• With: Dr. Michael Baden, Forensic Pathologist

    This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," August 18, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

    GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Today, lawyers for the family of Michael Brown announcing the results of a private autopsy, conducted by a frequent guest here on ON THE RECORD, former chief medical examiner for New York City, Dr. Michael Baden.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    DR. MICHAEL BADEN, FORMER NEW YORK CITY CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER: There are six bullets struck him. Six bullets struck and two may have reentered. And three bullets were recovered at the first autopsy, according to our report. One thing is that there are abrasions around the right side of Mr. Brown's face, rubbing against the ground, which happened, as best we can tell, when, after the gunshot wounds, he fell flat down unprotected and got those abrasions. Otherwise, no evidence of a struggle.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    VAN SUSTEREN: Dr. Baden confirming the unarmed teenager was shot at least six times, including twice in the head. Dr. Baden joins us right now.

    Dr. Baden, I always think you are the smartest, you are the best, you are the most experienced at. This I'm glad to have you be the one that conducted the autopsy.

    BADEN: Thank you, Greta.

    VAN SUSTEREN: But there are some things you didn't have. You didn't have the clothing, right?

    BADEN: Right.

    VAN SUSTEREN: OK. And you don't have a toxicology screen. Those are the two big things that you don't have yet.

    BADEN: That's right. Although I heard that the medical examiner's report from the first autopsy has been furnished to the prosecutor and, according to the "The Washington Post," that it does say that marijuana was found in the toxicology. And that the findings of Dr. Mary Case's office, who is the chief medical examiner, are very similar to the findings that we found as to the bullet tracks in the second autopsy.

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. In terms of the toxicology -- and I will get to the bullet wounds in a second -- does the fact that they found marijuana, does that exclude the fact that there might be other drugs in his system or that the marijuana was laced with anything? Is that the final analysis or could there be more information to come in terms of the toxicology?

    BADEN: I don't know, because I haven't seen the toxicology report yet. That's part of the autopsy and that should be coming to the family in the next day or two. And very important with marijuana is the levels of the different drugs that are present in marijuana, to have an opinion as to whether or not he might have been affected by the marijuana so that he may have been acting in a crazy way, and may have done things to the police officer that normally he would not have done.

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right.

    BADEN: Which would be the issue that might arise.

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. The advantage of having the clothes -- and I have learned this from talking to you over the years -- is that there may be a gunshot residue on the clothes that might be sort of helpful in determining distance between the end of the gun and the body. Now, you didn't have the clothes, but was there anything on the flesh that would give you any sort of hint as to distance?

    BADEN: No. Yes, the flesh around the bullet holes of entrance were clear. There was no gunshot residue, no stippling, no powders present around the entrance wounds, which indicates that the muzzle end of the weapon was a foot or two away at the time of discharge. It wasn't a close contact. It wasn't very close, as would have to be the case if they were fighting inside of a car.

    Now, the clothing. though, as you point out, can filter out gunshot residue, so that it would be important to know, and the crime lab, I'm sure, in Los Angeles County -- in St. Louis County, I'm sorry -- is doing is looking at the built perforations of the clothing to see if there is any gunshot residue there. And that will be important.

    VAN SUSTEREN: In terms of the actual wounds, I notice that from the drawing that there are a number of bullet wounds to the right arm. Would that be -- I know there has been at least some eyewitness testimony to say that his hands were raised. Are those wounds -- because it's hard to tell from the diagram -- consistent with the hands raised or not?

    (CROSSTALK)

    BADEN: They are consistent with arms. They are consistent, yes, with the arms, with the arm forearm and right forearm and arm being raised because they were on the right arm. But they are also consistent with the arms being at the side. So there could be either way from the gunshot wounds themselves in the arms.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Are they consistent with having -- coming at someone aggressively? Because I know there is that wound on the head, which could either be shooting when someone is down or perhaps someone is charging, either one.

    BADEN: Right.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Can you in any way sort of reach a decision whether or not the wound on top of the head and the arms would be consistent with someone being shot as is he going down or someone being shot as he is charging?

    BADEN: These wounds could be, again, done in either way, because the head is so mobile up, and the arm, the shooter's arm is so mobile, that they can have many different positions in which you get the same bullet track in the head. But what we can say is that when the bullet wound at the top of the head entered Michael Brown's body, he immediately lost consciousness, collapsed, and died. The mom wanted to know, for example, did he have any pain and suffering? Not after that gunshot wound. And he was then immobile and collapsed immediately on that shot.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Are we to assume -- and I realize that there is -- assuming sometimes a huge mistake, but that that would be the last shot if that's the one that took him down, since that's the fatal one or not necessarily?

    BADEN: That would be the fatal one and the one that took him down, yes. I assume it to be the last one because the discharge -- the discharge of the weapon would stop when he collapsed. But we can tell just from the bullet wounds of the arms and the rest of the body because he could be down, and bullet wounds could have still injured the arm and forearm in a similar way. But I think that's unlikely.

    But the point you make, Greta, also, is that he died because of that bullet wound in the head and brain. The other five wounds would not have been lethal in themselves.

    VAN SUSTEREN: How close, based on the fact -- and I realize you don't have the clothes that would be very helpful in looking for gunshot residue. But from what you said is that it was more than a foot away but you can't say whether it was two feet, three feet, four feet or six feet, right? So it could be as close as a --

    BADEN: That's right.

    VAN SUSTEREN: It would be as close as a foot, but no closer?

    BADEN: The muzzle could be -- but no closer, right. And he could be as far away as 35 feet. And after a foot, it would be the same two feet to 35 feet would be -- would look the same. No powder would get on the body.

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. What question should I be asking you that I haven't asked you that would be sort of very instructive or have I covered the main ones until we get more information?

    BADEN: Oh, well, to bring in a little bit of the law, you could ask, how's come there is a third autopsy being done, and could the government perform an autopsy without the permission of the family?

    VAN SUSTEREN: I will ask you that.

    BADEN: And the answer to that --

    VAN SUSTEREN: And, of course, he has also been embalmed, too, which makes it somewhat difficult.

    BADEN: Yes. He was embalmed before I did the second autopsy. What's interesting is that the government, the medical examiner's office and the police and the -- can do a -- order an autopsy when somebody dies, even if the family objects to it. But once that's finished and the body is returned to the family, the family has total control over the body. And even if President Obama wanted an autopsy done, a third autopsy, if the family didn't agree, the only thing that could happen would be a court order by a judge to do it. But the family here requested, they wanted the FBI to do a third autopsy because they feel that this will show how improper the shooting of their son was.