New Lynette Hooker Theories: Mangroves, Black Tankini & Grand Jury?

Summary

Criminally Obsessed Podcast Summary

Episode: New Lynette Hooker Theories: Mangroves, Black Tankini & Grand Jury?

Host: Anne Emerson
Guest: Alex Beer, Forensic Diver & Police Officer
Release Date: May 4, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the ongoing investigation of Lynette Hooker’s disappearance in the Bahamas, scrutinizing new and overlooked theories. Host Anne Emerson brings forensic diver and police officer Alex Beer on to discuss search strategies, potential hiding places, evidence challenges, and the intricacies of building a case without a recovered body. The conversation balances technical detail with empathy for Lynette and her family, exploring both the human and procedural dimensions of the case.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Disappearance and Scepticism Around Brian Hooker’s Account

• Timeline Recap: Lynette vanished a month ago from a dinghy in the Bahamas, with her husband Brian claiming it was a tragic accident.
• Universal Scepticism: “No one believes him? No one. Not his stepdaughter, not his friends. Well, maybe his attorney.” (Anne Emerson, [00:19])
• Alex's Perspective: Immediate suspicion is cast on the spouse, especially due to a lack of credible alternative narratives and inconsistent stories from Brian.

2. Search Strategies & Mangrove Theory

• Mangroves as Hiding Places: Alex confirms mangroves are “as good a place as any” for concealing evidence or a body due to their dense and twisted terrain.
  • “It is incredibly difficult terrain to search.” (Alex Beer, [00:57], [15:16])
• Search Difficulties: Searching mangroves requires “getting out of the boat and walking around”—a labor-intensive, physically demanding task. ([17:04])
• Community Input: Locals and family (especially Lynette’s daughter Carly) are involved in theories and informal searches but frustrated by limited official action and access.

3. The Boat as a Crime Scene – Security Concerns

• Unsecured Vessel: The Soulmate, Lynette and Brian's boat, was left “on the hook” and not impounded as a potential crime scene—contrary to US best practice.
  • “There's nobody being stopped from going out to it and boarding it and stealing off of it… that's unfortunate because I do feel like it's such a big part of the case.” (Alex Beer, [05:53])
• Tampering Risk: The lack of control potentially compromises physical and digital evidence on the boat.

4. Role & Recovery of Digital and Physical Evidence

• GPS, Phones, Smartwatches: Extensive effort is required to recover supposedly deleted data; “nothing is ever truly deleted.” (Alex Beer, [03:56])
• Battery Management Systems: While technically relevant, Alex downplays their value unless paired with known fuel logs or other context.
• Clothing & Last Seen Reports: Contradictions exist regarding what Lynette was last wearing. Husband says “black bathing suit,” but daughter and photos confirm a blue shirt, black tankini, headband, and a dry bag.
  • “Clothing lasts a fairly long time if it goes into the water… I would have divers in the water just doing patterns, looking for that shirt or a pair of sunglasses…” (Alex Beer, [21:38])

5. Murder and Cover-Up Theories: Physical and Environmental Obstacles

• Environmental Hazards: Discussion includes local shark-feeding sites like “Marnie’s,” where a body “would be eaten” swiftly, possibly leaving little to no trace ([18:33]).
• Burning Evidence with Flares: Theories about using flares to destroy evidence are dismissed; “they don’t burn so long that they would cause that to happen… you’re not going to incinerate it to the point where it’s unrecognizable.” (Alex Beer, [23:52])

6. Eyewitness, Timelines, & Doubt in Husband’s Story

• Inconsistent Accounts: Alex scrutinizes Brian’s explanations regarding the broken dinghy oar and three-foot waves.
  • “Your reaction time would have to be so unimaginably slow…,” “I still don't see how she flew so far away from the dinghy.” ([00:22], [29:49], [28:26])
• Swimming Conditions: The notion that Lynette could not make it to land is questioned; even moderate wind shouldn't prevent a swimmer from reaching shore in that area unless panicked or incapacitated.

7. Shift from Search to Investigation

• From Search to Recovery to Crime Investigation: After three days, the operation shifted to a recovery mission, later moved back to search/rescue due to backlash.
• Medical Realities of Drowning: In warm water, the window for successful rescue is extremely short—about 30 minutes—making early “recovery” status appropriate ([32:06], [34:14]).
• Detective Focus: At this stage, active search efforts wane, and detectives concentrate on building a prosecutable case ([37:20]).

8. Grand Jury and Prosecution without a Body

• Prosecutorial Hurdles: Alex explains arrest vs. prosecution thresholds—arrests can be made on probable cause, but “burden of proof” for conviction is much higher ([40:03]).
• Precedent Exists: Charges can proceed without a body if there’s enough circumstantial and physical evidence.

