A lot of people who watched the Netflix documentary “MH370: The Plane That Disappeared” have written me with questions. I asked my friend Sarah Wynter, star of the hit show “24,” to discuss some of the ones that have gotten asked the most. This is a new format for me; in the past I’ve mostly explained my ideas through writing, but I thought that people who came to my work via video might prefer that medium. I’m grateful to Sarah for helping me out with her considerably more advanced televisual chops.
Hi Jeff, my son Paul Weeks is on MH370. I have read your blog over the years and for the first time watched this type of doco. Did you think the plane landed in Kazakhstan or shot down ? I was contacted a few years ago by a Pakistani Doctor. He told me himself and a lot of local villagers so what they thought was the plane fly over their border toward landing in Kazakhstan. He said he had reported the sighting to the police at the time but they were not interested.
@Jeff Wise: I just watched an old BBC documentary in which someone from Inmarsat stated at first they were worried that “this was a hoax” and that the plane had crashed and someone else had pretended to be MH370 and assumed it’s ID.
I don’t think this comment is a sensational discovery, but given that you are championing the hoax theory, I thought it might be of interest to you. If that’s the case, I can get you the exact quote and reference to the documentary.
Good morning Mr. Wise, we are an Inmarsat service provider and sell airtime to private and gov. customers. One of these is a Government Air Force of a EU country. Something very strange occurred some years ago: their planes , based on data from Inmarsat, were in flight for over 20 hours, with one lasting over 38 hours. The aircraft were not equipped to be refueled when flying. So, in essence, while all was normal, the aicraft did fly short 2, 3, 5 hours segments, Inmarsat equipment generated incredible and not true flying records, up to 38 hours of continous operation. We have the records generated by Inmarsat, not just the CDRs, but also specific satellite data (with the pings once every a specific number of seconds) that confirm the flights: too bad the planes were actually not flying, but sitting in a hangar after being flown.
In other words, the plane was sitting on the ground, but the Inmarsat servers believes it was in the air.
I do not know if this could be helpful at all, but I’d like to send it to you for your consideration and evaluation.
Thank you for your attention.
@Peter ~ Surely the best outcome (with whatever theory) is closure for the families and better enforcement of flying laws/regulations <3
How is it that the fisher man who saw the blaze or fire in the sky on that night is not at all interrogated, secondly why won’t the authorities investigate or search the area mentioned by Tomnods on the area mentioned by her in South China Sea. Also why the search is never done in South China Sea?
Pierpaolo, That’s very interesting! Do you record BTO and BFO values?
Hi Vineet, this question has been asked and answered a lot. The South China Sea was searched extensively after the disappearance, and if the plane had crashed there, a lot of debris would have washed up.
Jeff – I asked this in the other comment thread but I think you missed it. I remember your delving here on the blog into the flaperon and barnacles and how long the pieces of debris would have actually been in the water. Re-watching episode 3, that was not covered.
What you wrote at the time seemed compelling to me and demanding an answer from the investigation.
A few years later now, what is your view? Was there convincing proof documented that the flaperon or any of the debris was in the ocean for the trip all the way? Or is the debris still suspect from even that angle?
DG, Thanks for the question, sorry I didn’t answer before. The marine biologists attached to the investigation had high hopes that the biofouling would yield important clues about the debris’ path through the ocean, as it progressively gathered more organisms as it floated from the impact site to the point where it washed ashore. As revealed in Australia’s final report, however, they instead discovered to their surpise that instead of being 15 months old, the organisms didn’t appear to have been living on the flaperon for more than about a month. Likewise with “No Step,” the organisms that they found were more consistent with shallow waters than deep ocean. A puzzler.
I predicted this outcome, by the way: http://jeffwise.net/2016/12/16/the-flaperons-path-to-reunion/
I thought so Jeff! Knew you were right! So that argues even more strongly for the debris pieces to have been planted by someone to wash ashore.
@peirpaolo this was my first thought when the suggested north and south possible flight paths emerged. The routes seemed to demonstrate that the plane was at an equal distance from the satellite during those 7 hours *in flight* but what if the plane was not in flight at all but the same distance from the satellite, but stationery. What if it had landed somewhere off the northern tip on Indonesia or wherever it was when the signal first came back on. What if it was turned on to land? Or if it did crash why was it not possible that the signal continued to connect with inmarsat from its wreckage?
