Answering your own question is something that is encouraged on stack exchange, which seems reasonable for most forums, but it seems to be somewhat against the approach of scientific skepticism, especially if the answer is posted at the same time as the question as it suggests there is little actual skepticism involved in the question. A better approach would be to include this information in the question, so we know on what basis the person posting the question is skeptical of the claim.
For a good example of this, see this question
where matt_black begins by mentioning a related issue that would cause us to naturally be skeptic of Easterbrooks claim regarding the oxygen isotope proxy.
In the particular case that generated this question, there doesn't seem to be anyone seriously doubting that Mr Williams did commit suicide, and had the sherriff's report was already available, as were reports from much more reliable news outlets than TMZ (which I had never heard of). This doesn't seem like skepticism to me.
I don't see anything wrong with posting an answer to your own question, but I do think the question should include the sort of basic facts that can be found via a cursory investigation, at least to show that there is some genuine cause for skepticism.