9. Family’s Pursuit of Justice and Public’s Role

• Carly’s Advocacy: Lynette’s daughter is leading efforts for renewed searches and public attention, frustrated by procedural gaps.
• Alex on Brian’s Demeanor:
  • “He’s a deceptive and inconsistent storyteller… I don't think anybody believes that it was a tragic accident. I don't believe it… But unfortunately it's not about what we believe, it's what they can prove.” ([41:13])
• Hope for Resolution:
  • “I don’t think you’ll get anything until he’s arrested… But ultimately he has the majority of the answers and right now he’s just not offering that up.” ([43:24], [44:50])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the importance of securing a crime scene:

  "I would have hoped that [the Soulmate] would have been secured somewhere where at least it could be under some type of supervision... If that's not happening, then that's unfortunate."
  (Alex Beer, [05:53])

• On the difficulties of the search:

  “You'd probably get pretty tore up trying to walk into [the mangroves] from the water side.”
  (Alex Beer, [15:16])

• On the physics of the disappearance scenario:

  “Your reaction time would have to be so unimaginably slow... I don't know how slow you could possibly move to before you're, like, reaching out for that person.”
  (Alex Beer, [00:22], [29:49])

• On prosecuting without a body:

  “You may not have a body, but if you have the evidence that will show that you have been lying... then that’s not necessarily not enough to charge.”
  (Alex Beer, [39:09])

• On the case’s emotional toll and realistic prospects:

  “I don't think you'll get anything until he's arrested... I think there's answers out there. But I think ultimately he has the majority of them, and right now he's just not offering that up.”
  (Alex Beer, [43:24], [44:50])

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:00–01:14 – Introduction to case and basics of Brian’s story
• 05:03–07:45 – Crime scene security and risk of evidence tampering
• 14:07–17:55 – Mangrove terrain as a hiding place and search difficulties
• 18:33–19:43 – Shark feeding areas and impact on recovery of remains
• 21:38–23:16 – Role and longevity of clothing, physical evidence possibilities
• 26:31–30:31 – Scrutiny of dinghy incident details, plausibility of Brian’s narrative
• 32:03–34:41 – Transition from rescue to recovery, the realities of marine search operations
• 37:20–40:57 – Shift from search to detective work—now about building a criminal case
• 41:13–43:20 – Brian’s limited cooperation with authorities and Alex’s assessment
• 43:24–44:50 – Likelihood and pathway to resolution or arrest

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a methodical, compassionate look at the unsolved Lynette Hooker disappearance, blending technical analysis with the lived experience of those seeking answers. It highlights investigative roadblocks, forensics challenges unique to the maritime setting, and illustrates the deep frustration felt by Lynette’s family in the absence of official breakthroughs. Despite gaps in evidence and cooperation, Anne Emerson and Alex Beer suggest the case is moving closer to a prosecutorial phase, with hope that persistent efforts—and perhaps a grand jury—could finally bring clarity and justice.

---

For further resources:

• Lynette’s daughter Carly's GoFundMe, for ongoing search efforts, is linked in the show notes.
• Anne Emerson will continue covering the case as new developments arise.

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everyone. I'm Ann Emerson, and this is Criminally Obsessed. Lynette Hooker disappeared one month ago. Her husband, Brian Hooker, says she fell off their dinghy in the Bahamas, that it was a terrible accident. No one believes him? No one. Not his stepdaughter, not his friends. Well, maybe his attorney.

[B]

Your reaction time would have to be so unimaginably slow. Somebody goes over the side of the boat. I don't know how slow you could possibly move to before you're, like, reaching out for that person.

[A]

That's Alex Beer, a forensic diver and a police officer who grew up on a sailboat. I've brought him back to talk about the case because I have so many more questions about where the investigation stands and about where Lynette could be. Let's say if you got into a dinghy and you decided to go into the mangroves and put a body somewhere in the mangroves, is that a good hiding place?

[B]

It would be once you're in there. I mean, usually it's shallow, the roots are very twisted, very difficult to get through. But if you were willing and you were trying to get back in there and hide something, it would be as good a place as any to hide to do that. It is incredibly difficult terrain to search.

[A]

And even if her body is gone, she should have left something behind.

[B]

I would have divers in the water, just doing patterns, looking for that shirt or a pair of sunglasses that hasn't been down there that long.

[A]

Let's get into it. Thank you so much for taking a break in your busy day, because I know you're in the middle of a lot of stuff, but I wanted to get back together with you to talk about the Lynette Hooker disappearance and the investigation into what happened in the Abacos. What would you do if you were on the ground right now and you were one month in and we don't have a body? And I know that the Coast Guard's investigating heavily, but. But what would you be thinking about right now?

[B]

I think at this point, you're at a month in. I would continue with the search in and around the water only if it were to find any sort of articles or anything. So I said missing items, you know, eyeglasses, things like that. If you could still narrow that. I wouldn't necessarily give up on that yet. I believe at this point in the case, I believe they've executed a search warrant for electronics from the boat. I know that takes time. I'm not a electronics analysis or forensic specialist, but I know that takes a considerable amount of Time to sort of get into it, see what they can draw from it, come to any kind of conclusions they may come to based on the information they're gathering from that, whether that was the GPS system or cell phones or smartwatches or any sort of data collection device that they could get into and see if there's any sort of clues there as either where to go or look or if there's any evidence of tampering to determine, you know, that sometimes the evidence that why has it been erased or cleared or factory reset? And that's usually a telltale. That's for lack of a better term, I guess, an admittance of guilt that there'd be no reason to factory reset your GPS in the middle of this or at the beginning of this, other than if you were hiding something.

