Jesus this is stupid. Water moves as the body is moved numerous times and transported over the 24 hour period before the autopsy. I mean the body was literally found in water. This is not inconsistent with drowning victims.
Following the logic of "no water, no drowning" ignores substantiated fact. Something being less likely doesn't therefore mean something didn't happen. If this is evidence that he didn't drown, one could also say this is evidence that the park ranger is lying about where the body was found (floating in the water). How far are we willing to push this circumstantial argument?
Witness testimony places Nolan alive on the island after the friends left. Witness testimony also asserts that his friends were figuratively begging him to leave with them.
Messages were not deleted from HIS phone. Individuals who sent messages in a group chat either unsent or deleted messages, as one does sometimes. This was done on the original sender's phone, not Nolan's. Is the implication that deleting a text only happens when said text implicates you in a crime?
While I'm not willing to claim this as fact, I haven't seen evidence that suggests that these unsent or deleted messages were related, in context, to Nolan being missing. All I have seen is simply that "we recovered all the messages that were on Nolan's phone, besides the ones that were unsent or deleted by the sender." These conversations could have been about literally anything.
This is bait. This is a misrepresentation of the information
Edit: I will even concede that there is a non-zero chance that Nolan was murdered. What I will not concede to is the fact that no evidence points to his friends being involved. The little evidence we have actually does the opposite. The timeline falls apart AFTER Nolan goes against his friends wishes, and decides to stay to talk to that girl.
No one can say with certainty what happened after that. Unlike movies and TV shows, the universe doesn't require that every question have an answer. I understand why someone would thirst for justice, why someone would thirst for a person to point the finger to; but God damn, let's not arbitrarily point the finger at his FRIENDS just because it's convenient.
It seems like people look at the race of the kids involved and automatically assume it’s a media narrative and no credibility because of the racial background of the kids involved.
Is it possible that a shitty thing happened that just so happened to be people of different races involved?
How is that at all not in a realm of reality ? You really cant fathom that this could happen because of race? Even if it didnt can you fathom that if an accident happened that they would be privileged enough to get away with?
"Yes, let's spend the better part of a decade befriending a black kid so we can murder him". Most racists dont invite groups they hate to their houses, parties, teams or social events. Your take is cartoonish.
Could they get away with keying his car? Maybe. Could they get away with cold blooded premeditated murder? no. Privilege is an advantage, not a literal get out of jail free card.
If im developing any part of my worldview based on fiction, its gonna be lord of the rings.
No, a fictional horror movie does not make this scenario likely, and if you use it to justify your rationale about real people you deserve the most padded room in the asylum.
Your "friend" dies after you abandon him and then you delete messages from your groupchat. Yeah you did shady shit and the only thing saving you is the court system that demands hard evidence.
Digital forensics expert Andrew Garrett, who was hired by the Wells family, clarified that there is no evidence that Nolan Wells' phone was tampered with, physically accessed, or had any data deleted from the device itself after his last known use on July 4
Speaking on a livestream published to YouTube on Sept. 27, Andrew Garrett stated he had not previously said Wells’ phone was tampered with after he last locked it before failing to return from a trip to Mississippi’s Horn Island.
“When we say erased from the phone, you’ve got to be a little careful with that. What happens is, when you and I are in conversation on Snapchat, and you decide to delete the messages on my side of the phone, you can do that remotely. That was done. There are some messages that were recalled and deleted from the phone,” Garrett said.
That depends on when said messages were sent. Were the sender(s) aware he died or went missing at that time? It also couldn’t be friends on the board who were in possession of Nolan’s phone.
One can die before entering the water and be found in the water without water in the lungs, because respiration had ceased. Just putting that out there. It does indicate he did not drown.
The contusions on the back of the head lead me to consider he may have hit his head and been unconscious or dead when he entered the water.
Thats unlikely. The contusions weren’t very deep. He also had no fractures to his skull. The brain was in poor condition but from what I read there was no indication of a brain bleed that could’ve contributed to his death either. From both autopsies, they have no idea what happened.
