Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: little jeremiah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm8IIyjNwWw

http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2014/10/bombshell-maui-police-department-loretta-fuddys-original-cause-of-death-is-drowning-2483294.html?currentSplittedPage=0

“...Folks, let this information sink in. The Medical Examiner found credible signs in Loretta Fuddy’s lungs and other organs that were consistent with drowning, made a “death by drowning” finding, and then someone covered up that finding by changing the cause of death to “acute cardiac arrhythmia due to hyperventilation”.”

READ CAREFULLY: THE EIGHTEEN MINUTE WINDOW


161 posted on 08/18/2016 3:37:45 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Fair Dinkum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: Fred Nerks

Thank you.


162 posted on 08/18/2016 4:26:10 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Half the truth is often a great lie. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

To: Fred Nerks

There were five different COD’s in the apparent cover up.On one of them “drowning” the local ME closed her case almost immediately and then an hour later he reopened it.


164 posted on 08/18/2016 5:11:48 PM PDT by rodguy911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

To: Fred Nerks
"someone covered up that [drowning] finding"

As far as the world knows, whatever covering-up may have been involved was unknown, because both were announced by that same Medical Examiner (ME) in her final report, which came out about month after the crash.

But it gets worse instead of better.

At the end of the autopsy session, the Cause of Death (COD) was declared by the ME to be drowning, pending toxicology reports. A drowning determination as a COD is implicitly a positive result based on physical evidence, not a logical elimination of some number of other possible CsOD. To make a drowning determination, there must have been evidence of the inhalation of ocean water (in this case) accompanied by consequent oxygen-starvation of the brain (of an actual person) to make that assertion.

That positive determination, once declared to have been made, should have overridden all other CsOD, unless there was further positive evidence in the toxicological results or while possibly noticing further evidence from viewing the body during the autopsy. If toxicology results were to have been returned with physical evidence of drugs, alcohol or poison, for example, such results might have overridden a less complex drowning COD determination, but without such further evidence, the positive drowning determination would remain and could not simply disappear from the autopsy report, even if an examiner were willing to allow himself or herself to be overridden by a COD based on third-party report.

To allow a declared COD of drowning awaiting toxicology reports to be vacated in favor of arrhythmia as the COD is implicitly to recognize the original drowning COD claim was false. But what could have happened in the hours, days or weeks before an ME vacates his or her previous drowning determination to ultimately favor a third-party-influenced determination?

Since an arrhythmia leaves no physical signs of its having occurred, and since the death in question was not contemporaneously witnessed by any competent medical professional, it should not be possible to have sufficient confidence in any other determination that would be unaccompanied by physical evidence so as to override completely and vacate an evidence-based drowning determination that the medical examiner implicitly said she had made by the end of the hands-on, eyes-on autopsy.

Allowing inferences based on second-hand reports from untrained lay-persons that manifest no physical evidence to override an albeit-tentative COD, but one nonetheless based on tangible evidence seems to imply the examiner has been swayed by one or more factors beyond the stated evidence, which was not claimed to be any physical evidence observed while viewing the body or on lab tests.   If a medical examiner were somehow convinced of the validity of one or more lay-persons’ second-hand report(s) in such a case, one might conceivably (to stretch that word very thin) be led to say an inferred arrhythmia may well have caused or led to the drowning, but not that the concomitant drowning did not happen!

In this case, the arrhythmia as the COD took the place of drowning with drowning no longer being even mentioned. --FAIL!

169 posted on 08/18/2016 6:49:49 PM PDT by rx (Truth Will Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

To: Fred Nerks
All nine of you calmly make your way out of the aircraft and don your life jackets.

You are floating in approximately 70 degree water.

4 between 100-200 yards (estimates were 300 yards)from shore.(some were able to stand in the water even though the plane crashed in 50 feet of water)

Within minutes, an aircraft circles overhead so you know you’ve been spotted.

5 The weather is clear, winds are 10-15 MPH,(18mph) swells are about six feet(no way—2-3feet at most) and water occasionally splashes your face. For at least 25 minutes, you manage to stay in a group but after the plane starts to sink, you begin to drift apart. Two here, two there.

One man swims ashore.(a former army guy I believe swam to shore in 6 minutes older guy) You can see and hear the rescue helicopters.

Yes it was a terrifying ordeal but you made it out safely, you are floating in a life jacket, holding on to the hand of your friend and co-worker, and help is on the way. Then, inexplicably, with your life jacket still on, you drown. No one else drowns, just you.

Not only do you drown, but no one sees you drown, not even the man who has been holding your hand. And, once you lost consciousness or died, your friend lets go of you and you float away, out into the ocean. How did you drown? Why didn’t anyone see you drowning? And why did your friend let you drift away?(Actually there were frogmen who took her to the closest smoke buoy about a 1/2 mile away)

There is more a lot more.

200 posted on 08/20/2016 8:57:50 AM PDT by rodguy911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson