your client

22        newspaper --

23                  THE REPORTER:  -- I can't take both of you at

24        the same time --

25                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- your client newspaper, the

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        "St. Pete Times" has reported this.

 2                  But let's go back to the question.  And I

 3        know Dr. Wood -- and I don't want to have a debate with

 4        you, Pat.  Let's go back to the question.

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  We're going to terminate this

 6        deposition if you don't just get off this.

 7                  MR. WEINBERG:  No, we're not going to

 8        terminate this deposition.  You're the one that started

 9        it by talking about cults.  Where do you come off

10        talking about that?

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  What I am going to do --

12                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- where do you come off

13        filing a paper talking about my client as a so-called,

14        quote, church, unquote?  Where do you come off doing

15        that?  That's irresponsible, and it's not professional

16        and you know it.  If I called your religion --

17                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- I'm going to terminate this

18        deposition, Sandy, if you don't stop it.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  I'm going to get back to the

20        questions.


22        Q    Now, Dr. Wood, if you go to the Tribune 

23   article -- turn to the Tribune article there, please.

24        A    (Complying.)

25        Q    Now, did you talk to a Tribune reporter over the

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   phone?

 2        A    Yes.

 3        Q    Which reporter was it?

 4        A    Cheryl Waldrip.

 5        Q    And did she tell you what she wanted to talk to

 6   you about?

 7        A    Yes.

 8        Q    What did she say?

 9        A    I don't recall exactly.

10        Q    Well, how long was the interview?

11        A    I don't recall.

12        Q    Approximately.

13        A    I don't recall.

14        Q    Well, was it more than a minute?

15        A    Yes.

16        Q    And did you put any restrictions on the interview?

17        A    I didn't have any restrictions going in.  I'm

18   perfectly capable of saying I will or won't answer any given

19   question.

20        Q    Was it before or after you met with Tom Tobin in

21   your office?

22        A    If memory serves me, it was before.

23        Q    Was anybody on the phone with you?

24        A    No.

25        Q    Did you make any notes of the interview?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    No.

 2        Q    Was a tape made of the interview?

 3        A    Not by me.

 4        Q    Did you refuse to answer any questions in the

 5   interview?

 6        A    Not that I can recall.

 7        Q    Did you -- were you referring to any records

 8   during the interview?

 9        A    No.

10        Q    Did the reporter refer to any records during the

11   interview?

12        A    Not that I recall.

13        Q    Did you get permission to do the interview with

14   anyone from law enforcement?

15        A    No.

16        Q    Did anyone from law enforcement tell you not to do

17   the interview?

18        A    No.

19        Q    Did you discuss the interview before it happened

20   with anyone from law enforcement?

21        A    No.

22        Q    Did you discuss the interview after it happened

23   with anyone from law enforcement?

24        A    Yes.

25        Q    Who?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    I believe Lee Strope, Wayne Andrews and Doug Crow.

 2        Q    What did the police -- was Strope and Andrews

 3   together or separate when you talked to them?

 4                  MS. ANDERSON:  This is completely             

 5        irrelevant, what conversation she had with law

 6        enforcement about this newspaper interview.  Let's      

 7        get onto some records-related question.

 8                  MR. WEINBERG:  It is a records-related

 9        question.

10                  MS. ANDERSON:  No, it isn't.

11                  MR. WEINBERG:  Oh, sure it is.

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  No.  You're just trying to get

13        inside the controversy of this criminal investigation.

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  No, I'm not, Pat.

15                  MS. ANDERSON:  Yeah, you are.

16                  MR. WEINBERG:  What I'm trying to find out    

17        is why your client talked to the press about her

18        conclusions, and whether or not law enforcement

19        indicated in any way that there was any problem with

20        that because that's what the standard is that we're

21        operating under.

22                  MS. ANDERSON:  And what difference does that

23        make?

24                  MR. WEINBERG:  Maybe you ought to read the

25        cases.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  Maybe I wrote the cases. 

