Autopsy to determine if mom dead
when man took pacemaker
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle


Authorities scheduled an autopsy today to determine whether a man removed a pacemaker from his 85-year-old mother's chest before or after she died. ADVERTISEMENT
Ann Hunt Donaldson's death was reported about 12:30 p.m. Sunday. Authorities who arrived at her home initially thought she died from natural causes, Harris County Sheriff's Lt. Danny Billingsley said. But emergency workers noticed a cut on her chest.

Billingsley said the woman's son, James Donaldson, told detectives he removed the pacemaker after his mother died of natural causes.

"His excuse for doing it is there had been this ongoing problem, I guess you could say dispute, with the insurance companies and doctors since 1995," Billingsley said.

James Donaldson, 59, was charged with tampering with evidence and remains in custody at Harris County Jail. It was unclear if he had an attorney yet.

Detectives asked him to produce the pacemaker, but he didn't turn it over.

"That's the whole deal, he won't tell us what he did with it," Billingsley said. "We want to make sure it was a natural (death) and not a result of him taking her pacemaker out."

The Harris County Medical Examiner's office was scheduled to perform an autopsy on the mother today, officials said.

Could he also have committed theft from a person, or maybe even robbery? Or, if the insurance company did have an ownership interest in the device, was it a theft from a company? And what is the value of a pacemaker (used)?

The pacemaker likely has a memory of the final heartbeats. So, there is electronic evidence of her death.

Was there a search warrant for the home?

OK John, you have often brought up the issue of when a person begins. Now you have raised the issue of when a person ends. If she was alive when the pace maker was removed I think murder is pretty easy. Heart surgery by layman with a pocket knife is pretty easy to prove as "an act clearly dangerous to human life". BUT if she was deceased was she a person for purposes of theft from a person? Could the State prove the taking was without her consent?

OK OK This is a bit morose, and I was tired of DWI Power POints. Forgive me.

Theft Sec 31.03(e)(4)(B) "Regardless of value, the property is stolen from the person of another or from a human corpse or grave;"

Thus this does qualify as a State Jail theft.

But let's say the pacemaker is worth more than $1,500 (which should be easy to believe). If I want to file a third degree felony theft, who is the owner of a pacemaker in a deceased person's body?

I am absolutely astounded at you guys creativity as your think through with what crime he could be charged -- I keep wondering about issues of competence and the rare conditions that might support an insanity claim (or no).

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Bradley:
But let's say the pacemaker is worth more than $1,500 (which should be easy to believe). If I want to file a third degree felony theft, who is the owner of a pacemaker in a deceased person's body?

---

Administrator of the person's estate? They have a greater right of possession than the defendant. Unless he is her administrator. Ugh.

Unless he is the administrator OR SOLE HEIR. Even if there is a separate administrator, if suspect is the sole heir, I think it's a wash there.

And Floyd, why are you so amazed at the thought processes going on here...? I don't know you well but I know you well enough to know that you are insightful and as a lawyer/PhD combo, surely you know the drill. Floyd is one of the best defendant's experts I have ever had in a murder case that was not without it's unusual details...

Let's say the insurance company claims some ownership interest in the pacemaker. Doesn't that make for a field day in court, because obviously the son wants the pacemaker as evidence, possibly in a wrongful death/products liability case. Aside from the morose details of it's removal and the obsessive compulsive nature of someone who would be compelled to do such an act, my question is which civil lawyer will get on board this train.

Or maybe the guy is just lonely. Maybe we could hook him up with the cryptkeeper that keeps the human skull on his coffee table that Mike Little posted about recently.

As always, in our profession, I think it is good to look at the positive side of things. It could be worse...he could have wanted to remove some artificial valves in her heart or some other prosthetic device. See, it could be worse

quote:

---

Theft Sec 31.03(e)(4)(B) "Regardless of value, the property is stolen from the person of another or from a human corpse or grave;"

Thus this does qualify as a State Jail theft.

---

Yet abuse of the corpse itself is only a class A misdemeanor (PC 42.08) ...

So I guess that proves that in corpses like in life it is better to give than to receive?

Well, they say you can't take it with you, so it's only fair that we make sure that no one can take it from you after you leave...