Pai Canadian Murder - The Dilatory Truth

[jayjay0]

While it is true that what has happened smells like corruption and abuse of power from a mile away, I think it is also true that this kind of nonsense is NOT just applicable to Thailand! I am sure that all foreigners could cite stories where their own police in their own country faired as badly in similar events! In Canada, the Pickton story is one prime example of how police can protect each other (because the rich and powerful count on them to protecft them): how the rich and powerful can protect the police and vice versa. The Robert Dziekanski story (and the Wikipedia article) reveal similar abuse and shenanigans from the police force and the justice system. In other words, corruption is not just a Thai word! It does not make it right, though! I hear many stories of foreigners being treated unjustly! I would like to know if in reality Thais (of lower status) suffer also from a justice system permeable to corruption from the ones who have power and money! I just saw (by sheer luck) a story of this Thai who had been wrongfully accused (so it would seem) of drug offenses (I am not sure of the details). I am not sure if she was of lower status. She was released and the media reported on the case though! What was very apparent was the lack of an interview by any official in the matter though! It does show that independent bodies must be set up, but how can you make them truly independent! That is the question! If reform in Western cultures is hard, one can only imagine how much harder this would be in Asian cultures, where saving face is an art form (where reform is an admission that things are not perfect,... an admission of error, which is frowned upon)! In other words, one better be VERY careful in the Land of the (happy, nervous, intimidated,...) Smiles!

Well said. Most westerners are to busy looking at others to see themselves.

It is called the Blue Line ask any westerner what that is and you will get a awful lot of What's, Pardon"s or Not sure what you are talking about.

No wonder they are so up in arms about it here. The culture they left embraced it but was not as honest as the Thai's They hid it. They come to a culture with a bit more honesty and they are appalled.

Like a old timer once told me if you are going to be a thief be a honest one.

[JimsKnight]

We know that the majority of Thais do not even know that the rest of the world exists, But how can those that are so called educated and aware of world opinion, not recognize that to the non third world countries, they themselves are nothing more than that. If you want the rest of the World to recognize you then you need to play by the Human rules. The days of the untouchables as far as law is concerned was left behind in the 18^th Century. Discrimination against people now belongs to the third World

I know this story and may the family get some justice from it

Thailand is the third world dude and the first-world has a lot of learning to do from it.

[swillowbee]

While it is true that what has happened smells like corruption and abuse of power from a mile away, I think it is also true that this kind of nonsense is NOT just applicable to Thailand! I am sure that all foreigners could cite stories where their own police in their own country faired as badly in similar events! In Canada, the Pickton story is one prime example of how police can protect each other (because the rich and powerful count on them to protecft them): how the rich and powerful can protect the police and vice versa. The Robert Dziekanski story (and the Wikipedia article) reveal similar abuse and shenanigans from the police force and the justice system. In other words, corruption is not just a Thai word! It does not make it right, though! I hear many stories of foreigners being treated unjustly! I would like to know if in reality Thais (of lower status) suffer also from a justice system permeable to corruption from the ones who have power and money! I just saw (by sheer luck) a story of this Thai who had been wrongfully accused (so it would seem) of drug offenses (I am not sure of the details). I am not sure if she was of lower status. She was released and the media reported on the case though! What was very apparent was the lack of an interview by any official in the matter though! It does show that independent bodies must be set up, but how can you make them truly independent! That is the question! If reform in Western cultures is hard, one can only imagine how much harder this would be in Asian cultures, where saving face is an art form (where reform is an admission that things are not perfect,... an admission of error, which is frowned upon)! In other words, one better be VERY careful in the Land of the (happy, nervous, intimidated,...) Smiles!

Well said. Most westerners are to busy looking at others to see themselves.

It is called the Blue Line ask any westerner what that is and you will get a awful lot of What's, Pardon"s or Not sure what you are talking about.

No wonder they are so up in arms about it here. The culture they left embraced it but was not as honest as the Thai's They hid it. They come to a culture with a bit more honesty and they are appalled.

Like a old timer once told me if you are going to be a thief be a honest one.

... yes ... well ... "if you are going to be a thief, be an honest one" ... real words to live by ... how trite.

... you appear to have put no more critical thought into the missive above ... anyone comparing official corruption in Canada, or the USA, with official corruption in the Kingdom of Thailand is attempting an intellectual lift far above their capability ... get a grip on reality, eh?

