Skip to content
personpersonJustin BrowerJustin BrowerForensic toxicologist at NMS Laboratories in Horsham, Pennsylvania.← All People
Expert witnessNMS Laboratories

Justin Brower

Courtroom still of Justin Brower.

Forensic toxicologist at NMS Laboratories in Horsham, Pennsylvania.

124 lines·3 proceedings·2 mentions

About

Justin Brower testified for the Commonwealth on Day 7 about medication testing he reviewed as a forensic toxicologist at NMS Laboratories. He explained that the laboratory performed targeted testing for four requested drugs rather than a broad panel, and that his role was to review the laboratory data and report for completeness and accuracy.

Brower reported lamotrigine at 6.1 micrograms per milliliter, mirtazapine at 200 nanograms per milliliter, quetiapine at 1,800 nanograms per milliliter, and trazodone at 0.44 micrograms per milliliter. He characterized the results as therapeutic except for potentially elevated quetiapine and compared that result with concentrations seen in suicide cases. Buckingham's comparison question used 800 rather than 1,800 nanograms per milliliter, a discrepancy that was not clarified. Interpreting Exhibit 183, Brower described diazepam as subtherapeutic and lorazepam as potentially therapeutic or lower, depending on dose.

Brower distinguished concentration comparisons from conclusions about an individual's behavior or breathing. He described possible sedating and respiratory-depressant effects but said an individualized assessment required clinical information. He also explained that Narcan would not counteract the drugs discussed because it acts on opioid receptors. Under Reddington's cross-examination, he acknowledged lacking prescription and other background information. He described mirtazapine as probably consistent with prescribed use, without knowing whether prescriptions existed, and said the quetiapine concentration was not necessarily toxic or lethal.

The court admitted the NMS laboratory report as Exhibit 206 during cross-examination. On redirect, Brower confirmed that he had authored a corrected report after receiving the case for review. The Commonwealth offered that report, and the court admitted it without defense objection. Neither side asked further questions, and Brower was released.

Trial Record (3)

2026 Trial2026 Criminal TrialJul 27, 2026 – Sep 4, 2026Called by prosecution

Justin Brower, an NMS forensic toxicologist, testified on Day 7 that medication concentrations were largely therapeutic, with potentially elevated quetiapine. He emphasized that the levels alone could not establish individual behavioral or respiratory effects and acknowledged lacking prescription background.

Day 7

DirectDirect Examination - Justin BrowerJustin BrowerShanan Buckingham2highlightsMentioned82lines spoken

Summary

Brower described mostly therapeutic drug concentrations, compared quetiapine with suicide-case levels, and emphasized limits on inferring individual effects from laboratory results.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Highlights (2)

testimony highlightBrower described targeted testing for four drugs and reported blood concentrations: lamotrigine at 6.1 micrograms per milliliter, mirtazapine at 200 nanograms per milliliter, quetiapine at 1,800 nanograms per milliliter, and trazodone at 0.44 micrograms per milliliter.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
testimony highlightBrower explained that concentration data support general opinions, not certainty about a particular person's behavior. He said he knew nothing about the case until speaking with counsel, which he thought occurred a few weeks earlier, and his available testing data concerned the four requested drugs.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
CrossCross-Examination - Justin BrowerJustin BrowerKevin Reddington1highlight39lines spoken

Summary

Brower qualified his drug-level interpretations, acknowledged missing prescription information, and distinguished elevated quetiapine from necessarily toxic levels. The NMS report was admitted as Exhibit 206.

Highlights (1)

admissionBrower acknowledged having no information about whether the person had prescriptions for these drugs, when prescriptions were obtained, or who prescribed them, while explaining that the laboratory does not always need that information.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