 2        Maybe I wrote a lot of the cases.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, and then maybe you

 4        shouldn't be taking the position that you're taking.

 5                  But unless you can demonstrate that in some

 6        way these documents are interfering with a criminal

 7        investigation, they've got to be released, particularly

 8        after she's talked about it publicly and talked to the

 9        police about her talking about it publicly.  And you

10        ought to know that.

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  Move on.

12                  MR. WEINBERG:  And you ought to know that --

13                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- move on --

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- as the "St. Pete Times"

15        lawyer.

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  Move on.  Let's go.

17                  MR. WEINBERG:  Excuse me?

18                  MS. ANDERSON:  Let's get onto something else.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, you had an objection.

20                  MS. ANDERSON:  Yes.

21                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, my question is on the

22        table.


24        Q    Did you -- what did you talk to Agent Strope about

25   concerning the article?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    I don't recall a specific conversation.

 2        Q    Did he tell you that you shouldn't have done it? 

 3   Did he tell you that?

 4                  MS. ANDERSON:  Objection.

 5                  MR. WEINBERG:  What's your objection to that?

 6                  MS. ANDERSON:  My objection is that this is a

 7        fishing expedition that is not designed or calculated

 8        to lead to admissible evidence.

 9                  MR. WEINBERG:  It's not a fishing expedition. 

10        Are you instructing her not to answer or not?

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  No, I'm not instructing her

12        not to answer.


14        Q    Then go ahead, Dr. Wood.

15        A    I don't recall the conversation.

16        Q    Okay.  If you go to "The Tampa Tribune" (sic)

17   article, paragraphs one and two, the -- it says, "Laboratory

18   tests indicate that a 36-year-old member of the Church of

19   Scientology went without fluids for five to 10 days and was

20   unconscious for up to two days before her unexplained death

21   in 1995.  Those conclusions by Joan Wood, the medical

22   examiner," and it says, "are at odds."  I take it that you

23   made those statements or statements like that; is that

24   right?

25        A    Yes.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    And that those statements were based on the

 2   autopsy protocol and the lab results that we've been talking

 3   about; is that right?

 4        A    Yes.

 5        Q    Further on in the article -- well, actually in the

 6   article it says, "Joan Wood said it's possible McPherson,

 7   who died in December '95, had nothing to drink throughout

 8   her 17-day stay at the Fort Harrison Hotel."  Again, you

 9   made that statement, and those statement -- and that

10   statement was based on the autopsy protocol and the lab

11   results from the vitreous fluids; is that right?

12        A    Yes.

13        Q    Then it goes on to say in "The Tampa Tribune"

14   article, "Wood said Wednesday the insect bites found on

15   McPherson's body after her death were most likely from

16   cockroaches."  In addition, said she was comatose for 24 to

17   48 hours of her life.  Again, you made those statements; is

18   that right?

19        A    Yes.

20        Q    And again, they were based on the autopsy

21   protocol, the vitreous fluids, and as to the cockroach

22   bites, the photographs; is that right?

23        A    Yes.

24        Q    Then on the second page, third column, it says,

25   "Wood said the infection, quote, absolutely did not, end

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   quote, cause the bruising and was not responsible for

 2   McPherson's death."  Now, what -- did you make that

 3   statement?

 4        A    Yes.

 5        Q    And did you base that statement, as to "absolutely

 6   did not cause the bruising and was not responsible for her

 7   death," on the autopsy protocol, the photographs and the

 8   slides of the skin?

 9        A    The photographs of the body; the slides of the

10   skin; the overall appearance of the body; the -- my medical

11   training and experience; my knowledge of infectious disease;

12   my knowledge of the types of bleeding caused by septic

13   emboli; my knowledge of Waterhouse-Friderichsen syndrome; my

14   knowledge as to the cause, in fact, of her death; all of

15   those.

16        Q    Did it also -- was it also based on slides of the

17   various organs?

