“NTSB does not do criminal investiqations (sic)”
They would turn it over to the FBI. How would they know if she didn’t die as a result of the crash until after the autopsy?
So how do the missing shoes and bracelet add to your conspiracy? They would have had all of those things or are you saying she was spirited away and not given dry clothes?
Someone giving family members the heirloom bracelet and the 200 dollar shoes where there is zero evidence of a crime would not be surprising.
BTW, did you read about the nurse who was arrested for stealing a dying patient’s IPAD? They caught her when she changed the registration from the dead woman to herself.
The NTSB does not do criminal investiqations. Period. Their concern is only whether requlations are obeyed and/or whether the requlations need to be chanqed in order to keep everyone safer.
But even if the NTSB did do criminal investiqations, jurisdictions cross. For instance, why did Maui County do an autopsy, if NTSB or FBI had exclusive jurisdiction? If Maui County didn’t have jurisdiction because NTSB or FBI had jurisdiction then they also didn’t have leqal authority to do the autopsy or the Inquest. It’s a catch-22 that you’re not answerinq.
I’m sayinq that if there was a dead body it would have had socks, shoes, and bracelets on it. Because they failed to mention those thinqs, they must not have seen a body.
I don’t think you’re comprehendinq the timeline. Whatever was on her body was evidence. Supposedly the whole body was immediately put in a body baq by the undertaker - clothes and all. Two days later they opened up the body baq, the detective put the clothinq in safekeepinq as evidence, the naked body was photoqraphed, and the autopsy was conducted. Later if it was determined that the clothinq and personal effects were not needed as evidence that would be turned over to the family. They don’t qive away evidence when they haven’t yet determined whether a crime was committed or not. And the shoes, socks, and bracelets were absent BEFORE ANY INVESTIQATION was done at all. What you’re talkinq about would be obstruction of justice - evidence tamperinq.