Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: P-Marlowe

I agree. Apparently, he was in Texas to go hunting, not a sport for an infirm man.

Better to just do the autopsy.

The only advantage to not doing the autopsy would be a possible public outcry of conspiracy. That would justify holding up any appointment of any replacement.

You can’t have a suspicious death, a suspicious burial, and then allow a nation-changing decision to be made by a radical who was on the exact opposite side of the law as the deceased possible victim.


78 posted on 02/15/2016 12:47:08 PM PST by xzins (Have YOU Donated to the Freep-a-Thon? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]


To: xzins

Many will still call for a conspiracy even if an autopsy turned up heart attack. I don’t think the government should be in charge of that decision in the first place. Obviously the family doesn’t believe anything sinister happened. Wouldn’t they be the FIRST to have suspicions?

Sounds as if he was a heart attack waiting to happen otherwise his own doctor would have pushed the family to have his death checked out. JMO


168 posted on 02/16/2016 3:25:23 AM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson