The Murder of Marine Col James Sabow

[Magda Hassan]

Dr Sabow sent me this download link to a clip from a movie that is being made about his murdered brother Col Sabow. It will be available to download until March 7th. It looks very good. Great production details. I hope it gets good distribution in the US and hope it get to the overseas markets too. It is certainly a story that needs to be told. It is a testament to the love of Dr Sabow for his brother that he has tenaciously kept pushing for his brothers' death to be further investigated as the murder it is.


SABOW UPREZ 1.25.14_3000Kbps_720p.mp4
https://www.hightail.com/dl?phi_action=a...0200000000


Below is an interesting video from The Richie Allen programme which is based in the UK. Well worth a watch. Starts about 1.20

[Albert Doyle]

Tried to play the download but my laptop seems to be having trouble with MP-4.


Good. The Sabow case deserved a follow-through.

[David Guyatt]

It's good to see this story getting wider attention. Hats off to Dr. David Sabow for his tenacity. I don't blame him for it either. If it had been my brother murdered I think I'd have relentlessly pursued it too.

[Magda Hassan]

Defrauding of the United States Congress by Elements within the United
States Military: The Murder of Marine Colonel James E. Sabow
Bryan R. Burnett*
The suspicious death of Marine Colonel James E. Sabow occurred in 1991in the backyard of his home in
the now closed El Toro MCAS Orange County, California. In 2003 Congressman Duncan Hunter,
Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, became aware of the controversy surrounding the
death of Colonel Sabow. He wrote into the Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (Section 584)
(www.meixatech.com/DefenseAuthAct-2004.pdf) compelling the Department of Defense (DOD) to
reinvestigate Colonel Sabow's death. The DOD contrary to the intent of this section of the Act and the
instruction of Chairman Hunter, retained Dr. Jon Nordby to investigate the death. Jon Nordby generated
a report in late 2004 (www.meixatech.com/NORDBY.pdf ) and another in 2005
(www.meixatech.com/NORDBY2.pdf ), both of which determined the Colonel committed suicide.
Nordby's science was outrageous by any measure, which is not surprising since he has no formal training
in the sciences prior to receiving his PhD in philosophy. Dr. David Sabow, forensic neurologist and
brother of the Colonel, was asked by Chairman Hunter to evaluate the first Nordby report. Dr. Sabow
identified numerous errors in Nordby's analysis (www.meixatech.com/EVALNORDBYREPORT-
SABOW.pdf ). I was retained after the first Nordby report, under the authority of Chairman Hunter, to
help address the issues presented by Nordby, specifically gunshot residue and crime scene reconstruction.
Dr. Sabow and I then collaborated to produce our own report which came to the conclusion the Colonel
was victim of homicide. We submitted our report to Chairman Hunter to assist him in his investigation of
Colonel Sabow's death. Our report (afterward separated into two reports) certainly did so. Although a
few aspects of the report have had minor changes due to new evidence becoming available, our
conclusion remains: Colonel Sabow's death was by homicide. These reports,
www.meixatech.com/SABOW&BURNETT.pdf and www.meixatech.com/BURNETT&SABOW.pdf ),
have been updated from those seen by Chairman Hunter. Hunter, after reviewing the opposing reports,
expressed the opinion to his staff Colonel Sabow was murdered. Hunter followed this personal
determination by requesting the U.S. District Attorney, Gonzales, to take over the investigation
(www.meixatech.com/HuntertoGonzales2007.pdf ) but was turned down. Gonzales claimed the case was
not in the jurisdiction of the federal government despite the death occurring on a US military base
(www.meixatech.com/DoJtoHunter2007B .pdf ). Chairman Hunter left office without further comment or
action on this matter.
Evidence shows Colonel Sabow sustained a powerful blow to the back of his head in the right occipital
region which knocked him unconscious, fractured his skull and severely damaged his brain stem. The
injury from the blow ultimately led to death of the Colonel. There was a massive hematoma over the skull
fracture as well as heavy swelling on the right side of the Colonel's neck
(www.meixatech.com/SABOW&BURNETT.pdf ) . A 12 gauge shotgun was discharge intraorally
following the Colonel's death. The autopsy of the Colonel was performed by the Orange County
Coroner's Office, California. Bizarrely, the medical examiner claimed suicide although the autopsy
report (www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORTAUTOPSY.pdf ) and photographs, autopsy and crime
scene, can only support homicide.
In 1993 the widow and brother (Dr. Sabow) of the Colonel filed suit against the DOD in the United States
District Court Central District of California Southern Division (SA CV 93-991). Evidence shows the
DOD took possession of the 35mm negatives of the autopsy of the Colonel. Both the Orange County
Coroner and the DOD generated photographic prints from the negatives. The DOD released autopsy




