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

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Yes.

Looker was very lucky to know that there would be a stone shop in Kanchanaburi.
 

Allegedly, Looker needed help to move the suitcase containing the body, but in Kanchanaburi, he was able to move the suitcase and some stones, too, out to a river.

[scubascuba3]

5 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Looker was very lucky to know that there would be a stone shop in Kanchanaburi.
 

Allegedly, Looker needed help to move the suitcase containing the body, but in Kanchanaburi, he was able to move the suitcase and some stones, too, out to a river.

Good point. Should be cctv of him buying these same stones, it would take a while to find a stone shop, I've never seen one

[josephbloggs]

48 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Looker was very lucky to know that there would be a stone shop in Kanchanaburi.
 

Allegedly, Looker needed help to move the suitcase containing the body, but in Kanchanaburi, he was able to move the suitcase and some stones, too, out to a river.

There are stone shops all over Thailand. There is one less than 1km from where I live in Bangkok, selling stones, rocks, granite, all sorts.

So funny reading all the armchair detectives on here casting doubt on everything, saying it's fishy etc.  I can just imagine the exact same posters calling for the death penalty if it was reversed - a Thai man accused of murdering an English girl.  But when it's the farang man suddenly the case is flimsy (not flimsy enough for an EU court), the fact he found stones is VERY strange, the fact he's built like a brick ****house doesn't register with anyone (how could he have moved it by himself?).

Anyway, carry on!

[Danderman123]

19 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

There are stone shops all over Thailand. There is one less than 1km from where I live in Bangkok, selling stones, rocks, granite, all sorts.

So funny reading all the armchair detectives on here casting doubt on everything, saying it's fishy etc.  I can just imagine the exact same posters calling for the death penalty if it was reversed - a Thai man accused of murdering an English girl.  But when it's the farang man suddenly the case is flimsy (not flimsy enough for an EU court), the fact he found stones is VERY strange, the fact he's built like a brick ****house doesn't register with anyone (how could he have moved it by himself?).

Anyway, carry on!

On your last point, why did he need help from a hotel Porter to move the suitcase, if he could move it alone out by the River?

 

Also, dismembering a body in a hotel room is pretty messy. There would be more than a little blood on the bedsheets.

[Danderman123]

The stories never mention whether he had previously been to Thailand. It’s possible Looker knew the lady from an earlier visit.

 

if he had never been to Thailand before, how would he know to go to Kanchanaburi?

[robblok]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

 

Sounds like conflicting stories.

Id blame Thai reporting and police.

[Mr Meeseeks]

52 minutes ago, robblok said:

Id blame Thai reporting and police.

Some would take the Thai police on their word.

 

The same police force that forced a patsy to masturbate so they could plant his semen sample at the scene of a murder, that allegedly gunned down diplomats in central Bangkok and just last week were caught on camera torturing and murdering a suspect in custody.

 

Odd.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Some would take the Thai police on their word.

 

The same police force that forced a patsy to masturbate so they could plant his semen sample at the scene of a murder, that allegedly gunned down diplomats in central Bangkok and just last week were caught on camera torturing and murdering a suspect in custody.

 

Odd.

Some would take the word of a white guy always without even considering that judges of other countries have looked at it odd.. Almost af it they think white guys dont commit crimes. Especially if they are fellow countrymen. While i know for a fact there are murderers in my country. They travel too.

[cleopatra2]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

On your last point, why did he need help from a hotel Porter to move the suitcase, if he could move it alone out by the River?

 

Also, dismembering a body in a hotel room is pretty messy. There would be more than a little blood on the bedsheets.

You would not normally find the equipment to dismember a body readily available in an hotel room. 

 

I am not sure where the dismembered body originates, but it does appear in the farang orientated press. 

I suspect it is misreporting from a different case where dismembered animal was stuffed in a suitcase. 

[josephbloggs]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

On your last point, why did he need help from a hotel Porter to move the suitcase, if he could move it alone out by the River?

Just because the porter took his case it doesn't mean he couldn't manage it.  Look at him.  Are you telling me he couldn't move a suitcase with perhaps a 50kg body in there by himself???

 

Quote

Also, dismembering a body in a hotel room is pretty messy. There would be more than a little blood on the bedsheets.

