Michael Hastings – “Foul Play Or Not” – Do you have a plausible theory?

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by WanDash

 

...Wan,
...Wanted to make a quick note.
...Last week I think it was, his brother made a statement, something about he was pretty sure that it wasn't murder. I am wondering if he made that statement because he already knew.

I'm guessing that the family believed it resulted from the same reason they had made the trip to L.A. - to get him into rehab. (assuming that story is accurate)
When KN937 said that there are some things the family knew of his personal/private life, that they would like kept private...I'm guessing this is what she referred to.
I have commented numerous times on this (possibility)...thinking that if this information had been made public much earlier-on...we might not have spent as much time trying to sift through what was available... (then again - we might have... who knows?)

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by heavenlyalchemy

 

Thanks for posting this report. It was quite a read. Although I am not able to read it all because of my eyes.

Anyways, there is a section on the toxicology report that says some about Dimatryptamine and how something can affect those results Negatively but I can't read it.

I think it shows to different compounds that can interfere

I was just wondering if it shows those in his system

Any time, glad to help. The lettering is fuzzy so that wouldn't help matters.

The compounds that would effect the Dimatryptamine outcome were not looked into from what I can see on the report. If someone were to want to find out if they were an issue, they don't have very long to request a new analysis. Only 6 weeks from the 10th of this month. Good catch by the way.

Well, just wanted to point out now that the toxicology reports have come out, I had a theory on page one of this thread that he may have been in a drug induced episode of sorts at the time of the crash. Well, he had meth and marijuana in his system according to toxicology reports. here is the article:www.theblaze.com...

Hours before the crash, Hastings had last been seen by one witness “passed out” sometime between 12:30 a.m. and 1 a.m. The crash occurred just before 5 a.m.

Originally posted by thesmokingman
Well, just wanted to point out now that the toxicology reports have come out, I had a theory on page one of this thread that he may have been in a drug induced episode of sorts at the time of the crash. Well, he had meth and marijuana in his system according to toxicology reports.

Of course he did.

Case closed.

Originally posted by thesmokingman
Well, just wanted to point out now that the toxicology reports have come out, I had a theory on page one of this thread that he may have been in a drug induced episode of sorts at the time of the crash. Well, he had meth and marijuana in his system according to toxicology reports. here is the article:www.theblaze.com...

Hours before the crash, Hastings had last been seen by one witness “passed out” sometime between 12:30 a.m. and 1 a.m. The crash occurred just before 5 a.m.

Thanks for dropping back by!
Yeah - that has always been a possibility.
I don't think that either the meth or marijuana that were in his system at the time of the accident would/could have accomplished this alone, though.
Unless you're counting other effects that these substances can have on a human psyche that may be at the tipping-point (susceptible or vulnerable) anyway.
But...again - thanks for the Touche!

reply to post by WanDash


I can say as a former addict and heavy user of meth, the effects that this drug can have on you sanity and judgement(especially when withdrawing or coming down off the high), are very unpredictable. I am not the least bit surprised by the findings myself. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but this is one I am finding very easy to discount in my unprofessional opinion

Originally posted by thesmokingman
...I can say as a former addict and heavy user of meth, the effects that this drug can have on you sanity and judgement(especially when withdrawing or coming down off the high), are very unpredictable. I am not the least bit surprised by the findings myself. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but this is one I am finding very easy to discount in my unprofessional opinion

Yeah - when I was younger...if I could have afforded it...I probably would have become addicted, too.
At this point - with the information & evidence in hand - I cannot state that I am convinced that "this case is closed".
I do admit, though, that the stack is starting to lean pretty heavily in that direction.