Figure 1. A. The modified photograph of the pre-autopsy photograph (rotated 90 degrees) shown in B; the swelling
of the upper right neck was hidden by airbrushing and depression of the right head (due to skull fractures) was
hidden by the masking procedure. B. The original photograph released by the Orange County Coroner in 2012.
photographs from the negatives in response to the discovery request by the plaintiffs. Neither the DOD
nor the Sabow family knew at the time the Orange County Coroner also made prints of the autopsy
negatives for their file.
In 2011 while I was reviewing some of the DOD-generated autopsy photographs of the Colonel, I realized
the pre-autopsy photograph of the posterior upper body and head (Fig. 1A) had unusual characteristics,
unlike any of the other autopsy photographs, which led me to question its veracity. Overwhelming
support for the questioned photograph being fraudulent came the following year. The Sabow family,
through their lawyer, compelled the Orange County Coroner to release copies of the contents of their
Colonel Sabow autopsy file. To the surprise of all involved, autopsy photograph prints were in the file.
Among these photographs was the unmodified photograph (Fig. 1B) of the one from the DOD that had
been questioned. The modified photograph (Fig. 1A) was constructed to deceive.
Analysis of the modified photograph revealed it was constructed by darkroom manipulation using a mask
as well as airbrushing. The goal was to hide the swelling on the right side of the Colonel's lower head
and upper neck. This work was peer reviewed and presented February 2014 at the annual meeting of the
American Academy of Forensic Sciences (www.meixatech.com/MANIPULATED
PHOTOGRAPHS.pdf). A manuscript (www.meixatech.com/FRAUDULENTIMAGES.pdf ) where my
findings are presented will be submitted to a journal before the end of this year.