18        A    Yes, but to a lesser degree.

19        Q    And then finally, in the last sentence of the

20   article, it says that you said that McPherson could not have

21   carried on a conversation with anyone that day.  Did you

22   make that statement or something like it?

23        A    Yes.

24        Q    And what was -- what public record was that based

25   on?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    Laboratory test results.

 2        Q    Okay.  Now, Dr. Wood, your office made public the

 3   autopsy report; correct?

 4        A    Yes.

 5        Q    In your interviews on "Inside Edition," with "The

 6   Tampa Tribune" and the "St. Pete Times," you discussed in

 7   some detail your conclusions as medical examiner regarding

 8   the cause of Lisa McPherson's death; correct?

 9        A    I wouldn't say "in some detail," but yes.

10        Q    Well, do you have any other opinion as to the --

11   strike that.  

12             Do you have any other proximate reason for the

13   cause of death other than what has been set forth in the

14   report of autopsy and discussed by you with the media?

15        A    Neither the proximate or the immediate.

16        Q    Excuse me?

17        A    Neither the proximate or the immediate.

18        Q    Is there anything else in your file to indicate a

19   different cause of death other than what is indicated here;

20   that is, thromboembolus-left main pulmonary artery due to

21   thrombosis of left popliteal vein due to bed rest and severe

22   dehydration?

23        A    No.

24        Q    You have -- am I correct that you've already

25   stated publicly that the staph infection pointed out to you

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   by Dr. Minkoff did not contribute to or cause the death?

 2        A    That's correct.

 3        Q    You have commented publicly on your interpretation

 4   of autopsy photos as well as your own observations regarding

 5   the appearance of Lisa McPherson including the cockroach

 6   bites; is that right?

 7        A    Could you repeat that question, please?

 8                  THE REPORTER:  Sure.

 9      (The aforementioned question was read by the reporter.)

10                  THE WITNESS:  Yes.


12        Q    You have discussed publicly lab results from the

13   autopsy including the vitreous fluid results; correct?

14        A    Perhaps the BUN and creatinine.  No others.

15        Q    Those were part of the vitreous fluid results?

16        A    Yes.

17        Q    Given what you have discussed publicly, given what

18   you have disclosed publicly by releasing the autopsy report,

19   can you tell us what is left in your file that you have not

20   commented on?

21        A    The hospital record --

22                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- wait just a moment.  To the

23        extent you can answer that question without revealing

24        the existence of investigative material, do so.

25                  THE WITNESS:  Okay.  Various tracking records

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        within the office; photographs; police interviews;

 2        investigative notes; records of telephone calls;

 3        microscopic slides; microscopic tissue blocks; tissue

 4        cups; remaining body fluids.


 6        Q    Excuse me.  What did you say?

 7        A    Tissue cups; remaining body fluids; requests for

 8   copies of the autopsy; if I didn't say it already, hospital

 9   records; EMS run sheets; tracking sheets from within the

10   laboratory with regard to toxicology; tracking sheets within

11   the laboratory with regard to the work-up of the body for

12   autopsy; release forms for the funeral home; tracking

13   records indicating the transmission of the body to us from

14   another facility.  That's everything I can think of at the

15   moment.  It may not be everything.

16        Q    Now, the hospital records were something that you

17   discussed with the media?

18                  MS. ANDERSON:  Is that a question?


20        Q    Correct?

21        A    I discussed hospital records with the media when

22   they brought copies provided to them by the family.

23        Q    And the copies they had was what you had; wasn't

24   it?

25        A    I didn't compare them.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    Did you look at what Mr. Meagher from "Inside

 2   Edition" had?

 3        A    Yes.

 4        Q    And did he have -- did it appear that he had a set

 5   from New Port Richey and a set from Morton Plant Hospital?

 6        A    That's what it appeared to be, yes.

 7        Q    Now, can you -- as to the -- as to microscopic

 8   slides, microscopic tissue blocks, tissue cups, remaining

 9   body fluids, paraffin blocks, those types of items, evidence

10   of organs, can you tell us how the disclosure of those types

11   of items to us under circumstances -- to our experts under

12   circumstances controlled by you, that are satisfactory with

13   you and the state attorney and the Clearwater Police

14   Department, could in any way impede or interfere with an

15   ongoing investigation?