[A]

Well, and. And you're talking about for the soulmate, because the soulmate is going to have. And this is. This is so interesting because I feel like especially a lot of our armchair detectives that watch. Watch our show, I think for the most part, like, we're getting more and more familiar with what some of that digital evidence looks like on land, but at sea, that's much more specific, isn't Is.

[B]

But it is comparable. It's no different than modern cars with a navigation system in your car that is basically the same thing. So if your car is found, they can go back into that system and sort of backtrack through it to see where the car had been. Even if you try and even when people think they've deleted something or factory reset something, the memory is there. I don't know the particulars of how they drag it out of there, but nothing is ever truly deleted. There's always some sort of. For those that work in that field, and I'm not one of them, but for those that work in that field, there's always something there that they can draw from it. It may even be the lack of the thing that should be there is pointing them in a direction of there was somebody trying to tamper with it, or there's evidence that somebody attempted to erase it or get rid of it. Whether they, you know, saw a TV show or I'm going to stick a magnet on it and try and delete it, they. They can almost always draw something out of it that will give them at least a direction to look.

[A]

Well, and surely, like when you're talking about the soulmate, which is the boat that they were on, you know, one thing that does concern me is that. And it concerned Lynette's daughter. Because we talked to Lynette's daughter as well, about her time down in the Bahamas. When Carly went down there to go check out things and see what was going on and see if they were looking for. How they were looking for her mom, she was concerned that people could get on and off that boat. Yeah, like, she got on the boat and literally just went on the boat and was, you know, digging around to get some. Some things that she wanted from her mom, like a necklace. And so, you know, and she started thinking, oh, my God, like, this is a. This could be a potential crime scene.

[B]

I'm not sure how the Bahamian police have. Or are handling that or if they are doing anything with it. I would tell you that here, if that was suspected, one of the first things you would do, much like, if a crime happens, utilizing a car, we would impound that vessel, basically seal it up and, you know, have control of it. In the Bahamas, they left it on the hook, and it's technically, you know, it has not been seized, so it's still private property. There's nobody being stopped from going out to it and boarding it and stealing off of it or, you know, and that's unfortunate because I do feel like it's such a big part of the case that I would have hoped that it would have been secured somewhere where at least it could be under some type of supervision, which is what we would do here. If we impound a boat, we take physical control of it, and then we'll either drop, we'll pull it out of the water, or we'll secure it at a facility or a marina where we can at least have eyes on it so that we know that people aren't coming and going from it. If that's not happening, then that's unfortunate.

[A]

Well, I know. And that's. I think what concerned her was all of a sudden, she kind of got on board and was like, wait a minute. Like, if I can get on this boat, everybody can.

[B]

It'll draw all kinds of people, curious people, people who want to get involved and think that they can find something or a clue or. It happens to people all the time. They find out that something, you know, bad has happened or their people are gone, people break. That's when people's homes are broken into, or no different here, that opportunistic people would see that as an opportunity to go in and steal stuff, to. Without a care in the world as to what's involved with this case or the fact that Lynette's missing and that's unfortunate, but it is a fact.

[A]

I know. That was really bothering me, too. I was looking at that, and it was. Yeah, because there's thousands. I mean, how much to be running a boat like that? You got a big. You got a nice big sailboat that's teched out to some degree. Right. For them to stay and live on this boat, that's thousands of dollars worth of equipment, at least, you know, tens of thousands of dollars.

[B]

I would think the value in it is the, you know, what people place on property. But I mean, certainly the value of anything that's not, you know, whether that's personal effects or just the. They want, you know, it fits their boat or it's a part they're looking for. I mean, a lot of this time breaks down to like, oh, well, you know, engines are valuable, but parts on engines are just as valuable to people if they're in that business. And it's no different than if you left your nice car in a bad part of town, that people could start taking things off of it because they want to profit from it.

[A]

Well, and one of the things that I have been learning about a little bit is the battery management system for. For sailors who are out on the water for an extended period of time, they need to be able to manage their battery. And the reason I bring it up with you, Alex, is I want to know if this is something that you think. And we're speculating. I understand that. But as far as how that battery management system on the Soulmate would be used, because to me, it's like another. Like you were talking about the GPS and the navigation system. That system has to be powered up and powered down. And let's say Lynette and Brian came in after a long day on the water. They're salty. You know, they're. They've been at the beach, they've been in the pool. The first thing I would do is get in a shower and take a shower. You know, I feel like these are all opportunities for a clue to find out where people were.

[B]

I mean, I think as far as battery management of both. Because there's. It is a big deal. It is something that typically on sailboats where you're. You're. The goal is to not be running the engine all the time, which is one way to charge your batteries. And then most sailors. Or more. More, More. I should say cruisers will have other things like solar panels, wind generators. You can have hydro generators, meaning it's. You're towing it behind the boat when the boat's sailing and that's generating power. I'm not sure how or how that would work as far as what you're going to gain from that. Because if it's hooked up to solar or a wind generator or both, those are sort of passive. They're kind of charging. When they charge when the sun's up, it's charging. When the sun's down, it's not for solar. And if it's a wind generator, if the wind is blowing, then it's, it's generating. And I don't know. I'm not saying that there isn't something there, but it's not something that I'm overly, I would be just overly focused on as far as managing, you know, what did the boat do right? Because we don't know how much fuel it had, didn't have. When was the last time they fueled up? And unless they do know those things, I mean, then you can start saying, well, they fueled up here, they should burn X amount if they motored this much. But there's a lot of guessing there or estimating. I don't know that that would be a focus for me in my investigation. Worrying too much about power management. I don't know that that plays a huge role in. Into her being missing or what they did. I mean, I think the big parts in this case are the big time gaps that have been sort of put out there via the stories that have been given. So I think those are really the parts where you go, well, how much area could they cover in that time frame? And then, you know, expand the search from there.

