State of New Hampshire v. Jean E. Allan
Docket No. 09-cr-1293(198841C)
Opinion Based on Fact, Circumstantial Evidence & The Obvious
This "Opening Statement" introduction and following postings in this matter have been Written by Jean E. Allan aka Jean E. Allan Sovik, (hereinafter known as DEFENDANT), beginning on this date (March 15, 2012) in re: State of New Hampshire v Jean E. Allan Docket No: 09-cr-1293-4 (199163c,199164c) & 09-cr-1346 (20016164c) and in re:Docket No: 09-CR-4147, in the Jurisdiction of Laconia District Court, 23 Academy Street, Laconia, New Hampshire 03246

NO WITNESS=NO CASE (Installment 11)


The intent of this installment is part of the Deathbed Promise that I made on March 22, 2001 to my Mother, Agnes Sovik Allan (Aggie). This installment is not intended to be a biography of my Mother’s life, although that story is, without a doubt, a fascinating one. It is about a young girl living and working as a nurse and part-time model in New York City, during the days of the depression, who marries a sea captain, and shortly thereafter moves to the Panama Canal Zone, where she lived for the next thirty years, or so. No, this installment is intended to be a chronicle of my mother’s last days of life while she was a patient in the Lakes Region General Hospital located in Laconia, New Hampshire.

For the most part the cause of Aggie’s death, as recounted by me herein, is in her own words. Shortly before she died, it was with great effort that she told me what had happened to her. And for the most part, the hospital records and testimony of an attending nurse support her story. I use the phrase ‘for the most part’ with particularity. This is because the Lakes Region General Hospital Records were redacted within days of Aggie’s death, and the un-redacted records have never been released to Aggie’s estate. I also promised Aggie, as she had requested, that I would seek to discover and expose those responsible.

As bad as Aggie’s last days were (in her words "they are awful, awful") the facts are obscure. There is no legitimate paper trail of her remains once the State of New Hampshire’s Office of Attorney General [NH OAG] took jurisdiction of her body sometime in early April 2001. I was informed that Asst Attorney General Kelly Ayotte was the person in charge. I was informed that an agent named Chapman was sent to accompany my Mother’s remains to the NH Office of Medical Examiner where a forensic autopsy was to be performed. I was informed by someone in the NH OAG that once it took jurisdiction I no longer had any decision rights, nor could I accompany her body to Concord. A FOIA has confirmed that Aggie’s file in the NH OAG is woefully incomplete as well as inaccurate. (Many of the documents used in this installment were saved by our beloved family friend, now also deceased, W. Kent Martling.)

The last time I saw Aggie was approximately 3AM on the morning of March 22, 2001. She agreed to die, after I agreed to make my Promise to her. Therefore, this installment is more about what I do not know, than it is about what I do know. As much as I requested information, "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof of Aggie’s alleged homicide had and has been either lost, stolen, or covered up. The chain of custody of Aggie’s remains does not exist. Anywhere! Where Aggie’s remains went after the State of New Hampshire took jurisdiction is still a mystery. And, until such time that the State of New Hampshire can supply me with answers to the questions that I have been asking since her death, my efforts to keep my Promise will continue.


NOTE: If you are a new Reader of this series "NO WITNESS = NO CASE", you may want to begin with reading the ten prior installments before you read this one. The main objective of this Series of Installments is to lay out DEFENDANT’s rebuttal argument, and "Affirmative Defenses" to the State’s REPORT "Testimony" that was faxed to the Laconia District Court [LDC] in re: 09-cr-1293-4 minutes prior to the hearing on the merits of the May 15-16, 2009 arrests in re: 1293-94 (in both cases the DEFENDANT is charged with misdemeanor criminal trespass). In re: 1293-94 the misdemeanor was an "A" classification, which entitled her to a Public Defender attorney. In re: 4147 the charges were classified a "B" and therefore the DEFENDANT had to defend herself, pro se. The REPORT "Testimony" was also submitted to the court in re: 09-E-4147, whose charges and the subsequent arrests of the DEFENDANT occurred after the Belknap County Superior Court ORDER that GRANTED DEFENDANT’s MOTION for a Temporary Restraining Order against Waukewan Holdings, LLC.


Serial Readers, by now, most likely have a good idea whether DEFENDANT’s testimony as laid out in the Series of Installments to date, would have been "meritorious" if given a full and fair hearing in a court of law. And, Serial Readers will most likely agree that "but for" the State’s Report that quashed DEFENDANT’s due process rights to a ‘full and fair’ hearing, the issues that have been raised herein could have already been resolved. One ongoing question is what could have been the incentives of certain State’s agents to act the way they did? In this installment (A DAUGHTER'S PROMISE) the Readers’ will be given the opportunity to contemplate the answer to the State’s motives and incentives. As you can glean from the title, this installment, above all the other installments in the Series NO WITNESS=NO CASE, has been the most difficult to write. But, a promise is a promise. And, for all the Readers that knew Agnes Sovik Allan, they know that one does not break a promise made to anyone; and, especially one made to her.

