Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't the first one already happen with Michael Hastings? Although to be fair, it's just suspicions and not any officially accepted story. Nonetheless, they're fairly strong suspicions, same as with the Karl Koch case.
Regardless of whether or not that is true (and full disclosure, I doubt that it is from what I've read) it is surprising to me how something with tenuous evidence can be presumptively believed to be true in certain circles. His own wife says it was a "tragic accident", and his brother says he believed Hastings to be in a "manic episode" at the time. Why is it that random people on the internet have so much more suspi…
The family is not interested in the emotional baggage of foul play, or the hassle of an arduous investigation, which would, hypothetically, probably be fruitless, even if suspicions were accurate. It's much, much easier for loved ones to swallow an official story of a tragic accident.
For total strangers, not burdened by emotions, the scenario is objectively disturbing.