Interview with a medical gynaecologist established, for a scientific advice about the Carlo Parlanti's case
Speaking is Dr. Ivanoe Santoro gynecologist interviewed December 11, 2009 by Antonella Ricciardi
In order to analyze Carlo Parlanti's case as much as possible in depth, objectively and scientifically, it is fundamental to review the studies of the experts in the medical fields. These medical reports can serve to provide clarity to the case, something of particular importance at this time, as Carlo Parlanti fights to gain a new trial. A second chance at trial is by no means a given in the United States (except in the case of a death sentence) and can be granted only in the face of compelling evidence presented by the accused after an arduous process which includes the filing of a "habeas corpus" petition. In practice gaining an appeal in the United States is comparable to obtaining a revision of sentence in Italy after exhausting all three levels of trial provided for in our judicial system…
Another crucial element is that Carlo Parlanti and his supporters are trying to obtain an appeal at the Federal level and not at the County; This in order to have a greater objective evaluation owing to incongruities, finally proven that occurred during the investigation conducted by Ventura County.
There are, in fact, elements in Carlo's case which do not add up; starting with the four (4) litters of wine [more than a gallon – Translator’s note] that according to White, he drank before inflicting the sexual assault, upon her (which, according to experts on the subject, would have resulted in alcoholic coma, or even death, in addition to inhibiting any physical ability to commit such a violent act; and even, in that condition, to consummate an act of sexual intercourse), up to the horrific detail of a nipple that, still according to White , Parlanti had almost severed with bites, but has never been reported by the physicians who examined White, and many more as well.
Since the gynecological perspective is the most important element in the Case of Carlo Parlanti and Rebecca Mckay White, we are presenting in this forum an interview with a doctor specializing in gynecology: Dr Ivanoe Santoro, who has authored a very detailed and carefully prepared report on the topic. This dialogue has as its primary goal the clear presentation of the facts concerning the evidence surrounding this case to a wide audience. However, there are some generic considerations that constitute an important premise to the topics in question and cannot be separated from Dr Santoro's report. Therefore we are including them at this point as an accessory introduction to the interview.
In particular, a doctor's opinion on a case should always derive from :
a) A medical history that is as complete as possible, and
B) A clinical examination performed live on the patient .
In this specific instance, Dr Santoro has neither interviewed or examined Mrs White; therefore he is expressing considerations, the value of which should be confirmed directly on the patient, if technically possible. It is only after collecting the history of family illness, a personal physiological and pathological history and obstetric/gynecological history, after a general and gynecological examination (using specific exams) that it is possible for any physician, including Dr Santoro, to release a report with absolute medical/legal vale (increased by the time lapse/gap, which should be as small as possible).
The report and the answers of Dr Santoro are based on the trial transcripts and documentation, especially the gynecological aspect of the accusation against Mr. Parlanti. Some portions, related with other alleged violence (including anal violence) and the alleged status of alcohol intoxication are outside the specific competencies of this specialist. What we are exposing emerges, therefore, from an analysis of the facts that is purely doctrinal and logical. It is based on the description of what has happened, with results that are obviously limited by being generated through hypothesis on a purely clinical examination level without a demonstration by Dr Santoro.
Dr Santoro doesn't knows if Mrs. White, at the time of the alleged facts, was simply in menostasi (lack of the menstrual flow because of the absence of the organ from which the menstrual fluid issues - uterus), or also in menopause (a situation characterized by the absence of ovary functions; in this specific case due to surgical removal associated with that of the uterus, as in a total hysterectomy with bi-lateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy). Dr. Agnesina Pozzi, who also prepared a medical opinion based on the trial transcript and used by dr Santoro, opines that Mrs. White was in a status of early Post-menopause after undergoing a surgery classified generally as "hysterectomy" . [A medical report signet by "Dr Jeff Bivens PA-C" and dated August 16,2002, certifies an "hysterectomy and bi-lateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy approximately in 1982 - TN]
Another fundamental premise is related to the modality of the clinical and laboratory procedures that should have been followed with an alleged victim of sexual violence : In the report of Dr. Pozzi, the main source of information for Dr. Santoro, it is in fact stated that there is no trace of the use of such procedures. An alleged sexual attack even if remembered and/or recounted "After a period of time, should always lead to a series of a gynecological and biochemical exams, lacking completely from this case (according to Dr Santoro's colleague) .
Here is the document with the questions to Dr. Ivanoe Santoro and his related answers.
Ricciardi : Rebecca McKay White, in her accusation against Carlo Parlanti, has included in her declaration, among other things, that she has been the victim of a sexual attack consisting of the introduction of a closed fist in her vagina. However, she underwent a total hysterectomy many years before when she was 30. You are no doubt qualified on this topic , being a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, and a hospital medical director in the same field; .in addition you were charged by the social security administration with the task to relate to the congress on how to assist alleged victims of violence in a hospital environment. Can you explain in synthesis why this particular information makes the likelihood of such a vicious attack improbable ?
DR Santoro: it's not that the attack is impossible. The introduction of a closed hand in a vagina is an act that can be performed. However, it requires special preparation involving the progressive dilation of the vulva's ring enormous lubrification and in addition a specific physical positioning of the "receiver” (Better if a "Gynecological” position); obviously the "receiver" should be consenting in order to avoid serious damage.