Why would he do it on the bed?  Wouldn't you do it in the bathroom?

And when did you see the evidence?  Where does it say there was no blood at all?  Why are you just making stuff up?
 

[cleopatra2]

8 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Just because the porter took his case it doesn't mean he couldn't manage it.  Look at him.  Are you telling me he couldn't move a suitcase with perhaps a 50kg body in there by himself???

 

Why would he do it on the bed?  Wouldn't you do it in the bathroom?

And when did you see the evidence?  Where does it say there was no blood at all?  Why are you just making stuff up?
 

The police statement to EU court, a cleaning maid found small amount of blood on bedsheets. 

A pillow was also missing

 

The porters statement said 2 persons required to move suitcase. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by cleopatra2

[josephbloggs]

8 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The police statement to EU court, a cleaning maid found small amount of blood on bedsheets. 

A pillow was also missing

 

The porters statement said 2 persons required to move suitcase. 

Yes, and one of his (many) defenders on here is using that information to suggest he couldn't have done it - if it needed two porters, how could this well built man have possibly moved the suitcase to a river by himself?  

[Danderman123]

I am just posting issues that the prosecutor needs to resolve, as well as pointing out conflicts in the accounts of the crime. 

 

If this was a Bangkok lady whose body was found in Kanchanaburi, and witnesses identified Looker as being in Kanchanaburi, that is fairly incriminating. It also rules out some former boyfriend as the perp.

[cleopatra2]

6 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Yes, and one of his (many) defenders on here is using that information to suggest he couldn't have done it - if it needed two porters, how could this well built man have possibly moved the suitcase to a river by himself?  

It does raise a few questions. 

After stuffing a suitcase with a dead body why would the perpetrator allow a stranger to handle the suitcase. It would obviously be unusually heavy. 

 

How did the perpetrator acquire the suitcase. Did they buy it or part of normal luggage. 

If normal luggage what happened to the suitcase contents. It is reasonable to expect that filled with the body no space would be left for its original contents. 

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

It does raise a few questions. 

After stuffing a suitcase with a dead body why would the perpetrator allow a stranger to handle the suitcase. It would obviously be unusually heavy. 

 

How did the perpetrator acquire the suitcase. Did they buy it or part of normal luggage. 

If normal luggage what happened to the suitcase contents. It is reasonable to expect that filled with the body no space would be left for its original contents. 

Oh if i had done it i would buy some plastic bags for my clothes or maybe i buy the suitcase locally if i done it there unplanned. Anyway easy to explain not really evidence.

 

And 50 kg is not that heavy its stated he lifts weights like me. For guys like that 50 kg is moveable. Though it would be heavy but there is stuff available tike suitcase trollies ect. Not really something impossible to do. 

 

Remember the same things of moving the body would have to be done by a much smaller Thai man. So if they can do it why would Looker not be able. Unless the people who say it was a Thai would think it was a group.

Edited August 30, 2021 by robblok

[chickenslegs]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Oh if i had done it i would buy some plastic bags for my clothes or maybe i buy the suitcase locally if i done it there unplanned. Anyway easy to explain not really evidence.

 

And 50 kg is not that heavy its stated he lifts weights like me. For guys like that 50 kg is moveable. Though it would be heavy but there is stuff available tike suitcase trollies ect. Not really something impossible to do. 

 

Remember the same things of moving the body would have to be done by a much smaller Thai man. So if they can do it why would Looker not be able. Unless the people who say it was a Thai would think it was a group.

Some of the questions posed here are answered in the report of the Spanish extradition hearing. This is the evidence presented to the hearing.

https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/51568-19-looker-v-hiszpania-decyzja-europejskiego-523271229

 

IMO - There does seem to be a great deal of compelling evidence.

I haven't read every post in this topic, so maybe this has been posted already.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

Some of the questions posed here are answered in the report of the Spanish extradition hearing. This is the evidence presented to the hearing.

https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/51568-19-looker-v-hiszpania-decyzja-europejskiego-523271229

 

IMO - There does seem to be a great deal of compelling evidence.

I haven't read every post in this topic, so maybe this has been posted already.