So, this one is for you Aggie!


Consistent with the practice of reporting throughout this Series of Installments, issues introduced into evidence, in the State’s REPORT "expert testimony", has been considered fair game for DEFENDANT to refute or challenge herein.

The issue of Agnes Sovik Allan was included in the Report "expert testimony" in two separate contexts:

    • On page 3, in Relevant History section, the REPORT stated that: "Ms Allan said she was born in Margarita, Canal Zone with dual citizenship (US and Panama). She had an older brother who dies shortly after childbirth in 1941. She described her father as a boat pilot for the Panama Canal who also later served as Port Captain for the Canal. She said he had previously turned down a scholarship to attend Brown University and instead enrolled at a maritime school at "Fort Skylar" (sic). She described her mother as a ‘nurse and model’ who had attended nursing school in Manhattan and who in the Canal Zone became "a diplomat’s wife" and engaged in "philanthropy….She denied any particular problems or traumas during childhood or adolescence, describing "great parents, great friends" and a youth characterized by "honors, cheerleading, sports, ROTC". She lived in the Canal Zone attending American schools until entering college at age 18."
      • On page 8, in Relevant History section, the REPORT stated that: "Ms. Allan writes that "2001 was a very bad year". Her 90 year old mother was living with her and had become "very distressed with the constant threats that were being made to take our home". She said her mother had twice suffered the distress of being "erased for the US Government Pension records". She developed a bladder infection in March and died April 14 (sic) "from what I allege to be suspicious causes". She said she demanded a forensic autopsy but her mother’s body "went missing" while in the custody of the NH Medical Examiner and "the case remains a mystery to me this day". She said no investigation was pursued despite her demands."
        • On page 12, in Mental Status and Current level of Functioning section, the REPORT stated that, among other things: "The content of Ms. Allan’s thinking as circumscribed within her living and evolving "case study" or "story", does appear to be psychotic, characterized by a web of non-bizarre and delusional perceptions and beliefs that is self-justified and self-fueled by its own internal logic. She appears to be caught up in a paranoid narrative that also has grandiose and somatic features, as subsequent events as they transpire become integrated within this narrative….Consistent with an over arching paranoid theme of a conspiracy to harm her and her family, individuals she has encountered become imposters, frauds, schemers, or at least contaminated or compromised parties to the conspiracy."

        Let’s begin this rebuttal installment by examining the State’s above quoted ‘expert testimony’, and its shorthand diagnosis that DEFENDANT’s "delusional perceptions and beliefs that is self-justified and self-fueled by its own internal logic". Serial readers will recall the State’s "expert" defended its REPORT "Testimony" with the excuse that: "It was not feasible and beyond the scope of this evaluation to attempt an account that will exhaustively cover every detail as reported by Ms. Allan".

        Fair enough, given the fact this report was based on a review of documents provided to the examiner without my permission, and a 45 minute interview process that was interrupted on three occasions, leaving interview time of approximately 25 minutes, at best. However, again, as DEFENANT has already pointed out in this series in prior installments, if the "expert" would have just googled the search terms, "Medical Examiner Staff Involved in Shakedown", it would have found some interesting facts about a scandal that involved a "shakedown scheme" by the NH Medical Examiner’s Office, which involved certain employees of that office who had taken "kick-backs" from certain crematoriums in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and in return, did not view the remains that were to be cremated. Below, please find certain quotes that have been taken from New Hampshire media stories that concern the unidentified remains of bodies which at the time were in the jurisdiction of the Office of the New Hampshire Medical Examiner. The reporting below has not been "self-justified" or "self-fueled", but written by responsible reporters reciting facts from others in the New Hampshire law enforcement community.

        • New England Sun Journal – June 2, 2008 – "Ex-forensic chief seeks plea deal for 40 charges" – "The former chief forensic investigator for the state (NH) medical examiner says she probably will accept a plea agreement to resolve the nearly 40 felony charges she faces"… "Kathrine Wieder, 53, is accused of failing to inspect bodies before they were cremated and improperly accepting fees for the work."… "The investigation into the medical examiner’s office came after a deputy who worked under Wieder was charged with stealing medication from the death scenes and improperly filing records. Wieder acknowledges that she sometimes did not inspect the bodies before receiving her $35 fee but said she was following the office’s established practices." "She (Wieder) said, adding that she believes the attorney general’s office was aware of the practice and never intervened."

