Rod Wheeler was on Fox an hour or so ago and said he thinks Perper was leaning toward natural causes and received info from the police that is making him re-think that position and run some different tests.
I have a feeling that Daniel's body will be exhumed very shortly because of tests that might have been lacking in his death. We'll see.
Perper had to interview the people who had proximity to Anna or knowledge of her condition prior to her death. Part of his investigation, besides the autopsy and subsequent tests.
Meanwhile, the Seminole police (and maybe in consultation with the FBI, who knows?) have been investigating the circumstances surrounding the death to see whether they can absolutely rule out unnatural causes, whether drugs or a deliberately hurtful act towards Anna, or even just plain negligence. You could always have a manslaughter charge against someone for some sort of negligence in a case where someone need not have died, but did die due to actions or inactions of others.
Anyway, suppose the police have been privy to what Perper has so far, and Perper has been privy to what the police have so far, and suppose the two items of evidence show that someone lied, and/or was involved whether deliberately or negligently in her death, in conflict with what this person(s) told the investigators...either Perper or the police, or both?
Would explain why Perper isn't satisfied with the conclusions he reached to this point.