I don't put a lot of faith in the official side of the story for a couple of reasons; one is the change in the cause of death, and the other is LE's statement about the case that has been posted here a couple times.
Changing the official COD this summer doesn't give much credence to the coroner there, in my opinion. If it was as has been stated and done because she wouldn't let things drop, that's outright unethical. If it was as she mentioned in the broadcast and it was changed once she brought in someone for a second opinion, it sounds like they knew they were wrong originally and wanted to avoid being accused of incompetence. If it was as some have suggested here and they just didn't have all of the results until months later, they should never have stated a definite COD without all information. If anything, it should have been stated to be "undetermined" until the rest of the results were in. MOO
The statement by LE bothers me because she doesn't say there's no evidence of stalking, she says there isn't enough evidence of any one person doing it to make an arrest. She also stated that they had several suspects, not that they had none. Under those circumstances, I think it's wrong for them to accuse TI of imagining things when they apparently never investigated the death enough to determine if it could have been a murder. I think they've closed the stalking case, not because they don't believe there was a stalker, but because there is no longer a "stalkee". I don't like the idea that the death of a victim might be considered to be the end of a case because it could just encourage stalkers to make sure to get rid of the victim if there's a good chance they're going to get caught soon. I also believe the person should pay for their crime even if the intended victim has died. The last reason is that after having gotten away with it once, I think there's a good possibility that he/she/they will decide to try it again with a new victim.