        • New England Sun Journal – June 2, 2008 – "" The entire presentation of this defendant is one of a person who dramatically and flamboyantly draws attention to herself as a victim in many ways while demanding special treatment as a result," wrote Dr. James Adams, the Department of Corrections’ chief forensic examiner, who was asked to evaluate Wielder’s competency."

        • Kelly Ayotte is on record as being NH Attorney General from June 15, 2004 (when she was tapped by Craig Benson to replace former NH Attorney General Peter Heed) until July 17, 2009. [NOTE: Kelly Ayotte was the person assigned by the Office of New Hampshire Attorney General to take official jurisdiction of the remains of Agnes Sovik Allan when her body was removed from the Lakes Region General Hospital. To this date the State of New Hampshire cannot provide a paper trail for the remains of Agnes Sovik Allan since her body was claimed by the New Hampshire Office of the Medical Examiner on April 1 2001.]

        • Concord Monitor – March 25, 2005 – "Authorities discovered crime scene evidence – including prescription drugs and materials relating to an old murder case – stashed in a storage unit rented by a former state forensic examiner (Kathrine Wieder) charged with fraud"… "The person who tipped the police off to the storage facility reported visiting the locker with Wieder, seeing several cardboard boxes holding files from the medical examiner cases and prescriptions stored in a black bag, according to court records."… "When the police searched the locker, they found records from the medical examiner’s office and a box containing evidence of a past New Hampshire homicide, court records say."… "During a search of Wieder’s home in October, the police recovered medication for two other death investigations, along with "several documents and files of decedents", State police Detective Jill Rockey wrote in her affidavit.

        • Concord Monitor – March 9, 2005 "Through their investigation, the police found Bayview Crematory in Seabrook was cremating bodies without state approval."… "Medical examiners are paid $35 for each cremation they certify. According to court documents, Wieder made about $20,000 last year from one crematorium alone". [NOTE: This implies that there were other crematoriums paying ‘kick backs’.]

        • Eagle Tribune – July 4, 2008 – "Wieder had faced more than 50 charges across three counties — Rockingham, Merrimack and Hillsborough — that could have landed her in state prison for years had she been convicted at trial. She pleaded guilty to 35 charges yesterday, which included felony theft by deception, fraudulent handling of recordable writing and misdemeanor charges of criminal solicitation and official oppression."

        Ok, so now we know that the State’s "expert testimony" on October 13, 2009 to the Laconia District Court was NOT "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". Not only was the "kick-back" scheme alleged, but Kathrine Wieder pled guilty. Her defense was that she did not act without the knowledge of the NH Attorney General’s office. Additionally, you have just read that it was the NH Office of Forensic Examiner that performed the competency exam on Kathrine Wieder. In fact, Dr. Adams, just days before his sudden death (click here), was scheduled to perform a forensic evaluation on the DEFENDANT. He was replaced by Dr. Petrou, who became the "expert witness", and author of the October 13, 2009 REPORT that is the subject of this rebuttal series of installments.

        What the above information also informs the Readers of is that the State of New Hampshire has apparently created a set of laws that applies to the Office of Medical Examiner in alleged homicide investigations. So, the next piece of information that would be material for the Readers’ to evaluate is the NH statute that controls the NH Office of the Medical Examiner. Those mandates are incorporated into RSA: 611-B section, as enumerated below. Considering that the NH OAG Criminal Justice Bureau took jurisdiction of Aggie’s body, it is evident that RSA 611-B is the applicable standard by which to judge the State’s actions.

        As a recap:

        • We know that Kathrine Wieder, pled guilty to a ‘kick back’ scheme that involved taking $35 per body, and yet she did not view the body prior to cremation.

        • We know that Kathrine Wieder had alleged in her defense that the State of New Hampshire’s Office of Attorney General was aware of her activities, but did not intervene to stop them.

        • We know from direct quotes from various investigators as well as what has been reported in the press that certain court records and through quotes from various investigators that documents and files that belong to the State of New Hampshire, and that should have been under lock and key in the files of the NH OAG were found under lock and key in private lockers owned or rented by Ms. Wieder.

        From the press reported above, it is clear that the NH OAG had a larger problem than just Ms. Wieder, but the plea bargain, which was settled for one year of home confinement quashed any further investigation into the systemic problems of the Office. Please note that this also included security of homicide files.

        Using RSA 611-B as an example of how Aggie’s remains were processed within the NH OAG system, the personal fact set of Agnes’ (Aggie’s) death, and yet to be located remains will be inserted (when applicable) into the general laws that apply to RSA 611-B section. Some of the facts to be introduced are from Aggie’s deathbed testimony to me. In a court of law my statements may be ruled inadmissible. But, since the NH OAG refused to witness Aggie’s deathbed statements, I am her voice (a daughter’s voice). And, now even my voice has no consequence, since I have been ruled ‘not competent’ by the State. NO WITNESS=NO CASE.

