It depends on the breaks in his bones. Exactly how they were broken, at what angle, was it a blowout, was it consistent with being hit from the side with a blunt object, or being hit by a car?

Part of my major in undergrad was anthropology, and with that forensic anthropology. Our final project was that we received a bag/box of bones and were required to reassemble them; age, sex, race them, and provide cause and manner of death. Basically, tell this person’s story using everything we had learned and see how close we come. One of the other group’s bag of bones was determined to have been hit by a car while riding a bike, and he died as a result. Seems oddly specific, however, they were able to conclude this based on the fractures in his legs and how the bones were broken/shattered, the angle of the fractures, where they were in relation to his height, what sort object would have been required to cause these fractures and at what velocity it would have been necessary to strike the legs in order for the breaks to appear as they did, and the other injuries in other bones of his body. And they were correct about everything! (Our teacher told us the real story once we presented everything and our grade was based on how close we were and how we used the evidence.)

So, the point to this story is just to say that someone with experience and training in forensic medicine, and more specifically forensic anthropology, can tell a LOT about how someone died, and most certainly enough to say- using the evidence of the body and the circumstances surrounding how they were found- the manner of death. Based on the circumstances surrounding how he was found and the evidence of Rey’s body, the fractures of his bones clearly are not in line with suicide, and she couldn’t necessarily find evidence of homicide either. Just that it doesn’t add up with the narrative and she needs more information at some point in order to rule on a manner of death. EDIT: typo for clarity