Brit accused of murdering Thai woman finally extradited from Spain to 'face justice'

[Tanomazu]

47 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

I do not recall the pillow being found with the victim ( I could be mistaken about this). 

As for the bloodstained, the indications are that it was a small amount. This could be in accordance to the small injury above her eyebrow. 

However I am not aware if any testing being carried out to ascertain if the blood matched the victim, Looker or was blood. 

The pillow reference is in the ECHR decision:

 

"One of the hotel’s cleaners had declared that some of the applicant’s bedroom sheets had had bloodstains on them and that one of the pillows had been missing."

 

https://www.stradalex.com/en/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/echr_51568-19

 

Since it was several bedsheets, plural, that had bloodstains it would imply more than very little blood, but bloodstains is clearly limiting the amount to stains.

[josephbloggs]

3 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

Exactly

Staff are likely to remember people who attract their attention. 

A Thai woman leaving alone would not attract any attention. 

I award you five stars as the best troll of the month, well done.  Can't believe people are still biting.

[robblok]

15 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Identical means similar in every respect. 

Extradition hearings accept what is asserted as fact. 

The requirement is a low bar. Below that of balance of probabilities. 

Right you know it better as the Spanish court if i did not know better id say you were Looker himself ????

 

Identical in case of a suitcase means same brand same model same color. Not rocket science. 

 

So what your saying is that a Spanish extradition court multiple cases actually would just accept some flimsy evidence. Your getting more and more desperate. Basing what you know on news articles and not giving credence to a Spanish court. Seems your desperate to clear this guy. 

 

 

14. The Audiencia Nacional also contended that Thailand had carried out a comprehensive investigation into the events in question and, on the basis of the evidence submitted, there were reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant could have participated in the murder. The Audiencia Nacional furthermore noted that the applicant was accused of a standard offence (delito ordinario); it was not linked with any political activity.

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

I award you five stars as the best troll of the month, well done.  Can't believe people are still biting.

Yea i should give up.. the guy is indeed as you describe. 

[josephbloggs]

1 hour ago, cleopatra2 said:

The DNA would be significant if Looker denied knowing the victim. 

Since Looker bought her out of the bar it is reasonable to assume they had an intimate relationship. 

It is reasonable in such circumstances for their DNA to transfer. 

 

We have a witness testimony stating he bought stones. The reliability of the witness account has not yet been tested. 

 

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

The DNA does not implcate him. Looker does not deny being with the victim. It is more than reasonable that his DNA would be present. However if he denied knowing the victim then the DNA would be a problem. 

 

As for eyewitness testimony, who would think that 5 witnesses not only could be wrong but they all identified the same wrong person. 

Yet you keep banging on that he got out of the van at Big C in Petchaburi, therefore he could not have been in Kanchanburi.  So the van driver's testimony is gospel right?   Why isn't he confused with a bald farang, but everyone else is?     You have no consistency in your arguments.

Man goes in room with woman.  Man comes out, woman is not seen.  Man's case on check out needs two people to carry.  Woman is found in an identical case, dead, weighed down by decorative stones the man is witnessed buying.  You dismiss all this as people get confused over appearances, she might have left unknown then been murdered by someone else and then stuffed in an identical suitcase that was also filled with similar stones, yet you believe the van driver who knows exactly where this guy disembarked.

Admit that you favour the white guy and be done with it - it would make things easier and you would get more respect for being honest.

[scubascuba3]

7 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

The body was not dismembered. 

 

Logically how could a person dismember a body in an hotel room without tools

also, blood is more likely to be period, rather than bucket loads of blood from dismembering

[scubascuba3]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

You can bet what you want but the court has proof it was identical, that is why they mentioned it. You have not seen their evidence. 

 

So now you without proof are disputing the Spanish court that was handed proof. Do you think they would use identical when it was not. That would be really bad for a court case. 

 

6. On 6 November 2014, a man reported that he had found a suitcase in a river. The suitcase, identical to one owned by the applicant, contained the woman's body, as well as several stones and rocks together weighing over 12 kg. 

 

Do you think that the judges would have put it there without asking the same question you did. They do this as professionals and everyone is looking over their shoulders. So to make such a grave mistake would be utterly stupid. Sorry I have more trust in the Spanish court then you do.

talk us through how the dismembering happened in the hotel room and only enough blood for a period?

[robblok]

4 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

talk us through how the dismembering happened in the hotel room and only enough blood for a period?

What dismembering its not reported in the article i posted. The one that was send to the Spanish court. You can get a body into a suitcase without dismembering before rigor mortis sets in its easier then with a living body. 

 

The dismemberment could have done later at his Hua Hin residence. If done at the hotel maybe in a bath tub. Once a person dies the heart does not pump remember so no huge streams of blood at all. 

[Neeranam]

On 7/13/2021 at 9:22 AM, Jonathan Swift said:

I suspect that his fate may turn out to be worse than death. A farang who killed a Thai woman sentenced to life in a Thai prison. 

Absolutely, this man will likely be beaten very badly at least, regularly. 

I knew an Ozzie English teacher who threw his Thai gf off a high balcony in Bkk re 1997. He was beaten until he was unrecognizable. 

Wonder where he is now, if alive, only 24 at the time. 

[cleopatra2]

11 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

 

Yet you keep banging on that he got out of the van at Big C in Petchaburi, therefore he could not have been in Kanchanburi.  So the van driver's testimony is gospel right?   Why isn't he confused with a bald farang, but everyone else is?     You have no consistency in your arguments.

Man goes in room with woman.  Man comes out, woman is not seen.  Man's case on check out needs two people to carry.  Woman is found in an identical case, dead, weighed down by decorative stones the man is witnessed buying.  You dismiss all this as people get confused over appearances, she might have left unknown then been murdered by someone else and then stuffed in an identical suitcase that was also filled with similar stones, yet you believe the van driver who knows exactly where this guy disembarked.

Admit that you favour the white guy and be done with it - it would make things easier and you would get more respect for being honest.

I am not favoring any side simply questioning the evidence provided. 

The RTP case rest solely on the victim being killed in the hotel. 

A reliance on hotel direct testimony that the victim was not seen leaving. 

The question that arises would the hotel have noticed if the victim had left. 

 

The victim had been identified by Nov 11th. The picture of of Looker and the victim widely distributed not only in the press but the surrounding area of Nana. Nov 17th

 

Looker was eventually identified by anonymous tip off in December. 

 

The hotel have a guest  that they think did not leave and bloodstained sheets from lookers room. But failed to notify the RTP

 

Is it not more likely that the hotel do not remember everybody who comes and leaves. 

Edited August 31, 2021 by cleopatra2

[scubascuba3]

1 hour ago, cleopatra2 said:

Is it not more likely that the hotel do not remember everybody who comes and leaves. 

Probably true, but it is common that a sex worker will leave her ID on reception at some hotels, was the ID still there, was it left there in the first place? how about CCTV. Carrying a case 50kg would be difficult even for two people, how about the belongings already in the case? sounds fishy