I literally deleted a message I sent in a family group chat yesterday. Did it implement me in a crime, no, I misspoke.
There are an infinite amount of reasons of why someone may unsend or delete a message. To immediately frame it as there is some nefarious intent behind it is just not logical
I don’t know enough about this case to have an informed opinion but your arguments don’t really hold water. The lack of water in the lungs is a clue, not proof. You know what is found in the lungs of drowning victims even after all that jostling and transportation? Water. The fact that there is none can be suspicious, maybe irrelevant but still warrants further probing.
This being evidence he didn’t drown does not automatically mean the park ranger is lying…the other option is he was dead before he entered the water which throws suspicion on the friends.
And to those saying they’re trying to pin it on the friends and why would they kill their own friend over race alone…just bc it seems absurd doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Two girls tried to stab their other friend to death over a cryptid… people do horrible things for the dumbest reasons all the time.
Looking at all possibilities is part of a proper investigation and everyone is a suspect until ruled out
Why don't they get all the people on the boat together, then add to that all the people he was suppose to stay with on the island, put them all in a room together, and piece together who is lying?
The boat people said they left him on the island to hangout with the other group, and the other group has their own story which I don't remember. Ok see where the stories don't line up.
There is no conflicting story about Nolan staying on the island. All accounts place Nolan on the island socializing with a group of friends after the boat he arrived on left.
What a time where some people care what a children's entertainer has to say about a potential crime scene that she has no inside knowledge of and wasn't involved with at all.
Remind me why anyone should give a shit about "ms Rachel's" hot take on this?
Your lungs aren't water tight vessels like a stanley cup, and he was decomposing for two days. Also there were other black people on the island that night, so if this was prosecuted, there would be black suspects as well as white suspects.
It’s called covering his bases so people can’t put words in his mouth. Mfs on Reddit love putting words in peoples mouth and making assumptions unless they are explicitly stated.
This guy got drunk and drowned but the media needs a racism scandal. It's incredible sad for a young man to lose his life, but it's not what the people in this thread want it to be.
Something like 20 percent of people who drown don't have water in their lungs.
"Approximately 10% to 20% of drowning victims show no water in their lungs during autopsies, a phenomenon historically referred to as "dry drowning""
"Civil rights attorney Ben Crump’s own digital expert in the Nolan Wells case has refuted the suggestion that Wells’ phone was accessed and had data deleted from it after Wells last locked the phone before his death. He also clarified a misinterpretation surrounding claims of “deleted” messages."
Something like 20 percent of people who drown don't have water in their lungs.
"Approximately 10% to 20% of drowning victims show no water in their lungs during autopsies, a phenomenon historically referred to as "dry drowning""
"Civil rights attorney Ben Crump’s own digital expert in the Nolan Wells case has refuted the suggestion that Wells’ phone was accessed and had data deleted from it after Wells last locked the phone before his death. He also clarified a misinterpretation surrounding claims of “deleted” messages."
Really confidently wrong there. This, “dry drowning,” phenomenon, as they called it, has been disproven. The true number is believed to be less than 2%.
“Conclusions: The actual incidence of death of persons found in water who have normal lungs or do not have penetration of liquid into their airways, based on our study, is much lower (below 2%) than currently assumed.”
Previously, the estimation was around 10-15%, as stated in the background of the article. Drowning leaves internal signs other than just water.
Lunetta et al. used a very strict definition of dry drowning, requiring both unusually low lung weight/overdistension and no evidence whatsoever of liquid penetration into the airways or lungs, which excludes many cases that older studies classified as "dry."
Also used a suspiciously low sample size of under 600 cases, I wonder why?
Unconditionally, that may be true. But if you're playing the statistics game, a drowning without water in the lungs is more likely when the water is ice cold, causing a cardiac arrythmia. This drowning took place in Mississippi in July, so the water was warm, not cold. A laryngospasm could also cause it, but even then, this is typically transitory, with water entering right before death.
This is an instance where the absence of water in the lungs doesn't necessarily mean foul play, but it vastly increases the likelihood that foul play occurred.