Why was Indonesia not investigated as THE last airspace it could be proved as being in? -Providing the Malaysian gov didnt make that up too. Interestingly there are large areas of this part of the world which have never been mapped on Google earth too. Could there be a reason for that?
I watched the Netflix documentary and went down the rabbit hole of looking for answers and came up with more questions than answers.
However something stood out to me and that was the 20 people onboard the plane MH370 who worked for Freescale Semiconductor, Inc based out of Austin, TX. Out of the 20 onboard this particular flight, 12 were from Malaysia and 8 were from China, not U.S. citizens.
This company, Freescale, filed a patent # US8650327B2 in late 2012. The company produces semiconductors which supply military radar and communications operations which are critical to the economic and national security of the U.S. Semiconductors enable most all modern industrial, commercial and military systems, phones, aircraft, the internet.. etc.
Freescale was acquired by NXP in a $40 Billion merger in 2015.
Then the company was going to merge again with Qualcomm in 2016 but was blocked by China and the deal fell through.
Recently (in seemingly unrelated events) the U.S. had a “Chinese Spy Balloon” fly from coast to coast over the continental U.S. seemingly “undetected”. Which makes something think “How could anything in U.S. airspace be undetected?
So this leads me to a few articles and documents, which these events could very well not be connected AT ALL, but they also seem to have some kind of ties.
“AXT Inc. has extensive ties to China that go beyond its manufacturing facilities there. The company owns an 85% stake in a Chinese subsidiary that produces materials for semiconductors and has counted as one of its biggest customers a giant state-owned defense firm linked to Beijing’s surveillance balloon program, according to AXT’s filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission in August.”
Article Link: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-firms-subsidiary-sold-electronics-chinese-defense-firm-linked-spy-b-rcna72712
Also in a 2007 PDF from UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION this same AXT, INC. stated:
“We sell our compound semiconductor substrates and materials worldwide. Our top revenue producing customers include: (20 companies listed including) Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.”
Link to public report: https://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReportArchive/a/NASDAQ_AXTI_2007.pdf
Kim, Well, the plane wasn’t an equal distance from the satellite, for the most part it was moving steadily away.
On the Netflix documentary a woman claims her cell phone got an incoming call from her father (who was on the plane) after the disappearance which she didn’t answer in time; why was that not investigated further? Where were the passengers cell phones last pinged? I think Malaysia Air tried to claim they didn’t have the capability of following up on that which seems hard to believe.
A lot of people are fascinated by the Freescale connection, but it’s not clear how to reconcile their presence with the observed trajectory of the plane.
This is all super interesting. I watched the Netflix documentary and also read a bunch of posts and comments on your blog. One thing that stood out for me (that didn’t come out in the documentary) was what you wrote about SDU and all of the other systems it is connected with. One of the related systems mentioned was the cockpit door lock. I have no idea whether or not this is a feasible explanation, but what if someone in the cockpit (Zaharie or possibly a hijacker) turned off the SATCOM system and locked the cockpit door but then someone else (Fariq or Zaharie, in the hijacker scenario) went into the electronics bay to try to disable/turn off the cockpit door lock and they were successful, but when the person or persons in control of the plane, became aware of this, they re-engaged the cockpit door lock which somehow resulted in the SDU also coming back online. Given everything you have written about the SDU and what most pilots know (don’t know) about it as well as the fact that it is not normally. used to track a plane’s location, it seems very unlikely to me that it was intentionally turned back on or hacked in an effort to throw anyone off the trail.
Debbie, This is a very interesting idea that a bunch of folks spent some time looking into back in the day. It’s all a bit vague in my memory but as I recall it wound up being the other way around from what you’d want — like, cutting the power shuts down the lock override, or something like that. Anyway, you’ve got good eyes for a potentially promising detail.
@Prudence Weeks: I hope that you will receive a reply from Jeff. Let me say how sorry I am for your loss. Whenever I see Danica cry on TV, I have to cry with her for feeling sorry for her relentless pain.
Hi Jeff,
I’ve read your book and followed your blog for years. A point I never understood was : why are you never looking into US role in MH370? I mean, why not seeing MH17 as a Russian response to American hijack of MH370 ? It sounds more logical than a Russian repetition of the same crime.