Figure 2. A. The cover page and page 16 of the first Nordby report in PDF format released in 2013 in response to a
Freedom of Information Act request to the DOD; the release of this report in 2004 was by fax and the images were
unusable due to poor quality. B. The image shown in A extracted and enlarged; low resolution, JPEG rectangle
artifacts and PDF artifacts severely restricted analysis. However, the extracted image from the PDF document
caused a color shift (black to deep red) mainly in the right neck showing part of the actual swollen area (at arrow).
This area of focused modification was also the in the first modified photograph. The manipulation by imaging
processing for this second fraudulent photograph was obviously poorly done. C. The unmodified photograph from
the Orange County Coroner for comparison.Another fraudulent photograph (Fig. 2), constructed from the same unmodified pre-autopsy photograph
(Fig. 2C) by image processing, was provide by the DOD to Jon Nordby for his first report in 2004
(www.meixatech.com/NORDBY.pdf ) to the US Congress. Nordby used this fraudulent photograph as
support for his conclusion that Colonel Sabow committed suicide.
In 2010 Naval Criminal Investigation Service (NCIS) Special Agent and cold case investigator, Julie
Haney of Camp Pendleton, perhaps initially unbeknownst to her superiors, started work on the Colonel
James E. Sabow case. In her letter of intent she states she is "reinvestigating the suicide case" of Colonel
Sabow (www.meixatech.com/Haney-Wheaton.pdf ) . She allegedly reviewed our and Jon Nordby's
reports and told me and others in our ad hoc group there was no question in her mind Colonel Sabow was
the victim of homicide. One of the individuals in our ad hoc group then got world-renowned forensic
pathologist Dr. Werner Spitz to review the case. Dr. Spitz submitted a notarized report to Julie Haney
(www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORT-SPITZ.pdf ) where he concluded homicide. Several days after
that report was released, Spitz verbally rescinded (i.e., changed his conclusion to suicide) without written
explanation nor could he supply an adequate verbal explanation when asked by Dr. Sabow
(www.meixatech.com/DSABOW-HANEY.pdf ). Haney then dropped her investigation allegedly based
on Spitz's verbal report and a one hour "consultation," in which I was excluded, with Dr. Glenn Wagner,
San Diego County Medical Examiner. However, Robert Romaine, a private investigator involved with
the case, was invited to attend that meeting the day prior to it. Romaine had difficulty understanding
some of the conversation between Haney and Wagner, but recounted aspects of that meeting
(www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORT-ROMAINE.pdf ).
It appears Dr. Wagner did not review any of the reports in this case (he did not have time as my report
was presented to him at the meeting), nor did Haney apparently present any of the observations and
conclusions by myself and Dr. David Sabow. Dr. Wagner rendered an opinion at the end of the meeting
that Colonel Sabow committed suicide. I cannot see how any professional could come to a legitimate
conclusion on a complex death investigation after only an hour's examination. And then restrict it to a
verbal opinion? I was outraged I was not invited to participate in the meeting even though I live in San
Diego County and could have easily attended. It is apparent from Robert Romaine's account that Dr.
Wagner likely focused on the fraudulent autopsy photograph (the meeting occurred more than a year
before the discovery of the fraudulent autopsy photograph) (www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORT-
ROMAINE.pdf and personal communication, August 2014). Following that meeting, I tried to arrange a
lunch presentation of my analysis and conclusions at the San Diego Medical Examiner's facility, through
Dr. Madeleine Hinkes, the San Diego Medical Examiner's chief anthropologist
(www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORT-ROMAINE.pdf ). Dr. Hinkes told me Dr. Wagner turned down
my proposal. Apparently Dr. Wagner wasn't interested in an opposing viewpoint and the prospect that
his determination could be in error. It appears the meeting was a sham to give Haney an excuse to drop
her investigation.
Amazingly, Julie Haney was actually at the scene of the Colonel's death in 1991and likely previously
knew details of the death investigation. She did not volunteer (claimed it was not relevant) to being
present until one of our ad hoc members, Gene Wheaton, pinned her down (www.meixatech.com/Haney-
Wheaton.pdf also www.meixatech.com/David Nicholas.pdf ).
Ms. Haney sent a one-page letter to Dr. Sabow of her findings (www.meixatech.com/SABOWREPORT-
HANEY.pdf ). Haney had most of the reports on this case including those by myself, Dr. David Sabow
and Dr. Jon Nordby, but she obviously had no ability to understand the issues or even identify them.
Issues that conflicted in these reports which require a critical, neutral evaluation are the pathology, GSR
distribution on the clothing of the Colonel, bloodstain/spatter evidence, staging of the death scene etc. Dr.
Wagner should have not only have recognized Haney was not qualified to present a case to him, but also
he was being presented only part of the discovery in the case. It is surprising MS Julie Haney, a veteranof many investigations for the NCIS, handled a case with such incompetence. If she represents the
quality of investigative personnel within our military, our country is truly at risk.
All federal government branches are prohibited from unilaterally thwarting the legitimate ends of a
criminal investigation (United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed. 2D 1039 (1974)). There
was no instruction from Congressman Duncan Hunter, Sr. restricting my investigation into Colonel
Sabow's death either in scope or time. My, as well as Dr. David Sabow's authority from the US
Congress is still active. It is apparent the DOD has been and likely still is actively interfering (e.g.,
fabrication of evidence and likely witness/investigator tampering) with a homicide investigation in
violation of the law. The fraudulent autopsy photographs, fabricated by the DOD, have influenced the
opinions of some experts (e.g., Dr. Nordby and likely Dr. Wagner).
Just the existence of the fraudulent photographs shows there is a criminal element within the DOD, likely
behind the homicide of Colonel Sabow, who will stop at nothing, short of additional homicides, to keep
the Colonel Sabow homicide hidden from public view.
I have provided links to the evidence and reports cited in this case. I invite critical scrutiny
(brburnett@meixatech.com ) of the documents, especially those from myself, Dr. David Sabow and Dr.
Jon Nordby.
* Bryan Burnett lives in Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California. He is a gunshot residue and digital imaging expert as well
as a certified crime scene reconstructionist and has over seventy publications spanning more than forty years in
seven different fields of science (www.meixatech.com/cv.pdf).