October 21, 2025 • 23 mins
This week on Pathology with Dr. Priya, a Zone 7 series, Sheryl McCollum and Dr. Priya Banerjee begin a two-part forensic review of the 2011 death of Ellen Greenberg, a young woman found with more than twenty stab wounds in her Philadelphia apartment. Despite the severity and location of her injuries, Ellen’s death was ruled a suicide not once but twice. In part one, Dr. Priya walks listeners through the science of sharp-force injuries, defines key forensic terminology, and explains why certain wound patterns, especially those to the back of the head and neck, raise significant questions about how this case was ever closed.
Highlights
- (0:00) Welcome to Pathology with Dr. Priya: A Zone 7 series—Sheryl McCollum and Dr. Priya introduce the Ellen Greenberg case and outline the official findings
- (2:00) Dr. Priya defines sharp-force injuries and explains the difference between stab and cutting wounds
- (6:45) Identifying single-edged versus double-edged blades and how wound shape reveals the type of weapon
- (8:00) Understanding defensive wounds and what their presence means
- (10:30) The classification of cause and manner of death and why Ellen Greenberg’s case remains controversial
- (13:45) How and why medical examiners revisit cases when new information or legal action arises
- (16:30) Reviewing Ellen’s autopsy and toxicology results
- (18:45) Why stab wounds to the back of the head and neck are nearly impossible to self-inflict and what that reveals about this case
About the Hosts
Dr. Priya Banerjee is a board-certified forensic pathologist with extensive experience in death investigation, clinical forensics, and courtroom testimony. A graduate of Johns Hopkins, she served for over a decade as Rhode Island’s state medical examiner and now runs a private forensic pathology practice. Her work includes military deaths, NSA cases, and high-profile investigations. Dr. Priya has also been featured as a forensic expert on platforms such as CrimeOnline and Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. She is a dedicated educator, animal lover, and proud mom.
Website: anchorforensicpathology.com
Twitter/X: @Autopsy_MD
Sheryl McCollum is an Emmy Award–winning CSI, a writer for CrimeOnline, and the Forensic and Crime Scene Expert for Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. She works as a CSI for a metro Atlanta Police Department and is the co-author of the textbook Cold Case: Pathways to Justice. Sheryl is also the founder and director of the Cold Case Investigative Research Institute (CCIRI), a nationally recognized nonprofit that brings together universities, law enforcement, and experts to help solve unsolved homicides, missing persons cases, and kidnappings.
Email: coldcase2004@gmail.com
Twitter/X: @ColdCaseTips
Facebook: @sheryl.mccollum
Instagram: @officialzone7podcast
📣 If this episode gave you new insight into the forensic complexities of Ellen Greenberg’s case, share it with a friend and leave a review. Your support helps others discover the science, the stories, and the heart behind Pathology with Dr. Priya | A Zone 7 Series.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Y'all, Welcome to Pathology with Doctor Pria. Today is going
to be I think probably one of the most in
depth sessions we've had. I am literally gonna just turn
this over to doctor Pria. Today we're going to be
talking about Ellen Greenberg. Ellen was found dead in her apartment.
(00:32):
She had twenty stab wounds to her head, neck and
torso and twenty bruises. It was ruled a suicide. There
has now been a second autopsy where they notated twenty
three stab wounds and thirty one bruises, but again ruled
(00:54):
it a suicide. There were no signs of struggle. But y'all,
here's the deal. Nicole Brown was murdered. There was no
signs of struggle there either. Not having signs of struggle.
To me, with a straight edge weapon does not necessarily
dictate suicide. If you are stabbed almost gravely one time,
(01:19):
you typically go to the ground and you're not moving. So,
doctor Pria, I know you have looked at this case.
I know you've talked to Joe jackalone about it, the
sergeant with NYPD, you've talked I think on other shows
about it. But if you would just go injury by injury,
(01:41):
stab wound by stab, wound, bruise by bruce, and let
us hear your thoughts.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Okay, let me sort of approach it how I approach
any case, and then we will maybe get into specifics
about this case. Okay, I think there's some important back
ground that we need to lay foundational knowledge. Sharp force
injuries is one of the common broader categories of injury
(02:10):
types that we see in forensic pathology. So I have
a whole lecture on this, I've taught it at different levels.
