Also the fact that the corrinor pronounced his death as cardiac infarction without even seeing the body, and then ordered that it would never need to be looked at.
Yeah. That is for sure. Colby also reveals the toxin would not appear in an autopsy – so there would be "no way of perceiving that the target was hit".
Then why wouldnt they let anyone view the body? A heart attack wouldn't show any outward signs of damage so viewing the body wouldnt be an issue. But if his throat were cut or he was beaten to death, that might be a little tougher to hide.
Who knows what else happened to him besides the heart attack. Maybe he had taken part in some rough foreplay of some kind or maybe they had tried to kill him in some other way before using the gun. But the gun is the cleanest solution.
view the rest of the comments →
fusir ago
Also the fact that the corrinor pronounced his death as cardiac infarction without even seeing the body, and then ordered that it would never need to be looked at.
darkknight111 ago
The refusal to autopsy is due to this:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/world/644439/CIA-heart-attack-gun-Mary-Embree-Frank-Church-William-Colby/amp
Only someone who is highly trained in forensics AND knows about this weapon would know what to look for.
Evidence destruction.
carmencita ago
Yeah. That is for sure. Colby also reveals the toxin would not appear in an autopsy – so there would be "no way of perceiving that the target was hit".
Coloradical2 ago
Then why wouldnt they let anyone view the body? A heart attack wouldn't show any outward signs of damage so viewing the body wouldnt be an issue. But if his throat were cut or he was beaten to death, that might be a little tougher to hide.
carmencita ago
Who knows what else happened to him besides the heart attack. Maybe he had taken part in some rough foreplay of some kind or maybe they had tried to kill him in some other way before using the gun. But the gun is the cleanest solution.