Edited January 1, 2011 by swillowbee

[geriatrickid]

Your entire sure fired thing is based on a western tradition. The tradition is how ever, very selective. The idea that every one is perfect is not there contention.However certain people must be or one should never listen to them again and every thing they have said is suspect. They must be more than human. (smacks of divine) In real life pretty unrealistic.

Good thing that is not the way it operates here.

To put it in a fading western quotation "People who live in glass houses should not throw rocks".

To give you a idea of how it works here I allow you to be wrong with out ignoring any thing you say. You do on occasion hit the bull's Eye dead on. And other times come close. This is not one of those times.

Hang on a second. There are some who are arguing the case from a western perspective and I explained why their arguments would not hold in the western context. Of course the western rules do not hold here, but then that means the Thai rules hold. And the Thai law system did yet process the Del Pinto case, nor was there a judgement. How can the judiciary get blamed for something it didn't even rule on? The delays in the case are typical of high profile murder cases in Thailand and even in the west. It took a year and a half for O.J. Simpson to go to trial in the USA and he was fast tracked. Long delays are common in the Thai court system just as they are in the western court system.

I don't get your point. You disagree with me that the Del Pinto case had discernible reasonable doubt. Fine. That's your view and many others in TVF.. There is no question Sgt. Uthai shot Mr. Del Pinto. None of the members of Thai Visa have read the investigation reports. I do not believe anyone has seen the full pathology report. I have seen excerpts. And yet the judgement is passed that Sgt. Uthai murdered Del Pinto. My personal view is that there was manslaughter, but that doesn't matter since I am not the judge(s). Calling the Del Pinto case a murder in the absence of a full airing of the evidence and a court trial is wrong.

The obsession over Sgt. Uthai means that the commanding officers and the government officials that allowed him to be on the street do not have to answer for their decisions, policies or continuing behaviour that will allow another Sgt. Uthai to occur.

[jayjay0]

Your entire sure fired thing is based on a western tradition. The tradition is how ever, very selective. The idea that every one is perfect is not there contention.However certain people must be or one should never listen to them again and every thing they have said is suspect. They must be more than human. (smacks of divine) In real life pretty unrealistic.

Good thing that is not the way it operates here.

To put it in a fading western quotation "People who live in glass houses should not throw rocks".

To give you a idea of how it works here I allow you to be wrong with out ignoring any thing you say. You do on occasion hit the bull's Eye dead on. And other times come close. This is not one of those times.

Hang on a second. There are some who are arguing the case from a western perspective and I explained why their arguments would not hold in the western context. Of course the western rules do not hold here, but then that means the Thai rules hold. And the Thai law system did yet process the Del Pinto case, nor was there a judgement. How can the judiciary get blamed for something it didn't even rule on? The delays in the case are typical of high profile murder cases in Thailand and even in the west. It took a year and a half for O.J. Simpson to go to trial in the USA and he was fast tracked. Long delays are common in the Thai court system just as they are in the western court system.

I don't get your point. You disagree with me that the Del Pinto case had discernible reasonable doubt. Fine. That's your view and many others in TVF.. There is no question Sgt. Uthai shot Mr. Del Pinto. None of the members of Thai Visa have read the investigation reports. I do not believe anyone has seen the full pathology report. I have seen excerpts. And yet the judgement is passed that Sgt. Uthai murdered Del Pinto. My personal view is that there was manslaughter, but that doesn't matter since I am not the judge(s). Calling the Del Pinto case a murder in the absence of a full airing of the evidence and a court trial is wrong.

The obsession over Sgt. Uthai means that the commanding officers and the government officials that allowed him to be on the street do not have to answer for their decisions, policies or continuing behaviour that will allow another Sgt. Uthai to occur.

Not sure why people insist on bringing the western perspective here. It is flawed point of view.

My point is that You are not looking at it from a complete point of perspective. If you will read the Whole article you will see where Sgt. Uthai's superior has consistently delayed the process. In addition even by Thai standards his word is highly suspect. Yet he wrote some of the reports you base your point of view on. In short we are looking for Justice.

You know as well as I do that the two do not necessarily go together. As my Criminology Instructor used to say "when you go to court you can be assured legal will be done".

For my self if he is guilty he is guilty no matter what a judge says. If he is innocent he is innocent no matter what a judge says.

Hence are differences on the subject.