So what does that mean? That means the mechanism of injury,
how the injury occurred is by a weapon that has
a at least one sharp edge. Okay. Now, typically when
(02:34):
we think about it, we think about a knife, right
as the most common weapon that has has at least
one single edge that's sharp. So they can be a
knife can be single or double edged. Okay, double edge
meaning too sharp, not two sharp edges, excuse me. Or
(02:55):
single edge meaning one blunt edge and the opposite edge
being the sharp cutting side of things. Okay, Now I'm
not getting into specific knives. Knives can vary in terms
of a knife can have double edge characteristics then change
into single or vice versa. There's so many different types
(03:15):
of knives out there, and I don't even pretend to
be an expert in them, but I have encountered sharp
force deaths using a variety of weapons, okay, And I
just want to touch on that that you need to
keep your mind open that it's not always a knife, okay,
And I'm not talking pocket knife versus hunting knife. It
could be something totally different. So it can be scissors, okay,
(03:39):
it can be an axe that has both slicing and
like chopping wounds, which are sharp and blunt type injuries.
You can have propeller injuries that also have like sharp
and blunt you know, aspects to them. I think often
like a broken wine bottle or beer bottle can have
(03:59):
very sharp edges, so you need to think sort of
more broadly, okay. And then you could even have a tip,
very rare cases, like I've had an ice pick right
that has like a pointy tip and goes in and
make sort of the same They're very small holes, but
(04:20):
still stabs deep into the body. Now, when I say
stab deep into the body, I want to really focus
on that word stabbing, okay, or stab wound. So there
is a very specific medical definition for stab wound versus
insized or cutting wounds. Okay, And what this means is
(04:42):
this is getting into forensic pathology. But I'm a stickler
for definitions because I you know, this is where my
expertise is, and I want to make sure I'm clearly
using the right terminology for others to understand. So, a
stab wound, by definition, is a caused by a sharp
instrument but yields a wound that is deeper within the
(05:03):
body than it is long on the surface. Okay. So
let's say it's an inch long on the surface, but
it enters the body and the wound goes three inches in.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
So you could be stabbed with a screwdriver.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Correct, right, because it's a small, tiny little hole, but
you're still going to get a much deeper path into
the body. And that's why it's so injurious. Okay. And
then the sort of sister act to that is a
cutting or insized wound. I just use cutting wound. I
think that's how I was trained. But these are synonyms
(05:36):
for the same thing, which means it is a longer
wound on the surface than it is deep into the body. Okay,
Now what I don't like people to assume is that
one is more injurious than the other. Okay. So, and
the perfect example is when if you were to take
(05:59):
a knife and cut my throat from ear to ear,
across the sides, and across the front of my neck, right,
that might be six eight inches okay, but then let's
say it's only three inches deep, and I say only,
but you're gonna hit the major arteries and veins on
both sides, right, the jugular, the carotids, You're gonna go
(06:22):
through my windpipe. Maybe my esophag isn't even all the
way to the spinal column. Okay. So it's not that
one is more deadly or less deadly than the other.
But we need to be accurate when we talk about
these as defining terms because they imply characteristics of the wounds. Okay. Now,
(06:42):
the one thing that is different in a stab wound
when we look at the surface, it leaves like an impression,
or you can deduce some characteristics of the weapon, i e.
Single or double edged nature. Okay, Now this is getting
(07:04):
into the technicalities. Sometimes you can and sometimes you can't,
so you know, but we can sometimes tell there's a
blunt edge and a sharp edge depending on the nature
of the wound in an ideal setting, but in any
kind of incized wound, because it's dragging across the surface
and not really entering deep, you're not going to be
able to characterize the knife or the instrument that's used. Okay,
(07:30):
I am going to say knife because we know in
Allen's case it was a knife. So I just want
to be less vague as we continue our conversation, and
we don't need to get into like I mean, I'm
not teaching medical doctors how to measure them and describe them,
so we're just going to be a little bit more general.
Like you know, know that they can be oriented in
different directions. They can go diagonally, straight, across, straight, down, right,
(07:54):
and so where on the body it is, you know,
whether it's a stab wound or cut wound, and what
is injured or all very important elements to document about
every wound. Okay. Now, sometimes you hear the word defensive wounds.
You know you've mentioned this, and what I want to
get into is what is a defensive wound? Okay? So
(08:18):
what defensive wound is typically seen in someone who is
being injured? Okay, So it is a very natural process
for us to put our hands over our face or
protect our neck or fight back, because I mean, we
don't have to be trained in jiu jitsu or karate.
This is just a natural reflex, you know, a life
(08:41):
saving reflex. Right, if someone's coming at you, you're not
going to stand there and take it. You're going to
fight back. Okay, whether you're a trained martial artist or
a little grandma, do you understand, like it's just a reflex.
