Michael Hastings Death: LA Coroner Completes Autopsy

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
...What, besides a note, would it take to "Validate" the possibility of suicide?
...

You know, I can't answer that with much more than conjecture.
In reading through the piece put together by Guy Montag, though...it appears that he went through a significant battle with "trying to find a reason to keep going" after the death of his fiancée a few years back.
Montag went further to note that, her birthday was only a couple/few days prior to the date of the accident...and that he (Hastings) had written the Afterword to his book (about her and her death) three years, to the day, before the accident.
Who knows?

reply to post by heavenlyalchemy


I am not sure that it was noted at the time of importance.

2 days had passed and the coroner does not have privy to the police report where it would have been mentioned.

reply to post by WanDash


Ya know how skeptical I am. .. .. I would call that somewhat coincedental and Highly Suspect.

If we go back a couple of months we will find that we both mention suicide as a possibility.

Though I have continually rulled that OUT.

Why?,. . . because of No Note. . and. .. . Complete Reckless Disregard.

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
...Ya know how skeptical I am. .. .. I would call that somewhat coincedental and Highly Suspect.
...If we go back a couple of months we will find that we both mention suicide as a possibility.
...Though I have continually rulled that OUT.
...Why?,. . . because of No Note. . and. .. . Complete Reckless Disregard.

I ruled it out...because I didn't want it to be the case. I wanted a "hero"...
Then - when you "ruled it out" because of No Note - I thought - "maybe I'm onto something".
So - I blame you (if it turns out that suicide was the killer)...

reply to post by WanDash


That's all about the "Reverse Psychology" at work here.

Although I do have Broad Shoulders, I can take it.

I think we have both worked so hard for our individual causes that we may have succumbed to one another’s cause.

If that makes any sense at all.

reply to post by WanDash


So my earlier supposition about murder should actually be:

No evidence of suicide.
No evidence of NOT suicide.
Therefore, suicide.

Originally posted by raymundoko
...So my earlier supposition about murder should actually be:
...No evidence of suicide.
No evidence of NOT suicide.
Therefore, suicide.

Could be - raymundoko
I am in no position to say yea or nay...
If you are including all manners & motivations by which someone dies at their own hand...then, you may be right.
I still view the possibility that he didn't think he was going to die with some regard.
And, again - that does not mean I am entirely convinced that "Foul Play" is an impossibility ---- just that, without new/more information of another variety coming forth, it is looking less likely.

ShadellacZumbrum

I am just curious though. .. Exactly what constitutes "Small Amounts"?

Does That mean that it was Small enough that it didn't kill him, OR, that he had not ingested any over the period of a few days?

Still allot of Unanswered Questions. .. But still NO Proof of Murder.

"Small amounts" could be consistent with a dosage of Sudafed and Advil that someone would be taking for a cold or flu and would give a false positive for amphetamine and marijuana if not followed-up on with much more costly gas-chematograph tests to verify the readings. I would be much more convenient to not do so. I would be curious to know what tests were used. LA coroner's office have not always had a reputation for thoroughness when it is suitable for them.

reply to post by WanDash

some "three-letter agencies" focus on finding &/or developing your "soft spots"...then...exploit them. 14 years off... 1 month back on... That is interesting.

This!


Also I am a bit puzzled how most people seem to accept the comments made by family members so easily. Personally I shudder to think what kind of nonsense some of my own family would spout about me under similar circumstances - they just don't know me well enough. Additionally Hastings had plenty of reasons to keep them out of the loop - partly for their own safety, partly to protect his sources and the stories he was working on. Plus the media will quote only the most sensational or most "desired" parts out of context.

This is crap!

Lets change the words a little. This has all the earmarks of a set up and all the right words are being used.

Passed out = Asleep.
Drugs in his system = so what!
'They' wanted him gone - he is gone!

Drugs in his system are not analyzed nor have they bothered to match these to his prescription meds. Coroner, bad boy!

When they start using all the right terminology, the terminology of a cover up, well, you get a cover up.

The fact that posters are defending the accident scenario with gusto is also a very good indicator in these cases.

Last, the Media is playing ball.