[jayjay0]

While it is true that what has happened smells like corruption and abuse of power from a mile away, I think it is also true that this kind of nonsense is NOT just applicable to Thailand! I am sure that all foreigners could cite stories where their own police in their own country faired as badly in similar events! In Canada, the Pickton story is one prime example of how police can protect each other (because the rich and powerful count on them to protecft them): how the rich and powerful can protect the police and vice versa. The Robert Dziekanski story (and the Wikipedia article) reveal similar abuse and shenanigans from the police force and the justice system. In other words, corruption is not just a Thai word! It does not make it right, though! I hear many stories of foreigners being treated unjustly! I would like to know if in reality Thais (of lower status) suffer also from a justice system permeable to corruption from the ones who have power and money! I just saw (by sheer luck) a story of this Thai who had been wrongfully accused (so it would seem) of drug offenses (I am not sure of the details). I am not sure if she was of lower status. She was released and the media reported on the case though! What was very apparent was the lack of an interview by any official in the matter though! It does show that independent bodies must be set up, but how can you make them truly independent! That is the question! If reform in Western cultures is hard, one can only imagine how much harder this would be in Asian cultures, where saving face is an art form (where reform is an admission that things are not perfect,... an admission of error, which is frowned upon)! In other words, one better be VERY careful in the Land of the (happy, nervous, intimidated,...) Smiles!

Well said. Most westerners are to busy looking at others to see themselves.

It is called the Blue Line ask any westerner what that is and you will get a awful lot of What's, Pardon"s or Not sure what you are talking about.

No wonder they are so up in arms about it here. The culture they left embraced it but was not as honest as the Thai's They hid it. They come to a culture with a bit more honesty and they are appalled.

Like a old timer once told me if you are going to be a thief be a honest one.

... yes ... well ... "if you are going to be a thief, be an honest one" ... real words to live by ... how trite.

... you appear to have put no more critical thought into the missive above ... anyone comparing official corruption in Canada, or the USA, with official corruption in the Kingdom of Thailand is attempting an intellectual lift far above their capability ... get a grip on reality, eh?

Sorry it was not my intention to post over your head.

[andrewdrummond]

I rather think the evidence of the two independent witnesses and Dr.Pornthips evidence that Leo was shot while on the ground makes all the negative comments about Carly Reisig statements rather insignificant or did you not understand this point?

Mr. Drummond, you can think what you want, but the law is the law. The chorus in TVF is that the law must prevail and that if this was in the west there would have been swift justice. Wrong. Dr. Pornthip cannot be considered a reliable expert. Her conduct in the bomb detector fiasco is responsible for that. If one wanted to apply western rules, then every case that Dr. Pornthip opined upon could now be contested and questioned. (I have been consistent in that opinion ever since the bomb detector crisis arose and made the statement at the time that every opinion Dr. Pornthip ever gave could be invalidated. That's how it works in pathology and the law.) One need look no further than Mr. Del Pinto's home country of Canada to see what happens when a pathologist bungles. Look up the pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and see what impact it had on the court system. One can therefore not rely on evidence that comes from a source that can be considered flawed.

Describing Carly Reisig's statements as insignificant, is a cute and convenient way of dismissing the fact that much of the information she provided was inaccurate and misleading. When a witness provides evidence like that, the witness testimony is dismissed in its whole, even if there are some valid aspects. Thailand allows for alot more wiggle room though, so the Reisig tale might be considered. Your overlook the fact that the Del Pinto case was neither heard nor adjudicated upon. The accused had legal rights, even if people disagree. The Del Pinto case had and still has reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the courts do not convict on the speculation of ThaiVisa experts or on Andrew Drummond's opinions. There are a great many people who love Thailand because of its laissez faire attitude on some issues. Well, hand in hand with that comes people like Sgt. Uthai.

I do not dispute that Sgt. Uthai may have had a questionable history. That then speaks to the big question: Why was he on the street with a badge and a gun? why didn't his commanding officer(s) address the allegations of drinking while on duty? Why didn't Dr. Pornthip raise these questions? Maybe Sgt. Uthai is guilty of the crime, but you and the other let's hang Sgt. Uthai are no better than the locals that seek to blame one person for a serious event that involves many.

Actually you do not have to be a forensic pathologist to know how Leo was shot. All you need to do is look at the x-rays and see the entrance and exit wounds to know that he was shot from above. Hence the GT200 business is irrelevant. As you point out the only evidence from Carly Reisig which is significant is what she told the court and that was quite detailed and specific. So what she told journalists as different times is totally irrelevant to the result of the case. The 'chorus' on Thaivisa has perhaps changed because people are now more aware of the facts. The fact that the court has not been able to adjudicate whether Uthai was on duty or not speaks volumes.

