What did the Allegheny County Medical Examiner's autopsy report say about Corey Comperatore's death?
Executive summary
The Allegheny County Medical Examiner’s office completed autopsies for Corey Comperatore and Thomas Matthew Crooks and concluded both men suffered a single gunshot wound to the head, a finding announced by Butler County Coroner William F. Young III after he sent their bodies to Allegheny County for autopsy [1] [2]. Young and subsequent local reporting described both deaths as homicides and emphasized that the Allegheny County Medical Examiner performed the examinations [3] [4].
1. What the autopsy finding was: single fatal head wounds
Local reporting conveys a clear, repeated conclusion: the autopsies showed each man died from a single gunshot wound to the head, language that appears across multiple regional outlets citing Butler County Coroner William F. Young III and the Allegheny County Medical Examiner’s office [1] [2] [5]. Those reports state the bodies were transported to Allegheny County the day after the July 13 shooting and that the Allegheny Medical Examiner completed the formal autopsies [1] [3].
2. Manner of death and chain of custody as reported
Butler County’s coroner publicly characterized both deaths as homicides and said he sent both bodies to Allegheny County because that office has the resources to conduct thorough autopsies in violent-death investigations [3]. The Allegheny County Medical Examiner is the local agency charged with investigating criminally violent and suspicious deaths in the county, a role reflected in public descriptions of the office [6] [7].
3. What the reports do not (publicly) show: limited public detail
The versions of the autopsy findings published in regional news stories provide the cause—single gunshot wound to the head—and the manner—homicide—but do not publish the full autopsy reports, ballistic analyses, toxicology results, or detailed forensic narratives in those items [1] [2] [4]. Available local coverage quotes the coroner’s summary rather than reproducing a complete Allegheny County Medical Examiner autopsy docket or forensic addendum, and public records access to full coroner case files can vary [3] [8].
4. Alternative viewpoints and unanswered forensic questions
Some independent writers and commentators have challenged whether all underlying forensic materials—ballistics, scene photos, chain-of-custody documentation, or comprehensive toxicology testing—have been released publicly, and have suggested the public record is incomplete, especially for third‑party scrutiny of who fired which shots [9] [10]. Those critiques question disclosure and timing rather than disputing the autopsy office’s announced cause of death; reporting in mainstream local outlets, by contrast, consistently cites the Butler County coroner’s statement that Allegheny completed the autopsies with the single-head-wound findings [1] [2].
5. How official procedure and public records intersect with reporting
The Allegheny County Medical Examiner’s office routinely handles sudden and violent deaths and maintains procedures and public guides for survivors and records [6] [11], and archival coroner case files historically can include inquest materials and related documentation [8]. However, the public summaries reported in the immediate aftermath focused on cause and manner rather than exhaustive forensic releases, leaving some forensic details to later disclosure or formal investigative reports [3] [4].
6. Bottom line and limits of available evidence
Based on the reporting available, the authoritative, repeated factual statement is narrow and specific: Allegheny County’s medical examiner completed autopsies concluding that Corey Comperatore died from a single gunshot wound to the head and that the death was considered a homicide, a conclusion announced via Butler County Coroner William F. Young III and reported by multiple local news organizations [1] [2] [3]. Publicly available coverage does not, in those cited items, include the full autopsy docket, toxicology breakdowns, or ballistic reports—gaps that have prompted outside observers to call for fuller disclosure if further forensic questions are to be answered [9] [10].