I don’t know what I might have expected from the coroner’s report/s.
In fact, I don’t think I was expecting much of anything to come from the same…that would affect my views on this case.
The presence of marijuana & amphetamine in his system only taints some of the previous assumptions that he was “off the wagon” and had been for years.
The family’s apparently-urgent concerns with regard to his alleged use of illicit substances, however, does weigh strongly on the treatment of other facts.
We have not known how to weigh the credibility of his statements in the email to associates and friend/s… Have not known how to weigh the sincerity of his concerns… Nor did we know if such emails were “once in a lifetime” messages, or “once every few months”, or “every-other-day”…or “what?”.
The news of his family’s involvements place a big question mark on the weight I had formerly ascribed to the email.
Doesn’t mean I have discounted it, entirely – or – that I have ruled-it-out as pertinent…but rather, now, I must consider that there are other strong contenders for its explanation.
Paranoia…?
Might be going to rehab…and doesn’t want his cohorts to know…?
But – the last line gets me… “…hope to see you soon…”

What we have, here, is a paint by numbers scenario…
We see the lines on the page – have studied them for weeks…making certain we knew precisely where every line went, what it connected to, and, when possible…why it was there…
Now…instructions have come down (from above)…telling us to apply “Black” to many of the sections we had (might have) formerly envisioned as “rose” or “gleaming white”…
And…what happens to our optimism?
Down the toilet.
We cannot envision a finished product that will leave us “satisfied for the effort”.

And – to the spirit molecule… I have read that it would have been impossible for him to have been driving, if under the immediate influence of the same… But, likewise, it’s effect on his psyche from previous (recent?) use…could certainly have resulted in such explanations as “invincibility syndrome” (made that up) or “god-like abilities’…etc… With a primary focus on questioning this illusion of reality.

...Hope to see you soon!

The "coloring game" is kind of fun to watch...if you're inclined to "being entertained".
I don't know what to make of this...but am placing it on the table, should anyone care to partake...

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.

But, 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..."

What would be strange about that ... Now that we know he was a total dope-head, and out of his mind delusional?
Well - why would you care about the safety of your car...only a few hours before taking your car on a super-high-speed trip through Hollywood?

reply to post by WanDash


2 Stories that cause conflict.

I only wonder if the next door neighbor girl gave her statement in exaggeration mode.

That is a serious conflict I would say. Family member puts him passed out and the neighbor puts him trying to borrow the car.

Well, .. which is it ?. .. It can't be both.

Is it a timing issue? Or, . Does the neighbor have a psychological issue that causes her to be a pathological liar?

I find it hard to believe that he was at the neighbor’s house trying to borrow the car only later to drive his own.

Like you, it does not fit for me.

And adding the part that he was "Scared and Wanted to leave town" doesn't fit either.

Or Maybe .. .. .

He went to the neighbors house much earlier than 12:00 and asked to borrow the car and when she turned him down he went home to take a nap. . .? ? ? ? .. That doesn’t work either. Because it doesn’t make sense. Not like any of this makes sense.

OR, . . .

Did he wakeup from being passed out and suffer a serious case of paranoia and ran to the neighbors?

How about if he was still asleep when he went to the neighbors.?

reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum

Well - the "piece" was an attempt to establish (verify/corroborate) Michael Hastings' mental/psychological state for the last months.
He had moved into the apartment months earlier. The neighbor's boyfriend/fiancée(?) had died in an automobile accident in April...and, she and Michael had taken-up friendship.
Her story was that he was quite paranoid about journalists being watched...etc... She had tried to assuage or temper his fears on occasion...but, he was inconsolable in those regards...believing that there was a lot more helicopter activity overhead...when he was home (at the apartment) than when he was not...
As in many other pieces of "witness testimony" and/or "reporting stories"...there are inconsistencies.
We did not hear from the family - per se - we heard what the coroner elicited from interviews with family members.
Again - trying to temper my former "jump-to-conclusion" with regard to the coroner's report...with one of the few tools I have left - being the ability to observe.

ETA: As to "scared and wanted to leave town" not fitting... I'm not so sure I'm there... Even under a "paranoid delusional explanation"...it is entirely reasonable to consider it possible that he counted his "family members" who were allegedly trying to persuade (or force) him into rehab...to be "in on it".

According to thewrap.com, the coroner's report stated "...the levels (of tetrahydrocannabinol & methamphetamine) indicated that Hastings had not recently used the drugs..."