[A]

It's interesting because when I've talked to some of the folks that are trying desperately to still find and recover her, her body is what we're assuming right now, one of the places. And I really wanted to show this to you because you're a Florida. You are a Florida man. Hold on one second. In a good way. I'm from South Carolina, so I get to say things like that.

[B]

That's okay.

[A]

It's just a screenshot. I took it from an Abaco's mangrove map.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Because I wanted to show you what's in that dark green. That's where the mangroves are.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And that's one thing that really got me thinking is if this couple had a background of, of dv, they had some domestic violence issues. There was definitely. There was assault reported. She actually, I think went to jail for a night because of a fight that they had gotten into. There's multiple reports that she was having trouble in her marriage with this. But as domestic violence happens, it's often behind closed doors. Right. So what I'm saying is, what if everything. The dinghy gets back to the Soulmate, and that's where the problem was. We also have a history of choking, and from reports from Lynette as well, that there had her daughter said that she had been choked before, which concerns me. But if that. And we're talking about hours now, we're talking about how long. How long if somebody died on Soulmate, how long would it be before cadaver dogs picked up on a scent like that, that. That somebody had died?

[B]

I wouldn't know the specific time on that. I mean, assuming that it. I do know this, obviously warm water, warm temperatures causes decomposition to happen much, much faster. So, you know, as soon as you are. You become deceased. You know, your body, it's an immediate response. It doesn't. It doesn't wait to start decomposing. It. It starts small and it's at a microscopic level. But for you to start to leave that scent, I mean, I don't think it would take that long for them to leave some sort of track like that. Again, I think what we talked about in our previous conversation was dogs require scent. So. But it's blowing 20 knots or whatever it was blowing out there. So strong winds makes it difficult for a dog to conduct a scent track.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

But if she was like, say, up in the mangroves or up in there, I mean, that's not a smell that you don't recognize. And anybody who's been around it knows what that smell is. And you go, oh, something over there is not right. And there'll be all kinds of telltale signs beyond that, but I don't think it would take that long. And I don't know. I don't. You know, I don't know why. And I know some people have. Have argued while there. She's not in the water. She's on land. And I. I find. I would find that harder to believe only because why would you go through the trouble of going to where there's potentially to be seen, whereas out in the water, nobody sees you? I just don't see that. But you can spend a lot of time trying to think, like, what the bad guy would have done and be wrong. And in that moment, who knows what the person was. Who knows what he was thinking?

[A]

Well, and when you look at mangroves, I guess I wanted from someone that knows mangroves, let's say if you got into a dinghy and you decided to go into the mangroves and put a body somewhere in the mangroves. Is that a good hiding place?

[B]

It would be. It's very. Once you're in there, I mean usually it's shallow. Once you get up into there, the roots are very twisted, very difficult to get through. But if you went, if you were willing and you were trying to get back in there and hide something, it would be as good a place as Eddie to hide to do that. It is incredibly difficult terrain to search. It's very thick. I would say that you'd probably get pretty tore up trying to walk into it from the water side if you try to get in there. Any kind of distance. But certainly you'd have the ability, you know, the mangrove roots kind of grow down and create these sort of captured. You know, so there's a lot of. You get. There's usually a lot of lobster in mangrove areas and there's a lot of fish and that's a popular spot for fish breeding, like shark breeding. Lemon sharks use migros a lot for. For hatchery. So there's a lot of things going on in there and. Yeah. Would it be a great place to hide to. To do that? Yes, sure.

[A]

But it would be really tough for the person to actually get. If you're motivated, if you're motivated, if

[B]

you, if you really don't want to get caught and you're motivated and you. I don't know. And again, you can, you can. What if something. And what if they did that and what if they. If I was him and trying to. If you try and put themselves in their shoes but you don't know what anybody's capable of in that moment of time and, and who knows we are. They. They. Who knows what they did? They. Did they just panic and hope that they're not or did they think plot this out and plan it out with a. Did they have a full blown plan in their head of what they wanted to do?

[A]

Yeah. I just don't know if the mangroves have been searched like. And I don't know how hard it is to search. You said it was quite hard.

[B]

You could do it. You would just you. But you've got to.

[A]

You.

[B]

It's one of those things like you got to get out of the boat and walk around and unfortunately I, I don't. I can't speak to what they have and haven't done since I'm not involved in this case.

[A]

Right.

[B]

But I would think that, you know, the abacos and in this area, you know, this isn't. You're not searching Texas that they're, it's a pretty, they're pretty small. There's only so much area to cover. You know the Bahamas are not mountainous. They're not, they're pretty flat like it doesn't take much to go and there's not a, they're not covered in forest there. It's pretty open land. So I would hope that they did their due diligence and looked at dinghy tracks or you know, where the dinghy was or where they should have gone from and to, and said well let's go over there and take a look. And did they do that? I don't know.

