A newly released certified copy of a Virginia medical report on Vincent Foster, whose controversial death was officially ruled a suicide, suggests that officials may have altered a copy of the report the Virginia Medical Examiner gave to Ken Starr and the Office of Independent Counsel of 1995.

The most recent copy of the certified report, obtained by WorldNet Daily, is clearly different from Starr's copy.

Foster, a long time Clinton friend and law partner of Hillary Clinton, was appointed deputy White House counsel by President Clinton in 1993. Foster was found dead in Virginia's Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993, with a gunshot wound. An investigation by Independent Counsel Ken Starr ruled that Foster had committed suicide.

"This raises the question of whether the Virginia medical examiner gave the independent counsel altered evidence," noted Favish.

"[As to] the cause of death -- the 'mouth-head' language on page one appears to have been altered on the original with correction fluid or tape, almost completely concealing what appears to be a four-letter word, and leaving small black marks that appear to be the remnants of four letters. That would be improper."

The most recently released certified copy comes from Virginia's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. The new certified copy was released to WorldNet Daily in response to a Virginia Freedom of Information Act request to inspect the original version. Virginia officials refused to comment on the legal request or a pending appeal.

According to Favish, Dr. Donald Haut was the only medical doctor to examine Foster's body where it was found. Haut typed a two-page report titled, "Report of Investigation by Medical Examiner."

"Page one of Haut's report states that the death shot was 'mouth-head,' but page two of the report states that the death shot was 'mouth to neck.' The official story on Foster's death is that the gun was inserted into the mouth and there was an exit wound in the back of the head, not the neck," asserted Favish.

The U.S. Senate published a drawing from the autopsy report that shows an exit wound on the back of Foster's head, just above an imaginary line connecting the tops of his ears. Officially, there was no neck wound.

However, according to Favish, the 1995 Senate Banking Committee report on the Foster death inexplicably quotes from both pages of Haut's report, including the mysterious neck wound.

"Neither the original nor a copy of the Haut report was known to be available to the public. That is, until a copy of a certified copy of the report was found and made public by non-government researcher Hugh Sprunt and Patrick Knowlton. Knowlton is a Fort Marcy Park witness who has filed a federal lawsuit alleging illegal intimidation by federal agents," said Favish.

Sprunt, who was contacted for this article, confirmed that he had discovered the medical report while examining Senate "Whitewater" documents at the National Archives in July 1997.

"In this case, a possible murder case involving the White House Counsel, the medical report was not done correctly. I can't think there was an innocent explanation of that," asserted Favish.

According to Favish, several questions remain to be answered:

Previous stories:

Documented contradictions in a newly released medical report -- which does not match a previous, publicly available copy -- are raising renewed questions about Foster's death.

Foster was found dead in Virginia's Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993, his death officially labelled a suicide. However, major inconsistencies and contradictions cast doubt on the government's "suicide" ruling, and a cloud of controversy has hung over the matter ever since.

Favish's interest, and the purpose of his FOIA request, was to inspect the original version of the report for alterations, to see if it had been improperly changed to conceal evidence of a neck wound, the existence of which the government denies.

His interest was piqued by the fact that the official record of the Foster death investigation contains unresolved contradictory information about the nature of a reported exit wound. Dr. Donald Haut, the only medical doctor to examine Foster's body where it was found, wrote a two-page "Report of Investigation by Medical Examiner," apparently signed on the day of death.

Page one of Haut's report states the death shot was "mouth-head," but page two of the report states that the death shot was "mouth to neck."

Although Haut's report is not reproduced in any publicly available government publication, it is available from the National Archives, and it is quoted in the Senate Banking Committee's January 1995 report on the Foster death. The Senate Committee's report quotes from both pages of Haut's report and fails to note that the quoted language is contradictory, i.e., "mouth-head" and "mouth to neck."

The Committee report states, "In his report, Dr. Haut wrote that the cause of death was a 'perforating gunshot wound mouth-head.'"

