Or you could just look at the facts of the case (currently: no foul play suspected). Are the cops in on it? The morgue? The local city? How high does this go?
This isn't something which happened in isolation. This isn't "someone died". It's "someone died, and dozens of people are going to sign off that this obviously not a suicide was definitely a suicide".
Like, is that possible? Can you fake a suicide and leave no evidence you did? If you can then how many suicides aren't actually suicides but homicides? How would we know?
You're acting like it's a binary choice of probabilities but it isn't.
Why did you have to make it go in the direction of conspiracy theory? Of course not.
An assassination that looks like a suicide but isn’t is extremely possible. You don't have enough details from the article to make a call on this.
> You're acting like it's a binary choice of probabilities but it isn't.
It is a binary choice because that’s typically how the question is formulated in the process of the scientific method. Was it suicide or was it not a suicide? Binary. Once that question is analyzed you can dig deeper into was it an assassination or was it not? Essentially two binary questions are needed to cover every possibility here and to encompass suicide and assassination.
This isn't something which happened in isolation. This isn't "someone died". It's "someone died, and dozens of people are going to sign off that this obviously not a suicide was definitely a suicide".
Like, is that possible? Can you fake a suicide and leave no evidence you did? If you can then how many suicides aren't actually suicides but homicides? How would we know?
You're acting like it's a binary choice of probabilities but it isn't.