[A]

I'd be interested to find out. I am actually going to ask because I haven't, I haven't asked specifically about the mangroves. I know they did beach searches. I know that, you know, obviously they've looked where they can in, in water areas. I have one grizzly question for you. There's a shark feeding area that's called Marnie's and that was concerning me too because it's known from the locals and the tourists that you can go and see the stingrays feed and the shark's feed in this area. What would happen if a body dropped into an area like that?

[B]

It would be eaten. Depending on the size of shark, you know, a big bull shark could, you know, can get and it depends, you know, typically they're not, they're not picky, they get what they can get and they, they pretty much wolf it down whole or. Yeah, and, or tear, you know, a large item would be torn up and, and they'll get what they can get. Is it possible that most of them and a part doesn't quite make it in? Sure. But you know those sharks, you know, and there's a lot of sharks in the Bahamas but if they can fit it in their mouth they'll, they'll do their best to get it down.

[A]

So there's nothing that they wouldn't eat?

[B]

No, not that I'm aware of. I mean they may get a bite of something that they didn't intend to. I mean sharks by their nature aren't known to hunt humans but at that point they're not. That's not the same to them. You're not, you're not fighting back, you're just like oh look what I came across. And in the ocean, you know, if it's a free meal then they're gonna go for it.

[A]

So that would also leave no trace.

[B]

Yeah, there would be no. I mean unless somebody I mean, it would be, you know, it'd be right out of the movie, right out of Jaws when they're. They're cutting open sharks and like, the license plates fall out or the, you know, the. And here in Florida, we've had those cases where alligators have gotten a hole and you cut an alligator open and there's a human arm inside the. The digestive tract of the digestive sits. Is it possible that that could have happened? It is. If she was in the water, I mean, at a month, there wouldn't be much left anyway. You know, we've seen it where like, like scuba divers or. Or something that's got missing snorkeling. Like, it'll be down to the bone, except maybe where their mask was, because they couldn't, you know, the small animals just did that. I'm not talking about shark attacks. I'm talking about just being picked and picked and picked down to skeletal remains, except where the mask was, because it was sealed on that part of their face. And you'll see that because it's unforgiving. I mean, the sea life and in the ocean is typically not much left of a victim that's been left in there for an extended period of time.

[A]

There's one other thing that's really. And I don't know if I don't think we had talked when I found this out, but I heard directly from Carly. She had on a blue shirt, and we've now seen pictures in media reports that she had on her blue shirt that she always wore, and she had a headband and she had a dry bag, and she didn't just have on a black tankini. That was the way it was reported by her husband, was that she just was wearing a black bathing suit. That may have been the last thing that he noticed, but there was definitely a blue shirt. So you have all of these physical evidence. Where is it?

[B]

I mean, again, and I know there's going to be people in the comment section that are gonna. They're gonna argue on this point, but clothing lasts a fairly long time if it goes into the water where, in my opinion, I think the more logical explanation is that he did this and put her in the water. Where that was, I don't know. But if it was in this general area, I would have divers in the water just doing patterns, looking for that shirt or a pair of sunglasses that hasn't been down there that long to see. And, you know, it's not deep, but I would literally have divers just doing patterns, do a section at A time move on to the next section. But because typically clothing we've, we've recovered on a missing diver call, we recover like a wetsuit that was all caught up on a coral head. It was completely shredded and it clearly showed signs of a, of, of what appears to be multiple sharks. But the wetsuits, you know, it was pieces of it. But you could I say, hey, I found this blue shirt. This is about where I was at. Does this match? And you can, you know, you'll know whether it's been down there for a month versus it's been down there for two years just by its condition. And so I would personally be, I'd be in the water and it would be exhausting and a ton of work and a lot of effort. But those are things that you could certainly find if they're down there. And it's, I believe, worth looking for.

[A]

Can I ask you. There was one thing, and this is just a theory, so I wanted to see if you thought that this was even a plausible theory, that the flares. He said he set off flares. Right. So could flares be strong enough? Let's say if you dug a hole on the land and you stuck a bunch of things like a phone and a shirt and a headband, like a dry bag in that hole and then lit the flares, would they be hot enough to melt physical evidence?

[B]

Sure. I mean, the flare is burning incredibly hot. They don't burn incredibly long. So. And even in that regard as anybody, you know, you can throw stuff into a fire or even with a flare, you're not incinerating it. It's not completely gone clothing or whatnot. But, but typically, like a phone or something like that is not going to just turn into powder. It's, it's. You're not going to incinerate it to the point of where it's unrecognizable. It may be there may do a tremendous amount of damage and not be able to recover anything off of it. But rarely would you incinerate it to where you wouldn't be able to say, like that, that was a phone. And they don't typically burn so long that they would cause that to happen. Now, flare only lasts, you know, depending on the flare. Shooting a flare in the sky, they only last, whatever it is, five to, to eight seconds of flight time and burn time, and then they sort of fizzle out or land in the water.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

You know, they don't burn for hours.

[A]

Right.