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  That requires a legal

17        conclusion on her part, and she is not competent to

18        make that judgment.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, but your papers say that

20        she's the one that did make the judgment, Pat, as to

21        there being a valid law enforcement exemption and --

22                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- your client has no

23        standing.  These are not even records, these specimens

24        aren't.  So forget it.

25                  MR. WEINBERG:  We have no standing?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  Right.

 2                  MR. WEINBERG:  I have as much standing as you

 3        do and any other person walking out on the street.

 4                  MS. ANDERSON:  Yes, exactly, which is no

 5        standing.  Until there's a defendant --

 6                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- so is that your position as

 7        a lawyer, that a member of the public has no standing

 8        to make a request for a public record?

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  These are not records.

10                  MR. WEINBERG:  Oh, yes, they are.  Mr. -- Dr.

11        Wood has already acknowledged that they're records.

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  They're not records.  The

13        specimen are not records.

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  Yes, they are, Pat.

15                  MS. ANDERSON:  You have standing to request

16        the records, yes.

17                  MR. WEINBERG:  They are records, and she's

18        already acknowledged that they're records.  She's

19        already acknowledged that at the end of the process

20        that we can have access to everything in her file,

21        including these specimens.  She's already said that in

22        the record.

23                  MS. ANDERSON:  How does that translate into

24        acknowledging that they're records?  They're not

25        records.  They can't be copied.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MR. WEINBERG:  That's your position then?

 2                  MS. ANDERSON: Yeah, that's my position.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  Maybe you ought to read some

 4        of the cases because they are records.

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  You know, you better stop

 6        being personally insulting.

 7                  MR. WEINBERG:  I'm not -- you're the one

 8        being personally insulting.  I'm not being -- first of

 9        all, you're the one that's pointing a finger at me.

10                  MS. ANDERSON:  I don't know you from Adam. 

11        But, you know, I had heard that you were a good lawyer. 

12        I did not expect insults during this deposition.

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, I expected -- to tell

14        you the truth about it, I expected when I walked in

15        yesterday to be greeted in a nice manner by folks, and

16        you didn't even say hello to me and neither did George

17        and neither did Dr. Wood.

18                  MS. ANDERSON:  Now that is a lie.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  It is not a lie, Pat, 'cause

20        you didn't.

21                  MS. ANDERSON:  As I recall, I shook your

22        hand, Sandy.

23                  MR. WEINBERG:  You didn't -- you wouldn't

24        even look at me, and I don't know why.

25                  Look, you know, I represent somebody and it's

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        my job, you know.  And you may not like the clients

 2        that I represent, but it shouldn't be personal between

 3        me and you.

 4                  MS. ANDERSON:  Exactly.  And so --

 5                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- that's exactly right.

 6                  MS. ANDERSON:  And so why are you being

 7        personally insulting?  Why are you doing that?

 8                  MR. WEINBERG:  But that's what you're doing. 

 9        You know, why did you call my client a "so-called

10        `church'" in a pleading?

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  Is this America?  Are we

12        entitled to have our own opinions?

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  Okay.  Can I get back to the

14        question?

15                  Could you read my question back?  Because it

16        was a proper question.  It is what this case is about. 

17        And Dr. Wood, I believe, should be able to answer that. 

18        It has nothing to do with a legal conclusion.  Either

19        it's her belief or it's not her belief.

20                  Could you read that question back for her?

21                  THE REPORTER:  Yeah.

22      (The aforementioned question was read by the reporter.)

23                  THE WITNESS:  I am not an attorney.  I do not

24        have the ability to make that judgment.

25                  And second of all, I would not turn over

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        those types of scientific evidence to anyone in the

 2        absence of a lawsuit, meaning that someone has been

 3        charged with a crime or there is some civil litigation

 4        ongoing.


