That doesn't even make sense.
Moreover, it flies in the face of the clear reading of Haw. Rev. Stat. §841-14. §841-14 addresses "the remains of any human body."
Somebody probably provided samples of Fuddy’s blood to the MPD for their “autopsy”. I’ve been told some of the particulars as to how autopsy results are faked when US intelligence people need to “extract” an operative whose continued presence threatens their operation, and it includes having blood samples that had been taken in advance, as well as other very fascinating details.
They probably did have “remains” of a human body - if blood is considered “remains”.
But the only real requirement for this situation if David Louie ordered MPD (and other agencies) to fake Fuddy’s death is that there is a legal appearance that they were authorized to do what they did - specifically, to order an autopsy based on somebody appearing to come to death under the circumstances of HRS 841-3 while at the same time claiming that HRS 841-3 was NOT in effect so no sworn witnesses were required.
IOW, y’all may be right that HRS 841-14 requires the circumstances of HRS 841-3 to be met. But if that is true, then why did the Chief say that HRS 841-14 was in effect (when he claimed it as the authority for ordering an autopsy) but not 841-3?
The discrepancies just keep piling up, no matter how you slice it.