Bob Saget dead at 65 -- hours after performing live

[IceIce9]

Bob Saget's family trying to prevent further details about his cause of death being made public | Daily Mail Online

'Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm in the form of extreme mental pain, anguish, and emotional distress if Defendants release the Records in response to public records requests or otherwise disseminate the Records for any other reason or purpose,' the lawsuit stated, according to a copy obtained by ABC News.

Hmmm.
Something they want prevented ?

Imo.

From the article:


Byron York, the Washington Examiner's chief political correspondent, responded to the autopsy report by questioning whether the initial investigation could have gone deeper.

'This is really odd. Makes you wonder about the thoroughness of the original investigation of the scene,' he tweeted.

Former AUSA-SDNY Richard Signorelli weighed in and suggested that there may have been foul play involved in Saget's death, despite officials ruling it an accident.

'No wrongdoing found. Something doesn't make sense given his severe head injuries,' he tweeted.

 

[IceIce9]

'There Is NO WAY This Could Have Occurred With One Fall’: Famed Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht Calls For Second Autopsy On Comedian Bob Saget

Joining the chorus is neurosurgeon Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN's chief medical correspondent, who said on an episode of New Day: “I think what it reveals more than anything else is this was not a simple bump on the head.”

“The fracture in the front of his eye sockets and contusions these are things that cannot be attributed to injuries away from the point of impact.”

 

[jjenny]

I don't think there was an initial investigation. I don't think the scene was ever treated as a potential crime scene. It was originally believed Bob died from either a heart attack or stroke. And then it was found to be a major head trauma, but I don't think much if any investigation was done after that. If he died from a fall in a hotel room, how did that fall happen without disturbing anything in the room, and how did he end up in bed after it?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

'

“The fracture in the front of his eye sockets and contusions these are things that cannot be attributed to injuries away from the point of impact.”

We already know that part isn't true since it has happened before and been documented in the medical literature so he's factually incorrect there.

 

[IceIce9]

I don't think there was an initial investigation. I don't think the scene was ever treated as a potential crime scene. It was originally believed Bob died from either a heart attack or stroke. And then it was found to be a major head trauma, but I don't think much if any investigation was done after that. If he died from a fall in a hotel room, how did that fall happen without disturbing anything in the room, and how did he end up in bed after it?

I am sure Ritz has cameras in the elevators and halls. Wondering if it has been reviewed to see if anyone else entered his room?

 

[jjenny]

I am sure Ritz has cameras in the elevators and halls. Wondering if it has been reviewed to see if anyone else entered his room?

I have the same exact questions. Was the video viewed to see if anybody could have entered his room, or if he left his room to go to the lobby (or something like that). There is also key card information. Was his room door open at any point after he entered it? Again, he was found in an orderly hotel room, in bed, after the major head trauma that broke his skull in multiple places. This doesn't exactly add up very well to a picture of him suffering an accident in his hotel room and thinking nothing of it. Now, maybe it was a freak accident but would be nice to know if an investigation at least looked into whether anybody else was in the room at some point.

 

[beatrixpotter]

We're going in circles and neither is going to convince the other. But suffice it to say that yes, the injuries do match up, according to forensic pathologists (the only true experts; neurosurgeons don't do autopsies), case reports, and peer reviewed articles all linked in this thread.

Everyone is free to form their own opinion of course about whether or not in his case this could have happened, but putting something out there as fact when it is not and has been proven not to be fact is spreading misinformation.

The family's request to withhold the records from the public doesn't change the fact that the injuries occurred and there was only one impact site. It also doesn't change the conclusion that it was likely sustained from a posterior fall, per the autopsy. The only thing the family's lawsuit does is open the possibility that there was something else going on either medically or personally before the fall or right after the fall (i.e. someone may have helped him get into bed or maybe he had a medical condition that predisposed him to the fall or maybe he had a seizure, who knows?).

I saw one of the links you provided. The link itself described it as a rare event. There is a difference between a rare event and a likely event. On top of that the example in the link you provided was of someone falling down a set of stairs and being found unconscious at the bottom of the stairs.