I fully agree with you when you connect the two tragedies. There’s no way these 2 are not connected. But the attitude of the American and Western countries with MH17 was very interesting. Despite having Bellingcats investigation and The Hague trial, I’ve never heard top gouvernemental officials from US or UK putting pressure on Russia to explain itself about MH17 and killing 200 innocent, as if all boards were fully aware of what happened the 2 times but kept silent about it.
It fits perfectly with the scenario that says Russia tried to deliver something in China but US tried to divert MH370 and succeeded by killing innocents, and Russia gave a response to that 3 months later.
Have you tried this lead? (I know it denies Inmarsat’s data but well, there’s so much to tell about that)
Do you feel threatened or uncomfort to go that way, with researching against your own country?
Total genuine question, no provocation. Investigating alone is anyway a hard path.
Thanks a lot!
PS: why nobody underlines the fact that Blaine Gibson was in the story BEFORE the debris? He traveled to the Maldives and met the people there month before the debris, going for the DG scenario
Prue, After you posted your comment I emailed you directly, but allow me to repeat here what I wrote in that email:
Based on technical analysis of the satellite data, I really think there are only two possibilities — that the plane went south into the ocean or north into Kazakhstan. I don’t think there is any plausible narrative surrounding the plane being shot down over the South China Sea.
I’ve also been approached by people who say they saw the plane flying north, but frankly I think it’s most likely they were seeing something else, because the flight path implies that the plane was flying at a more or less typical cruise altitude — not the sort of thing that’s very noteworthy anymore.
A lot of people have been asking me lately, “Do you think we’ll ever find the plane?” I do, I just think it will take a sense of urgency on the part of the public. The Australian government shouldn’t have shut down the investigation; results have to be found. If we can find the Higgs boson we can find a 210-foot-long plane. I’m hoping that the documentary stirs public awareness enough that the public demands a blue-ribbon independent commission of the brightest minds to go over the case and figure out where the searchers went wrong.
Peter, Without thinking about it I responded to Prue’s comment by email rather than with a public comment. I’ve now gone back and replied directly to her comment here.
Ben, I don’t mind the idea that the US might have been involved! If I thought it were I’d be pissed and would say so. I’m still pissed, for example, that the Bush administration lied to convince the American people that we had to invade Iraq, and that the American people, knowing this, voted to reelect him in 2004. The whole thing is a war crime and it’s shocking to me that no one was held to account. Now that Trump is facing indictment a lot of pundits are waving their hands and saying, “Oh no, a former US president has never been criminally prosecuted before!” I think we should get in the habit.
OK, now that I’ve gotten that off my chest, to your question: why I suspected Russia and not the US. The reason is not because I dislike Russia or even, as the documentary states, that MH17 made me suspicious. I actually had already started investigating a possible link to Russia the month before, when I realized it was possible theoretically to alter the BFO data. If that vulnerability was exploited then the plane most likely went to Kazakhstan.
As to your PS: This is true, I’d already had discussions with Blaine before he found No Step. He was very much a fringe character in the community of online MH370 discussion. For a while he was promoting the idea that secret agents had smuggled a universal solvent onboard and used it to dissolve the plane in midair.
Thanks a lot Jeff for your answer!
If we rule out Inmarsat data (which I admit is a big assumption), would you agree then, that it makes more sense MH17 being a response to a US move who ended up killing innoncents rather than an escalating provocation made to roughly cover up Crimea’s invasion for a few days?
Regarding Blaine, thanks for your answer. That’s exactly what I meant. The guy was throwing hundreds of BS theories, before he started a new role: the one of finding the debris
take care
PS: it’s actually even possible to believe in the Inmarsat data and that MH370 is in the SIO, and imagine that the plane was diverted by the US, and MH17 a response of the Russians who’ve lost the cargo when thinking US would not try anything on a civil airplane full of innoncents
Good afternoon Mr. wise.
I have a question:
Was the passenger list of MH370 investigated?
Thiarles, Yes, it was.
Hello Jeff,
I still cannot udnerdtad if there were debris on shots from satellite in the point where the plane dissapered from radars (China sea), why they did not search there? Why all efforts were put only to Indian ocean?
Kateryna, The Tomnod woman in the show was one a great many who said that they saw pieces of debris in their imagery. It’s a trick of the eye — a puff of cloud or bit of whitecap can look like anything.