        Other facts (as stated above) came from certain nurses’ testimony to me, and my Mother’s redacted medical file. The complete Agnes S. Allan Autopsy File was confiscated on May 15, 2009, when I was arrested and evicted from the cottage that was owned by the Jean E Vorisek Family Trust, and located in Center Harbor, New Hampshire. Aggie had lived in her ‘little casita’, since 1978. A question for the Readers to ponder is: If there was nothing to Aggie’s claim of being poisoned, and then subdued by force by certain doctors and staff of the Lakes Region General Hospital, then why did certain agents of the State of New Hampshire go to such effort to erase the paper trail of her body, and then cover it up with its REPORT diagnosis that I am ‘not competent’? Is the answer simply: NO WITNESS = NO CASE?


        B:11 Oath; Duty To Investigate in Medico-legal Case.

        I. Each medical examiner shall, before entering upon the duties of the office, take an oath of office.

        II. A medical examiner shall make investigations in medico-legal cases. A medico-legal case exists when death is pronounced or remains are found indicating that a human has died and that death is known or suspected to have resulted from:

        (h) Poison, illicit drug use, or an overdose of any drug or medication.

        • On June 12, 2001 in my capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Agnes S. Allan, I wrote to Attorney General Philip McLaughlin. Incorporated into the June 12, 2001 letter was a request for a formal investigation into Aggie’s death. The letter also included a complaint of Medicare Fraud. In addition to Aggie’s allegations that she was poisoned, and then subdued by force by certain employees of the Lakes Region General Hospital, the hospital billed Medicare for $43,000 worth of surgery that it had never performed. (Aggie was on the FEP insurance plan since she was the widow of a US Government employee. My father, Captain Robert A. Allan was employed by the Marine Division of the Panama Canal Company for over 30 years.)

        • In the letter, I explained to NH AG McLaughlin that the doctor that allegedly performed Aggie’s forensic autopsy said he found that she had not recently had any surgery, which was consistent with even the redacted hospital records, and my personal observations. The problem, as the records would show, is that Dr. Gilson never performed an autopsy on Aggie. When she was admitted to Lakes Region General Hospital she weighed, as she would say, "135 pounds soaking wet".

        • The woman that Dr. Gilson allegedly autopsied weighed 169 pounds. And, there were many other irregularities that should prove the "Jane Doe" file that I paid Katherine Wieder $35 for, was not Aggie. (And, yes, it is the one and the same Katherine Wieder that pled guilty in the "$35 per fraudulent cremation kick back" scheme that has been reported upon above.)

        (Serial Readers will recall the "I smell a rat" test. Well, hold your noses for this one.)


        611-B:14-a; Medical Records

        "For the purpose of any medical examination into the cause and manner of death, and where medical treatment has been provided to the decedent who is the subject of the examination, upon written request of the supervising medical examiner any individual, partnership, association, corporation, institution, or governmental entity which has rendered such treatment shall provide the supervising medical examiner with all medical records pertaining to the decedent and the treatment rendered.

        "This section shall not preclude the supervising medical examiner from directly inspecting or obtaining any medical records pertaining to a case under the jurisdiction of the chief medical examiner

        ." The records shall be promptly provided to the supervising medical examiner. When the records are incorporated into the files of the medical examiner or the office of the chief medical examiner, they shall be confidential and shall not be available for public inspection.
        • Again, with special thanks to Kent Martling, we now have a copy of a letter dated on July 9, 2001, from the NH OAG and signed by Charles T. Putnam, Chief of Criminal Bureau. To quote:

        "Your letters dated June 12, and June 25, have been referred to me for review and response. I have carefully reviewed your letters to determine if this office could be of some assistance to you. I appreciate the amount of time and effort that you took to document your concerns."

        "As you may know, a forensic autopsy was conducted on your mother’s remains. We are waiting for the results of various tests conducted with the autopsy."

        "Thank you for your time and attention that you have given to this matter. I appreciate your concern for determining the precise cause of your mother’s death."

        • There appears to be no record of any further communications from NH OAG to Aggie’s Autopsy Report. A FOIA request did not even find the above copied letter in the NH AG’s official files.
        611-B:13; Charge Of Body

        Last revised 2007§ -Whenever the medical examiner has notice of the body of a person whose death is supposed to have been caused in a manner described in RSA 611-B:11, the medical examiner shall take charge of the body and may go to the place where such body lies. The medical examiner may authorize the moving of the body.