According to the LA Times article, "...Hastings had arrived in Los Angeles from New York the day before the accident, with his brother scheduled to arrive later the day of the crash 'as his family was attempting to get [Hastings] to go to detox,' the report stated..."
And, likewise - "...Hours before the crash, Hastings had last been seen by one witness "passed out" sometime between 12:30 a.m. and 1 a.m. ..."

In the LA Weekly article by Gene Maddau, we see... "...In the days leading up to his death, one of his brothers visited L.A. in an attempt to get Hastings into rehab; he later told investigators he feared more serious drug use..."

In the Hollywood Reporter article, we find, first...that Michael Hastings was wearing a seat belt.
We further see... "...A complete case report, also released Tuesday, reveals that Hastings had suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from his time as a war reporter in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the report, police officers spoke with an unnamed source close to Hastings, who said that family members had just arrived from New York in an effort to get Hastings to go to rehab. After what the family believed to be 14 years of sobriety, they suspected that Hastings had begun to use drugs again in the month prior to his accident -- shortly after moving from New York to Los Angeles. ..."

I do not see, in any of these "articles", that a family member was the source of information on "last seeing Michael passed out between 12:30 and 1 a.m.".
Perhaps you have seen another story/source that makes this claim.

I see three accounts for recent travels and family member involvements...
1. The LA Time says that Michael had just arrived in LA from New York, the day before the accident, and that one of his brothers was scheduled to arrive later that day (presumably, the day of the crash).
2. LA Weekly makes no mention of Michael having returned from New York the day before...and says that one of his brothers had visited L.A....in the days leading upt to his death...
3. Hollywood Reporter says "an unnamed source" said that family members had just arrived from New York in an effort to get him to go to rehab...
4. Michael Krikorian says that the coroner's report states "...famıly had just arrıved from New York the day prıor attemptıng to get the decendant to go to rehab"...and that "another family member was due to arrive the morning of the crash"...

I, likewise, see the gamut from he was addicted...to family members suspected he had begun using...to...a brother believed he had been using the spirit molecule recently.

Have you ever dealt with law enforcement or examiners of various sorts...who try to piece a story together to the best of their ability... And later see what they said about what you said?
I don't think I have EVER read such a report (when I had been personally involved), and come away saying "that's what I said" or "that's what I meant"... It was ALWAYS skewed (or - even entirely misrepresented, mischaracterized or even mistaken). I don't know that you can point an accusatory finger at them... After all ------------- It's just a job!

How to discredit someone.

Step 1 - show them as a Drug user ( or drinker)
Step 2 - This is what caused the delusions ( and the paranoia to chase his articles)
Step 3 - add an unnamed source
Step 4 - Add a family reference

Would seem to me he was partying in NYC....

Originally posted by matafuchs
How to discredit someone.

Step 1 - show them as a Drug user ( or drinker)
Step 2 - This is what caused the delusions ( and the paranoia to chase his articles)
Step 3 - add an unnamed source
Step 4 - Add a family reference

Would seem to me he was partying in NYC....

edit on 21-8-2013 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)

He had moved to L.A. in February...from New York.
I believe that his wife was still living in New York.
And, of course, his family is from the northeast...

reply to post by WanDash

I do not see, in any of these "articles", that a family member was the source of information on "last seeing Michael passed out between 12:30 and 1 a.m.".

It is in the coroners report. The name has been left blank.

reply to post by WanDash


No, he had just come back from NYC a day or two before the crash.

Really hate to do this...but - errors should be corrected...and, I found errors...so -
In this post, I showed a linear method of calculating the speed of the Mercedes according to the security camera video.
In the process of posting numbers...I erred, and added 1/3rd of a second to the Second #15 (or - full second) portions...which exaggerated the results...
So...for anyone who still cares about the speeds...I will simply enumerate, as follows:

the first #s should have been... 1.5034 seconds -- 153.652 feet/second -- ~105 miles/hour
the second #s should have been... 1.1769 seconds -- 200.532 feet/second -- ~136 miles/hour
the third #s should have been... 1.6667 seconds -- 141.6 feet/second = ~96.5 miles/hour

Off to sulking land.