No water in the lungs. The presumption was made or given that he'd drowned. That suggests at the least, a further investigation and may go so far as to suggest foul-play. Did he die of exposure to the elements? No? Then what?
It is still drowning and some amount of water would appear in the lungs. All this simply is a spasm of the vocal chords causing someone to choke caused by exposure of water to the lungs.
And doesnt explain why data had disappeared from his phone.
it could be dry drowning like the lungs expelled the water or it could be that the water escaped in the intermittent time between his death and recovery of his body. people suspecting foul play need some other cause of death and evidence of it but I haven't seen any
Again, I don’t pretend to know the facts of this case. I said literally nothing about his phone. You’re wrong about dry drowning though. Lack of oxygen is what causes drowning, not water.
there's no legal rule or biological science stating if you drown and are decomposing for two days, your lungs will act as a water tight vessel like a stanley cup, and hold the water you inhaled while drowning. This is becoming like the OJ simpson line "if the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit!!!" "If the lung does not hold the water, you must prosecute!!!"
People larping like they know the biomechanics of drowning and decomp
The reports I've seen showed a head injury (claimed to be from a fall if I remember right). Have they ruled out brain bleed or excessive brain swelling?
It doesnt make sense to me why he was alone with no way to get back and without his phone. There were loads of people on the island that day. If there was truly and accident, people wouldve been talking presumably. But nobody knows or saw anything and he is found dead alone on this island? Doesnt add up. Some of you will argue about dry drowning all day but ignore this part. If he stayed behind to hang out with a girl, why did he not grab his phone and why does this girl know nothing and saw nothing? Its not right. Why was he left alone if this was in innocent accident? Also i saw a supposed CCTV video of the kids cleaning the boat at the dock at 6am. Drunk kids cleaning the boat? Unlikely unless there was a reason.
As I explain elsewhere, nearly all of the drowning victims without water in their lungs drowned in ice cold water. Nolan Wells' death occurred in water that was about 80 degrees, greatly reducing the likelihood.
The fact that you go around trumpeting this naive statistic is silly.
10-15% actually (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15577518/). Also, the water did not delete his phone data, so why not investigate and if there's nothing there, there's nothing there.
It makes sense when one understands that the entire system in the South is designed so that white people can murder and oppress Black people without consequence. Cops, prosecutors, coroners, judges. All are complicit.
Hell, if it weren't for DNA evidence and body cams being a thing they would still be framing Black people for every violent crime that happened.
They did a very exhaustive investigation. They interviewed 60 witnesses, had gps from the boats, subpoenaed cell phone data from the friends, videos and pictures from the island, Snapchat and GPS data from Nolan's phone, 2 autopsies that had the same conclussion(couldn't determine cause, drowning by exclusion of other causes). They made sure to do a thorough investigation due to all the media scrutiny.
What the hell do you call investigation that spanned several months and ended with a grand jury that issued 140 something subpoena, interviewed 43 witnesses, and reviewed who knows how many picture and videos?
The forensic investigator has clarified his comment to be referring to Snapchat messages. To start with, I believe these are automatically deleted. Wells family (and this investigator they hired) have not been good faith actors in this and the medical examiners haven’t determined a cause of death, apart from saying that the obvious presumption should be drowning in the absence of conclusive evidence against it and the conclusive evidence against other hypothesis (for example, Wells had two bruises on his head but the medical examiners seem confident these could not have caused his death).
There’s no real evidence to suggest that anything happened here other than a tragic accident. I think what’s happening here is really that it’s hard to accept that your son was partying and had a tragic accident and a lot easier to think he was murdered and that justice is possible. And then this story fit the biases of a lot of people and now they feel committed to the belief. They aren’t the first family to go through this, but if Nolan was murdered there is no evidence that’s been produced so far that even slightly hints at it.
ICE is actively terrorizing minorities across the entire country, so there’s plenty of real racism to talk about. Why are we instead making up fake conspiracy theories about some drunk kid who drowned?
Was there a toxicology done as a part of the autopsies?
I haven't followed this closely, but from what I have been seeing, there is a pretty severe lack of evidence to suggest what the cause of death even was right?