 6        Q    Do you consider a Public Records Act lawsuit a

 7   lawsuit?

 8        A    No.  I said someone charged or a civil litigation

 9   related to a death ongoing.

10        Q    And where in the Public Records Act does it say

11   that?  Does it draw that distinction between -- as you

12   understand it, since you are the records custodian, and I

13   believe you said earlier that you were the one that made the

14   decision or your office did as to what to release and what

15   not to release, can you tell me where it is in the Public

16   Records Act that draws that distinction?

17        A    Well, first of all, there are two things.  There's

18   number one, active criminal investigation; and number two,

19   my responsibility under the law with regard to being the

20   custodian of records.

21        Q    All right.  But the active criminal investigation

22   did not prevent you from releasing the autopsy report or

23   talking to the press about your conclusions; is that right?

24        A    You are misstating.  I did not realize that there

25   was an active criminal investigation at the time I released

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   it.  Had I realized that, I would not have allowed the

 2   copies to be released from my office.  

 3             And my decision to speak with the media regarding

 4   the findings of the -- regarding the death in a limited

 5   fashion does not change the public records law in the state

 6   of Florida.

 7        Q    In your opinion?

 8        A    In the opinion of multiple attorneys with whom

 9   I've spoken.

10        Q    Now, at the time that you made the public

11   statements on "Inside Edition," "Tampa Tribune" and the "St.

12   Pete Times," did you know that there was an active criminal

13   investigation?

14        A    Yes.

15        Q    Now, who in your office, if anyone, examined the

16   file following our Public Records Act request to determine

17   whether anything in the file should be turned over?

18        A    I did.

19        Q    What did you -- what parts of the file did you

20   examine?

21        A    The file.

22        Q    Did you make any attempt to excise out non-exempt

23   material from the file?

24        A    There was nothing in that file that I viewed, not

25   being an attorney, as non-exempt.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    And of course, at that time, that included the

 2   autopsy report as well; is that right?

 3        A    No.  As I told you, that -- well, at that moment

 4   it did, yes, because I was laboring under a

 5   misunderstanding.

 6                  MS. ANDERSON:  Sandy, we're going to have to

 7        check with the state attorney's office about her

 8        scheduling.

 9                  MR. WEINBERG:  I've probably got about ten

10        minutes and I'm done.

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  Okay.


13        Q    Now, in this law -- in the response to the lawsuit

14   that was filed by you, you attached interrogatory questions

15   to the Church of Scientology asking to identify the name and

16   last known whereabouts of all persons known by you to have

17   provided care to Lisa McPherson the last seventeen days;

18   identify the last known whereabouts, type of medical degree

19   or training and any state of licensure for all health care

20   professionals known by you to have provided care for Lisa

21   McPherson; and then indicate by name and last known

22   whereabouts the individuals who were with Lisa McPherson

23   during the last forty-eight hours of her life.  

24             Why did you serve those interrogatories on the

25   Church of Scientology?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  Why?

 2                  MR. WEINBERG:  Why?  Yeah, why.

 3                  MS. ANDERSON:  Answer that if you can.

 4                  THE WITNESS:  Because I need that information

 5        to go forward to make a determination in this case.


 7        Q    Now, do you think -- have you ever served

 8   interrogatories on a member of the public that made a Public

 9   Records Act request?

10        A    I never had anyone make a Public Records Act

11   request in which there was a lawsuit.

12        Q    You mean you've always turned over the records

13   when they made a request?

14        A    It's always been resolved in some fashion other

15   than a lawsuit.

16        Q    Well, in this case, do you acknowledge that I

17   wrote two letters to your office seeking the records and

18   articulating in some detail what I wanted and the

19   circumstances under which I wanted them?