        • Unfortunately, at least at this time, we have been unable to locate the series of faxes that I wrote to then NH AG McLaughlin, which explained the series of events that created the need for the State’s Medical Examiner to take jurisdiction of Aggie’s remains.

        • But, if I had not been found to be ‘not competent’ I would have testified to my personal knowledge of the events. In short, after Aggie’s primary care doctor signed a consent document which would have allowed the Lakes Region General Hospital’s pathologist to perform the forensic autopsy, she reneged.

        • I contacted several other NH private hospitals to see if they would perform the autopsy. Dartmouth Hitchcock initially agreed, and then withdrew its consent.

        • Finally, when Dr. Abbott, the administrator of Lakes Region General Hospital, essentially threatened to throw Aggie’s body out into the dumpster in the parking lot, the NH OAG consented to take jurisdiction. And, that is where the paper trail ends.
        611-B:15; Postmortem Examination (Last revised 2007)

        I. If the medical examiner determines that an external examination of the body is necessary to determine the manner and cause of death, the medical examiner may arrange for the body to be transported to a funeral home or other facility where an examination can be conducted. In the event that the decedent’s family or next of kin does not employ the services of the funeral home or other facility used to transport the body, the cost of that transport shall be billed to the state.

        II. In the event an autopsy is ordered, the medical examiner shall arrange for the body to be transported to the morgue. The cost of that transport shall be billed to the state.

          • Although I am not in possession of the actual statement and payment made, the attached letter that has just been rediscovered by me clearly shows that it was the Mayhew Funeral Home that picked up Aggie’s body at the direction of the NH OAG Kelly Ayotte. But, I paid the bill contrary to the above II, which states: "the cost of that transport shall be billed to the state".

          • In a June 21, 2003 letter, almost two years after Aggie was transported to the NH Office of Medical Examiner in Concord, NH; and, after being stonewalled by the State for NOT producing the chain of custody paperwork, which I had requested in order to Probate Aggie’s estate; I requested the information from Mayhew Funeral Home. To wit:

          "I am writing to you to request an affidavit of the bill of particulars surrounding your Funeral Home’s services to Agnes S. Allan. Specifically, please attach all descriptions of actions consistent with "all governing laws, policies, procedures, and requirements of the Lakes Region General Hospital, the Mayhew Funeral Home, the Granite State Crematory and the State of New Hampshire. Please specify any contacts you may have had with the New Hampshire Department of Justice during the course of its homicide investigation."

          "Agnes S. Allan died, in her words, an "awful, awful" death at the hands of the Lakes Region General Hospital on May 22, 2001. To this date her estate has not received a final death certificate, nor the forensic autopsy that was allegedly performed on her body, sometime in the first week of April, 2001."

          "As her only surviving child I filed a request for an investigation into her death shortly after she died. A letter was received by me from the New Hampshire Department of Justice, Homicide Division stating such an investigation was underway. I have received no further official information form the NH Department of Justice as to the status of that investigation." [In 2003 Ms Ayotte had left the service of the NH OAG and became personal counsel to then Governor Craig Benson]

          "The State’s Medical Examiner’s Office has a policy that for one to get a copy of the autopsy report, pictures included, one must submit a check payable to the State of New Hampshire. I did as the procedure required. To date the estate of Agnes S. Allan has not received a copy of the autopsy report, and without a final cause of death, I am told, there cannot be a final death certificate."

          "Any and all information that you can provide to the estate of Agnes S. Allan would be helpful in finding out the truth of the matter. I am especially interested in your providing me with any and all paperwork that the Mayhew Funeral Home received from the Lakes Region General Hospital that legally allowed for the removal of Agnes’ body from the hospital and the documented authority that gave you permission to transport her body from the hospital to the Office of Medical Examiner in Concord, New Hampshire; and, from there, the legal paperwork that allowed Mayhew to have her body cremated."

          "More than two years later, there are many unanswered questions and the estate of Agnes S. Allan cannot be legally settled until they are legally answered, in accordance with Probate Court Rules and all other governing law, policies, procedures, and requirements of the State of New Hampshire and the government of the United States of America. Agnes was a pensioner of the Federal Government, as you are aware. Until these issues can be resolved, Agnes cannot have a funeral service, not can her ashes be placed in consecrated ground. Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this very serious investigation into the death of Agnes S. Allan."


          Jean E. Allan

          III. The medical examiner performing the postmortem examination shall take and preserve, under proper seal, such portions of the body and its contents, together with such other articles that may require subsequent examination in order to determine the manner and cause of death.( Revisions , eff. Sept. 14, 2007.)

          • Whether this mandate was in effect in April 2001 is not known to me, but if it was the above mandate was not fulfilled by the NH Office of Medical Examiner as the above letter certifies.

