Lol Buddy, if you cant see that drugs weren’t related in this matter you’re ignorant and can’t read. The tox report was clean. If you don’t want to accept that then move on.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by jonnyanony

Member since Nov 2020

14914 posts

Posted on 1/15/23 at 10:57 pm to Dale3

It's not about "accepting" it my guy it's about actually having that information and not making a wild guess.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Dale3

'Merica

Member since Aug 2014

576 posts

Posted on 1/15/23 at 11:00 pm to jonnyanony

It’s ok man, not everybody can read and comprehend.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by NC_Tigah

Make Orwell Fiction Again

Member since Sep 2003

135671 posts

Posted on 1/15/23 at 11:02 pm to Dale3

quote:
Simple use of context clues leads you to the conclusion that drugs were not the cause of death from this statement.

No. Not even close.

However, when I searched for the same, I did find Brister had just finished some sort of exercise at the gym. So that increases possibility he could have had contributory cardiac pathology.

Normally a coroner's report to that effect would appear fairly quickly s/p autopsy. I've not seen anything reported along those lines though. Serum/tissue tox results take longer to get back. Sounds like authorities are awaiting those.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by jonnyanony

Member since Nov 2020

14914 posts

Posted on 1/16/23 at 7:28 am to Dale3

quote:
It’s ok man, not everybody can read and comprehend.

You're literally using a proof by assertion fallacy.

This isn't about reading.

Reading would tell you there has been no tox report released or known to the public.

Assuming would tell you, hell, anything you want. But it doesn't make it true or even likely.

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Return To Board