2 minutes ago, suspectdevice said:

Her hand is limp and not holding his. He is holding hers as if she is his property.

Your point being? She does not appear to be following him as he claimed is mine!

Edited August 26Aug 26 by jacko45k

All the self appointed detectives.

On 8/26/2026 at 4:45 AM, Georgealbert said:

Mr Donhomla said he had placed all his hopes in his only child, who had travelled from northern Thailand to Pattaya about nine days before her death to see the beach and visit friends.

I'm not sure too many people actually believe this.

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

I'm not sure too many people actually believe this.

As noted above per Sydney Morning Herald, Ms. Cake's father and great-aunts gave her money for her Pattaya trip to cover her travel. Maybe the money was also for any expenses she might have before she turns her first couple of tricks.

On 8/26/2026 at 8:39 AM, mrmicbkktxl said:

Well where is the knife and what about fingerprints?

it's a good point. There has, to my knowledge, been no mention of a knife other than what he's saying. This of course doesn't mean there wasn't a knife. Did he dump it? We don't know? Do the BIB have a knife in their possession? Again we don't know. This part of the case is not being openly talked about by either side other than his claim she used a knife to threaten him.

To the above: Under Thai self defense regs it really does not make any difference knife or not. The question is: was the response proportional to the threat.

And since if the court agrees on a self-defense claim, all murder-type charges would be dismissed so the court does not take this claim lightly.

Edited August 27Aug 27 by JerryM

On 8/27/2026 at 12:28 AM, jacko45k said:

Your point being? She does not appear to be following him as he claimed is mine!

My point being that she didn't seem overjoyed to be with him!

On 8/26/2026 at 8:10 AM, save the frogs said:

A good lawyer should be able to get to the truth by making the defendant trip up on his own lies in court.

He has a right to silence. He doesn't even have to stand the stand and give evidence. It's up to the prosecution to prove his guilt.

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

He has a right to silence. He doesn't even have to stand the stand and give evidence. It's up to the prosecution to prove his guilt.

you dont have the right to silence in a court room

35 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

you dont have the right to silence in a court room

The Thai Constitution: Section 40(4) guarantees the fundamental right of an accused person or witness not to give statements that incriminate themselves.

Right to Remain Silent: During a police interrogation or court proceeding, an accused individual can refuse to answer questions without that silence being legally treated as an admission of guilt