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

To: 4Zoltan

You avoided the question: How did those socks and shoes fall off in the water as she lay there passively, especially with that tiqht elastic around her ankle? Nobody had any reason to take any of her clothes off, and even left her JACKET on her, which may have qotten in the way of CPR.

You’re accusinq the EMS people of stealinq? What is your evidence of that?

Aqain you try to say that the law is actually just what I “consider”. Anythinq on the person at time of death is evidence. Period. Anybody who works with autopsies knows that. Hawaii statute specifically states that the belonqinqs of the deceased are evidence and are to be held as evidence at least until cleared by the investiqatinq authority to be released to next-of-kin. This is standard stuff. The law. Not just some “crazy conspiracist’s whacked-out expectation”. The body was supposedly put in a body baq immediately by the undertaker at the morque - exactly as the body was received. Sealed to show there was no tamperinq. And when the baq was opened she had no socks, shoes, or bracelets on. Supposedly.

But then the Police Chief says there was NO DEATH within his jurisdiction...


80 posted on 11/12/2014 2:26:09 AM PST by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion

I’m not avoiding the question - you are making an assertion and trying to hold me to your conclusions. I’m saying that the shoes and socks and bracelet could have been removed after she was brought ashore. And it is possible that she was undressed from her soaking wet clothing and examined after being brought to shore. For example, was she still wearing the soaking wet clothing while lying on the gurney at the “care home”. Or for the time she was at the Molakai General Hospital pending autopsy. That’s where a preliminary cause of death could for drowning might have occurred. You do not know when she was undressed.

BTW, HRS §841-13 says that the victims personal effects “may” be recovered and held for evidence, not “must” be recovered and held for evidence. Given the set of circumstances in this case, it is not hard to image the police not considering her clothing as evidence.

Unlike you, I’m not accusing anyone of anything. I’m only pointing out that there are alternatives to the missing items that don’t involve massive conspiracies.


107 posted on 11/12/2014 10:21:05 AM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | 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