P

Originally posted by MindBodySpiritComplex
...I am a bit puzzled how most people seem to accept the comments made by family members so easily. Personally I shudder to think what kind of nonsense some of my own family would spout about me under similar circumstances - they just don't know me well enough. Additionally Hastings had plenty of reasons to keep them out of the loop - partly for their own safety, partly to protect his sources and the stories he was working on. Plus the media will quote only the most sensational or most "desired" parts out of context.

While thinking about it, last night, a lot of what you have stated (here) went through my mind, as well.
It seems that I had expected (among other possibilities) this to be the finding/s a good while back... Except, I don't think I expected the "immediacy" or "urgency" of the family situation/involvement to be such a factor.
And - as you say - there have been times when some of my family members (parents, sibling, spouse, etc...) have jumped to some of the most preposterous conclusions about my well-being, sentiments &/or intentions - and their claims were issued as "fact"/s.
You have to admit, though, that such statements from family weigh more heavily in one's estimation of the incident...than all the sheer speculation that has preceded.

Just thought I'd add this for temperance-sake...

As is par for the course... Read two sources...get two stories...
But - here's one that is kinda bugging me...

One of the "facts" we have been fed, states that Hastings was last seen (by a family member?) passed out sometime between 12:30 and 1:00 a.m. ...a few hours prior to the crash.
Here, in Gene Maddau's piece, we have his next door neighbor - Jordanna Thigpen - saying that he came to her apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo...because he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined telling him her car was having mechanical problems.
She added "He was scared, and he wanted to leave town..."

reply to post by pheonix358

The fact that posters are defending the accident scenario

What Facts or Evidence Proves Otherwise. At this point I have Never seen Anything other than Speculation, Conjecture, Concoction, Assumption, Supposition, postulation, and just plain Wild @$$ Guesses.

Like this Stupidity here. ..

'They' wanted him gone - he is gone!

Where does that come from? How do you know they wanted him gone? What Facts or Evidence do you have that supports that statement? Do you have access to information that no one else has? If you do that would be great if you shared it here.

Hate to say it but the Ignorance is running Thick in the Air.

This is from another thread previously, but I just have to:

reply to post by Archie


I know that guy is banned, but ultimately people like him were making wild claims just FEEDING the flames of inaccuracy.

I have finally read the autopsy/toxicology report and found a couple of things interesting.

The detection of Amphetamine is miniscule and can be attributed to his prescription for Adderall (as co-founder of LA Times states in comment under article. To see people assume he was on a Meth-binge is sad to me. If this had been the case I would expect the coroner to describe traces of discolouration on his fingers of uncharred hand (?, Or am I confusing Meth with Crack smoking?)
As for the "medical" Marijuana, it is unlikely to be as strong as skunk which can trigger psychosis in some individuals. Nonetheless it would strengthen feelings of paranoia. But as it was only detected in metabolite form unlikely to have affected him at time of event.

The reason his blood was tested for dimethyltr*** would be because a family member suggested he had used it "recently" , yet none was detected. The fact it is mentioned followed by,

Thıs drug, known as 'busınessman's trıp' or 'fantasıa', can cause 'ımpaıred judgement that often leads to rash decısıons and accıdents' accordıng to the Palo Alto Medıcal Foundatıon.

( in the Micheal Krikorian article) I don't know how many people at the Palo Alto foundation have actually used dimethyl** but the sentence suggests they haven't....

a: it is not widely available, so Michael most likely had this in his posession for some time, or met someone in posession who had experience with dimethyl***.
b: It is not addictive, hardly a reason to stage an intervention for by family members (unless they were clueless about it's effects)
c: Actually smoking it is quite tricky and requires specialised paraphernalia. So he either had previous experience or there was an experienced user with him at the time to demonstrate/guide him on use.
d: It is known as the "spirit-molecule" because rather than a recreational/ego drug, and leaves one feeling "cleansed" and with clear thoughts afterwards. Whilst duration itself is short, it is impossible to move let alone stand up and get in a car.
e: Michael was an intelligent being who would likely have researched the effects beforehand and known that state of mind and setting are of uttermost importance. (so was there someone with him at the time? if so,who?)
If , however, it was his first experience with the drug and he was unprepared for its effects and by fluke managed to smoke it affectively it could well have scared the scrap out of him.... and may have caused his family/wife to become concerned.

