Posted on 11/11/2014 3:16:35 PM PST by ethical
Something About The Way She Died Part 2 by Linda Jordan
On January 6, 2014 we were told that Hawaii Department of Health Director Loretta Fuddy, a central player in the production of Barack Obama’s controversial birth certificate , died from cardiac arrhythmia after the small plane she was in had to make an emergency ocean landing.
In September 2014 a recently discovered report, from a Maui Police Detective, revealed that Fuddy’s heart wasn't the problem after all. The Medical Examiner concluded she had drowned, in spite of the fact that all witness accounts say she was in a life jacket that kept her afloat.
Now, it’s November 2014 and I have just reviewed a debriefing report from a Commander with the United States Coast Guard (USCG) who was part of the rescue effort after the ocean ditching. This report says that Loretta Fuddy died from “severe internal injuries”.
I include the relevant part of the debriefing below.
I was told that no records were in the possession of MPD and to their knowledqe there were no records that anybody else had either.
“What changed by an hour later?”
the realization she died in flight.
That is not the same as saying no records exist. The county may have the records, it is just the PD is not aware of them.
Also, the form submitted to the MCPD by the company Harle works for has a place for autopsy/pronouncement travel and other expenses to be listed and submitted for reimbursement, stronqly suqqestinq that the procedure is for the company to arranqe the travel themselves and then submit the bill to the county for whom they are doinq the autopsy.
“The sworn statement statute is cited in the article.”
841-4 in part:
“The testimony of all witnesses examined by any coroner or deputy coroner pertaining to the death of any person wherein a coroner’s investigation is required,”
So if the coroner decides not to take any witness statements, there would be no sworn witness statements.
Are you say the coroner has no discretion about whether they need witness statements? I don’t see that in the statutes.
I suspect that after the autopsy results, the coroner wouldn’t see a need for witness statements.
The county chartered a plane for one person to qet to Molokai to do an autopsy - a MCPD expense, since it was the MCPD Accountinq Office which had (and qave me) the invoices they qot for autopsy expenses, which were billed not to the County of Maui but to the Maui Police Department - but it didn’t come out of the MCPD budqet and was never reimbursed by the MCPD, and the MCPD never even knew about it?
That’s not how this stuff works.
And the fact remains that they described a “body” that had no socks, shoes, or bracelets on, which is not what Loretta Fuddy’s body would have looked like if she had been under the blanket in the morque. And they played fast and loose with the details of what the autopsy found too - havinq a preliminary cause of death that would be based on findinq water in the lunqs, but switchinq to a COD that defies water beinq found in the lunqs (because if she died of cardiac arrhythmia she died suddenly and wouldn’t have had time to breathe water into her lunqs.
Is that Clinical labs of Hawaii?
They list four Anatomic and Clinical Pathologists, two on Maui, one in Honolulu and one in Kauai.
Since Dr. Harle lives and works on Maui, she may have made an arraignment with the county. Now if she had to travel to Honolulu by commercial flight, there is a place on the form to list the expense.
Seriously?
“wouldn’t have had time to breathe water into her lunqs.”
Water could still be in her lungs if her mouth was open. Waves breaking over her face would have allowed water to get into the lungs.
Here is an article on drowning, read the section labeled diagnosis.
http://www.forensicpathologyonline.com/E-Book/asphyxia/drowning
If she was going to have an arrangement with Maui it would be with the Maui Police Dept. Yet the Maui Police Dept has no records indicating that she was there for either the pronouncement of death or the autopsy and they do not believe there is anybody else who has such a record either.
Seems like I’ve said this before and you’re just ignoring it.
If she had water in her lunqs then why would the preliminary diagnosis be changed from drowning to cardiac arrhythmia? There was nothing physical that they could have seen in the autopsy which would have indicated cardiac arrhythmia like the water in the lungs would indicate drowning. They never asked to see medical records which would have indicated whether she had heart problems. And they never did the enzyme test which would have conclusively proven cardiac arrhythmia.
So Harle (if she had been there to do the autopsy) supposedly threw out the one piece of physical evidence she had and chose a different cause of death without any physical evidence to back up the change.
But this is all just spinning around and around, because I’ve already said this stuff before, and it just gets ignored. Like a puppy chasing its tail.
They knew exactly where and under what conditions it was claimed that she died. This isn’t MCPD’s first time around dealing with HRS 841-3-mandated investigations at the same time as the NTSB investigated the cause of a crash. There was a helicopter crash in 2011 that killed 5 people, and Maui County did their HRS 841-3 investigation at the same time as the NTSB did their investigation of the crash. Whether the death is classified as “in-flight” is neither here nor there if the death occurred within Maui jurisdiction. If the people died on Maui County (land or water), then it is Maui County jurisdiction.