20        A    Yes.

21        Q    Okay.  And is there any particular reason why

22   after both of those letters somebody didn't just call me up

23   and say, "Well, at a minimum I'm going to give you the

24   autopsy report, which I've already been talking to the press

25   about"?  Is there any particular reason about that?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        A    No.  As I told you, to be included with the 

 2   letter -- which was shortstopped by your filing of the

 3   lawsuit -- was going to be a copy of the autopsy report.

 4        Q    Now, in my second letter I told you exactly when I

 5   was going to file the lawsuit; didn't I?

 6        A    You put me under an arbitrary time frame of your

 7   making, yes.

 8        Q    Now, can you explain what bearing those questions

 9   have on whether or not you have an obligation to turn over

10   public records in a public records request?

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  Well, now, you're going to be

12        getting into attorney/client work product.  And at

13        that, I have to object to and instruct her not to

14        answer that.  The answer to that question is going to

15        reveal conversations I have had with her.

16                  MR. WEINBERG:  Okay.  Well, maybe you can

17        tell me what the relevance of this is and why this

18        isn't harassment.  I mean, when --

19                  MS. ANDERSON: -- harassment?

20                  MR. WEINBERG:  Yeah, harassment.  Has the

21        "St. Pete Times" ever been served with interrogatories

22        when they made a Public Records Act request?

23                  MS. ANDERSON:  Of course.  Of course.

24                  MR. WEINBERG:  And what's the relevance       

25        of interrogatories as to whether or not a public

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        official -- what difference does it make?  I could      

 2        be Joe, the garbageman, and make the same request. 

 3        What difference does it make whether -- in anything

 4        about the person making a Public Records Act request?

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  Well, for example, let's

 6        suppose that you assert waiver as a legal theory in

 7        your papers.

 8                  MR. WEINBERG:  Uh-huh.

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  Let's suppose that some of     

10        the individuals whose name appears -- who will appear

11        in answer to those interrogatories, we'll have

12        information of theirs on that waiver issue.

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  How?  It's her obligation. 

14        It's not my obligation.  It's her records.  They're not

15        my records.  I can't waive her exemption.

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  No.  You're missing my point.

17                  MR. WEINBERG:  I've missed your point         

18        because you're totally irrelevant.  You're completely

19        irrelevant.

20                  And really, you know, any -- if it gets to

21        the point where a citizen is bombarded by a public

22        official with discovery in order to make a Public

23        Records Act request, you know, that flies in the face

24        of what the Public Records Act is all about.

25                  MS. ANDERSON:  Do you think a Public Records

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Act plaintiff is immune from discovery?  Is that your

 2        position?

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  I think a public -- yeah, I

 4        do.  Discovery like this, absolutely.  It's totally

 5        irrelevant, completely irrelevant.

 6                  MS. ANDERSON:  Interesting theory.

 7                  MR. WEINBERG:  It's -- if you can explain to

 8        me how it's relevant --

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- listen, we need to call the

10        state's attorney because we do have this trial cooking.

11                  MR. WEINBERG:  Do you think that they         

12        would -- are they going to call here?

13                  MS. ANDERSON:  I don't know how you got it

14        working.

15                  THE WITNESS:  They'll be calling upstairs.

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  She's on as the third witness.

17                  MR. WEINBERG:  Okay. 


19        Q    Now, as to --

20                  MS. ANDERSON:  How you doing?

21                  THE WITNESS:  Fine.  Thanks.


23        Q    Have you made any disparaging remarks to anyone

24   other than your lawyer regarding Scientology, the Church of

25   Scientology or Scientologists?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  That is completely irrelevant

 2        and not calculated to lead to discovery of evidence.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  And how is that, Pat?  If

 4        she's biased and her bias is impacting on her -- what

 5        you've described in here as her discretionary response

 6        to public records, it is one of the most relevant

 7        things that there is.

 8                  I don't want to get in a big dispute about

 9        it.  But I have the right to ask the questions,

10        particularly in light of your answer that calls it a    

11        "so-called `church.'"

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  I do not think that's

13        relevant.  I don't think it's going to lead to any --

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- are you instructing her not

15        to answer?