          • And, considering the above reporting on Ms. Wieder’s personal stash of homicide cases, it is clear that the problem was systemic.


          611-B:17; Performance Of Autopsies (Last revised 2007)

          I. If the supervising medical examiner, attorney general, or county attorney deems that an autopsy is necessary, he or she shall direct that one be made. The commissioner of the department of health and human services may, pursuant to RSA 126-A:5, V, request an autopsy of any individual who dies while admitted to, a resident of, or receiving care from New Hampshire hospital, Glencliff home, or any other residential facility operated by the department or a contract service provider.

          II. The supervising medical examiner shall have the authority to conduct an autopsy and shall comply with any request by the attorney general, a county attorney, or the commissioner of health and human services to perform an autopsy.

          • Allegedly, Deputy AG Kelly Ayotte authorized the supervising medical examiner to conduct a forensic autopsy on Aggie. At that time, the State of NH claimed to have jurisdiction over her remains.

          611-B:2; Chief Medical Examiner; Authority; Rulemaking (Last revised 2007)

          I. There is hereby established within the department of justice the office of chief medical examiner. The office shall be under the immediate supervision of a person who shall be known as the "chief medical examiner," and who shall be a duly licensed physician and certified by the American Board of Pathology to possess special competence in forensic pathology and who has had experience in forensic medicine. The chief medical examiner shall be nominated by the attorney general and appointed by the governor and council and shall serve for a term of 5 years and until a successor is appointed, unless sooner removed by the governor and council for cause in accordance with the provisions of RSA 4:1. The chief medical examiner shall be subject to direction and control by the attorney general in all matters relating to the enforcement of the criminal law. The chief medical examiner shall enforce the provisions of this chapter. The chief medical examiner or designee shall be continually available for emergency consultation as necessary for carrying out the functions of this office.


          611-B:21; Autopsy And Investigative Reports (Last revised 2007)

          I. The medical examiner shall charge a reasonable fee for each autopsy report made available upon request. Such fee shall be credited to the medico-legal investigation fund established under RSA 611-B:28.

          • At the time I was asked by Katherine Wieder for a check for $35, I believed that to be the amount the State charged for autopsy reports with pictures. Coincidentally, it is the same amount that Ms. Wieder charged to sign off sight unseen on the paperwork to illegally cremate a body. (Are you all holding your noses by now?)

          II. Homicide autopsy reports shall be made available only to the department of justice unless a written release is provided by the department of justice.

          • If Aggie’s autopsy report was released and/or provided to the NH OAG, a FOIA found no record of such action.

          III. Except as provided otherwise by law and in rules adopted by the chief medical examiner pursuant to RSA 541-A, autopsy reports, investigative reports, and supporting documentation are confidential medical records and, as such, are exempt from the provisions of RSA 91-A. Copies of such documents may be made available to the next of kin, a law enforcement, prosecutorial, or other governmental agency involved in the investigation of the death, the decedent’s treating physician, and a medical or scientific body or university or similar organization for educational or research purposes. Autopsy reports, investigative reports, and supporting documents shall not otherwise be released without the authorization of next of kin.

          • Considering that I was the Executrix of the Estate of Agnes S. Allan, pursuant to the above section, I should have had access to all documents that related to Aggie’s autopsy. And, when I finally did get an autopsy report of a Jane Doe who was clearly not Aggie, I should have been able to get an explanation for the mix up. Instead a "cover up" was put into effect. And, that cover up has remained, and remains to this day and to the posting of this installment.

          IV. The copy of the report provided to the department under this section shall be privileged and confidential as provided in RSA 126-A:4, IV(b), except that the medical examiner may forward a copy of the report to the department of justice if the medical examiner finds that the cause of death may be attributable to criminal conduct, or may otherwise disclose the report in accordance with this statute.


          611-B:27-a; Autopsy Expenses (Last revised 2007)

          I. All autopsy-related bills shall be submitted to the office of the chief medical examiner, which shall authorize them and submit them for payment to the state treasurer, chargeable to the medico-legal investigative fund established pursuant to RSA 611-B:28.

          II. For purposes of this section, autopsy expenses shall include morgue costs, microscopic processes, toxicology, body transportation, x-ray costs, and other ancillary testing costs.

          • The Estate of Agnes S. Allan paid $35 to the State of New Hampshire pursuant to the direction given to it by Katherine Wieder. And, if the above mandates were in effect in 2001, the payments were taken in violation of the section above.


