Although this incident was not reported as a mutilation, it is of special interest to the project because of the damage to the carcass. The animal was owned by a rancher from Cordova, who had noticed that his cow had not been coming to feed for several days. Instead, the animal remained in a shaded area, which was readily visible to the owner. On December 4 at 8 a.m. the owner discovered the animal had died and that the anus area had been removed in a nearly-perfect circle. Having heard about my project from his son, who is an Indian tribal police officer, the owner contacted me to see if I would be interested in observing the animal.
Shortly afterwards I went to Cordova accompanied by Dr. Philip Shultz, a retired Santa Fe surgeon; Cipriano Padilla, district attorney investigator; and Henry Guillen, livestock inspector. In the presence of the owner and his son, we examined the animal, which was a female bovine approximately five years old. It was lying on its left side about 75 yards from the ranch house.
There was a five to six-inch circular hole in the anus area. One common characteristic of the so-called "classic mutilation" is the perfectly cored anus. This anus certainly appeared to fit that description. However, the evidence points to scavengers rather than skilled surgeons as the parties responsible for the damage, for although the incision seems to be very smooth when viewed from a distance of six feet, closer inspection reveals that the edges of the out are actually quite jagged, particularly in the 7 o'clock position. Moreover, coyote droppings were found near the carcass. According to the owner, coyotes are quite prevalent in the area as are wild dog packs.
Evidence found at the scene indicated the animal had suffered from diarrhea. Judging from the dark color of the stool, it also had been hemorrhaging internally. A blood sample was taken from the exterior jugular vein by Dr. Shultz. In an effort to help the owner, this specimen and a skin sample, together with other evidence collected at the scene, (i.e. blood stained leaves) were taken to Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL) for analysis.
Although unable to determine the exact cause of death, LASL in a letter dated December 7, reported that the leaves and droppings contained blood, indicating the animal had suffered from a severe bloody diarrhea. Inspector Guillen had previously suggested that red water -- a type of clostridial infection known as bacillary hemoglobiuria -- could have been the cause of death, since other cases had recently been reported in the area. Unfortunately, LASL was unable to test for clostridium perfingens, as the facilities were temporarily unavailable. However, a chemical analysis of the blood sample was conducted in their conventional proximity screen for 52 agents. The results were negative. In short, there was no evidence the animal had been drugged.
As a result of these tests, LASL concluded that the animal, which had obviously been ill for some time, had probably died from a massive infection. They also maintained that the carcass had probably been damaged by ravens, magpies, and other scavengers, for the skin sample had obviously been torn. However, there were no teeth marks found in the specimens submitted.
Figure No. 49 was taken at approximately six feet from the carcass and shows a hole that could easily be described at this distance as a perfect circle. It should be noted that a collection of blood has drained into the lower portion of the cavity.
Figure No. 50 is a close-up shot of the same area taken with a macro lens. As is evident in this picture, the edges of the circle are actually quite jagged. In addition, one can see a small portion of its innards hanging over the edge of the circle,, which is certainly a far cry from the surgical precision so often attributed to such cuts.
In conclusion, this case again emphasizes the fact that a carcass viewed at a distance appears quite different from one viewed at closer range. As Figure No. 49 so graphically illustrates, it can easily be understood why a person viewing the carcass from a distance of several feet might describe the damaged anus as a feat of "surgical precision." Closer inspection, however, would certainly negate this conclusion. In short, both the evidence at the scene and the tests performed by LASL clearly indicate that the animal had died from natural causes and was subsequently damaged by scavengers.