Edited January 1, 2011 by andrewdrummond

[TheLaughingMan]

You claim my knowledge is lacking. I believe it exceeds yours as I have at least read some of the "forensic" documentation in addition to the same information as you have, unless you are going to claim that you have read the investigation reports and spoken with the investigators. You are now dismissing the Thai judiciary as corrupt where judge's seats are bought. Well, you are going to have to make a tough decision now in respect to consistency. if you consider the Thai judiciary corrupt in the whole then you must reject the Thaksin verict since it was that "corrupt" court system that found him guilty. If the system is corrupt, then all decisions that flow from it are invalid. Strangely enough that puts you in good company with some of the people currently incarcerated on political charges.

Anyway, you do realize that Sgt. Uthai's case wasn't even pleaded or adjudicated, so where do you get off claiming the judges were corrupt? Hello?

Now you bring up your girlfriend that you claim was being considered for a judge's seat and claim the events as you dscribe them are an attestation of Thai judicial corruption. Junior level magistrate positions have always been politically linked appointments in the west. In Mr. del Pinto's home country municipal and provincial court judges are usually friends of the governing party. There was an ongoing scandal in Canada called the Judge's Affair in respect to the appointment of judges associated with fundraising for both the Liberals and Tories. So what's your point? How do you think people get a QC designation in the UK?

I do not dispute for a minute that there may be questionable practices in the Thai court system, but in most cases these are civil commercial disputes involving factions of the ruling oligarchy. However, more specifically in the Del Pinto case, you insinuate that Sgt. uthai was walking about because of the Thai judiciary. WRONG. There was no judicial involvement.

As an aside, I suggest you keep your yap shut when in the proximity of your girlfriend's work colleagues. Comments such as yours will end up ostracizing the woman and leaving her stuck filing real estate papers.

You're confusing me with another poster I guess, I never said anything about judges being corrupt on THIS case. I was hinting that YOUR philosophy of legal system and truth here in Thailand was totally absurd. You are wrong to think that there is any kind of real law being upheld here and yet you keep spouting off on how the justice system this and that... it has no relevance HERE.

You bring up a lot of examples that mean nothing, Thaksin what? Uk what? totally meaningless. In the Uk judges will be murdered if they dont take bribes? What are you going on about? Bottom line you keep talking about the way the justice system will or should be treating this case and its laughable.

Once again, I did not insinuate that Uthai was walking about because of the Thai Judiciary system, I was simply pointing out the serious flaws in your logic.

She's my ex, she doesn't need to worry about me saying anything to anybody. Thanks

[Steely Dan]

I rather think the evidence of the two independent witnesses and Dr.Pornthips evidence that Leo was shot while on the ground makes all the negative comments about Carly Reisig statements rather insignificant or did you not understand this point?

Mr. Drummond, you can think what you want, but the law is the law. The chorus in TVF is that the law must prevail and that if this was in the west there would have been swift justice. Wrong. Dr. Pornthip cannot be considered a reliable expert. Her conduct in the bomb detector fiasco is responsible for that. If one wanted to apply western rules, then every case that Dr. Pornthip opined upon could now be contested and questioned. (I have been consistent in that opinion ever since the bomb detector crisis arose and made the statement at the time that every opinion Dr. Pornthip ever gave could be invalidated. That's how it works in pathology and the law.) One need look no further than Mr. Del Pinto's home country of Canada to see what happens when a pathologist bungles. Look up the pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and see what impact it had on the court system. One can therefore not rely on evidence that comes from a source that can be considered flawed.

Describing Carly Reisig's statements as insignificant, is a cute and convenient way of dismissing the fact that much of the information she provided was inaccurate and misleading. When a witness provides evidence like that, the witness testimony is dismissed in its whole, even if there are some valid aspects. Thailand allows for alot more wiggle room though, so the Reisig tale might be considered. Your overlook the fact that the Del Pinto case was neither heard nor adjudicated upon. The accused had legal rights, even if people disagree. The Del Pinto case had and still has reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the courts do not convict on the speculation of ThaiVisa experts or on Andrew Drummond's opinions. There are a great many people who love Thailand because of its laissez faire attitude on some issues. Well, hand in hand with that comes people like Sgt. Uthai.