          611-B:24; Release Of Body (Last revised 2007)

          The medical examiner, upon the completion of the investigation, shall release the dead body, upon their claim therefore, to one of the following persons:

          I. The husband or wife, as the case may be.

          II. The next of kin.

          III. Any friend of the deceased.

          • Considering all of the information laid out above, if this mandate was in full force and effect in 2001, this section was also violated by the State of New Hampshire’s Office of Attorney General and Office of Medical Examiners.


          611-B:6; Indemnification Of Medical Examiner (Last revised 2007)

          The provisions of RSA 99-D shall apply to the chief medical examiner and any other medical examiner or investigator employed in the office of the chief medical examiner for claims arising from the scope of their official duties, including, but not limited to, the practice of forensic pathology and the practice of clinical forensic medicine.



          • 99-D:1; Statement of Policy. – It is the intent of this chapter to protect state officers, trustees, officials, employees, and members of the general court who are subject to claims and civil actions arising from acts committed within the scope of their official duty while in the course of their employment for the state and not in a wanton or reckless manner. It is not intended to create a new remedy for injured persons or to waive the state's sovereign immunity which is extended by law to state officers, trustees, officials, and employees. The doctrine of sovereign immunity of the state, and by the extension of that doctrine, the official immunity of officers, trustees, officials, or employees of the state or any agency thereof acting within the scope of official duty and not in a wanton or reckless manner, except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, is hereby adopted as the law of the state. The immunity of the state's officers, trustees, officials, and employees as set forth herein shall be applicable to all claims and civil actions, which claims or actions arise against such officers, trustees, officials, and employees in their personal capacity or official capacity, or both such capacities, from acts or omissions within the scope of their official duty while in the course of their employment for the state and not in a wanton or reckless manner.

          • Willful and wanton conduct means "acting consciously in disregard of or acting with a reckless indifference to the consequences, when the Defendant is aware of her conduct and is also aware, from her knowledge of existing circumstances and conditions that her conduct would probably result in injury." [Duncan v. Duncan (In re Duncan), 448 F.3d 725, 729 (4th Cir. Va. 2006)]

          Keeping all the above in mind, Aggie’s last "awful, awful" days (as she struggled to tell me, and as I was able to glean from her redacted hospital record, and from the verbal testimony of certain on duty nurses), are now recounted below in her "daughter’s voice":

            • The episode began on March 9, 2001. Aggie had just finished her bath and was feeling "woozy". Against Aggie’s wishes I called her doctor and an ambulance was sent to pick her up, and take her to Lakes Region General Hospital. Aggie had recently turned 90. It seemed, at the time, to be the prudent thing to do.

            • When Aggie was admitted at the Emergency Room, blood tests were taken it was found that Aggie had a high red blood count. The Emergency Room doctor decided to admit her, and began a regime of Cipro.

            • The next day I came to visit her and she appeared to be much better. She was complaining about the food, and wanted to come home. (The technical information gleaned from the Aggie’s medical records are excerpted in the June 12, 2001 letter to NH AG McLaughlin). After speaking with the floor doctor Fredrick Hartman, I did not sense that Aggie was critical so I left for the night.

            • The redacted hospital records show that Dr. Hartman, who was not her primary care physician (and without consulting Aggie’s primary care physician, that I am aware of) ordered her medication to be change. Remember Aggie was trained as a nurse, and she was still very keen.

            • The redacted hospital records show that on the critical morning of March 11th (coincidently the nurse list was redacted from the medical file) Aggie was given Ampicillin, a drug that Aggie’s primary care physician would have known she was allergic too. Also the hospital record shows her allergy to Ampicillin at the top of the medical administration sheet. She was ultimately given four doses.

            • Then according to what Aggie told me, and what the redacted hospital record shows is that Dr. Hartman on his last round of visits told Aggie that she would "not make it through the night". A nurse, wrote the threat down in her daily progress notes. She later confirmed to me personally that Aggie had told her of Dr. Hartman’s threat. Aggie told the nurse she was afraid to go sleep.

            • The redacted hospital records record that Aggie knew that she was developing an allergic reaction to the medications. She did not know that Dr. Hartman had switched out the Cipro for the Ampicillin. Aggie confirmed to me that she knew she was going to go into anaphylactic shock, if something wasn’t done, and done quickly.

            • The redacted hospital records show that after many complaints about the medication, Aggie took it upon herself to pull out the intravenous tubes that were supplying the medications to her.

            • The redacted hospital records, the nurses, and Aggie all report that Dr. Capron, (not Aggie’s primary care physician, but a partner in the practice) ordered, from his home (it was now a little after mid-night) the duty nurses to reinsert the intravenous with the Ampicillin. Aggie struggled to keep it out, and according to Aggie and at least one of the nurses present, she was subdued by force in the process.

            • In the struggle, the intravenous was reinserted incorrectly, and the poison then rapidly spread throughout her system.

