Inaccuracies for no reason

The film said he died the day after the court decision. The resources I looked at said it was only a few days.

The film said traces of poison were found in his blood, true enough so far. Then it says police ruled against foul play. What I read said there was insufficient evidence. Which on the surface sounds like the same thing, except there was conjecture he committed suicide. In the absence of sufficient proof of suicide or murder, a ruling against foul play seems reasonable. If the filmmakers suspect conspiracy, then say so.

Was he only 3 months away from retirement? More conflicting evidence from the movie vs. other sources which said he was 61 or 61 not 64.

Any thoughts or better "facts" anyone? Thanks.