So I want to say that is why we look
for them or anything that might be characteristic of a
(09:02):
defensive wound. Okay, I'm never gonna just call something a
defensive wound. What they are usually are like small wounds
on the fingers, the hands, even the forearms, right if
you're using it to defend yourself, a shield yourself. And
so usually they're just slices, so I e. Slicing wounds
(09:22):
or insized wounds, cutting wounds. Okay, there, but the location
and the characteristic nature of them being there tells us
that the victim fought back. Okay, So that's why they're
defensive in nature. So I can say it is my
medical opinion that this cluster or the ones on the
hands are characteristic of defensive wounds. Okay, Now you also
(09:47):
have to remember other body parts move, so if someone
is pushed back onto the floor, they can often like
even have you know, they can use their feet, right,
and there are legs to fight back depending on the
nature of the altercation. So we always look at the
(10:09):
legs and feet for defensive wounds too. Characteristically it's the
hands maybe the forms, you know. But I'm just saying
to think outside the box a little bit. So that's
basically the forensic pathology of sharp force wounds, which I
think will allow for a more meaningful conversation as we
face this discussion. I also want to talk about cause
(10:35):
and manner of death as it relates to this case,
because boy, it's been all over the place, and I
think the most fundamental thing is this is just my
opinion on the case. Okay. I have never been and
I want to say that because I went to med
school in Philly, right and I trained an internal medicine
for a year in Philly. But I have no connection
(10:57):
to the Philadelphia Medical Examiner office. I don't actually know
anybody in that office practicing, and I don't know the
doctor Simon personally. So there's no ill will, nothing, nothing
going on. It's purely commentary on this case and professional
you know, Roles. So we know that the cause of
(11:19):
death in Ellen is I would certified as multiple shark
force injuries or stab wounds, whatever you want to call it.
So it's the sharp force injuries and the bleeding out
from those injuries that cause their death. Now it's really
the manner of death which is being discussed here, right
that is the big debate. So a manner of death
(11:42):
is natural accidents, suicide, homicide, or undetermined, okay. And we've
seen quite a few flavors chosen for this case over time.
This case spans quite a you know, unfortunately she passed
many years ago, it's still you know, up for discussion.
There's legal suits against it, and you know, luckily I'm
(12:04):
just looking at it from the outside. I have no
involvement in the case. The family hasn't hired me, so
I just want to put that out there. And so
it's not natural. Natural is defined as purely a medical
condition without any external factor. So there's none of that, okay,
So we know it can't be natural. We're not you know,
(12:24):
it doesn't look like it's an unintentional outcome of an action.
That's an accident. So now we get to suicide, which
is the intentional taking of one's life by one or
more actions, homicide which is death at the hands of
other of another or others, and then undetermined, which is
(12:45):
when you can't, despite your best efforts, decide between two
or potentially more of the manners that were just defined. Okay,
so initially it seems and correct me if I'm wrong,
because I don't have all the facts. You know, it's
such a long, convoluted case. But my understanding is it
(13:07):
was initially ruled a suicide, then there was legal action
by the family that they were obviously upset with that ruling.
Then the case was re reviewed at some point went
to undetermined manner, and this week, with more as a
consequence of further legal decisions, they re reviewed the case
(13:30):
and issued it as the manner as suicide again, so
the undetermined was reversed to suicide. That is my sort
of understanding of how the case was handled. Now, as
a medical examiner who's practicing, I do legal consultations, I
do cases personally. You know, if someone comes to me
(13:53):
and say you have a case from ten years ago,
twenty years ago, well not twenty because I've only been
practicing fifteen. But let's say what your prea your first case,
you know, one of your first cases. We have new
evidence on and you need to check it out. It
would be in my mind malpractice not to right, because
there could be new DNA, there could be a confession,
there could be I don't know, like something found at
(14:16):
someone's home. Like there's always things that pop up. And honestly,
I have a case, a cold case going to court
soon because there was a jail confession on the stabbing,
you know, so you know, I was like, when was
this case like, and they was a twenty ten I said,
that was one of my first cases when I was here. Yeah,
we got a jail confession, so you know, you never
know when things pop up. You know, the jail confession
(14:38):
doesn't change my ruling because I called it a homicide,
but right, like something new you never know could change.
And so cases I think we all have, like reserve
the right to revisit a case if necessary, Okay, So
whether that be in a week, in a month, ten years,
(14:58):
whatever it is, okay, So it's not improper to revisit
a case. I think their revisiting was more court mandated,
but I just want to put that out there. You know.
It's not common that we do, but it can be,
you know. And if you give me this new, aha,
piece of evidence and I change my mind where I
changed the declaration, you know, the cause and manner, Well,
(15:19):
that doesn't mean I was wrong, right, It's just how
it's you know, what was my thought process then is
differently affected than now because of this new information.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Sure, and you've said that multiple times.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Right, so you know, none of that is improper to me.