Bob Saget was found in a hotel room laying on his bed no where even near something that would offer that level of fall/blow let alone enough recovery to return to a hotel room and place themselves neatly in bed. <modsnip>

 

[happyday]

We already know that part isn't true since it has happened before and been documented in the medical literature so he's factually incorrect there.

It’s hard to deny that not just one, but quite a few doctors are not buying the autopsy findings. I’ve believed since the beginning that it could have been one blow to the back of the head from a fall, but was it really? So many doctors are finding it unlikely that I can’t ignore that something is definitely amiss.

 

[jjenny]

There was a case where a guy was found dead in a hotel room with multiple blunt trauma and it was ruled an accident as well. I found that one fishy as hell. How thorough do police investigate these cases if at all?
Ruling revives questions about DC death of ex-Putin aide | AP News

 

[Betty P]

The earlier news reports about Bob's death stated he was found by the hotel housekeeper. They thought he had slept through his checkout time. This implies several hours passed before he was found the next day.

Seemed a little unusual at the time, moreso now. The link below is from an article written shortly after his death was reported.

Bob Saget Discovered Dead By Housekeeping After Missing His Hotel Checkout: Source

Deputies were called at 4:00 pm by the Ritz-Carlton Hotel.

Again, I'm curious about what happened because it would be wrong if this was an unreported homicide.

 

[jjenny]

The earlier news reports about Bob's death stated he was found by the hotel housekeeper. He had slept through his checkout time. This implies several hours passed before he was found the next day. Seemed a little unusual at the time, moreso now.

Bob Saget Discovered Dead By Housekeeping After Missing His Hotel Checkout: Source

Deputies were called at 4:00 pm by the Ritz-Carlton Hotel.

His relatives called the hotel and asked them to check, per other reports. I don't think it's unusual. He could have decided to stay longer and so on. If there was a "don't disturb" sign on the door, housekeeping won't go in. If there wasn't it would be interesting to know why they didn't go in to clean the room. In good hotels, they usually clean rooms every day. But some guests don't want that done, so they put a "don't disturb" sign on the door.

 

[Betty P]

His relatives called the hotel and asked them to check, per other reports. I don't think it's unusual. He could have decided to stay longer and so on. If there was a "don't disturb" sign on the door, housekeeping won't go in. If there wasn't it would be interesting to know why they didn't go in to clean the room. In good hotels, they usually clean rooms every day. But some guests don't want that done, so they put a "don't disturb" sign on the door.

I don't find that part too unusual. I was just noting that, in retrospect, it also looks like it provided a large window of opportunity to put things in order, get stories straight, etc.

ETA: I have a feeling one possibility is that the hotel might have been negligent in some way. A security breach, a bad employee, etc. Could be innocent, like Bob walking to the ice machine and getting mugged. No one finds him until morning, etc. JMO

 

[happyday]

I don't find that part too unusual. I was just noting that, in retrospect, it also looks like it provided a large window of opportunity to put things in order, get stories straight, etc.

ETA: I have a feeling one possibility is that the hotel might have been negligent in some way. A security breach, a bad employee, etc. Could be innocent, like Bob walking to the ice machine and getting mugged. No one finds him until morning, etc. JMO

I hadn’t thought of that possibility. But wouldn’t the family be demanding an investigation once they learned about the extent of the injuries? And now filing the suit to prevent info from being released? That’s what gives me pause. It seems like the opposite response a family would have if they thought the hotel and/or LE was covering something up or didn’t investigate properly? I really don’t know, but like IceIce9 has been saying since the beginning, there must be something about the whole situation the family does not want out.

 

[pbj]

FROM ABC NEWS: "On Tuesday, Saget's wife, Kelly Rizzo, and three daughters filed a lawsuit against the medical examiner's office and the Orange County sheriff seeking injunctive relief to prevent the release of any records -- including photographs, video and audio recordings, and "statutorily protected autopsy information" -- related to his death."

