Friends, family and experts make case for accidental death Ray Sherman testifies in court Wednesday during a hearing to change the death ruling of his son, Raymond Sherman II (photo by H. Marc Larson). By Sonja G. Ostrow News-Chronicle Justice was blind to age, education and ethnicity Wednesday, as the second day of the Raymond Sherman II trial included the testimony of a number of 15-year-old students and that of an 80-year-old expert witness. Attorney Avram Berk gave his closing statement in a case the Sherman family hopes will change the ruling on their son's death from "undetermined" to "accidental." Brown County Circuit Judge Richard Dietz is expected to announce his decision this morning. Several high school students who had been friends with Sherman testified in the morning. Each described Sherman as confident, popular and happy. One friend said he and Sherman had planned to start a band, in which Sherman was to play the drums. Their first practice was scheduled for the Monday following Sherman's death. Sherman's father, Packers' wide receivers' coach Raymond Sherman, also testified. He said that on the day of his son's death, May 19, 2003, his son left two messages on his cell phone in which he spoke excitedly of his plans to see "The Matrix: Reloaded" movie that night with his father. He also listed times when the movie was playing that day. Interim medical examiner Al Klimek ruled the boy's death a suicide - a ruling changed to "undetermined" in November - without speaking to him or his wife first, the elder Sherman said. The two experts whose testimony was presented Wednesday found fault with Klimek's methods. According to Joseph H. Davis, a forensic pathologist and former president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the National Association of Medical Examiners, and Michael Graham, the president of NAME and chief medical examiner for St. Louis, a sound investigation into the possibility of a suicide requires speaking with friends and family. "An understanding of what happened comes not only from physical evidence but from the circumstances surrounding the death," Davis said. In Ray Sherman II's case, Davis and Graham found independently that the suicide ruling was not feasible. Both greeted Klimek's ruling of suicide with confusion, and said that instead of making a ruling within 24 hours without making a thorough investigation, Klimek should have said the investigation into the manner of death was pending. Davis said an important factor in his determination that Sherman's death was accidental was the carelessness with a firearm the boy had demonstrated the day before while playing with a friend. "The elements of an accident were here," Davis said. Graham said observations made by a neighbor who spoke with Sherman about 10 minutes before he died were critical in his findings. Because the neighbor described Sherman as being in a good mood, Graham said, "To rule suicide in this case, you would need evidence of a major intervening incident, and I can't imagine what emotional upset you could have in the garage that would lead to taking your own life. ... It doesn't make sense that anything happened, because there was no one (in the garage) to stimulate such an emotional reaction." The testimony of John Pratt, a firearms expert, supported the view Sherman's death was accidental. Pratt said the semiautomatic gun used by Sherman is difficult to operate safely, even for those who have been trained to do so, and especially for those, like the younger Sherman, who have had no training in the use of a firearm. In his closing argument, Berk reiterated the statements of the witnesses, describing Sherman as caring, unique and, above all, a normal, well-adjusted 14-year-old boy. "Raymond was not perfect. He had his talents; he had his flaws. But he did not intend to leave this world when he went into that garage and played with that gun," Berk told the court. Although he said he did not want to criticize Klimek, Berk said it was obvious that even Klimek did not believe Sherman had intentionally shot himself. Berk said the matter at stake was a label that had been placed incorrectly because the definition of suicide had been misunderstood. The correct label for Sherman's manner of death, he told the court, is accidental. But, Berk said, echoing a statement made by Davis, "It's not accident by default. It's accident by proof. It's accident by evidence." Klimek ruled Sherman's death a suicide based on his take on a statute. In Wednesday's testimony, Yvette Sherman said Klimek told her the definition of suicide used by laymen and that used by medical examiners are different, and a medical examiner does not have to consider intent. That testimony was rebutted Wednesday in testimony by Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a forensic psychiatrist, professor and member of numerous academies and committees, including the American Academy of Forensic Sciences.