But the situation in which this would have happened, according to Mrs. White's story, is very different. In fact, the introduction of Mr. Parlanti's hand (and more than just the hand) would have been executed with force: Impulsively and vehemently. It would have happened while he was under the influence of enormous quantities of alcohol and without any preparation or preventative lubrification. This is, by the way, the vagina of a non-consenting woman, a vagina made considerably less elastic and pliable by the modification produced as a result of menopause and of ablative surgery executed decades before.
Ricciardi: In addition, according to Mrs. White Carlo Parlanti is said to have persisted, penetrating her not only with his hand but up to the fore arm: Is that possible? And what damage could that cause?
Dr. Santoro: Mrs. Anedda has prepared a graphical representation that I deem very credible as well as representative of the actual dimensions of Mr. Parlanti's closed fist, his wrist and the inferior third of his forearm. In this representation she has super - imposed the image of a female's genital apparatus, respective of their relative proportions and dimensions. Even at first glance, we can immediately see in this graphic the potential injuries and associated damage that such an introduction of a fist would cause. In addition, as explained in my report to Mrs. Anedda, this graphic represents a situation ameliorative from the real condition present in Mrs White, since in her case the body and the neck of the uterus were absent, at the time of the events, because of the effects of the ablative surgery. This means that the graphic should have depicted the vagina only, then compared it in super-imposition, with the complete fist, wrist and forearm of Mr. Parlanti. The represented vagina should also have been shallower (in longitude) because of the removal of the so-called "vaginal neck" that is inevitably extracted together with the uterus neck in a total hysterectomy -
In extreme synthesis, this would have caused :
A) Damage to the upper vaginal sutures (the so-called "vaginal dome") Consisting essentially of the actual breaking through of the vagina itself. There could be an invasion of the penetrating object into the pelvic area, coming into contact with internal structures such as peritoneal blood vessels, both arterial and venous, of the pelvic and abdominal area, intestinal curvatures ileo-coliche, mesentere, omento and gall bladder with a potential risk contusion laceration and/or injures caused by ripping.
B) Vascular damages due to injures, mainly on the lateral walls of the vagina and the area of the vulva-vaginal entrance, causing arterial and venous hemorrhages, many of which could present an immediate danger to life itself (especially if affecting the larger vessels)
C) Lasting effects provable even after a length of time : The ripping of the vaginal dome, with partial, non uniform healing over time, as in a "second intention" with an evident granularity of the tissues; peritoneal irritation; a possible "evisceration" of the intestinal bends inside the vaginal cavity through the opening already mentioned in the vaginal dome .
D) Damage related to a phlogistic-irritative pathology (peritonitis) such as observed in a contact between organs normally sterile, namely those projected by the peritoneal, and structures bearing a polluting physiological charge: namely the exterior of a hand, wrist and inferior third of the fore arm during a case of traumatic breakthrough of the vaginal dome. A second cause for this pathology could be the migration of germs normally colonizing the vaginal environment into the peritoneal cave that is no longer protected by an anatomical barrier like the sutured superior portion of the vagina. It's entirely a different mater when a vagina is sutured or closed on a “second intention” involving a clean cut, after proper disinfection, such as during an ablative surgery.
Therefore we're talking about injuries which would be very evident, very serious injures to the receiving subject some of which might well even prove lethal.
Ricciardi: Is it possible for a woman to escape with her life after being subjected to the violence which Mrs. White ascribes to Mr. Parlanti?
Even if this is possible, what would her physical state be like?
Santoro: It would be possible only in the case of :
A) lack of breakthrough of the vaginal dome
B) Lack of hemorrhagic complications of any seriousness
C) Absence of organic injuries, both vascular and infective due to penetration/breakthrough in the involved area.
On a purely theoretical and doctrinal level the possibility that the first or second did not happen is very slim given. The modality in which the alleged attack would have occurred. Let's not forget the conditions under which this rape is said to have happened:
A) In an aggressive manner, with force; certainly not in a progressive fashion
B) In a non-consenting woman
C) In a un-relaxed woman (It would have been even better if she had been anesthetized)
D) Perpetrated by a man of robust constitution, who was intoxicated by alcohol (he should have been in a state of alcohol-induced delirium
According to the quantities referenced by Mrs. White and detailed in Dr. Pozzi’s report).
Ricciardi: What are the normal examinations performed in cases of alleged rape? Are these exams lacking, in whole or in a part, in the case of Rebecca Mckay White? I'm asking you, knowing that you have read the report of another expert in the medical field, Dr. Pozzi, who has learned about much of the trial through trial documents.
Dr. Santoro: In my report related to the Parlanti/White case, I have included the evidence, the laboratory exams and the clinical exams that should be executed during a medical- legal assessment of a case such as the one in question. It locks to me that these exams are completely or almost completely absent in this case, also according to the report prepared by Dr. Pozzi .
From the survey conduced by the expert at the scene of the alleged crime and reported by Dr. Pozzi, there are no traces of "environmental" evidences linked to this rape. There is also a complete lack of clinical evidence (both generic and gynecological) of the violence of the attack reported by Mrs. White herself.
Therefore I restate here what I have already said in this interview and more largely discussed in my report: the entire description of the story is in on obvious and blatant diametric opposition to everything I know to be true of descriptive and topographical anatomy, surgery and pathology of the female genital apparatus and in the fields of clinical gynecology and legal medicine.
Interview of December 11, 2009 – Introduction and questions by Antonella Ricciardi
[This report was published on the journals Dea Notizie, Caserta24ore, Corriere di Aversa e Giugliano, Italia Sociale, Qui Calabria, Rinascita (in the on line and local "Rinascita Campania", L'Altra Voce, NewsBlaze (American journal)]