Sorry for the accidental double-post.
Now that is a most interesting case, pitting the brother (who was 'in on it' since he knew about the fake funeral, etc.) against the airline (who was also 'in on it,' since its employees/agents would have necessarily been part the plan to simulate operational failure and a "crash" landing at the spot where the stealth diver was pre-positioned).
Presumably, the defense lawyers are not the same lawyers consulted as to the airline's potential civil and criminal liability for being part of a scheme to stage a risky water landing with a fixed-gear airplane having other passengers aboard. So they might not already know Loretta Fuddy is still alive.