[B]

Road flare, even a, like the road flares we use, I Mean they'll burn for 20 minutes. But you don't think somebody's going to recognize a bright red flame going on somewhere on the beach and be like, what's going on over there? And nobody's reported that. So.

[A]

No. And I would think it would have to be up into the wood line of one of these places, like it would be. It's just there's so much time, Alex. And I guess that's what I keep on trying to fill are all these hours with all these theories.

[B]

I think because nobody, because there is nobody else, right? There's. There's a lot of people who have come forward with like conversations they've had with him, but nobody else is coming forward that I'm aware of that either saw them personally on the boat or on the dinghy, were sitting next to them at the res. Like I haven't seen or heard any of that. Not to say that there weren't people at the restaurant, but like nobody else was in the dinghy. There wasn't a third person who's now going to come out of the woods and be like, yes, I was there and this is what happened. And so in the absence of answers, we start to just let it formulate and like, what about this and what about that and what about. And I think that I would hope that the detectives are doing that and asking those questions, but I think there's more answers there than people realize because we're not privy to all of the information.

[A]

I was able to pull up the dinghy that they have. The reason I'm showing you this is because of the conversation we've had before about these oars and the pins in the oars and how it all just didn't quite make sense that an or broke. The pin of an ore broke.

[B]

If you were trying to save your wife's life, whether the pin broke or not, you can still pick up the thing and paddle in the water with it. If one of your oars broke, you have another one, just use it like a paddle and keep going. I don't think that would stop you if you were truly trying to make way and get back to the person that you cared about.

[A]

Well, and you just did a swift water rescue training, didn't you?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Okay. So that it kind of. I just listened to the conversation that he, that Brian Hooker had with the Stevensons and the recorded conversation and he was just talking about the three foot waves, regardless if there were three foot waves or not. I talked to Carly about how deep it was that water was at high tide, no deeper than 10ft right in that area and actually quite shallow. Very quickly, from what I understand. But, but he talked about how she blew away from him and quickly he goes. It's amazing how hard it is to see a small person in two to three foot waves. And I'm not saying that's not true.

[B]

Oh, I would agree with, I would actually agree with that statement. It is difficult to keep an eye on somebody in 2 to 3 foot waves for sure.

[A]

But how difficult is it for that person to just make it to land if you're just a little bit off the coast? I'm not trying to really poke holes in it even. I'm just trying to understand, is it that much of a swift water right there?

[B]

No, I wouldn't constitute that as swift water. You know, swift water by definition is, you know, moving more than a knot and a half. That's pretty fast. The average, the average swimmer can't swim against that. And, but the wind is not going to stop you from being able to swim and make forward momentum. So wind is not going to prevent you from being able to swim into the wind. That's not, it's not blowing you back. It doesn't matter if it, you know, I mean, it'd have to be a hurricane to really affect you that much. So 20 knots of wind, you're at what you're, you're basically barely out of the water. So there's not a lot of surface area for it to be pushing on. You can, you can swim against that. I don't see that as being a big, the big hurdle. If you're a fairly fit person that is comfortable in the water, as long as you're not panicking, it would not, in my opinion, have that much an effect on you. And like I said before, that wind would have an effect on the dinghy. Yes. But I, I still don't see how she flew so far away from the dinghy. And your reaction time would have to be so unimaginably slow to not. Somebody goes over the side of the boat. I don't know how slow you could possibly move to before you're like reaching out for that person.

[A]

Well, there was other. Let me see if I can see. I think I had one other thing that I wanted to show you. Okay. This is what he had told me. The boat's not designed to be rowed. So if you sit on top of the engine to try and row, that thing would, I would remember writing it down when he was saying this because I was like, oh, my gosh, it would put all the weight in the back, and you would tip backwards because you're so far back. Does that make sense? On a. On a dinghy like this, you would

[B]

sit with your back towards the front of the boat, and you wouldn't row from the way you'd sit right in the middle and you'd row the bow into the. You know, would be moving forward if you were rowing correctly, I think.

[A]

And I could be wrong, and I'll take this out if I'm wrong about it, but I think this seat that you see there is something that they had removed.

[B]

Yeah. And so you would. I mean, you would then be sitting down in the boat. And again, the boats aren't really meant to be rowed. They're very wide. That's a very short paddle to make it into it, or it's just not. Those are there as an emergency. They're meant to have a motor. They're meant for the motor to work, and then you use paddles. Like if you. If you. Your motor just died in your dire need. And like I said, that's why it's got that T handle on the end of that paddle. Because now you just get up in the bow of the boat and you pull on either side and pull for whatever you got. And you can do that with an oar or a paddle. But you would try me making any kind of headway with it that you could. It wouldn't look good, and it wouldn't move fast, but you could.

[A]

You could do it, but you could make it happen.

[B]

Right.

[A]

The other thing I'm wondering about right now, just from an investigative standpoint from your. From where you're looking, are. Is the. Is the emphasis right now. I know it was literally, I was looking back at the records three days after Lynette disappeared, that. That they changed it to a recovery mission. And I think they changed it back because. But they did initially go already after three days. No, this is going to be a recovery because we see no signs of her. I do think they turned it back because I think there was so much backlash about that, that they were like, okay, let's. Let's move this back to rescue. But.

[B]

But it's not.

[A]

But it's not.