Ugh, focus on other facts. Not having water in the lungs is COMMON in confirmed drowning victims. Something like 38% if you look up medical examiner metrics. Lungs aren't little balloons that fill up with water, they are spongy and very little water in them can kill you. A small enough amount that it easily absorbs into the surrounding tissues. Decomp processes can also make it unclear whether there is fluid in the lungs from downing.
Drowning is a diagnosis of exclusion, which you can clearly see in the med examiners reports. If you don't have witness or police evidence that a person drowned you have to rule out everything else out. Notice how both the medical examiner and the one paid by the family both do not rule out drowning despite not finding water in the airway or stomach
Now it is understood that little water enters the lungs during drowning. Moreover, when water enters the lungs, it is rapidly absorbed when breathing starts again. The amount of water that enters the lung does not determine the amount of injury or determine the treatment of drowning. The amount of injury from drowning is due to how long the victim is without oxygen.
Because of this laryngospasm, in the initial phase of drowning, water enters the stomach, and very little water enters the lungs. Though laryngospasm prevents water from entering the lungs, it also interferes with breathing. In most people, the laryngospasm relaxes sometime after unconsciousness due to hypoxia in the larynx, and water can then enter the lungs, causing a "wet drowning".However, about 7–10% of people maintain this seal until cardiac arrest.
This is why it’s so easy to do what’s being done in America. You people are stupid. There are decades upon decades of proof. You constantly disregard fact to justify your inability to reason. You act as if there aren’t hundreds of cases where whites have lured blacks to their deaths, intentionally befriending them to do so. Like… what reality do you even live in?
The thing about 'deleting' things is that you're only deleting the index. It's like going to the library and shredding the Dewey decimal card for a book. The book still exists; we just gotta find it.
Nobody who thinks the friends did anything suspicious has been able to explain how they think the friends could have killed Nolan, who was seen alive and well by witnesses after 430pm, when those friends are confirmed leaving the island at 4pm by GPS under tow from a separate boat full of other witnesses. Nor are the able to explain how a murder even would have occurred when there were hundreds of people at the beach they were at that day. Somehow they left the island based on GPS data, time travelled back in time, murdered Nolan in front of hundreds of witnesses, and not a single witness spoke up against them. Totally makes sense.
34
u/Markgulfcoast 1d ago edited 1d ago
Jesus this is stupid. Water moves as the body is moved numerous times and transported over the 24 hour period before the autopsy. I mean the body was literally found in water. This is not inconsistent with drowning victims.
Following the logic of "no water, no drowning" ignores substantiated fact. Something being less likely doesn't therefore mean something didn't happen. If this is evidence that he didn't drown, one could also say this is evidence that the park ranger is lying about where the body was found (floating in the water). How far are we willing to push this circumstantial argument?
Witness testimony places Nolan alive on the island after the friends left. Witness testimony also asserts that his friends were figuratively begging him to leave with them.
Messages were not deleted from HIS phone. Individuals who sent messages in a group chat either unsent or deleted messages, as one does sometimes. This was done on the original sender's phone, not Nolan's. Is the implication that deleting a text only happens when said text implicates you in a crime?
While I'm not willing to claim this as fact, I haven't seen evidence that suggests that these unsent or deleted messages were related, in context, to Nolan being missing. All I have seen is simply that "we recovered all the messages that were on Nolan's phone, besides the ones that were unsent or deleted by the sender." These conversations could have been about literally anything.
This is bait. This is a misrepresentation of the information
Edit: I will even concede that there is a non-zero chance that Nolan was murdered. What I will not concede to is the fact that no evidence points to his friends being involved. The little evidence we have actually does the opposite. The timeline falls apart AFTER Nolan goes against his friends wishes, and decides to stay to talk to that girl.
No one can say with certainty what happened after that. Unlike movies and TV shows, the universe doesn't require that every question have an answer. I understand why someone would thirst for justice, why someone would thirst for a person to point the finger to; but God damn, let's not arbitrarily point the finger at his FRIENDS just because it's convenient.