From what the family is trying to have not released including "photographs, video and audio recordings", it appears that an investigation was done. I'm sure the videos would include any of the video from the security tapes. I wonder what the audio recordings are from. I'm still thinking the injury and death were related to an unseemly event that the family does not want released. I'm thinking he was alone since no other person is being investigated. Just my thoughts, and I don't mean to be disrespectful to a well loved man.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I saw one of the links you provided. The link itself described it as a rare event. There is a difference between a rare event and a likely event.

I'd argue a murder in a hotel is also a "rare" event. It happens, but it isn't a common occurrence. A rare event means that it isn't the most likely thing to happen, the very definition of a freak accident as someone else said earlier in the thread.

On top of that the example in the link you provided was of someone falling down a set of stairs and being found unconscious at the bottom of the stairs.

But the headstrike was in one place, so it doesn't matter what he fell off of/down. The point was that with a headstrike in one place, the other injuries occurred. All those saying it's not possible are just wrong as proven by that report. As I said before, we can argue that we don't think it happened to BS, but that isn't the same as saying it isn't possible to hit the back of the head and have those other injuries.

Bob Saget was found in a hotel room laying on his bed no where even near something that would offer that level of fall/blow let alone enough recovery to return to a hotel room and place themselves neatly in bed.

That isn't really true. He could have fallen and hit his head just as hard on the tub or the sink. He could have hit the corner of a nightstand. We don't really know. But all those things would offer the same level of blow as in that report.

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

 

[jjenny]

FROM ABC NEWS: "On Tuesday, Saget's wife, Kelly Rizzo, and three daughters filed a lawsuit against the medical examiner's office and the Orange County sheriff seeking injunctive relief to prevent the release of any records -- including photographs, video and audio recordings, and "statutorily protected autopsy information" -- related to his death."

From what the family is trying to have not released including "photographs, video and audio recordings", it appears that an investigation was done. I'm sure the videos would include any of the video from the security tapes. I wonder what the audio recordings are from. I'm still thinking the injury and death were related to an unseemly event that the family does not want released. I'm thinking he was alone since no other person is being investigated. Just my thoughts, and I don't mean to be disrespectful to a well loved man.

Video and audio recordings could be of an autopsy itself. It doesn't necessarily mean an investigation was done.

 

[ApparentlyInDenial]

There's room for various types of reasoning with any case. Some people are deductive and put forward Theory X as the 'definite' answer, and others are abductive and might put forward a few theories based on their observations, with the proviso that they may or may not be correct.

What happens here is when deductive thinkers and abductive thinkers get into a fight; deductive are always absolutely certain of their theory, whereas abductive want the space to be able to explore a couple of theories.

 

[ApparentlyInDenial]

No family who cares about justice is going to want to suppress a murder.

Whilst that rule might be true most of the time, it isn't true all of the time. You're basically stating it's 'impossible' for a family to suppress a supposed suspicious death if they care about justice, then drawing from that an inference that because they've suppressed info then the death cannot be suspicious.

It isn't impossible, and as you eloquently said about the medical side, we don't know all the facts. We know the possibilities and we're all in the dark.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Whilst that rule might be true most of the time, it isn't true all of the time. You're basically stating it's 'impossible' for a family to suppress a supposed suspicious death if they care about justice, then drawing from that an inference that because they've suppressed info then the death cannot be suspicious.

It isn't impossible, and as you eloquently said about the medical side, we don't know all the facts. We know the possibilities and we're all in the dark.

You're right that it isn't always true. But based on what we know about the family, my opinion is that they would not suppress the information if they believed this was murder. The ME ruled it an accident and the family has bought that so I don't think they think it was murder. And given that they and the ME and the police know way more than we do about this case, I'm going with that.

 

[ApparentlyInDenial]

You're right that it isn't always true. But based on what we know about the family, my opinion is that they would not suppress the information if they believed this was murder. The ME ruled it an accident and the family has bought that so I don't think they think it was murder. And given that they and the ME and the police know way more than we do about this case, I'm going with that.

And if you’re happy with that - and you seem intellectually rigorous- that’s fair enough.