Ratchaburi: Elder sister makes gruesome discoveries after her brother went missing

[webfact]

Ratchaburi: Elder sister makes gruesome discoveries after her brother went missing

 

Picture: Thai Rath

 

A 54 year old woman called Khwanreung in Ratchaburi was concerned when her sister in law called her to say that she was unable to contact her husband.

 

Last night Khwanreung went to her brother's house where he lived alone. It was used as a vehicle seat shop.

 

In an area near the house she saw two vehicles that had burned out in a fire. One was a red Citroen, the other a car of indistinguishable Japanese make.

 

A little way from the vehicles there was a dog with something in its mouth. 

 

She prodded it with a stick - it was a liver. 

 

In the Citroen she found charred bones, part of an unrecognisable corpse. She had no doubt it was her missing brother. A Phu Yai Ban (local village leader) confirmed that he thought they were human remains and the Jom Beung police were called. 

 

They believe the remains are those of 43 year old Thitinan who owned the seat cushion shop. 

 

Police and forensics officers at the scene found a 35 liter "gas donut" tank under the rear seat and evidence that the Citroen had collided with the old Japanese car.

 

Khwanreuang gave further evidence. She said that on Friday at 2pm her brother called her to ask if he could borrow a battery charger but she said she didn't have one. He said that he was going to put gas in a tank and that it was noisy. 

 

She told him to be careful. 

 

His last words before he rang off were: "It won't explode".

 

She said her brother lived alone at the house and she went there after her sister in law said she had been unable to contact him.

 

The dead man's daughter had seen a fire but didn't imagine that her father was in the conflagration. 

 

The police think that there was an explosion and a collision while the victim was driving the car.

 

Source: Thai Rath

 

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2020-07-27

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Burma Bill]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

A little way from the vehicles there was a dog with something in its mouth. 

 

She prodded it with a stick - it was a liver. 

 

In the Citroen she found charred bones, part of an unrecognisable corpse

Interesting situation - was the liver "fried" or raw????

[tifino]

• ... and - what about the (was there/) another body - in the other car

[Puchaiyank]

Of all the possible ways to die, dying by fire would be one of the worst possible scenarios. 

 

RIP...

[Aussieroaming]

RIP and condolences to the wife. A pretty aweful wày to perish.

[Aussieroaming]

1 hour ago, Burma Bill said:

Interesting situation - was the liver "fried" or raw????

If you thought your joke was funny then maybe buy a new joke book. A pretty crass statement given the circumstances. 

[johnray]

Good dog, fetch the newspaper, and parts my brother's corpse.

[Burma Bill]

13 minutes ago, Aussieroaming said:

If you thought your joke was funny then maybe buy a new joke book. A pretty crass statement given the circumstances. 

It was not meant to be a joke, being a retired forensic scientist - 2 burnt out cars, one with charred bones - a dog nearby with liver in its mouth so I will rephrase my question, was the liver also charred or not?

[hotchilli]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

His last words before he rang off were: "It won't explode".

RiP .... it seems you were wrong.

[Bangkok Barry]

1 hour ago, Burma Bill said:

Interesting situation - was the liver "fried" or raw????

Today's award for brain-dead idiotic comment. Someone has been burned to death and you make a joke about it. If I was a mod then you'd be banned from the site as you clearly don't have enough brain cells to be a useful member.

[Bangkok Barry]

24 minutes ago, johnray said:

Good dog, fetch the newspaper, and parts my brother's corpse.

Today's award for brain-dead idiotic comment. Someone has been burned to death and you make a joke about it. If I was a mod then you'd be banned from the site as you clearly don't have enough brain cells to be a useful member.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, Puchaiyank said:

Of all the possible ways to die, dying by fire would be one of the worst possible scenarios. 

 

RIP...

The "good" news it that most people suffocate from the smoke long before they burn.

[Burma Bill]

26 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

Today's award for brain-dead idiotic comment. Someone has been burned to death and you make a joke about it. If I was a mod then you'd be banned from the site as you clearly don't have enough brain cells to be a useful member.