Jeff, the most fun story for me on the missing flight MH370 was presented and written by Boyd Anderson in his book “Under The Radar 537-555 Trumpence”. Good old gold heist. You can view his YouTube channel video “Under The Radar 537-555” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hNtmk55ehw. Another video version is here – https://thephaser.com/2021/06/537-murdered-55-tons-of-gold-the-story-of-mh370-boyd-anderson/. Hey the number add up!!
If you are fully awakened and understand that there is a Committee of 300 running the world and there is a lot of evil trying to control the planet then Boyd’s story could have some legs. Oh I am an investor in Goldmoney.
Jeff
If memory serves me wasn’t there at one point “pings” detected when searching for the aircraft in the southern Indian Ocean? Obviously it didn’t lead to anything, but what is the logical explanation to this?
Dave, They detected pings but they were a red herring, so to speak — the signals were transmitted at the wrong frequency. Do this day no one knows what really was generating them.
@Jeff Wise: oh, right, I didn’t think about that possibility. Sorry.
Mr. Wise, As someone who spent their entire career working ‘black’ programs for the U.S. Government, all I can say is don’t believe everything you hear – or see. Aircraft like the Boeing 777 can be remotely piloted, and neither the Captain or First Officer would know what was taking place behind the scenes. Remember the Stuxnet worm? The Stuxnet worm attacked Siemen Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) used to control the gas centrifuges at the Iranian Nuclear facility. The centrifuges were commanded to spin in the critical range, but to the ‘scope dope’ everything looked normal. MH370 had its last maintenance ‘A’ check on 23 Feb.2014. The CIA or Spetsnaz could have installed equipment in the ‘Electronic Bay’ that would be used to remotely control MH370. The aircraft was flown to the deepest darkest part of Kurdistan. The bodies were put in containers set at a very low temperature. At a later date, those bodies were taken out of storage and used in MH17. Many Russian ground personnel said the bodies were already dead, and void of all bodily fluids. Why would our country do such a thing? To get rid of Putin.
Wayne, What is the purpose of writing something like this?
I for one really eant to search Kazakhstan and the surrounding areas it seams similar to Estonia incident.
Pierpoli’s comment is fascinating. I have often wondered if something happened around the final turn (like a nose dive a La the 737-800, or a fire) and the Inmarsat data was all simply wrong. Has any new debris been uncovered in the past couple years?
@Jeff Wise: I just finished the Netflix documentary. I just realized that there is a part of your theory which I am not sure I understand properly:
You raise the possibility that the debris might have been planted. So you have faith in the Inmarsat data as provided by Inmarsat, but you have doubts/concern about the debris. While watching the Netflix documentary, I just realized that this strikes me as odd, because it would be infinitely easier to provide false data than false debris.
I mean: If you have suspicions about the evidence not being authentic, why not question the Inmarsat data rather than the debris ?
Someone in the documentary did indeed question the Inmarsat data. I have to go back and check, but I think it was Florence de Changy.
To me both Florence de Changy and Mark Dickinson/Inmarsat seem truthful and authentic, but of course you can never say by a few minutes seen on TV. And I grant you that Blaine’s uncanny ability to find MH370 debris is certainly surprising.
However if someone had planted the debris, they would have never just put it there on the shore. First of all, the danger of being caught red-handed is just not worth it. And second of all, why the completely unnecessary effort? You just had to pick up B777 scrap metal from a plane graveyard and throw it in the Ocean near arc7 and let the Ocean currents to the work for you. They would make sure that the debris beaches where it has to according to drift models, etc.
So in essence:
It’s much easier to plant false data than false debris. And if you were to plant false debris, it’s much easier to throw it into the Ocean than plant it along the shores of multiple countries …
Mat, When the Inmarsat data first came to light, the Malaysia government reached out to Kazakhstan about conducting a search. But within a few days the analysis of the data convinced them that the plane had gone south, and that idea was dropped.
Truman, From time to time Blaine pops back up with a new piece of debris, but none of it adds much to our understanding of the mystery. As to the possibility that the Inmarsat data is all wrong, the question would then be: wrong, how? And why? If one is to find a way forward, one must have concrete ideas that can be tested and, if necessary, discarded.