Originally posted by matafuchs
reply to post by WanDash

 

...No, he had just come back from NYC a day or two before the crash.

Well then - that could be... But - who knows.
One report said he returned from NYC the day before. I haven't seen others stating the same.
And...if one of his brothers had been in L.A. for days leading-up-to the last day... ... ...just leaves me confused.

This is just a hypothetical scenario...
Please do not take offense...

A family (in the collective sense) perceives that a family member (in the objective sense) is on a "bad" path.
Whether the family's perceptions are correct, incorrect, biased or unbiased...is irrelevant, for the purpose of this supposition/proposition...

The family ... operating under the guidelines of "tough love" ... decides that they will "intervene".

They, first, express their concerns to the "bad path member"... Then, express their views on "what needs to take place"...to the "bad path member".

And - when the "bad path member", apparently thumbs his nose at their suggestions...saying - you don't know what you're talking about...the "family" elects to take matters into their own hands.

Pressure is applied... "Bad path member" tenses...and resists... More pressure is applied...

And even more pressure is announced for the coming day...
But
...the coming day finds no-one to apply pressure to.

Who does family blame?

"It certainly wasn't OUR fault!
"All his paranoia regarding the Feds...COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRUE!!!!!!!!
" -- Else, we are to blame for not believing him...
"SOOOOOOO....It was not the Feds' fault, either.
"It was bad path member's fault...
"Or - the fault of those nasty drug dealers...or whomever gave him prescription to treat his post traumatic stress disorder...
"After all - it's hard enough to lose him...and know you'll never see him, or talk to him, or laugh with or love with...him...again --- please don't tell me I'm to blame..."

Sorry to posit such an unsavory theme...but, I think this scenario plays out often enough...to be acknowledged along with other possibilities.

ETA: The above is not an attempt to lay blame on the family of Michael Hastings. It is not even meant to suggest that the above is what happened. It is, rather, an attempt to consider rational and plausible possibilities that go beyond "jumping to conclusions" on the basis of information derived from the coroner's report - in addition to considering other-than-the-obvious explanations for why 'the family' formed the trombone section in the No Foul Play Parade...from virtually, Day 1.
Thanks for your consideration!

reply to post by WanDash


It appears as though you know a little something about Intervention.

I have seen Intervention rear its ugly head on several occasions and while the outcome was quite desirable, there were in fact 2 instances where suicide occurred. It happened pretty much the same way you mentioned clear up to the point of laying blame as to who was responsible for the outcome. Not a pretty Sight at all. Have you ever been to a funeral where almost everyone is fighting? Very Very sad.

Here are 2 things in particular that I keep thinking about.

1) The brother making the comment that he didn't believe Michael was killed.

2) The family convening on his location to possibly "Force" rehab on him.

Some important notes. ..

The brother making mention about that in particular leads me to believe that he already knew that there was a good possibility it was because of drugs.

Also, with all of the family members coming together in LA is indicative of an "Intervention". That is important in my mind because typically when it comes time for an intervention everyone has already done everything else. Which, I might add is an indication that this was a problem Much Longer than the month or so prior that is being reported.

If you have any understanding of "Gateway" Drugs then you know that people will abuse use the same drug until they are at a point where the dosage has to be continually increased at which time they change to something more powerful. It is also important to bring into light that this period of "Usage" goes on a hell of allot longer than a month before the person will move onto something more powerful.

At the same time keep in mind that the samples were taken 2 days almost exactly to the hour from the time of the accident.

This is important because even though he was dead his metabolism was still working almost in the same way that your fingernails continue to grow after you are dead.

So, the levels of drugs that the drug screen shows it actually an inaccurate account as those levels would have Most Certainly been Much Higher had the samples been taken on the day of the accident.

Something unusual .. . maybe not. .. maybe a matter of semantics. .
The medical report states that a family member mentions that several years prior that he had an accident , which happened when he was abusing Ritalin, and in the next sentence says that he was institutionalized in 1999. So, are those 2 different instances? And what constitutes several years?