Ramsey County affirms six murder convictions linked to former medical examiner

Ramsey County announced a review of six convictions after a medical examiner‘s past testimony faced scrutiny. The office said Tuesday that murder convictions in six cases were fair despite this medical examiner’s involvement.

Dr. Michael McGee is a former Ramsey County chief medical examiner, a position he held for over 40 years. While he worked on cases in Ramsey County, he also worked on cases elsewhere in Minnesota and Wisconsin.

In 2021, Judge Ralph Erickson of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals criticized McGee’s work, calling McGee’s findings and testimony about the case of Dru Sjodin’s death “unreliable, misleading, and inaccurate.” McGee has since retired.

Subsequently, the Prosecutors’ Center for Excellence reviewed Ramsey County cases where McGee was a witness. Additionally, the Great North Innocence Project was also consulted. Three independent medical examiners also reviewed the cases.

In total, 215 cases were identified for review. The review consisted of three phases. By phase three, a total of seven Ramsey County cases required further review.

Ultimately, the convictions in six of the cases was found to be fair.  “It doesn’t mean that there wasn’t concerns that were surfaced as a part of this process,” Ramsey County Attorney John Choi said at a press conference. “Some of those things are going to inform our future work.”

However, Choi characterized McGee as “a product of his time,” citing issues the committee took with McGee’s stylistic choices and terminology.

“We have evolved in many ways in how we think about our work as prosecutors, and how we think about getting to just outcomes,” Choi stated. “

In the seventh case, in which there was a more recent plea agreement, findings were shared with the defense team and the legal process will continue to unfold. While Choi does not think that the conviction will necessarily change in that case, he said that, “I just think that there was enough information in there that maybe we were biased in how we looked at this.” Information on that case will come at a later date.