Peter, The point I’ve been trying to get across is not that the Inmarsat data could have been changed, but that there is a specific, identifiable vulnerability by which the data could have been changed. And that in fact there is some evidence that it was. For what it’s worth, there’s also some evidence that the debris was planted, namely the fact that none of the pieces bore marine fouling whose age was consistent with the time it was meant to have been in the ocean.
Has anyone reputable been able to scan Kazakhstan visually early on with equipment that would show debris from MH370? Thank you, Jeff.
Nobody reputable has scanned Kazakhstan but I went down a rabbit hole of my own, as I describe here:
http://jeffwise.net/2015/02/23/what-went-on-at-yubileyniy/
@Jeff Wise: I know. That’s exactly my point. I am very familiar with your thoughts after having followed your blog ever since MH370 disappeared as you know maybe.
Could you re-read my post again? I am not sure you understood what I tried to convey.
Peter, I know that you’re familiar with my theory, that’s why I pointed out that I had identified a specific vulnerability. Because that vulnerability is extremely arcane and could only come from a perpetrator with very sophisticated knowledge of avionics, satellite communication and electronic warfare. It’s not all easier than planting debris. Which, btw, apparently didn’t involve throwing airplane parts in the ocean near the 7th arc, but somewhere much closer to Reunion, as it had only been in the water for about a month.
faking data = very hard
faking debris = relatively easy
Occam’s razor tells us the pilot did it. I will debate anyone on this anytime. All the other theories just have major flaws and require way too many assumptions.
Secret electronics cargo theory
-USA and Malaysia have very good relations and the US could have easily stopped this plane on the tarmac if it wanted to. That would’ve pissed off China for sure. So why the hell the US would disappear dozens or more Chinese civilians and really risk antagonizing China?
Battery fire theory
-I can see how a defective Lithium cell could possibly self-ignite during the flight despite the cold conditions in the cargo bay. But these fires create a ton of smelly smoke quickly which would have been noticed and a mayday would’ve been heard on the radio. As the fire progressed trough the battery cargo it would have crackled and poped loud and some units might have slightly exploded but nowhere near the strength needed to cause any damage. The fire would’ve brought the plane down and burnt pieces of wreckage would’ve been found as well.
Hi-jack theory
-Criminals or terrorists with the skills to pull off a hi-jacking post-9/11 would use these skills for a purpose. I mean other than helping old ladies try to find their purpose in life by finding cresting water on satellite imagery. The idea that a country like Russia is behind it is preposterous. There just isn’t any credible motive for such a risky operation. The idea that Russia could’ve done it to distract from it’s military operations is demonstrably wrong. The last years have clearly shown that Putin doesn’t give a fxxk. Usually intelligence operations between countries are designed to be as secret and discrete as possible. Disappearing a civilian aircraft would kind of defeat the purpose. So much risk, so many witnesses and records of everything. A thousand cameras in your face from your car to the boarding area.
Intercept theory
-Happened before, happened after. Not just by Russia, the US navy also downed a civilian airline once. I considered the possibility that Russia could’ve downed both Malaysian planes by accident. If the US was having exercises in the area it’s not impossible that Russia would have units close by to observe. Perhaps the 777 has features that somehow appear threatening on Russian made radars. But if that scenario is true than the claim that American AWACS were in the area for MH370 is also true. These AWACS would certainly be observing the Russian and there is just no way in hell that the US would’ve stayed silent if they had evidence that Russian downed MH370 or was connected to it’s disappearance in any way shape or form. This scenario also excludes the US as the ones who downed the flight by accident because with a navy exercise going on there would be a carrier group nearby and they would’ve sent fighters to investigate MH370 instead of firing blind.
The idea I seen on the show that two AWACS hid the plane is absolutely ridiculous. Radar jamming doesn’t make any particular plane disappear, it overwhelms the radar station with signals making it impossible to track. No such event was reported.
The idea that MH370 was spotted by an AWAC at least once like the frenchman was supposedly told is not unlikely. If true than the US probably stays silent because the truth is the pilot did it and proving so to the public would only embarrass Malaysia. As I stated before US and Malaysia have good relations and are partners in trade and the war on terror. The US is just satisfied the crash wasn’t terror related or a hidden defect putting other lives in danger. There would be no upside to saying anything.