In the narrative of his report, Haut wrote, "July 20, 1993 After anonymous call was received at 18:04 hours U.S. Park Police officers found 48 yrs Caucasian male with self-inflicted gunshot wound mouth to neck on a foot path in Marcey Park [sic]. His car was parked in the parking lot but no note was found."

"MEDICAL HISTORY Unknown," wrote Haut.

The Senate never explained why it failed to further address this important contradiction in Haut's report.

A "mouth to neck" description is significant because it contradicts the official autopsy conclusion of "mouth to head" and the conclusions of Independent Counsels Robert Fiske and Kenneth Starr. Starr's report on the Foster death says the autopsy report "indicates 'backward' and 'upward' as the direction of the bullet through the head".

The doctor who performed the autopsy said the exit wound was "three inches from the top of the head."

The Starr report also states the "autopsy report and the reports of the pathologists retained by the OIC and Mr. Fiske's office demonstrate that the cause of death was a gunshot wound through the back of Foster's mouth and out the back of his head."

A drawing from the autopsy report, as published by the U.S. Senate, shows an exit wound on the back of Foster's head, just above an imaginary line connecting his ears. Thus, officially, there was no "mouth to neck" shot.

The difference between a mouth-to-head shot and a mouth-to-neck shot is significant. A typical gun-in-the-mouth suicide will result in a mouth to head shot-entrance wound in the roof of the mouth and exit wound in the back or top of the head -- because this ensures sufficient blood loss and brain destruction to induce death.

A potential gun-in-the-mouth suicide victim does not want to cause an exit wound in the back of the neck because that increases the chances of survival, most likely as a quadriplegic.

Haut's report of a neck wound takes on even more significance in light of additional evidence: One such wound was reported to be an entrance wound on the side of the neck. Starr said that paramedic Richard Arthur, "initially said he saw what 'appeared to be a bullet wound, an entrance wound' on the neck."

Not mentioned by Starr is that Arthur testified he was only two to three feet away from Foster when he observed the apparent bullet wound on the right side of Foster's neck, around the jaw line and underneath the right ear.

But even Starr's expert, Dr. Brian Blackbourne, said an autopsy photo showed there was "dried blood" at the neck location, although he said the photo did not show any injury to the neck.

Starr did not explain why Blackbourne's interpretation of an autopsy photo (as opposed to a photo taken at the park) is more reliable than Arthur's personal viewing of the body. Nor did Starr ever say whether Blackbourne was shown all the photos of Foster's neck that were taken at the park at about the same time Arthur saw the body.

A flaw or alteration in the Haut report found at the National Archives in 1997 uncovered the controversy about a possible neck wound. Non-government researcher Hugh Sprunt, along with Patrick Knowlton, a Fort Marcy Park witness who has filed a federal lawsuit alleging illegal intimidation by federal agents, made the Foster neck wound public from the report.

According to Sprunt, the "mouth-head" language on page one appears to have been altered with correction fluid or tape in order to conceal what appears to be a four-letter word. The area is replaced with the word "HEAD" typed to the right of and slightly higher on the page than the remnants of the possible partially-obscured word.

This observation fuelled speculation that the possibly-obscured word is "NECK," as appears on page two of Haut's report. However, the word "neck" on page two was left unaltered.

The report is on a two-sided, single-sheet form. Did someone alter page one, unaware that the form continued on the backside? Given that the front page of Haut's report appears to be complete with a signature and a date, it is possible that somebody unfamiliar with such a form could have missed a back page.

The issue of possible alteration raises serious questions, because it is improper to alter a medical record that completely obscures words. According to a leading textbook on medical record-keeping, "Mastering Documentation," proper alteration of a medical record is done by lining out any words that need to be corrected so that all the original words can be recognized, and then initialling and dating the change.

In a declaration submitted in response to the Haut report FOIA lawsuit, Associate Independent Counsel Julie A. Corcoran states that the office of the independent counsel does not have the original version of the Haut report. She states, "at the time of the FOIA request" the independent counsel had "a certified copy of the report sought, not the original report."