What I wholeheartedly disagree with is the ruling that this
is not a homicide. And as the information has come forth,
you know, initially I was sort of familiar with that
made familiar with the case. I was sur tangentially involved
(15:54):
with the Hulu special, but I didn't tape it and
so I didn't really look at the file that closely
until I was asked to comment earlier this week when
that thirty two page or thirty three page report came out,
and I really had a head to toe look at
you know, what was the investigative information, and this is
what's common knowledge. This is what's been released. I don't
(16:16):
have special permission anyways, Like when I looked at the injuries.
I mean, part of it is we don't practice in
a black box. But when I'm reviewing a case, this
is how I handle any expert case. I'm always going
to go to the autopsy first. Does that make sense?
The scene and the autopsies my area of expertise. That's
where I need to form my independent opinion, and then
(16:39):
sort of go back and read the police report or
whatever investigative information there is. And that's exactly how I
approached this report as well. I like flipped to the
autopsy studies and said, huh, that doesn't make sense. Let
me keep reading. Now. I want to say that you know,
Ellen Greenberg had psychiatric history. I'm not ignoring that. You
(17:02):
know she was under stress, she was under the care
of a psychiatrist, all of which which is appropriate, Okay.
And then her toxicology reflected that nothing was excessive even
though she had controlled substances like ambient and another and klonopin,
which is another sleeping medicine. She didn't take a whole bottle, right,
which sometimes we see in suicides. Right, So that's one
(17:25):
thing to consider there was no suicide note. But again,
in suicides, a minority of cases have notes. Okay, I
think it's only twenty or twenty five percent, So you
can't rely on that to rule every case of suicide,
otherwise it'd be under called.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
Okay, yep.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
And then we get into the actual injuries and apartment.
You know, there's this history of the apartment being locked
and then broken into or pushed open by the fiance.
You know, this is where I really rely on CSI
(18:04):
and police investigation. I'm not a door jam a door expert,
a lock expert. You know, I would need to get
that information from my colleagues like you. But what I
can say is I'm going to hone in on the injuries. Okay,
there are diagrams that have been shown to me and
(18:24):
my other presentations or they're and they're not generated by me.
They were made by someone else. However, they're sort of
what I would say, two key injuries that really concern me. Okay,
And so I want to bring up something. You know,
(18:47):
it's maybe a nervous laugh, but what is a common
statement that we hear stabbed in the back right? And
why do we say that? Because usually it's someone else
screwing you over for being colloquial. Right, That's not something
that usually we see people do to themselves because you
(19:10):
can't reach it. Okay. So the fact that she has
multiple injuries to the back of her head neck are
already atypical for suicide. Okay, And let me preface this
by saying I am very cynical in life. Probably my
work has made me that way. I approach every death
(19:33):
is like, uh, oh, what's this? Does that make sense?
Not like, oh, that's just a drug overdose or that's
just you know, someone committing suicide. No, do you understand?
That is never my approach. I'm always like, okay, so
that's the story provided to me. Does this make sense?
Like my radar is always up? Okay, because I don't
want to miss something, whether it be at the crime
(19:54):
scene or at the autopsy table. So this is already
a typical I'm not loving that this thin young woman
is stabbed multiple times and now in areas that aka
stabbed in the back, right, it's really the neck and
the skull. But these are very difficult areas to reach yourself.
(20:19):
So this is not sitting well with me. She has
the final wound. We can never say which like the
order of the wounds because it's just so so many.
And when I look at wounds, all I can say
is whether they were like when she was alive or
when she was dead. Okay, so anti mortem or post
(20:41):
mortem respectively. And so what I'm looking for is bleeding. Okay,
So bleeding. And when I say alive, I don't necessarily
mean conscious. Okay, but her body is working, her heart
is pumping. It may not be the strongest, but it's
still pumping, and she has a blood pressure. Okay. Now
(21:03):
those two things are needed to bleed into a wound.
If you cut yourself while you're alive, you're gonna bleed, Okay.
By contrast, in at autopsy, if I cut into someone,
they don't get a bruise, they don't get bleeding. Yes,
they do bleed. They leak blood from blood vessels that
are holding blood. Okay. But if I just take if
(21:24):
I give them something super official like a paper cut
or a little bit deeper, that's going to remain with
no blood because their the heart's not beating and they
don't have a blood pressure.
Speaker 1 (21:35):
Okay, absolutely, yep.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
So that is a clear differentiation of what is happening
when as someone is getting injured and dying. Now, when
we read her report or this new report, that's quite voluminous.