The pilot theory
-Dude most likely was very smart but also suffering from life long depression. Because of his intelligence he was able to hide his depression and appear to be functioning normally. But he wanted to end it. It was not out of immediate passion, rather a cold, reasoned calculation equation. As time progressed and years passed the variables in his equation changed somewhat but the solution always came out the same regardless; I want to end it. This happens all the time and I know first hand. The problem is he still had people in his life who loved him and he just could not bear the idea of breaking their hearts by killing himself. If he was to do it he would to do it in a way that no one would find out about it. He probably spent a lot of time thinking of ways to do it, but Malaysia is a rather small and densely populated place. Even If he went into the jungle to hide and off himself the odds are his suicide would’ve been discovered eventually. It’s quite difficult to vanish without a trace. I can totally understand and relate to his thinking. He had thought of using an airplane before but not seriously, at least until his everlasting hatred of life itself finally wore him down. Being a respected airline pilot he most likely would have easy access to radar coverage maps and have a good understanding of how they operated. So he planned his route, made one dry run on his simulator not to practice the flight itself but rather to prepare his mind for it. A good pilot like this probably just needed hand written notes to do this flight.
He knew that without a body his loved ones would not believe he’s dead, and they certainly wouldn’t believe he would crash his plane on purpose. He would be dead but In their minds he would still be alive. Win-Win.
Finally he just waited for the right time. I suspect one or both of these things could be true and verifiable: 1- He waited to command a flight that had less passengers than usual because killing them was not his objective. 2- He waited to command a flight when by chance the aircraft had more fuel than usual so he could push his route at the maximum. I believe pilots can easily order more fuel at the last moment but doing so would certainly have aroused suspicion.
The pilot had the motive, the capability and the opportunity to do it. He thought no one would ever find out because there wouldn’t be any evidence and because he thought no one could ever really understand him.
The biggest issue with the northern path theory I have is that Jeff proposes an incredibly elaborate plot that would’ve taken substantial planning; yet why would someone attempt this when there would’ve been no way to guarantee sufficient fuel to get the a/c to the cosmodrome? doesn’t that kill the theory? What am I missing? I will post in other thread also.
Very curious why the investigation did not drill down on the 20 co-workers on-board from Freescale Semiconductor (see below, from BBC.Com). Rare that such a large number of staff travel on the same plane. Who might want these people and their knowledge?
The co-workers
Also on the plane were 20 staff members from a US technology company, Freescale Semiconductor, which makes powerful microchips for industries, including defence.
Twelve employees were from Malaysia and eight were from China. The company said it was “deeply saddened” by the news, in a statement on its website.
S Thomas, A lot of people over the last nine years have expressed interest in the presence of the Freescale Semiconductor employees aboard the plane. It does seem curious. But where does one go from there? One can imagine all sorts of motives that various world actors might have for taking the plane, but that doesn’t do us much good in generating a detailed narrative of the plane’s movements that matches the evidence in hand. I’m reminded of Philomena Cunk segment, where she asks an Egyptologist whether the pyramids were built from the bottom up or the top down. It seems to me that approaching the MH370 mystery by speculating on motive is like trying to build a pyramid from the top down.
Truman, You’ve hit on a major flaw in the northern theory — fuel is definitely a problem. However, there’s much we don’t know about the fuel burn rate and the winds aloft, so while this is definitely problematic, I don’t feel that it makes an endpoint over Kazakhstan impossible. And since at this point every remaining possibility is pretty darn weird, unless we can exclude a hypothesis as flat-out impossible then it has to stay on the table.
Hi Jeff,
Really enjoyed the documentary, the video here, your book and much of the content on your site. Thanks for taking the time to respond to everyone in great detail. It’s a rarity in this day and age.
I’m still undecided on which theory I think holds the most weight. I’m not naturally wired towards buying into conspiracies, and every time I follow the evidence trail for each theory it seems to unravel to some degree eventually, or needs a leap or two to fill the gaps. That being said the thing about this case, unlike a lot of cold cases, is that there’s physical evidence of an actual plane somewhere (Ie, it was there when it took off, we all know that, and we don’t know where it is now) Planes doesn’t just disappear so ‘someone’ had to have made it disappear, which would have taken some serious collusion to keep it covered up for so long, or we still haven’t been looking in the right place. The priority at this stage has to be for major experts to follow the trails further and get the case reopened because it’s mind-boggling to me that they closed the case.
I’ve sent you an email about further discussions, and a podcast and would love to hear back from you.
Thanks for all the content