            • According to all accounts, shortly thereafter large allergic lumps began to form under Aggie’s tongue. The lumps were full of fluid, and the records show that the nurse recognized that Aggie was suffering from a severe allergic reaction to the Ampicillin.

            • Protocol was to call Dr. Capron again. Dr. Capron (again from home) did not order the termination of the Ampicillin but instead added Vicodin to the mix. Aggie’s record showed that she was also allergic to narcotics of which Vicodin would have been one.

            • According to all accounts, Aggie immediately went into anaphylactic shock.

            • Although the Order sheet clearly said that I was immediately be called if there were any change in Aggie’s condition from the last time I saw her. The call never came. I was fifteen minutes away. The above deterioration of her condition happened over a period of some hours.

            • According to all accounts, Aggie was then removed to ICU. She was somehow administered the drug Ketamine, a drug that is known to produce hallucinogenic states, or more commonly known as the date rape drug because the victim has no memory of the event.

            • While the attack was going on the records show that Aggie’s blood pressure went sky high, but then began to subside again.

            • According to the redacted record, around 6AM on March 12, Dr. Capron (still calling from home) ordered all medication to cease. I still had not been called.

            • Sometime after 6:30 AM I got an anonymous call from someone at the Lakes Region General Hospital. The caller told me Aggie had died.

            • I rushed to the Lakes Region General Hospital, but on the way I was pulled over and told that there was something wrong with my Jeep, and it needed to be impounded immediately. I explained my situation to the police officer, but to no avail. They impounded the Jeep. I walked to a close friend of Aggie’s, explained the situation, and she was shocked. She had visited Aggie with me and believed her to be ‘on the mend’. She rushed me to the hospital. We arrived around 10 AM.

            • When I got to the hospital I asked for the morgue, since I was told Aggie had died. Her body was not there. No one could locate Aggie. Finally, someone said that she was in a storage room. I located her. She was not dead.

            • I immediately demanded that her feeding tubes be reinserted, which after great debate, they were. Aggie was put back into ICU and for the next 10 days, I never left her side.

            • It was clear to me that she had been killed. One of the nurses confessed to me about the force that was used (Aggie called it a beating), and the reinsertion of the poisonous medications that had left her right arm totally gangrenous (click here).

            • Over the next several days, I waited for Aggie to die. She could not speak since her tongue was still so swollen, but then the swelling began to go down, and Aggie began to talk to me.

            What has been recounted above has been supported by hospital records and on duty nurses’ testimony. The Ketamine blocked Aggie’s memory from the point after she went into anaphylactic shock, but not to the events leading up to the shock.

            As Aggie was able to tell me her story, I wrote frequent faxes to the NH AG begging them to send someone to the Lakes Region General Hospital to take her deathbed statement. No one ever came while she was still alive. I have recounted the circumstances that caused the NH OAG to take jurisdiction. By the time NH OAG took jurisdiction on April 1, 2001, Aggie’s body, according to the Lakes Region General Hospital pathologist, had putrefied. The gangrene had spread throughout her body. Even before she died the skin on her right arm was beginning to slough off. There is no way that the perfectly appearing body of the 169 pound Jane Doe whose autopsy I paid $35 for was my Mother, Aggie.

            Considering all of the above, the only way I can fulfill my Promise to Aggie is to have the homicide investigation (that never was) opened.

            And, again the issues that need to be resolved are:

              • Why didn’t anyone from the NH OAG respond to my numerous faxes while Aggie was able to give a death bed statement?

              • Why was Aggie’s medical file redacted within days of her death?

              • Why did Aggie’s primary care physician renege on her consent for an immediate forensic autopsy to be performed by the Lakes Region General Hospital pathologist?

              • Why after granting consent did the Dartmouth Hitchcock pathologist renege?

              • Why was there not a chain of custody paper trail once NH AG Kelly Ayotte sent Investigator Chapman to take custody of Aggie’s remains?

              • Why did the State not follow its own mandates pursuant to RSA 611-B when it took jurisdiction of Aggie’s remains?

              • Why did Aggies file go missing at the NH OAG?

              • If Katherine Wieder has already pled guilty to stashing homicide case files in her own private storage facilities, what proof does the State of New Hampshire have that Aggie’s file wasn’t disappeared for the purpose of a ‘cover –up’?

              • Were the State’s agents’ actions wanton and reckless pursuant to the definition herein?

              • Why doesn’t the State send Aggie’s case to the cold-case division of the NH OAG to answer these and other questions once and for all? At this time the only answer to this questions must be NO WITNESS = NO CASE. 

              Installment #12 will begin DEFENDANT’s summation …

              [This Page Last Updated on May 28, 2012]