I really want to focus on two wounds. Or let
me back up. The knife is found left in her
(21:59):
in the left side of the chest, so we know
by definition that's the last wound the weapon is left there. Okay,
So unless the weapon is left in I can only
tell you if this wound came before or after her
physiologic death. Okay, but now I know that with the
knife sticking in there, Okay, that was the last impact,
(22:20):
the last insertion of the weapon. However, there were two wounds,
one to the base of her skull and one to
the neck that were hot, like very concerning to me.
And as I read this, because you know, when I
was trying to prepare for potentially going on the Hulu show,
(22:40):
I was listening to podcasts like I had no materials
in front of me. Does does that make sense? So
I was just listening to more lay capture. I really
wanted the meat and potatoes which I got in these reports.
Now that is critical. So there's these two wounds. He
has multiple wounds, multiple sharp force injuries, and multiple bruises. Okay,
(23:02):
the sharp force injuries are these two stab wounds, which
indeed they are stab wounds to the back of her
neck and the base of her brain to me, caused critical,
devastating neurologic injury that would mean she could not stab herself. Y'all.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
We're gonna stop right there with part one. I think
that's pretty powerful. We're gonna come back with part two
and doctor Pria is gonna explain more about how Ellen
could not have stabbed herself past just one of those wounds,
much less two that would have rendered her incapable of
(23:48):
stabbing herself more
Y'all, Welcome to Pathology with Doctor Pria. Today is going
to be I think probably one of the most in
depth sessions we've had. I am literally gonna just turn
this over to doctor Pria. Today we're going to be
talking about Ellen Greenberg. Ellen was found dead in her apartment.
(00:32):
She had twenty stab wounds to her head, neck and
torso and twenty bruises. It was ruled a suicide. There
has now been a second autopsy where they notated twenty
three stab wounds and thirty one bruises, but again ruled
(00:54):
it a suicide. There were no signs of struggle. But y'all,
here's the deal. Nicole Brown was murdered. There was no
signs of struggle there either. Not having signs of struggle.
To me, with a straight edge weapon does not necessarily
dictate suicide. If you are stabbed almost gravely one time,
(01:19):
you typically go to the ground and you're not moving. So,
doctor Pria, I know you have looked at this case.
I know you've talked to Joe jackalone about it, the
sergeant with NYPD, you've talked I think on other shows
about it. But if you would just go injury by injury,
(01:41):
stab wound by stab, wound, bruise by bruce, and let
us hear your thoughts.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Okay, let me sort of approach it how I approach
any case, and then we will maybe get into specifics
about this case. Okay, I think there's some important back
ground that we need to lay foundational knowledge. Sharp force
injuries is one of the common broader categories of injury
(02:10):
types that we see in forensic pathology. So I have
a whole lecture on this, I've taught it at different levels.
So what does that mean? That means the mechanism of injury,
how the injury occurred is by a weapon that has
a at least one sharp edge. Okay. Now, typically when
(02:34):
we think about it, we think about a knife, right
as the most common weapon that has has at least
one single edge that's sharp. So they can be a
knife can be single or double edged. Okay, double edge
meaning too sharp, not two sharp edges, excuse me. Or
(02:55):
single edge meaning one blunt edge and the opposite edge
being the sharp cutting side of things. Okay, Now I'm
not getting into specific knives. Knives can vary in terms
of a knife can have double edge characteristics then change
into single or vice versa. There's so many different types
(03:15):
of knives out there, and I don't even pretend to
be an expert in them, but I have encountered sharp
force deaths using a variety of weapons, okay, And I
just want to touch on that that you need to
keep your mind open that it's not always a knife, okay,
And I'm not talking pocket knife versus hunting knife. It
could be something totally different. So it can be scissors, okay,
(03:39):
it can be an axe that has both slicing and
like chopping wounds, which are sharp and blunt type injuries.