You have obviously not read my explanation above. It was meant to be a serious question by a retired forensic expert using jargon when involved in a post mortem (and I apologise for this). The circumstances in this unfortunate affair seem strange.  You automatically thought it was a joke - not so!!

[Morty T]

1 hour ago, Burma Bill said:

You have obviously not read my explanation above. It was meant to be a serious question by a retired forensic expert using jargon when involved in a post mortem (and I apologise for this). The circumstances in this unfortunate affair seem strange.  You automatically thought it was a joke - not so!!

Why are you even bothering to defend your comments, most of the comments left on the so called forum are  'brain dead idiotic.'

[Bangkok Barry]

2 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

You have obviously not read my explanation above. It was meant to be a serious question by a retired forensic expert using jargon when involved in a post mortem (and I apologise for this). The circumstances in this unfortunate affair seem strange.  You automatically thought it was a joke - not so!!

I did read your 'explanation', and it was still a brain-dead comment. If you can't see that then I feel sorry for you. You really need to think before hitting the send button. Ask yourself questions like 'does this enhance the thread', 'can what I write be misunderstood', 'is my comment insensitive'. Stuff like that. 

[Why Me]

2 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

You have obviously not read my explanation above. It was meant to be a serious question by a retired forensic expert using jargon when involved in a post mortem (and I apologise for this). The circumstances in this unfortunate affair seem strange.  You automatically thought it was a joke - not so!!

Newton's 4th Law: For every jerk there is an equal and opposite reaction. Not that Newton himself was known to be a sweet personality.

 

Bill sweetheart, don't double down. The anti-jerk forces will not relent. The Law says so.

[Jimjim]

On 7/27/2020 at 8:22 AM, Bangkok Barry said:

I did read your 'explanation', and it was still a brain-dead comment. If you can't see that then I feel sorry for you. You really need to think before hitting the send button. Ask yourself questions like 'does this enhance the thread', 'can what I write be misunderstood', 'is my comment insensitive'. Stuff like that. 

Except he clearly has stated it was not meant as a joke.  You are inserting a joking tone.  He meant it seriously.  He clarified that it was a serious comment.  There's nothing in the comment that puts it in a context of having to be a joking tone.  That was your reading of it, which he clarifies was not his intent.  Pretty clear.  You just want to have a go and have it be a joke, even though he's said it's not a joke.

 

Now, in all seriousness, he has a point.   If the story is insinuating that the liver was from the crash victim, seems unlikely so why include it in the story at all?  But if it's raw, foul play is afoot, I think was Bill's reasoning.  If it's charred, the dog would have feasted on his burned body, which frankly seems very strange for a dog to do.  Either way, weird.

 

I think the liver has nothing to do with the crash.  As often is the case, a story from Thai media which has random facts and unexplained details.  I think it was translated from Thai, which probably contributes to confusing details.

[Bangkok Barry]

3 hours ago, Jimjim said:

Except he clearly has stated it was not meant as a joke.  You are inserting a joking tone.  He meant it seriously.  He clarified that it was a serious comment.  There's nothing in the comment that puts it in a context of having to be a joking tone.  That was your reading of it, which he clarifies was not his intent.  Pretty clear.  You just want to have a go and have it be a joke, even though he's said it's not a joke.

 

Now, in all seriousness, he has a point.   If the story is insinuating that the liver was from the crash victim, seems unlikely so why include it in the story at all?  But if it's raw, foul play is afoot, I think was Bill's reasoning.  If it's charred, the dog would have feasted on his burned body, which frankly seems very strange for a dog to do.  Either way, weird.

 

I think the liver has nothing to do with the crash.  As often is the case, a story from Thai media which has random facts and unexplained details.  I think it was translated from Thai, which probably contributes to confusing details.

I repeat, before posting - You really need to think before hitting the send button. Ask yourself questions like 'does this enhance the thread', 'can what I write be misunderstood', 'is my comment insensitive'. I was not the only one who misunderstood the intent of the post.