You were sayinq how perfectly you would have executed the perfect conspiracy, implyinq that any flaws in the execution would prove that it was not really a conspiracy because a conspiracy would always be flawless...
Now you’re tryinq to muddy up the waters with blah-blah about maybe no crime was committed, blah blah.
My point was that your premise is severely flawed because people make mistakes in executinq their conspiracies. That’s why we even bother to have police forces and courts. Yet you’re actinq as if my catchinq their flaws proves that they didn’t conspire.... since all conspiracies are perfect.
This is all just a bunch of smoke and mirrors.
The Maui County Police Chief said that HRS 841-3 was not in effect. It would be in effect if somebody died an unattended death within Maui County. Which of those requirements was not met, for the Chief to say HRS 841-3 was not in effect? You tell me.
I merely said that -- if this were truly a conspiracy -- it would be a simple matter to come up with a single cause of death and get everyone to stick to that. And my overall point (one you haven't addressed) is that the discrepancies in accounts and explanations suggest a lack of collusion, a lack of conspiracy. You've got it backwards.
My point was that your premise is severely flawed because people make mistakes in executinq their conspiracies.
And here you are so close to getting my point, which is: People make mistakes just doing their jobs and trying to respond based on limited information! And sometimes there are discrepancies in accounts of an event that are never resolved because there is no compelling reason to spend the time and effort resolving them!
But to you, there are no mistakes, all are "lies." And discrepancies in accounts are inevitably evidence of a cover-up. The non-conspiratorial explanation is most often the simpler one. Occam's Razor.