You can have propeller injuries that also have like sharp
and blunt you know, aspects to them. I think often
like a broken wine bottle or beer bottle can have
(03:59):
very sharp edges, so you need to think sort of
more broadly, okay. And then you could even have a tip,
very rare cases, like I've had an ice pick right
that has like a pointy tip and goes in and
make sort of the same They're very small holes, but
(04:20):
still stabs deep into the body. Now, when I say
stab deep into the body, I want to really focus
on that word stabbing, okay, or stab wound. So there
is a very specific medical definition for stab wound versus
insized or cutting wounds. Okay, And what this means is
(04:42):
this is getting into forensic pathology. But I'm a stickler
for definitions because I you know, this is where my
expertise is, and I want to make sure I'm clearly
using the right terminology for others to understand. So, a
stab wound, by definition, is a caused by a sharp
instrument but yields a wound that is deeper within the
(05:03):
body than it is long on the surface. Okay. So
let's say it's an inch long on the surface, but
it enters the body and the wound goes three inches in.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
So you could be stabbed with a screwdriver.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Correct, right, because it's a small, tiny little hole, but
you're still going to get a much deeper path into
the body. And that's why it's so injurious. Okay. And
then the sort of sister act to that is a
cutting or insized wound. I just use cutting wound. I
think that's how I was trained. But these are synonyms
(05:36):
for the same thing, which means it is a longer
wound on the surface than it is deep into the body. Okay,
Now what I don't like people to assume is that
one is more injurious than the other. Okay. So, and
the perfect example is when if you were to take
(05:59):
a knife and cut my throat from ear to ear,
across the sides, and across the front of my neck, right,
that might be six eight inches okay, but then let's
say it's only three inches deep, and I say only,
but you're gonna hit the major arteries and veins on
both sides, right, the jugular, the carotids, You're gonna go
(06:22):
through my windpipe. Maybe my esophag isn't even all the
way to the spinal column. Okay. So it's not that
one is more deadly or less deadly than the other.
But we need to be accurate when we talk about
these as defining terms because they imply characteristics of the wounds. Okay. Now,
(06:42):
the one thing that is different in a stab wound
when we look at the surface, it leaves like an impression,
or you can deduce some characteristics of the weapon, i e.
Single or double edged nature. Okay, Now this is getting
(07:04):
into the technicalities. Sometimes you can and sometimes you can't,
so you know, but we can sometimes tell there's a
blunt edge and a sharp edge depending on the nature
of the wound in an ideal setting, but in any
kind of incized wound, because it's dragging across the surface
and not really entering deep, you're not going to be
able to characterize the knife or the instrument that's used. Okay,
(07:30):
I am going to say knife because we know in
Allen's case it was a knife. So I just want
to be less vague as we continue our conversation, and
we don't need to get into like I mean, I'm
not teaching medical doctors how to measure them and describe them,
so we're just going to be a little bit more general.
Like you know, know that they can be oriented in
different directions. They can go diagonally, straight, across, straight, down, right,
(07:54):
and so where on the body it is, you know,
whether it's a stab wound or cut wound, and what
is injured or all very important elements to document about
every wound. Okay. Now, sometimes you hear the word defensive wounds.
You know you've mentioned this, and what I want to
get into is what is a defensive wound? Okay? So
(08:18):
what defensive wound is typically seen in someone who is
being injured? Okay, So it is a very natural process
for us to put our hands over our face or
protect our neck or fight back, because I mean, we
don't have to be trained in jiu jitsu or karate.
This is just a natural reflex, you know, a life
(08:41):
saving reflex. Right, if someone's coming at you, you're not
going to stand there and take it. You're going to
fight back. Okay, whether you're a trained martial artist or
a little grandma, do you understand, like it's just a reflex.
So I want to say that is why we look
for them or anything that might be characteristic of a
(09:02):
defensive wound. Okay, I'm never gonna just call something a
defensive wound. What they are usually are like small wounds
on the fingers, the hands, even the forearms, right if
you're using it to defend yourself, a shield yourself. And
so usually they're just slices, so I e. Slicing wounds
(09:22):
or insized wounds, cutting wounds. Okay, there, but the location
and the characteristic nature of them being there tells us
that the victim fought back. Okay, So that's why they're
defensive in nature. So I can say it is my
medical opinion that this cluster or the ones on the
hands are characteristic of defensive wounds. Okay, Now you also
(09:47):
have to remember other body parts move, so if someone
is pushed back onto the floor, they can often like
even have you know, they can use their feet, right,
and there are legs to fight back depending on the
nature of the altercation. So we always look at the
(10:09):
legs and feet for defensive wounds too. Characteristically it's the
hands maybe the forms, you know. But I'm just saying
to think outside the box a little bit. So that's
basically the forensic pathology of sharp force wounds, which I
think will allow for a more meaningful conversation as we
face this discussion. I also want to talk about cause
(10:35):
and manner of death as it relates to this case,
because boy, it's been all over the place, and I
think the most fundamental thing is this is just my
opinion on the case. Okay. I have never been and
I want to say that because I went to med
school in Philly, right and I trained an internal medicine
for a year in Philly. But I have no connection
(10:57):
to the Philadelphia Medical Examiner office. I don't actually know
anybody in that office practicing, and I don't know the
doctor Simon personally. So there's no ill will, nothing, nothing
going on. It's purely commentary on this case and professional
you know, Roles. So we know that the cause of
(11:19):
death in Ellen is I would certified as multiple shark
force injuries or stab wounds, whatever you want to call it.
