You have a very odd mindset.
In the Michael Jackson case, you have asserted that the jury should have convicted him regardless of the evidence because he admitted to sleeping with children.
In the Schiavo case, you toss aside the results of this autopsy because some other ME was guilty of malfeasance, therefore this ME's painstaking work cannot be trusted. In fact, you advocate allowing an ME who is under federal investigation for crimes himself to be the "outside observer."
Very illogical.
Leaving Michael Jackson aside for the moment, the problem with Pinellas County is that from my readings (which were pretty extensive when the whole Schiavo affair hit 2-3 months ago), it's a pretty corrupt place in general. Judge Greer apparently is a big real estate crook, the Sheriff's office seems extremely corrupt, the nursing home situation is corrupt - the whole county stinks. I wouldn't have any confidence in anything that came out of Pinellas County even ASIDE from the Schiavo case.
The ME's office has been corrupt in the past. My point with this is that many people might simply accept any findings BECAUSE an ME says so - well the preceding ME had to resign because of changing her findings under pressure. It's actually very relevant because if it happened once, obviously it can happen again. The only way to forestall even the appearance of impropriety was to try to include other parties in the autopsy, particularly those of the opposition side. It might not have resolved anything, but then again - neither did this.