William Sawyer Case Study
William Sawyer’s 12/16/15 Report – Plaintiff’s toxicology expert
It is Mr. Sawyer’s opinion within reasonable toxicological certanty that, upon the analyses conducted to date and facts in the case, including the history of Det. Broehm’s incident, there is reasonable probable cause and sufficient evidence that the Mosquito Magnet® was the proximal cause of Mrs. McCool’s death. According to him there is evidence that the “Patriot Mosquito Magnet” (the McCool’s trap is an Independence model) is capable of releasing sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions within the range consistent with induction of restrictive airways which may have caused Mrs. McCool to suffer a transient hypoxia and dizziness that in turn caused her to fall onto the pool deck and …show more content…
Sawyer also mentions that Mrs. McCool purchased Cutter Backyard ™ Bug Control Outdoor Fogger on the day of her death and that she contracted a landscaping company that maintained her yard and shrubs. He opines that if the Mosquito Magnet was incidentally sprayed with a sulfur-containing product by Mrs. McCool or by the landscaping maintenance personnel, then the exogenous contamination of the Magnet with sulfur containing sprays may have further enhanced the formation of sulfur dioxide. Sawyer also refers to Kaltofen’s findings that the propane used to fuel the McCool’s trap contained 44.7 PPP (by weight) reduced sulfur. Additionally, Sawyer reiterates that the Patriot Mosquito Magnet is capable of producing toxic gases at levels of at least 2 PPM (5,244 ug/m3 ) consistent with dose-dependent variable degrees of bronchoconstriction depending on the individual’s sensitivity to SO2. According to him there are peer-reviewed studies that reveal that higher acute exposure levels among healthy non-asthmatics individuals greater than 1 PPM reveal mild to severe bronchoconstriction over a 1 PPM up to 40 PPM dose range producing severe bronchoconstriction at 40 …show more content…
Marthinums van Schoor Report dated 12/11/15
Dr. van Schoor’s report is divided into different sections and subsections. The sections that are specific to his opinion are summarized below.
It is Dr. van Schoor’s opinion that Woodstream “designed” the Mosquito Magnet and that their engineers had the responsibility to ensure that the trap was safe and reliable, which in turn called for an ASME engineering Code of Ethics. According to Dr. van Schoor this Code states the following:
- Engineers should hold paramount the lives, safety, health and welfare of the public. - Engineers shall not approve plans and/or specifications that are not safe for the public health and welfare according to engineering standards; - When engineers’ professional judgments are over ruled by circumstances where the health and welfare of the public are endangered, engineers shall inform their clients or employers of the possible consequences; - Engineers should provide data and publish standards, test codes, and quality control procedures that would allow the users to understand the safe use of the products or systems; - Engineers show conduct review of safety and reliability of the designs, products, or systems before approving the design
It is Mr. Sawyer’s opinion within reasonable toxicological certanty that, upon the analyses conducted to date and facts in the case, including the history of Det. Broehm’s incident, there is reasonable probable cause and sufficient evidence that the Mosquito Magnet® was the proximal cause of Mrs. McCool’s death. According to him there is evidence that the “Patriot Mosquito Magnet” (the McCool’s trap is an Independence model) is capable of releasing sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions within the range consistent with induction of restrictive airways which may have caused Mrs. McCool to suffer a transient hypoxia and dizziness that in turn caused her to fall onto the pool deck and …show more content…
Sawyer also mentions that Mrs. McCool purchased Cutter Backyard ™ Bug Control Outdoor Fogger on the day of her death and that she contracted a landscaping company that maintained her yard and shrubs. He opines that if the Mosquito Magnet was incidentally sprayed with a sulfur-containing product by Mrs. McCool or by the landscaping maintenance personnel, then the exogenous contamination of the Magnet with sulfur containing sprays may have further enhanced the formation of sulfur dioxide. Sawyer also refers to Kaltofen’s findings that the propane used to fuel the McCool’s trap contained 44.7 PPP (by weight) reduced sulfur. Additionally, Sawyer reiterates that the Patriot Mosquito Magnet is capable of producing toxic gases at levels of at least 2 PPM (5,244 ug/m3 ) consistent with dose-dependent variable degrees of bronchoconstriction depending on the individual’s sensitivity to SO2. According to him there are peer-reviewed studies that reveal that higher acute exposure levels among healthy non-asthmatics individuals greater than 1 PPM reveal mild to severe bronchoconstriction over a 1 PPM up to 40 PPM dose range producing severe bronchoconstriction at 40 …show more content…
Marthinums van Schoor Report dated 12/11/15
Dr. van Schoor’s report is divided into different sections and subsections. The sections that are specific to his opinion are summarized below.
It is Dr. van Schoor’s opinion that Woodstream “designed” the Mosquito Magnet and that their engineers had the responsibility to ensure that the trap was safe and reliable, which in turn called for an ASME engineering Code of Ethics. According to Dr. van Schoor this Code states the following:
- Engineers should hold paramount the lives, safety, health and welfare of the public. - Engineers shall not approve plans and/or specifications that are not safe for the public health and welfare according to engineering standards; - When engineers’ professional judgments are over ruled by circumstances where the health and welfare of the public are endangered, engineers shall inform their clients or employers of the possible consequences; - Engineers should provide data and publish standards, test codes, and quality control procedures that would allow the users to understand the safe use of the products or systems; - Engineers show conduct review of safety and reliability of the designs, products, or systems before approving the design