I do not dispute that Sgt. Uthai may have had a questionable history. That then speaks to the big question: Why was he on the street with a badge and a gun? why didn't his commanding officer(s) address the allegations of drinking while on duty? Why didn't Dr. Pornthip raise these questions? Maybe Sgt. Uthai is guilty of the crime, but you and the other let's hang Sgt. Uthai are no better than the locals that seek to blame one person for a serious event that involves many.

Actually you do not have to be a forensic pathologist to know how Leo was shot. All you need to do is look at the x-rays and see the entrance and exit wounds to know that he was shot from above. Hence the GT200 business is irrelevant. As you point out the only evidence from Carly Reisig which is significant is what she told the court and that was quite detailed and specific. So what she told journalists as different times is totally irrelevant to the result of the case. The 'chorus' on Thaivisa has perhaps changed because people are now more aware of the facts. The fact that the court has not been able to adjudicate whether Uthai was on duty or not speaks volumes.

And despite Geriatrikid's attempt at obfuscation the fact remains that if the Thai courts had got their act together quicker there would have been one less murder victim. Perhaps the stonewalling and delaying tactics by the Pai police chief should make him an accessory to the second murder - but I suppose that would be a step to far when living in an accountability vacuum like Thailand.

[geriatrickid]

I rather think the evidence of the two independent witnesses and Dr.Pornthips evidence that Leo was shot while on the ground makes all the negative comments about Carly Reisig statements rather insignificant or did you not understand this point?

Mr. Drummond, you can think what you want, but the law is the law. The chorus in TVF is that the law must prevail and that if this was in the west there would have been swift justice. Wrong. Dr. Pornthip cannot be considered a reliable expert. Her conduct in the bomb detector fiasco is responsible for that. If one wanted to apply western rules, then every case that Dr. Pornthip opined upon could now be contested and questioned. (I have been consistent in that opinion ever since the bomb detector crisis arose and made the statement at the time that every opinion Dr. Pornthip ever gave could be invalidated. That's how it works in pathology and the law.) One need look no further than Mr. Del Pinto's home country of Canada to see what happens when a pathologist bungles. Look up the pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and see what impact it had on the court system. One can therefore not rely on evidence that comes from a source that can be considered flawed.

Describing Carly Reisig's statements as insignificant, is a cute and convenient way of dismissing the fact that much of the information she provided was inaccurate and misleading. When a witness provides evidence like that, the witness testimony is dismissed in its whole, even if there are some valid aspects. Thailand allows for alot more wiggle room though, so the Reisig tale might be considered. Your overlook the fact that the Del Pinto case was neither heard nor adjudicated upon. The accused had legal rights, even if people disagree. The Del Pinto case had and still has reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the courts do not convict on the speculation of ThaiVisa experts or on Andrew Drummond's opinions. There are a great many people who love Thailand because of its laissez faire attitude on some issues. Well, hand in hand with that comes people like Sgt. Uthai.

I do not dispute that Sgt. Uthai may have had a questionable history. That then speaks to the big question: Why was he on the street with a badge and a gun? why didn't his commanding officer(s) address the allegations of drinking while on duty? Why didn't Dr. Pornthip raise these questions? Maybe Sgt. Uthai is guilty of the crime, but you and the other let's hang Sgt. Uthai are no better than the locals that seek to blame one person for a serious event that involves many.

Actually you do not have to be a forensic pathologist to know how Leo was shot. All you need to do is look at the x-rays and see the entrance and exit wounds to know that he was shot from above. Hence the GT200 business is irrelevant. As you point out the only evidence from Carly Reisig which is significant is what she told the court and that was quite detailed and specific. So what she told journalists as different times is totally irrelevant to the result of the case. The 'chorus' on Thaivisa has perhaps changed because people are now more aware of the facts. The fact that the court has not been able to adjudicate whether Uthai was on duty or not speaks volumes.

Mr. Drummond, you cannot have it both ways. You first made an attempt to use Dr. Pornthip's statement(s) as a basis of support for your position. After I demonstrated why her opinion(s) should not be considered credible, you now say one does not need to be a forensic pathologist. How convenient.