16                  MS. ANDERSON:  No, I'm not telling her not to

17        answer.


19        Q    Could you answer that question, please?

20        A    I don't recall any disparaging comments.  I'm

21   conducting a scientific investigation here.  You don't seem

22   to understand that.  And it doesn't make any difference to

23   me whether the individuals involved are agnostics, atheists,

24   Scientologists or Catholics.

25        Q    Have you made any negative statements to any of

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   your medical examiner colleagues regarding Scientology,

 2   Scientologists or the Church of Scientology?

 3        A    I believe I explained to one associate that they

 4   had been -- that the Church of Scientology had been

 5   extremely difficult to work with over the years that I had

 6   been here because we simply could get no information from

 7   them when we needed information desperately in an attempt to

 8   determine what happened to someone and why it happened.

 9        Q    Have there been other cases that you've done

10   autopsy on involving the Church of Scientology?

11        A    Oh, yes.

12        Q    And how many other cases?

13        A    Well, four cases come to mind just off the top of

14   my head.

15        Q    Have you expressed negative opinions about the

16   church, the Church of Scientology or Scientologists to other

17   medical examiners around the state?

18        A    Not that I recall.

19        Q    Have you spoken with Sergeant Andrews and Agent

20   Strope about their views of the Church of Scientology and

21   Scientologists?

22        A    In a general fashion, yes.

23        Q    Did Agent Strope tell you that he believed that

24   the Church of Scientology was not a legitimate religion or

25   words to that effect?

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                  MS. ANDERSON:  Objection, fishing expedition,

 2        has no relevance.

 3                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, he told me that.  He

 4        told me about that, and Dr. Wood has said that he

 5        talked to her.


 7        Q    So what I'm asking you, Dr. Wood, is whether he

 8   told you in words or effect something to the effect that he

 9   believed that the Church of Scientology was not a legitimate

10   religion.

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  And I'm objecting because it

12        has no bearing in this case.

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  You've made your objection. 

14        And she -- I note the objection and she -- you know,

15        the question stands.

16                  THE WITNESS:  All he said to me that I can

17        recall was that he objected to the likening of an

18        auditor-scientologist relationship as being that like a

19        priest-penitent.


21        Q    In the Catholic church?

22        A    In the Catholic church.

23        Q    And did you in that conversation express any

24   similar view?

25        A    No, not that I recall.

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        Q    Where did this particular conversation -- is this

 2   more than one conversation or just one conversation?

 3                  MS. ANDERSON:  This is irrelevant and not

 4        calculated to lead to discoverable evidence.

 5                  MR. WEINBERG:  With all due respect, bias is

 6        one of the most relevant issues in any lawsuit.

 7                  MS. ANDERSON:  What this police officer

 8        thinks is not relevant in this lawsuit.

 9                  MR. WEINBERG:  But what she thinks is.  And

10        she filed a paper --

11                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- she has just answered your

12        question --

13                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- could I just finish --

14                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- and now you're saying,

15        "Where did the conversation go?"

16                  MR. WEINBERG:  And she filed a paper which

17        calls my client a so-called church, quote, unquote.

18                  MS. ANDERSON:  So what.  So what.

19                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, believe it or not, I've

20        interpreted that, and so has anybody else that looked

21        at the quotes, as her saying that it's not a legitimate

22        religion.

23                  MS. ANDERSON:  So what.

24                  MR. WEINBERG:  So what?

25                  MS. ANDERSON:  Yeah.  What difference does

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        that make?

 2                  MR. WEINBERG:  Well, you know, maybe I think

 3        that that is bigoted.  Maybe I think that that is

 4        biased.

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  Is this a civil rights action?

 6                  MR. WEINBERG:  No.  What it is is that we are

 7        entitled to be treated the same way as any other

 8        citizen.

 9                  MS. ANDERSON:  I agree.

10                  MR. WEINBERG:  And if, in fact, her feelings

11        were so strong as to put in a public document that it

12        was a -- not a legitimate church, quote, unquote, then

13        that indicates to me a concern that she is not going to

14        be fair.