How many times and ways do I have to say the same thing? I quoted the NTSB guy saying the cause-of-death investigation is Maui County’s responsibility because the NTSB does NOT have jurisdiction over the county. I’ve shown crash after crash where MCPD’s Criminal Investigations Division has conducted the cause-of-death investigation. You just aren’t listening. In the face of evidence to the contrary you are insisting on what has already been documented as wrong - not addressing any of the evidence but simply repeating your claim without substantiation, over and over again.
That’s troll behavior.
The autopsy result supposedly DEPENDED ABSOLUTELY on witness statements.
Anonymous witness statements not taken under oath and contradicting what was said publicly by the witnesses.
So to bypass the requirement for sworn statements Dr Harle (who wasn’t there, used no means to communicate the pronouncement of death that the anonymous EMS worker claimed she made, didn’t know what Fuddy was truly wearing in the water, and changed the cause of death without substantiation after failing to do the enzyme tests that would have made her case or request the medical records that would have been legal-quality evidence rather than mere hearsay,) used hearsay from the NTSB even though the NTSB says they did NOT talk to her and the MPD (in a news article) said the NTSB only gave the conditions of the crash.
So witness statements were supposedly CRITICAL to the determination of the cause of death. It’s just SWORN WITNESS STATEMENTS that weren’t so important...
Statements are MANDATED in HRS 841-3. Anyone with knowledge is required to report the facts they know about the circumstances of the death to the coroner with jurisdiction. Those are mandated witness statements - not up to the discretion of the coroner to seek out, but MANDATED for the witnesses to go to the coroner and present, under oath. Unless Fuddy is still alive and the witnesses know it, they could/should all be fined for failing to obey HRS 841-3.
Has it ever occurred to you that this is because the local authorities have jurisdiction mandated by state statute when a death occurs within their statutory boundaries, and a federal investigation over and above the state-mandated one does NOT negate those state mandates? Which is exactly what the NTSB investigator, Jim Struhsaker, said in the article I posted for you to look at.
It is consistent in all these instances that have been mentioned - by me several times before and now even by you - but you’re refusing to see what’s right in front of your face.
841-3 does not mandate sworn statements. The passage you refer to is for people reporting a death that the coroner is not aware of. None of the witnesses in the crash had an obligation to report to the coroner because the police were on the scene. That’s why the penalty is only up to $100. Parking tickets in Maui can cost you more than that.
As for the coroner depending on witness statements, they do that all the time. Consider a traffic accident with a fatality. The police take witness statements. But they are not sworn statements. That doesn’t mean the coroner cannot considering them in their report.
AS to Dr. Harlin, we know that the Lanai crash involved a charter aircraft. Charter by the county for the five county employees. The County may have a standard budget item for chartering aircraft that all departments draw from. The Maui PD may not have budget item for such an expense.
butterdezillion wrote:
” The county chartered a plane for one person to qet to Molokai to do an autopsy - a MCPD expense,since it was the MCPD Accountinq Office which had (and qave me) the invoices they qot for autopsy expenses,which were billed not to the County of Maui but to the Maui Police Department - but it didn’t come out of the MCPD budqet and was never reimbursed by the MCPD,and the MCPD never even knew about it? ....”
When did the county charter a plane for one person to get to Molokai?
The shoes and socks could have come off in the helicopter or on land as they were checking her vital signs. The planar reflex is often done as one of the signs of death. After that they could have easily been left behind or given to her relative who was at the scene.
In forced landings passengers are often told to remove jewelry.
YOu don’t charter a flight for one person.
And if she was flown in by ANY aircraft the attorney for Maui County - who was the one responding to my request on behalf of the MCPD - would not have said that to their knowledge there was nobody else who would have records either.
And you’re just maklng stuff up about HRS 841-3. Where does 841-3 stipulate that witnesses don’t have to report what they know about the circumstances of death if the police show up sometime after the death? The police were not on scene when Fuddy allegedly died; that’s why the witnesses who WERE there at the time would be needed - regardless of how the police first found out that there was a death.
They didn’t. I didn’t put the /s sign but posed it as a question that showed how unlikely the claim of a chartered flight is, given all the other things that also don’t add up.
Did you see anybody moving to take off jewelry in Puentes’ video?
The USCG helos have advanced equipment to monitor and treat stuff like heart attacks, but they took the time to take off her socks and shoes so they could tap both of her feet, in order to determine if she was dead?
They didn’t take off her jacket, shirt, or bra to use paddles, apply electrodes, or anything like that, but they took off both socks and both shoes to figure out if she was irreversibly dead?
You’re grasping at straws, and it is very evident to everybody reading this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.