5. The Thai Government sent to the Spanish authorities a report prepared by the Thai police, which contained a summary of the evidence gathered against the applicant in respect of the crimes that he had allegedly committed. According to the report, the applicant had entered Thailand via Suvarnabhumi Airport (Bangkok) on 31 October 2014. He had murdered a Thai woman, aged 27, on the night of 1-2 November 2014, while she had been in his hotel room in Bangkok. The woman had worked as a prostitute in a bar, and she had been recorded by video cameras leaving the bar with the applicant on the night in question. They had also been witnessed entering the hotel together. The next day the applicant had checked out of the hotel and had asked a bellboy to help him carry his suitcase outside. The bellboy later reported that the suitcase had been very heavy and that two persons had been needed to carry it to the van in which the applicant had then driven away. The woman had not been seen leaving the room. 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.

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. A witness declared that the decorative stones found in the suitcase were identical to some bought from him by the applicant. According to another witness, the applicant lived in a house in Thailand for about six months every year. The clothes he had been wearing on the night of 1 November 2014 were found in that house following a search. His DNA (taken from some of his possessions) was compatible with DNA samples taken from the victim's nails and skin on her waist. The applicant left Thailand on the Padang train for Malaysia on 27 November 2014.

 

Yes this is great thanks for finding it it confirms that they have good evidence. Unlike some people seem to suggest.

[cleopatra2]

12 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

Some of the questions posed here are answered in the report of the Spanish extradition hearing. This is the evidence presented to the hearing.

https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/51568-19-looker-v-hiszpania-decyzja-europejskiego-523271229

 

IMO - There does seem to be a great deal of compelling evidence.

I haven't read every post in this topic, so maybe this has been posted already.

I do not see the compelling evidence. I can only see conjecture / hypothesis. 

When he left the hotel the van took him to Petchaburi. 

Where is the journey to kanchanburi. 

[cleopatra2]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

5. The Thai Government sent to the Spanish authorities a report prepared by the Thai police, which contained a summary of the evidence gathered against the applicant in respect of the crimes that he had allegedly committed. According to the report, the applicant had entered Thailand via Suvarnabhumi Airport (Bangkok) on 31 October 2014. He had murdered a Thai woman, aged 27, on the night of 1-2 November 2014, while she had been in his hotel room in Bangkok. The woman had worked as a prostitute in a bar, and she had been recorded by video cameras leaving the bar with the applicant on the night in question. They had also been witnessed entering the hotel together. The next day the applicant had checked out of the hotel and had asked a bellboy to help him carry his suitcase outside. The bellboy later reported that the suitcase had been very heavy and that two persons had been needed to carry it to the van in which the applicant had then driven away. The woman had not been seen leaving the room. 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.

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. A witness declared that the decorative stones found in the suitcase were identical to some bought from him by the applicant. According to another witness, the applicant lived in a house in Thailand for about six months every year. The clothes he had been wearing on the night of 1 November 2014 were found in that house following a search. His DNA (taken from some of his possessions) was compatible with DNA samples taken from the victim's nails and skin on her waist. The applicant left Thailand on the Padang train for Malaysia on 27 November 2014.

 

Yes this is great thanks for finding it it confirms that they have good evidence. Unlike some people seem to suggest.

The DNA has no evidiential value. He does not deny knowing her. 

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The DNA has no evidiential value. He does not deny knowing her. 

The rest is damming enough. Totally different from your story and the fact they see 2 go in and only 1 ever come out is pretty damming too. Plus a too heavy suitcase that needed 2 to handle. Same suitcase as the one he used in the hotel is where here body was found in.

 

That is really damming so yes I am now even more convinced of his guilt. Especially now seeing this evidence instead of all the rumors on the forum. I wonder if @Mr Meeseeks still thinks he is being framed reading some actual court information instead of the rumor mill.

[cleopatra2]

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

The rest is damming enough. Totally different from your story and the fact they see 2 go in and only 1 ever come out is pretty damming too. Plus a too heavy suitcase that needed 2 to handle. Same suitcase as the one he used in the hotel is where here body was found in.

 

That is really damming so yes I am now even more convinced of his guilt. Especially now seeing this evidence instead of all the rumors on the forum. I wonder if @Mr Meeseeks still thinks he is being framed reading some actual court information instead of the rumor mill.

