Posted on 01/10/2014 1:52:43 PM PST by The Sons of Liberty
Barring more definitive evidence, I'd lean more toward Fuddy being the third person from the right in the foreground in your second image, the one of the passengers floating in the water after the crash as posted by matt1234 at # 45, and I'm even more convinced that the man next to her there, the second person from the right, is Keith Yamamoto.
The problem is to definitively identify her in the image taken of the plane passengers in the water after the crash.
imo that's NOT Fuddy. And at second look, that woman could be wearing a lifevest, it's hard to tell if that's her arm or a vest.
I'll let you compare...
It looks to me like it could be the same woman. The hair’s about right, and the other facial features do look a bit similar.
Without seeing pictures of the other passengers its difficult to tell
The big mystery to me is who are the other two passengers and why did they take off and /or refuse treatment ? Are they hiding? Why? Did anyone interview them or even get their names?
So who is holding whose hand in the image of the two people by the door of the aircraft before it sank?
Seeing that we are mostly guessing here, I might suggest that there were two people who went along for the ride and didn’t pay...?
Might have been the son of the pilot as someone suggested, and perhaps Fuddy invited her sister?
Something so simple...and on a bad day, better to keep quiet about it. The investigators would certainly know.
Which photo are you referring to?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3110483/posts?page=179#179
The third one on tbis comment, I cropped and enlarged. I’ve posted it three times now...
You should be able to clearly see the person on the right is holding the arm or the hand of the woman on the left.
But... this is interesting:
"When Hollstein saw that everyone was out of the plane, bobbing in the water and seemingly without any major injuries, he swam for shore, guessing it took 90 minutes. He said he was surprised to hear that Fuddy had died. "She was doing fine out of the airplane," Hollstein said. "Her assistant was really watching her. He was taking care of her."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/13/hawaii-plane-survivor/4017865/
Maybe that was the person Holstein was referring to... her assistant.
Someone’s red flag has gone up in the office of the investigator. They’re keeping mum to see what shakes out of the coconut tree after repeated interviews. Who changes story? Which story doesn’t fit? Why?
They no doubt know cause of death. But let’s say it was drowning. It would not be unusual in this circumstance. BUT there may be a mark on her body that makes them ask: “Was it assisted by someone, and who was involved?”
So investigation continues before its ruled “accidental”!
The thud that caused the plane to go down has not been explained yet either
My thought also. It matters because they may have heard or seen something boarding or in the brief flight that is relevant to the actions you just described Was she coherent getting on or during the flight?
I’m beginning to think that anyone who wants to hear that she was ‘put down’ will see the woman holding the wing as being Fuddy, and anyone else, like myself, who thinks she had a stroke or a coronary occlusion, will see her being held by the arm or the hand, at the door of the aircraft.
This identification discussion could go on forever. The question isn’t really which one she is in the water, the question is, why did the aircraft lose power? Because if it was sabotage on the island, they were ALL meant to be victims.
That’s a bit far fetched when you look at the video I posted of the twin-engined Cessna going down in much rougher water - and the pilot getting out to walk on the wing. An aircraft can be sabotaged in a number of ways, but no one can guarantee the passengers won’t get out and do what this group did. Float and get rescued.
Unless it’s a b.o.m.b. of course...and this wasn’t.
And the one who died was an overweight sedentary woman aged 65, whose physical condition or health record no one here knows.
Most of the questions raised during this event and its aftermath are due to sloppy reporting imo, and the fact that the airline operator had the gall to go down there and retrieve the engine and leave the aircraft in the water, where it (perhaps) sustained more damage. His insurers are bound to be asking why he did that, not to mention the concern of the engine manufacturers.
The large government subsidies that airline received just might have clouded his judgement...and like some wag said way back, no one is really certain that the salvage boat brought the right plane back to shore. Luckily, the helicopter pilot says he noted the number on the tail.
Likely but not confirmed yet.
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.