[B]

It's not a rescue search, or it would be. I mean, beyond an hour, you know, and you're assuming. And. Or there's some assumption there that if they're in the water, there's a search, then rescue and recovery is really only determined when you. You have somebody you have a witness that says they went down right here. You have about an, you know, in cold water you have about an hour. In warm water, you really have about 30 minutes to make that, to make that rescue.

[A]

Because.

[B]

Well, because cold water helps put the body into shock, which triggers your body to go into sort of a survival mode. And cold water will force the blood to your core, which helps prolong the ability to possibly revive you. In warm water, that doesn't happen. And it's not as prevalent and it's not as prevalent in adults as it is in children. So typically that window between rescue and recovery is determined by the head medical, chief medical person in any county and most warm climate areas that windows about 30 minutes where it's considered your rescue efforts are made beyond that time, typically. And there's always somebody that's gonna say, well, I heard a story of somebody that was underwater for hours. I saw the documentary Last Breath. He was down there for 32 minutes. Yeah, those are, those are true. And those stories have happened, but the majority of them have happened in cold water. Right. There's a documentation of a woman who, I think it was Norway. She was beneath the ice for like 90 minutes. They recovered her, revived her with no. And that's with no lasting neurological effects. That's not to say that you can't get somebody back from a drowning who's been drowned longer, but they may have prolonged and permanent neurological damage due to the starvation of oxygen to the brain.

[A]

That's interesting. So this was recovery.

[B]

It was a recovery probably from the get go. It's a rescue when you were actively going out there to get the person. If a boat is sinking and the coast guard is responding, that's a search and rescue mission. Right. Because they go, oh, there's a boat going down. We have a possibility of saving a life. I don't know that this search ever started off with the idea that they were saving a life. As much as they were just trying to find the person. It was. It was really. It wasn't a recovery or a rescue. It was just a search.

[A]

It was just a search. Well, we were eight hours out, right? You were eight hours out. By the time you were, you know, the, the investigators were even notified. Brian said in his conversation that they didn't get out there until 5am Right.

[B]

And unfortunately, you know, we're. There's a lot of assumptions being made and I understand where people get upset. Well, what do you mean it's not a rescue? You don't think that she's. It's not in. In the profession that we're. That I'm in. It's not a. It's not a. You can't always approach it from an emotional standpoint because it will. It becomes very, very difficult. It's not that we don't have feelings, and it's not that we're not empathetic or sympathetic to the situation, but you have to make that determination at some point, because what are we. Like, how do you do this? Like, in a. In a. In a rescue, things are moving fast, developing quickly. In a recovery, things kind of slow down a little bit so that you can maybe reformulate a better plan or to get more information or you maybe you're. It's a risk that you're trying to mitigate, and you try and work through those things. It's not meant to be. We don't care. It's just a matter of how is this being categorized versus so how we can determine how we're approaching it. While that is all going on, everybody's there, focused on that. But at some point, just like in law enforcement, we can be focused on something, but that doesn't stop the rest of the surrounding area from things happening. People are still calling 91 1. People are still having medical emergencies. People are still having domestic violence. There's other things happening that we have to address those things too. So at what point do you start moving some resources back into normal activities to ensure that everybody's being taken care of? And not everybody. Not everybody can just be focused on one thing.

[A]

Well, and you have the. The. The search and then the recovery. But then you. You also have this investigation going into a possible crime scene. You don't know how she went missing. So you've got, like, these two. You've got these two things going on at the same time. In your opinion, do you feel like right now that after a month, they're moving into who did what when? If there was somebody responsible for this? Are you looking at, like, the investigation of what happened to Lynette more than can we find Lynette?

[B]

I would think at this point, it's probably the majority of this is in the hands of the detectives that are not actively searching for any sort of missing items or things like that. They are now probably focusing from a detective standpoint on what do we have in hand that we can use to build a case to either prosecute or determine that we cannot prosecute. And I'm not sure where they're at on that or how far along they are on that, but it is firmly in their hands to make sure that they're. They're covering and gathering as much intelligence they can based on the things that they have. You know, there's, there's some big gaps in this scenario, in this story that he is told that nobody has the answer to that other than him. And ultimately it would have been her. It's, it really, at this point is going to come down to what can they determine based on the things that they have, whether that's the electronics, the warrants they've executed, his statement, physical evidence that they, they may or may not have. And is that going to be enough to bring charges against him for, for her. Her being, you know, right now, I keep saying missing, but let's, let's say for her being what I would assume they're going to charge him with. If they charge him, I would assume the charge would be murder.

[A]

Right. I mean, and there is like nobody. But that doesn't mean. I mean, we've had this before where we don't have a body, but we go ahead and have charges drawn.

[B]

You may not have a body, but if you, if you have the evidence that will show that you have been lying, which is a line in your statement, would be an implication of guilt, then that's not necessarily. Not enough to charge. It's very different. And I don't know that everybody is aware of this, but, you know, a lot of people assume that if they're arrested. So if a police officer or deputy arrests you, they are not charging you. They're not. They're not the jury and the judge and the lawyer. Right. The statutes and the requirements to make the arrest for that officer to put you in handcuffs and take you to jail is elements of the statue or elements of the crime. But that by no means guarantees that you are going to be prosecuted and found guilty, if that makes sense.

