Divers in the water searching for Lynette Hooker — ‘no body homicide’ prosecutor’s insight

US Coast Guard search teams and divers are now in the Bahamas, specifically searching for Lynette Hooker in an area identified by GPS data. This data does not align with Brian Hooker's account of his location when Lynette allegedly went missing, raising significant alarms for investigators.

According to reports, US Coast Guard search teams and divers are now in the Bahamas, searching for Lynette Hooker. The reason they are looking in a very specific area is because there is GPS data they have obtained that does not match up with Brian Hooker's story.

Brian Hooker's boat, 'Soulmate,' was impounded and moved to Fort Lauderdale for forensic examination. The probable cause for this action stems from the fact that both his personal GPS and the boat's Automatic Identification System (AIS) data contradict his story. The AIS was notably turned off during the night Lynette disappeared, suggesting a potential crime occurred on the main boat, not just the dinghy.

Both his GPS and his onboard ship navigation, which I think is called AIS, both of those things don't match the story that he told. The GPS doesn't seem to match where he told the police or the Bohemian authorities where he was. And the AIS was actually turned off from the night of the April 4th all the way to the morning of April 5th. Those things right there in my mind... that's enough probable cause to say, 'Let's go get this boat and see whether anything actually happened on the boat, not on the dinghy.'

While 'no body' murder cases are typically challenging due to unknown 'when, where, and how,' this case is considered stronger. Brian Hooker's own admissions establish that he was the last person to see Lynette and that she entered the water, providing crucial 'when' and 'where' context. His subsequent actions, such as immediately leaving the Bahamas after release despite promising to search, and his ongoing silence, are viewed as highly incriminating circumstantial evidence.

In this case, I think it's a lot easier because you have some significant evidence that you don't ordinarily have. By his own admission, he was the last person to see her. By his own admission, she went into the water. So, you have a lot of this information you don't ordinarily have. ... He initially said, 'I'm going to stay in the Bahamas. I want to find my wife.' And then pretty much very soon after he was released, he came back to the United States, which is also a bit incriminating.

Before an arrest or prosecution, a prosecutor must not only gather damning evidence but also actively seek and consider 'information inconsistent with guilt' (exculpatory evidence). This ensures truthfulness to the court and prevents moving forward on a case if there's a plausible innocent explanation for seemingly incriminating details, such as a technical malfunction of the boat's systems.

What I'd want to know is, do the police or the prosecutors have any information that is inconsistent with his guilt. That's important because that's something that is not usually given out publicly. ... If I also have information that says, 'Well, wait a second. He has an explanation for why he said where he was is different than the GPS because he said, 'I was searching for her. I was so exhausted. I couldn't keep track of where we were.' or there is some indication that there was someone else there.'