Monday 22 April 2019

Goa's Oldest Online News Portal

Society | People

No pre-death injuries to Fr Bismarque, but cause of death withheld

 

The second autopsy report has ruled out the possibility of body injuries caused to Fr Bismarque Dias before he died in the river.

However, instead of giving any conclusion on the cause of his death, the forensic experts have suggested diatom study of the samples and chemical analysis of viscera.

The authorities would accordingly now send samples of water in the creek of St Estevam, where Fr Bismarque’s body was found floating.

The second autopsy report is interestingly silent on the cause of his death, which was stated as ‘asphyxia (suffocation) due to drowning in the water’ after the first autopsy was conducted.

The second autopsy was conducted yesterday evening at the Goa Medical College hospital by three experts, headed by forensic head Dr Edmundo Rodrigues.

North Goa Additional Collector Swapnil Naik said the report clearly states that the injuries on the body were post-mortem (after death).

Fr Bismarque, a priest-turned-activist, was found dead in the river at St Estevam, with his body found floating in the water on Saturday morning while he had gone missing the previous day.

After the first post-mortem conducted on the same day, relatives of Fr Bismarque, along with social activists, had raised doubts over his death and a second autopsy was ordered by Additional Collector Naik.

The prime concern raised by his relatives was the injury marks on his body, which were recorded in the pre-autopsy inquest panchanama but were not specified in detail in the post-mortem report.

“The new autopsy report states that all the injury marks on his body were post-mortem (after death), and not ante-mortem (before death), marks of aquatic creatures”, said Naik. 

 

The report also states that the cause of death would be fully established after reports of diatom study and chemical analysis if viscera is sought.

The viscera would be sent to CFSL, Hyderabad tomorrow, said Naik.

Two boys accompanying Fr Bismarque to the Babhol Manos at St Estevam on Thursday night have told the police that three of them had drunk two cartons of beer.

“The alcohol content in the body would be known only after chemical analysis of viscera comes”, he said.

The question becomes pertinent since doubt have also been raised if Fr Bismarque was really drunk when he went for a swim post-midnight.

Naik said the report of the second autopsy would be now forwarded to the police for further investigation and action while reports of second autopsy and inquest panchanama would also be given to Fr Bismarque’s relatives.

Social activists have raised doubts over Fr Bismarque’s death, calling it suspicious, since he was involved in several public protests including some issues relating to CRZ violation in his own St Estevam village.  





Total Comments :1

Name
Place
Email
Comments
Verification Code Enter The Code Displayed hereRefresh Image
 

Questions about Fr Bismarque Dias' death - the answers lie with these two 'village boys'

-evaluate again-

09, Nov 2015

LUIS DIAS | Before we all swallow the "asphyxiation due to drowning" story and the truth also gets asphyxiated and drowned, A few nagging questions:

1.How does a man who is known by so many of us to be a good swimmer, suddenly drown in waters he knew and loved all his life, on his own island, in his own backyard?

2.We who knew him, knew that he was not a drinker. A glass or two at the very most from my recollection, more as a social thing than for the drink itself. Why would he act so completely out of character and consume "15 beers", or "most of two cartons of beer", as the press almost gleefully proclaimed at the drop of a hat?

3.What sort of investigative journalism is this that takes the statement of suspects and passes it off as fact? Why was there not even a murmur of scepticism in the report, about how things do not really seem to add up?

4.Does anyone really drink 20 beers in one night? I'd like to meet the person who does. I'll bet he's not a priest who spent all his life leading by example, a beacon for the youth and loved by them for his simple, vice-free existence.

5.We are being actively encouraged to believe that Fr. Bismarque Dias somehow brought about his own demise by reckless actions that we all know are completely out of character for him. Who is foisting this upon us and why?

6.Fr. Dias not returning home to dinner as he had said he would (Herald, 8 November), is also mysterious. He was not the sort of person to cause unnecessary anguish to his mother or the rest of his beloved family. How come he didn't call to say there was a change of plan?

7.Who are these 'two boys'? We, as the public, have the right to know. We are being told they are village boys, another report says that one is a 'migrant', another a 'local'. Why the mystery? How does it hamper the investigation just to know who these mysterious 'boys' are, and why everyone seems to be taking their version as fact, as the gospel truth?

8.We've all been on picnics. If one of your party is missing, do you just assume that that person has 'gone home', and do nothing about it until the next morning? Especially after you 'knew' that person had gone into the water after 'drinking', which is what the 'boys' themselves are saying? Why such a long delay in reporting someone 'missing'?

9.Why is the police not finding these holes in their story, and why are not the 'boys' at least provisionally being regarded as murder suspects until exonerated by forensic evidence?

10.If it is really "asphyxiation due to drowning", could we have a little more to corroborate this? It certainly doesn't tally with the statements of those interviewed on Prime Goa Channel who clearly stated they saw injuries and bleeding from the groin and genitals, and evidence of a blow to the head.

Answers, please.

 
John W D'Souza , Margoa - Goa

Society