The MSM reporting

Journ­al­ist Mi­chael Hast­ings, who was killed in a Los Angeles car crash in June, died of “trau­mat­ic in­jur­ies” as a res­ult of the ac­ci­dent and had traces of drugs in his sys­tem, Los Angeles cor­on­er’s of­fi­cials said Tues­day.

while the coroner concluding that they weren't significant in the cause of accident is misleading, as are those posters here saying "told you so"!


One thing I am grateful for is the conclusion that he was instantly killed (before being engulfed in flames).

reply to post by bowaconstricta


Did you by any chance note that the samples for the toxicology were taken exactly 2 days after his death? Do you realize that the drugs had time to clear out of his system before they took the samples? Do you know that Dimethyltryptamine only stays in your system 2-4 days?

reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum


Yes I do, and do you realise that the coroner would have taken that into consideration before stating that neither Amphetamine or Marijuana played a role in the "accident".

no traces of dimethyltrip** were found and speaking from experience I can tell you that you feel fresh as a daisy after this short but intense experience. The reason it is an illegal substance (odd considering it naturally occurs in your body as it does in many foods) is because TPTB (and that includes the religious ones) do not want encouragement of enlightenment among the masses, because that would really be dangerous for them!

P.S this post will probably be modded, as could can't even use the standard shortened term for this substance here...

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by bowaconstricta

 

Did you by any chance note that the samples for the toxicology were taken exactly 2 days after his death? Do you realize that the drugs had time to clear out of his system before they took the samples? Do you know that Dimethyltryptamine only stays in your system 2-4 days?

Actually that would be someone living, with blood flowing, organs doing their thing and oxygen coming into the blood stream.

wiki.answers.com...'___'_stay_in_your_system

This says that '___' over the amount your body produces when you sleep stays in your system for 2 - 5 days.

And here:
www.erowid.org...

it says" is almost certainly made by the pineal gland in the brain. ... right before human death, your brain pumps out heavy doses of dimethyltryptamine."
.

reply to post by heavenlyalchemy


There are at least 10 body functions that continue after death.

Bacteria and enzymes would have been at work breaking those products down.

Originally posted by bowaconstricta
...The detection of Amphetamine is miniscule and can be attributed to his prescription for Adderall (as co-founder of LA Times states in comment under article. To see people assume he was on a Meth-binge is sad to me. If this had been the case I would expect the coroner to describe traces of discolouration on his fingers of uncharred hand (?, Or am I confusing Meth with Crack smoking?)
As for the "medical" Marijuana, it is unlikely to be as strong as skunk which can trigger psychosis in some individuals. Nonetheless it would strengthen feelings of paranoia. But as it was only detected in metabolite form unlikely to have affected him at time of event.
...The reason his blood was tested for dimethyltr*** would be because a family member suggested he had used it "recently" , yet none was detected. ...

Thanks for the insights (some if it "news" to me)!

('___') a: it is not widely available, so Michael most likely had this in his posession for some time, or met someone in posession who had experience with dimethyl***.
b: It is not addictive, hardly a reason to stage an intervention for by family members (unless they were clueless about it's effects)
c: Actually smoking it is quite tricky and requires specialised paraphernalia. So he either had previous experience or there was an experienced user with him at the time to demonstrate/guide him on use.
d: It is known as the "spirit-molecule" because rather than a recreational/ego drug, and leaves one feeling "cleansed" and with clear thoughts afterwards. Whilst duration itself is short, it is impossible to move let alone stand up and get in a car.
e: Michael was an intelligent being who would likely have researched the effects beforehand and known that state of mind and setting are of uttermost importance. (so was there someone with him at the time? if so,who?)
If , however, it was his first experience with the drug and he was unprepared for its effects and by fluke managed to smoke it affectively it could well have scared the scrap out of him.... and may have caused his family/wife to become concerned.

More excellent points and questions.

One thing I am grateful for is the conclusion that he was instantly killed (before being engulfed in flames).

Agreed.