[A]

Yes, it makes perfect sense.

[B]

It's much less the threshold for us to make the arrest because, okay, well, we've checked all these boxes. All the elements of the crime are there, but then the lawyer to prosecute that and to get a verdict of guilty or not is quite a bit more the burden of proof. And those things becomes a much bigger hurdle to get over. So the detectives are trying to make it as good a case as they can before they present it to the attorneys and say, this is everything we have A to Z. Is this enough for you to seek indictment for this person or to bring this person into custody or to extract them back to the Bahamas and charge them With a crime of murder, I don't know whether they're there or close to there or not.

[A]

Well, and Alex, what I learned was that there from. From Carly, from Lynette's daughter, was that he only answered four out of 94 questions that they held him on and then held him longer to try and get him to answer more questions.

[B]

For me, as an outsider looking in with no involvement in this case, I see a guilty man who is just trying to chalk it up and hoping everybody was going to buy the story. And again, I said it before. He's a deceptive and inconsistent storyteller. And I don't think that in every case, especially in a marital case where one or the other, whichever the spouses goes missing or is murdered, it is almost always the other spouse. It's not a stranger out of the. Out of the woods. It's almost always the other spouse. And I say all because it's not 100%, but this doesn't look like a case where it really could have been anybody else. And I think he wants everybody to believe that it was a tragic accident. I don't think anybody believes that. I don't think the police believe that, and I don't think your viewing public believe it. I don't believe it. Unfortunately, it's not about what we believe or feel. It is what they can prove. And if they can, if they have a strong enough case to get a jury to get a group of people to agree and say, we don't believe it, and they charge, it doesn't necessarily require her to be found. It just requires the law enforcement and the attorneys to do their jobs thoroughly and correctly so that all that evidence can be submitted into court.

[A]

100%, like justice for this situation, however it turns out, whether they figure out something else happened, you know, whatever that. That truth is or that justice that we get to. For Lynette, it's incredibly important.

[B]

There's a lot of stuff that's been put online, and I realize that there's a lot of people that are invested in, like, getting this out and. But I do think there's a lot of information that not everybody is exactly privy to that they weren't in the interrogation room. They don't know the 94 questions he didn't answer or the, you know, the four that he did. You know, all we know is what we've seen on TV, what has been theorized 100%.

[A]

Do you think we're going to get any resolution?

[B]

I don't think you'll get anything until he's arrested. I think if he's arrested and he's, he's charged with the crime and they lay out a case that shows that he's, he's in trouble of, of, of unless he comes clean and makes a deal. I don't, I don't know that unless, you know, unless something comes up and the Bohemians come up with something that is like, aha, we found this, we now can move forward. I don't suspect a lot of answers unless somebody is there, you know, doing the work. And I don't know if they are or they aren't. I'm not, I'm not a part of it. And if I was, I couldn't really answer one way or the other. But it takes a tremendous amount of effort to do a exhaustive in water search. And it just takes a lot of time. And people would say, well, a month has gone by. Well, that's, that's a lot of time to some people. But if you're searching a large body of water that's, you know, that's a, that's a drop in the bucket. It could take, it could take a long time. And the reality is that I don't know what the extent of their investigation is or is not, but I think there's answers out there. But I think ultimately he has the majority of them. And right now he's just not offering that up.

[A]

I mean, thank you so much. I really, really appreciate your time. Fascinating. You know, there's a lot there that I think we can, we can. Will take us to the next part of this investigation. And, and I think it's really interesting to think about the different charges that could be brought, including lying to officials or obstruction of justice or, you know, all those little thing, all those charges, not little, but those charges that kind of ra. Wrap around a case like this.

[B]

Right. I mean, it could be anything from, you know, tampering with, you know, tampering with evidence. You know, I'm. Again, I think there's enough there. And this is my, I'm not a, I'm not a prosecutor, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what's holding them back from it. I mean, it seems to me like there's enough there to pursue a grand jury or something to try and indict him on charges and bring him up on, on charges to at least get yourself to put some pressure on him to, to be more forthcoming and to, to sort of clarify what it is that, that he's claiming happened. Because I I just think he's been dishonest. And I think that the stories, the talking to the friends on the phone, like, none of that is. Is making a whole lot of sense other than he's just trying to keep himself from being blamed or. Or arrested for it, which ultimately, I think that he's responsible.

[A]

Well, thank you so much. I appreciate your time today. Great conversation. And we'll come back to you when we get some more information, which hopefully will be soon. I've made multiple calls to the Coast Guard who refer me back to the Bahamian police. They're not talking. Neither is Brian Hooker's attorney. Lynette's daughter Carly is trying to get back to the Bahamas to continue the search for her mother and to get more answers. She has a GoFundMe set up to help with travel and accommodations. I'll put a link to it in the description in case you want to donate. We are counting down to CrimeCon Vegas at the end of this month, and I want to meet you there. I'll be hosting two panels. I'll have a lot more information about that coming up soon, but be sure to use Criminally Obsessed at checkout to get 10% off your CrimeCon ticket through their website. And don't forget to, like, subscribe and turn on your notifications so you don't miss any of these cases. And I'll see you tomorrow.