Presumptuous
"Flying Counsel" - as a fellow member of the bar (not a pilot, but earning a second (Master's) degree in law, specifically an LL.M. in Air and Space Law) - I'm going to object to your post. First, even if all you have said is valid - which it most clearly is NOT - but even were it all valid, this is a pilots' forum, and if the pilots for whom it was created want to articulate disbelief while the facts are assembled and the cause-and-effect analysis is made, it is no skin off of any competent attorney's briefcase. Yes, yes air crash disasters are incredibly high-profile, politically charged events - but one of the ethics of the legal profession is to apply professional judgment, not emotion. Second, the hypoxia and/or other incapacitation possibility appears to be a valid one - in other words, although you can say that the flight did not arrive at its destination, you cannot rule out the hypoxia/incapacitation causal chain. So treat your hosts here with some respect, Counselor. ("Sustained.")