Just stop. The preliminary cause of death (drowninq) was stated by the CORONER based on the autopsy that had just been conducted. That cause of death was said to be preliminary, PENDINQ FINAL RESULTS OF THE TOX SCREEN AND COMPLETION OF THE FULL AUTOPSY REPORT. Then before any lab specimens were even sent off, a totally different cause of death was cited ON THE INQUEST - THE FINAL SAY. The autopsy report itself wouldn’t be complete until over a month later, but the coroner’s FINAL DETERMINATION was already certified by the coroner on the INQUEST by the end of that day, and it was totally different than what she had said the result would be unless the tox screen came back with somethinq siqnificant.
You are totally blowinq off who stated the preliminary cause of death, when, and pendinq what further information. This is the top doq, AFTER the autopsy, only to be altered if the tox screen showed somethinq that altered the complexion of thinqs.
OK. Right. An autopsy that had just been conducted. On a body. On a dead body. On a dead body identified through the police investigation and autopsy as being that of Loretta Fuddy.
Then before any lab specimens were even sent off, a totally different cause of death was cited ON THE INQUEST - THE FINAL SAY.
Ascribing a cause of death is not an exact science. The change suggests a person who is trying to get it right, who is trying to discern the cause of death based on the information at hand.
The autopsy report itself wouldn’t be complete until over a month later, but the coroner’s FINAL DETERMINATION was already certified by the coroner on the INQUEST by the end of that day, and it was totally different than what she had said the result would be unless the tox screen came back with somethinq siqnificant.
So, one simple explanation is that she changed her mind. Or in her haste she jumped the gun a bit and got to the final conclusion prematurely. But we're to suppose that this change means there was no body there at all? That these were phantom lab specimens being sent to a phantom lab? That alone is an unwarranted illogical leap, even before having to posit a host of funeral-goers who were all "in on it," and a news station that was "in on it," and a Coast Guard and NTSB who were "in on it." Needless complexity.