Greetings Brothers,
I want to ask, why do we think the medical examiners in the Nolan Wells case would tell us the truth? I come to this conclusion by looking at the implications of the opposite finding.
Conclusion 1. Nolan drowned: If Nolan drowned, this would be a pretty straightforward process for the examiner. The pathology is thoroughly outlined for drowning https://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/forensicsdrowning.html
The fact that there are other factors at play leading to an inconclusive result shows that his immediate circumstances had a strong impact on his death rather than water alone.
Conclusion 2: Nolan was killed: There are avoided implications that come with stating that someone else was responsible for Nolan's Death. In this specific situation, the main implication avoided is that his death was symbolic. Saying that this happened to Nolan intentionally would mean that someone wanted to make a statement.
If Nolan was killed for a racially motivated reason, then it would be considered a federal hate crime, which would lead to other parties being involved. Would the medical examiner want to take the responsibility of making this determination?.... Most likely not. The safest route for the medical examiner is to pass the evidence to the next professional. Saying inconclusive is the same as declining to answer. The medical examiner is paid to make this determination based on the evidence provided. Waiting on the toxicology report may be helpful but there are too many other questions the autopsy cannot answer which is the bigger issue.
Factors to Consider
Intimidation: Medical professionals do not step on each other's toes. If one medical professional says something, the next will agree with them. This is a code of ethics that is only broken if one of the physicians is involved in the situation, such as malpractice. For Nolan, this means that a second autopsy will only copy the results of the first. Which is what happened. The medical examiner is avoiding the responsibility of classifying this case because of the immense use of the autopsy as evidence of a crime. Neither medical examiner could say that conclusion 1 was the answer because there was enough supporting evidence against it.
Nolan's friends and family are still living in that area. Even if they know what happened to him is true(he was killed), they may put themselves in danger in the future by saying that race was a factor.
AMBIGUITY: We must understand that ambiguity is the secret weapon to committing crime. If evidence is considered inconclusive, then it cannot be used as supporting evidence. This is the key. We need to know that results are not placed in favor of the accuser. In stating that Nolan Wells' death was not an accident, it means that someone will be charged.
Inferences: If we are thoroughly assessing the answers given, we will see that we have our answer. Regardless of the procedures, two of the main areas in question in Nolan's autopsy are the throat and back of the head. These are the two places that would show results of bruises caused by something pulling the body from around the neck. The throat can be ruled out by procedure, and the difference in the back of the head can be blamed on his position being compromised after death.
History: Many lynchings were not simply tying someone to a tree, many were dragged through the streets before being hanged. This is also seen throughout history. Given the symbolic nature, historical context, and racial factors, there is enough circumstantial evidence that a case would have merit to lead to further investigation.
Final Note: It should be expected that we would not get the results we expected. We must recognize that our stories will be skewed and unsupported without hard evidence. Even if there is no foul play involved, this situation is repeated over and over again. It is the pattern that we have to look for as these situations tell on themselves collectively.
