The head of Ukraine's Defence Intelligence says Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny died from a blood clot, denying speculation that he was killed while in prison.
If a clot was formed due to a poison or something, is that detectable? Or is this one of those things that will always be shrouded in suspicion because we'll never know if the clot was 'natural' or part of a more intentional plot?
I mean, you can always posit another hypothesis because it is very difficult to prove a negative, but if a coagulant or something was administered to him, it should turn up on an autopsy. Ultimately, given the position of Ukrainian intelligence here, the more reasonable conclusion is that people die eventually and that's the extent of the meaning of what happened (or perhaps you could add that the stress of his situation hastened his demise, which is probably true).
Why is this news being given by Ukraine's intelligence chief? I would assume we'd get it from another vector.
Because if anyone has incentive to say he was assassinated, it's Ukraine, so we can be pretty sure they're telling the truth.
That does make sense.
If a clot was formed due to a poison or something, is that detectable? Or is this one of those things that will always be shrouded in suspicion because we'll never know if the clot was 'natural' or part of a more intentional plot?
I mean, you can always posit another hypothesis because it is very difficult to prove a negative, but if a coagulant or something was administered to him, it should turn up on an autopsy. Ultimately, given the position of Ukrainian intelligence here, the more reasonable conclusion is that people die eventually and that's the extent of the meaning of what happened (or perhaps you could add that the stress of his situation hastened his demise, which is probably true).