[butterdezillion]

I just know a little bit from when I was checking out Breitbart and Cormier’s deaths, so that involved CA’s laws regarding autopsies. The county coroner is required to do autopsies of all deaths without an obvious cause or where a crime is suspected. If the county is required to do the autopsy I believe the autopsy is a public record. If it is an autopsy at the request of family, that is done privately and is not a public record.

If the laws are at all similar in Hawaii it would give another reason to have a plane crash, and to falsely report that the intended victim had been found in the fuselage: if it was clearly a drowning then the county coroner wouldn’t be required to do an autopsy and the results would thus be private. If she died of unexplained causes AFTER the crash it could compel a coroner to do a public autopsy.

Every staged event is built to have plausible deniability, and this one is no exception. It could have just been that she’s deathly afraid of water and had a heart attack, and all the reporting discrepancies were just SNAFU’s. Or it could be something else.

We know that she died AFTER the crash. My question would be whether the autopsy was compelled by law and thus is a public record, or whether the autopsy was at the request of the family and is thus a private record. It sounds like the medical people are claiming it was a private autopsy, but if that was so then the NTSB would have no business even getting the autopsy report. So as with all the other reporting, this leaves questions rather than answers.

[butterdezillion]

Gotta run so this will be quick.

The confusion over where Fuddy was found would allow a private autopsy to be started before anybody in the public knew that she did NOT die from drowning.

Somebody should look to see when we first found out about Yamamoto holding her hand in the water as she was floating safely with her life jacket. Was that before, or after, the autopsy was started?

[Fred Nerks]

So if there's to be an investigation into the crash, considering there was a fatality, as you wrote If she died of unexplained causes AFTER the crash it could compel a coroner to do a public autopsy just when would the public hear of it? At the enquiry into the the accident and not before?

Why is everything to do with Hawaii so darn contradictory? Is that State the 50th of the United States or some principality with laws and culture/ culture all of its own?

And what about her insurance company? Are they just going to pay up for her accidental death without the coroners report? There would be more than one entity interested in the cause of death, surely.

[bgill]

In Texas, it used to be (could be still) that autopsies were done on everyone, except the elderly, no matter how they died. Didn't matter if it was obvious the person died from drowning, falling off a ladder or had been terminally ill. It could be a money grab or cya for the local government.