• The copy released by Corcoran is a two-sided, single-sheet document bearing the independent counsel's document control numbers on the lower right corner of each page. Corcoran also states that the newly released copy is a "true and correct copy of the certified copy of the document in the OIC's files."
• Close inspection of the "mouth-head" language on the copy provided by the independent counsel's office shows a perfectly clean white area. However, the same area on the National Archives copy shows the possible remains of a four-letter word.
• The copy in the National Archives and the copy from the independent counsel were both certified by the autopsy doctor, James Beyer, who was assistant chief medical examiner at the time. Beyer's certification on the National Archives copy is dated November 2, 1994. However, his certification on the independent counsel copy is dated January 30, 1995. In addition, Beyer certified both pages of the National Archives copy, but only the first page of the Independent counsel copy.

Neither Fiske nor Starr addressed the inconsistency with Haut's report, except by hiding them from the public. Fiske's report failed to mention Haut's medical report. And Starr's report, released publicly in October 1997, quotes from the possibly altered language on page one of Haut's report that states "mouth-head," but does not quote the "mouth to neck" language on page two.

According to Favish, the independent counsel was made aware in February 1998 that the copy of the Haut report found at the National Archives might have been improperly altered.

"I explained the matter to a federal district court during my FOIA lawsuit against the OIC (Office of Independent Counsel) seeking photographs of the body. The OIC has never publicly stated that it inspected the original version or told the public why the National Archives copy is different from the OIC's copy," said Favish.

Favish made an oral request for inspection of the original Haut report to Virginia's office of the chief medical examiner. Carol Nance of Virginia's office of the attorney general later denied the request. Although a written request under Virginia's FOIA has been made, no response has yet been received.

Attorney Allan J. Favish is interested in viewing the original Foster medical report, authored by Dr. Donald Haut -- the only medical doctor to evaluate Foster after his death -- because, he says, the report is "internally contradictory."

The Haut Report, as it is known, was signed July 20, 1993 -- the day Foster died. Favish claims the report said the fatal shot was "mouth-to-head," but that page two of the report describes the shot as "mouth-to-neck."

"The Haut Report has not been reproduced in any published government report," Favish maintains, "but it is available from the National Archives, and it was quoted in the Senate Banking Committee's January 1995 report on the Foster investigation."

The Los Angeles attorney said the Senate mentioned the Haut Report as concluding that Foster's mortal wound was a "perforating gunshot wound mouth-head." However, the Senate also noted that in a written narrative of the same report, Dr. Haut said:

"Therefore, inexplicably, the Senate report quoted from both pages of the Haut Report, but failed to note that the quoted language is internally contradictory," Favish contends.

Based on this discrepancy, Favish said he filed a FOIA request to see the original Haut Report, but was denied by the Office of Independent Counsel.

"In defiance of the Freedom of Information Act, without citing any of the exemptions from disclosure contained within the Act, and falsely stating that it 'has not previously withheld any information sought by' me, the Office of Independent Counsel refuses to allow the public to inspect the original version of the two-page medical report about Vincent Foster's death, commonly referred to as the 'Haut Report,'" Favish said in a statement released to WorldNet Daily.

In addition to the descriptive differences Favish said exist within the document, he maintained that his request should not have been denied by the Office of Independent Counsel because:

• "A copy of the Haut Report has been officially released to the public without any official redaction.
• "There is information on the original version of the Haut Report that is not available on the [public] copy of the report, namely, the nature of the apparent alteration of language on page one of the report that purportedly describes Foster's fatal wound. It is impossible to tell from the publicly available copy whether the apparent alteration is the result of an erasure, the application of correction fluid or something else, and what, if anything, is written underneath any such correction fluid."

"That information only can be obtained by inspecting the original version of the Haut Report," Favish said. "By refusing to allow the public to inspect the original, the OIC is withholding information. Therefore, the OIC is legally obligated to allow the public to inspect it."