Animals ate him to the bone. Insects too.It's all very "fishy"...if you'll excuse the pun. Is it possible for there to be only bones after a month?
I had breakfast at a diner this morning. The waitress and I were discussing this. She feels something is definitely suspicious about this discovery and said she felt the remains being "skeletal" after only a month made her think it's unlikely that it's Laundrie. But I don't know if weather conditions or him possibly being an animal's meal contributed to that.It's all very "fishy"...if you'll excuse the pun. Is it possible for there to be only bones after a month?
Thats why they had to rely on his dental records.The body was also under water for weeks being nibbled at by fish.
It wasn't exactly in dry storage.
Probably why they're calling in an anthropologist to examine the bones since a regular autopsy impossible. Other than what's left in the bones or on the bones how do they determine if he took himself out or was killed. It is possible he could've experience vigilante justice or stumbled on something he shouldn't have.It's all very "fishy"...if you'll excuse the pun. Is it possible for there to be only bones after a month?