It is not really damming. 

Because nobody has seen the womanleave does not mean she did not leave. 

 

Witness statements 2 to 3 weeks after the event are notoriously unreliable. 

Take the cleaning maid, how many rooms would she have worked. Quite remarkable that she can actual remember the specifics of one room on a particular day 

 

The do not say it is the same suitcase. Only a witness states that it is similiar

Edited August 30, 2021 by cleopatra2

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

It is not really damming. 

Because nobody has seen the womanleave does not mean she did not leave. 

 

Witness statements 2 to 3 weeks after the event are notoriously unreliable. 

Take the cleaning maid, how many rooms would she have worked. Quite remarkable that she can actual remember the specifics of one room on a particular day 

Blood and missing pillow is something people remember and a suitcase having carried by 2 also. Anyone not seeing this is obvious bias. The fact alone that she was not seen going out is not important but combine with blood and a heavy suitcase. (that is something that really stands out) makes the proof easier. 

 

Then a minivan to Kanchanaburi and found in HIS suitcase. No not damming at all.. are you so bias you cant see the evidence ?

 

Guess professional judges also found it sufficient to extradite so that says enough. Unlike you they are a bit less bias. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by robblok

[cleopatra2]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Blood and missing pillow is something people remember and a suitcase having carried by 2 also. Anyone not seeing this is obvious bias. The fact alone that she was not seen going out is not important but combine with blood and a heavy suitcase. (that is something that really stands out) makes the proof easier. 

 

Then a minivan to Kanchanaburi and found in HIS suitcase. No not damming at all.. are you so bias you cant see the evidence ?

 

Guess professional judges also found it sufficient to extradite so that says enough. Unlike you they are a bit less bias. 

Where is the minivan to kanchanburi? 

[jacko45k]

3 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Stone shop?

 

there are really shops that sell stones large enough to weigh down a body?

 

 

Garden centres cater for rock gardens.....

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Where is the minivan to kanchanburi? 

The white minivan that in some news reports was seen in kanchanaburi is mentioned here too. But your missing the biggest part of the evidence HIS suitcase. Explain your way out of that one please. 

[cleopatra2]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Blood and missing pillow is something people remember and a suitcase having carried by 2 also. Anyone not seeing this is obvious bias. The fact alone that she was not seen going out is not important but combine with blood and a heavy suitcase. (that is something that really stands out) makes the proof easier. 

 

Then a minivan to Kanchanaburi and found in HIS suitcase. No not damming at all.. are you so bias you cant see the evidence ?

 

Guess professional judges also found it sufficient to extradite so that says enough. Unlike you they are a bit less bias. 

Maybe I am bias because I would like to see proof

[cleopatra2]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

The white minivan that in some news reports was seen in kanchanaburi is mentioned here too. But your missing the biggest part of the evidence HIS suitcase. Explain your way out of that one please. 

The initial reports said a taxi on the night. 

The police were wrong on this. 

The minivan went to prachinburi. Dropping off at Big C

 

What does his suitcase prove. 

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by cleopatra2

[robblok]

Just now, cleopatra2 said:

Maybe I am bias because I would like to see proof

Will be presented in court. Just the fact it was his suitcase and if they have the proof would be so damming combined with the rest that a guilty verdict is almost certain. If they have good proof of this then end of story.

 

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.

 

 

You havent seen it the judges have. Maybe better to let professionals handle this.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, cleopatra2 said:

The initial reports said a taxi on the night. 

The police were wrong on this. 

The minivan went to prachinburi. Dropping off at Big C

Evidence of this please.. i mean your asking me for evidence but you take your unsubstantiated stuff as evidence while stuff checked by a professional judge is not valid according to you. Talk about bias.

 

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.

[cleopatra2]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Will be presented in court. Just the fact it was his suitcase and if they have the proof would be so damming combined with the rest that a guilty verdict is almost certain. If they have good proof of this then end of story.

 

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.

 

 

You havent seen it the judges have. Maybe better to let professionals handle this.

You have no proof that it is his suitcase. Only conjecture. Nobody has placed him in kanchanburi