So it's the sharp force injuries and the bleeding out
from those injuries that cause their death. Now it's really
the manner of death which is being discussed here, right
that is the big debate. So a manner of death
(11:42):
is natural accidents, suicide, homicide, or undetermined, okay. And we've
seen quite a few flavors chosen for this case over time.
This case spans quite a you know, unfortunately she passed
many years ago, it's still you know, up for discussion.
There's legal suits against it, and you know, luckily I'm
(12:04):
just looking at it from the outside. I have no
involvement in the case. The family hasn't hired me, so
I just want to put that out there. And so
it's not natural. Natural is defined as purely a medical
condition without any external factor. So there's none of that, okay,
So we know it can't be natural. We're not you know,
(12:24):
it doesn't look like it's an unintentional outcome of an action.
That's an accident. So now we get to suicide, which
is the intentional taking of one's life by one or
more actions, homicide which is death at the hands of
other of another or others, and then undetermined, which is
(12:45):
when you can't, despite your best efforts, decide between two
or potentially more of the manners that were just defined. Okay,
so initially it seems and correct me if I'm wrong,
because I don't have all the facts. You know, it's
such a long, convoluted case. But my understanding is it
(13:07):
was initially ruled a suicide, then there was legal action
by the family that they were obviously upset with that ruling.
Then the case was re reviewed at some point went
to undetermined manner, and this week, with more as a
consequence of further legal decisions, they re reviewed the case
(13:30):
and issued it as the manner as suicide again, so
the undetermined was reversed to suicide. That is my sort
of understanding of how the case was handled. Now, as
a medical examiner who's practicing, I do legal consultations, I
do cases personally. You know, if someone comes to me
(13:53):
and say you have a case from ten years ago,
twenty years ago, well not twenty because I've only been
practicing fifteen. But let's say what your prea your first case,
you know, one of your first cases. We have new
evidence on and you need to check it out. It
would be in my mind malpractice not to right, because
there could be new DNA, there could be a confession,
there could be I don't know, like something found at
(14:16):
someone's home. Like there's always things that pop up. And honestly,
I have a case, a cold case going to court
soon because there was a jail confession on the stabbing,
you know, so you know, I was like, when was
this case like, and they was a twenty ten I said,
that was one of my first cases when I was here. Yeah,
we got a jail confession, so you know, you never
know when things pop up. You know, the jail confession
(14:38):
doesn't change my ruling because I called it a homicide,
but right, like something new you never know could change.
And so cases I think we all have, like reserve
the right to revisit a case if necessary, Okay, So
whether that be in a week, in a month, ten years,
(14:58):
whatever it is, okay, So it's not improper to revisit
a case. I think their revisiting was more court mandated,
but I just want to put that out there. You know.
It's not common that we do, but it can be,
you know. And if you give me this new, aha,
piece of evidence and I change my mind where I
changed the declaration, you know, the cause and manner, Well,
(15:19):
that doesn't mean I was wrong, right, It's just how
it's you know, what was my thought process then is
differently affected than now because of this new information.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Sure, and you've said that multiple times.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Right, so you know, none of that is improper to me.
What I wholeheartedly disagree with is the ruling that this
is not a homicide. And as the information has come forth,
you know, initially I was sort of familiar with that
made familiar with the case. I was sur tangentially involved
(15:54):
with the Hulu special, but I didn't tape it and
so I didn't really look at the file that closely
until I was asked to comment earlier this week when
that thirty two page or thirty three page report came out,
and I really had a head to toe look at
you know, what was the investigative information, and this is
what's common knowledge. This is what's been released. I don't
(16:16):
have special permission anyways, Like when I looked at the injuries.
I mean, part of it is we don't practice in
a black box. But when I'm reviewing a case, this
is how I handle any expert case. I'm always going
to go to the autopsy first. Does that make sense?
The scene and the autopsies my area of expertise. That's
where I need to form my independent opinion, and then
(16:39):
sort of go back and read the police report or
whatever investigative information there is. And that's exactly how I
approached this report as well. I like flipped to the
autopsy studies and said, huh, that doesn't make sense. Let
me keep reading. Now. I want to say that you know,
Ellen Greenberg had psychiatric history. I'm not ignoring that. You
(17:02):
know she was under stress, she was under the care
of a psychiatrist, all of which which is appropriate, Okay.