15                  On top of that, one of the investigating

16        officers in this case told me and told Mr. Fugate, who

17        was at the meeting, exactly what Dr. Wood just said he

18        said, which was he got grave offense by any suggestion

19        that the Church of Scientology was a church like his

20        church, the Catholic church.

21                  So yeah, I'm concerned about that, and I

22        think bias is an issue in this case.  Yes, it is.       

23        And --

24                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- it might be an issue --

25                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- I'm trying to do this in as

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1        professional and low-key a fashion as possible.  I

 2        understand your sensitivity.  I understand Dr. Wood's

 3        sensitivity.  But you need to understand my client's

 4        sensitivity.  Okay?

 5                  MS. ANDERSON:  If it were on the table that

 6        she were treating the church differently than someone

 7        else, for example, you might have a point.

 8                  MR. WEINBERG:  But you know what?  I don't

 9        know of anybody who has ever been served in a public

10        records lawsuit with discovery questions with regard to

11        an ongoing criminal investigation.

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  You're wrong.  Just go call

13        any of the --

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  -- now --

15                  MS. ANDERSON:  -- nineteen lawsuits.

16                  MR. WEINBERG:  Now, are you being sarcastic?

17                  MS. ANDERSON:  No, I'm not.


19        Q    Could you answer my question, please?

20                  MS. ANDERSON:  What is the question?


22        Q    The question was:  Was this a series of

23   conversations or one conversation with Agent Strope?

24        A    I recall one conversation.

25        Q    Were there any similar conversations with Sergeant

            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1   Andrews?

 2        A    No.

 3        Q    Were there any similar conversations with the

 4   state attorney's office?

 5        A    No.

 6        Q    Have you taken any public positions over the years

 7   in Clearwater adverse to the Church of Scientology?

 8        A    No.

 9        Q    Have you talked to Wayne Shelor with regard to his

10   views about the Church of Scientology?

11        A    No.

12                  MS. ANDERSON:  And I'd like a standing

13        objection to any questions like this if you don't mind.

14                  MR. WEINBERG:  That's fine.


16        Q    Did you have any discussions with the reporters

17   you talked to about your views of Scientology, including Mr.

18   Meagher?

19        A    No, not that I recall.

20                  MR. WEINBERG:  Why don't we take a couple

21        minute break.  I'll chat with them, and there may be a

22        couple more questions or I may be done.

23           (The deposition was concluded at 11:15 a.m.)



            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                      S T I P U L A T I O N S

 2        It was agreed upon between counsel present and the

 3   witness that reading and signing of the deposition is not

 4   waived.






















            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                      CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER



 4   STATE OF FLORIDA       :

          I, Jill M. Giles-Saenz, Court Reporter and Notary
 7   Public in and for the State of Florida at Large:

 8        DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing deposition was
     taken before me at the time and place therein designated;
 9   that before testimony was taken, the deponent had been sworn
     previously; that my shorthand notes were thereafter reduced
10   to typewriting under my supervision; and the foregoing
     pages, numbered 150 through 196, is a true record of the
11   testimony given by the witness.

12        I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not a relative, employee,
     attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor relative or
13   employee of such attorney or counsel, or financially
     interested in the foregoing action.



20                     Jill M. Giles-Saenz
                       Court Reporter
21                     Notary Public
                       State of Florida at Large




            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1             I have read the foregoing pages and,

 2             except for any corrections or amend-

 3             ments I have indicated on the sheet

 4             attached for such purposes, I hereby

 5             subscribe to the accuracy of the 

 6             transcript.


 8             _____________________________________
               (Signature of Deponent)
10             (Date)

11             _____________________________________
               (Witness to Signature)














            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


 1                      E R R A T A  S H E E T

 2   PAGE NO.       LINE NO.       CORRECTION
























            TAMPA BAY COURT REPORTERS, INC.  (813) 229-0014


Return to Lisa McPherson page