And then her toxicology reflected that nothing was excessive even
though she had controlled substances like ambient and another and klonopin,
which is another sleeping medicine. She didn't take a whole bottle, right,
which sometimes we see in suicides. Right, So that's one
(17:25):
thing to consider there was no suicide note. But again,
in suicides, a minority of cases have notes. Okay, I
think it's only twenty or twenty five percent, So you
can't rely on that to rule every case of suicide,
otherwise it'd be under called.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
Okay, yep.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
And then we get into the actual injuries and apartment.
You know, there's this history of the apartment being locked
and then broken into or pushed open by the fiance.
You know, this is where I really rely on CSI
(18:04):
and police investigation. I'm not a door jam a door expert,
a lock expert. You know, I would need to get
that information from my colleagues like you. But what I
can say is I'm going to hone in on the injuries. Okay,
there are diagrams that have been shown to me and
(18:24):
my other presentations or they're and they're not generated by me.
They were made by someone else. However, they're sort of
what I would say, two key injuries that really concern me. Okay,
And so I want to bring up something. You know,
(18:47):
it's maybe a nervous laugh, but what is a common
statement that we hear stabbed in the back right? And
why do we say that? Because usually it's someone else
screwing you over for being colloquial. Right, That's not something
that usually we see people do to themselves because you
(19:10):
can't reach it. Okay. So the fact that she has
multiple injuries to the back of her head neck are
already atypical for suicide. Okay, And let me preface this
by saying I am very cynical in life. Probably my
work has made me that way. I approach every death
(19:33):
is like, uh, oh, what's this? Does that make sense?
Not like, oh, that's just a drug overdose or that's
just you know, someone committing suicide. No, do you understand?
That is never my approach. I'm always like, okay, so
that's the story provided to me. Does this make sense?
Like my radar is always up? Okay, because I don't
want to miss something, whether it be at the crime
(19:54):
scene or at the autopsy table. So this is already
a typical I'm not loving that this thin young woman
is stabbed multiple times and now in areas that aka
stabbed in the back, right, it's really the neck and
the skull. But these are very difficult areas to reach yourself.
(20:19):
So this is not sitting well with me. She has
the final wound. We can never say which like the
order of the wounds because it's just so so many.
And when I look at wounds, all I can say
is whether they were like when she was alive or
when she was dead. Okay, so anti mortem or post
(20:41):
mortem respectively. And so what I'm looking for is bleeding. Okay,
So bleeding. And when I say alive, I don't necessarily
mean conscious. Okay, but her body is working, her heart
is pumping. It may not be the strongest, but it's
still pumping, and she has a blood pressure. Okay. Now
(21:03):
those two things are needed to bleed into a wound.
If you cut yourself while you're alive, you're gonna bleed, Okay.
By contrast, in at autopsy, if I cut into someone,
they don't get a bruise, they don't get bleeding. Yes,
they do bleed. They leak blood from blood vessels that
are holding blood. Okay. But if I just take if
(21:24):
I give them something super official like a paper cut
or a little bit deeper, that's going to remain with
no blood because their the heart's not beating and they
don't have a blood pressure.
Speaker 1 (21:35):
Okay, absolutely, yep.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
So that is a clear differentiation of what is happening
when as someone is getting injured and dying. Now, when
we read her report or this new report, that's quite voluminous.
I really want to focus on two wounds. Or let
me back up. The knife is found left in her
(21:59):
in the left side of the chest, so we know
by definition that's the last wound the weapon is left there. Okay,
So unless the weapon is left in I can only
tell you if this wound came before or after her
physiologic death. Okay, but now I know that with the
knife sticking in there, Okay, that was the last impact,
(22:20):
the last insertion of the weapon. However, there were two wounds,
one to the base of her skull and one to
the neck that were hot, like very concerning to me.
And as I read this, because you know, when I
was trying to prepare for potentially going on the Hulu show,
(22:40):
I was listening to podcasts like I had no materials
in front of me. Does does that make sense? So
I was just listening to more lay capture. I really
wanted the meat and potatoes which I got in these reports.
Now that is critical. So there's these two wounds. He
has multiple wounds, multiple sharp force injuries, and multiple bruises. Okay,
(23:02):
the sharp force injuries are these two stab wounds, which
indeed they are stab wounds to the back of her
neck and the base of her brain to me, caused critical,
devastating neurologic injury that would mean she could not stab herself. Y'all.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
We're gonna stop right there with part one. I think
that's pretty powerful. We're gonna come back with part two
and doctor Pria is gonna explain more about how Ellen
could not have stabbed herself past just one of those wounds,
much less two that would have rendered her incapable of
(23:48):
stabbing herself more
Host
Sheryl McCollum
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!