Yes, Mr. Del Pinto suffered 2 wounds; One to the face and one to the lower abdomen that ricocheted about lacerating his liver and causing a fatal injury. The Alberta medical examiner's office didn't offer an opinion as to the actual circumstances leading up to the death of Mr. del Pinto did it?. Carly Reisig has made a statement to the investigators but that statement has yet to be reviewed by defense counsel, nor has she given a witness statement under oath in the court where she could be cross examined. As you well know, apparent credible witness statements often fall apart on the witness stand. I do not think anyone in TVF has any additional facts than those that were made available subsequent to the initial event. You were given access by the family to Patty Job's review right? You saw Dr. Chan's opinion, right? Oh wait, there wasn't an opinion. All the report said was that there were 2 bullet wounds, either of which would have proven fatal. There was no conclusion offered as to the full circumstances of death and yet you are offering shallow hints as to what the full events were. The family did not receive the complete autopsy report performed in Thailand, did it?. My personal opinion was that the initial autopsy was flawed, but that's a different aspect to the story and one can't criticize your beloved Dr. Pornthip.

And despite what you state that Carly Reisig's multiple different statements made to journalists and to the investigators not being relevant, you are very wrong. You have enough friends that have practiced criminal law. Go ask them what their views are on a witness that changes her version of events like a Pattaya hooker changes johns. IMO the case was blown from the start because the police commanders didn't respond appropriately, the initial forensic exam was inadequate and the key witness,Carly Reisig did not offer credible consistent statements.

[oldsailor35]

The least we can all do is boycott Pai.

why stop there, boycott thailand, that'll work, that'll show em

I live here so It is a little harder for me to boycott Thailand. But I agree with you if foreigners are thinking of coming here. That is a very good reason that they shouldn't.

Yes OK ! but just consider the many thousands of honest hard working Thais who will be punished for the actions of rogue policemen. Anyhow, i have a good idea that its already happening as so many tell me that they think Thailand is a dangerous place. Its time the prime minister woke up to this and had one of those BIB type crackdowns ! which we see on a regular basis.

[oldsailor35]

I hadn't forgotten about this sad case, and some of the others:

Two Brits shot and killed by a cop in Kanchanaburi

The Thai lady had her arm lopped off with a machete on a hellish motorcycle ride, by a Thai cop.

Regarding those three cases and others, I wonder whether any of the cops were found guilty in a court, and if so, if they suffered the same penalties that you or I would suffer if we were caught doing such dastardly things. Some might say police (and others in position of authority) should suffer more dire consequences, as they're the ones paid and trained to protect us. It's a sick irony that Thaksin was trained as a policeman, yet he's a poster boy for causing untold harm and abuse to his fellow Thais.

Ohhhhhhhhhh dear ere we go again ! sick aint it.

[oldsailor35]

Your entire sure fired thing is based on a western tradition. The tradition is how ever, very selective. The idea that every one is perfect is not there contention.However certain people must be or one should never listen to them again and every thing they have said is suspect. They must be more than human. (smacks of divine) In real life pretty unrealistic.

Good thing that is not the way it operates here.

To put it in a fading western quotation "People who live in glass houses should not throw rocks".

To give you a idea of how it works here I allow you to be wrong with out ignoring any thing you say. You do on occasion hit the bull's Eye dead on. And other times come close. This is not one of those times.

Hang on a second. There are some who are arguing the case from a western perspective and I explained why their arguments would not hold in the western context. Of course the western rules do not hold here, but then that means the Thai rules hold. And the Thai law system did yet process the Del Pinto case, nor was there a judgement. How can the judiciary get blamed for something it didn't even rule on? The delays in the case are typical of high profile murder cases in Thailand and even in the west. It took a year and a half for O.J. Simpson to go to trial in the USA and he was fast tracked. Long delays are common in the Thai court system just as they are in the western court system.

I don't get your point. You disagree with me that the Del Pinto case had discernible reasonable doubt. Fine. That's your view and many others in TVF.. There is no question Sgt. Uthai shot Mr. Del Pinto. None of the members of Thai Visa have read the investigation reports. I do not believe anyone has seen the full pathology report. I have seen excerpts. And yet the judgement is passed that Sgt. Uthai murdered Del Pinto. My personal view is that there was manslaughter, but that doesn't matter since I am not the judge(s). Calling the Del Pinto case a murder in the absence of a full airing of the evidence and a court trial is wrong.

The obsession over Sgt. Uthai means that the commanding officers and the government officials that allowed him to be on the street do not have to answer for their decisions, policies or continuing behaviour that will allow another Sgt. Uthai to occur.

Manslaughter ? Pinto , unarmed laying on the ground, a drunken Sgt Uthai standing over him and then shooting him with his police pistol..........."Bloody hell" how can this be anything else but murder ?

[Steely Dan]

I hadn't forgotten about this sad case, and some of the others:

Two Brits shot and killed by a cop in Kanchanaburi

The Thai lady had her arm lopped off with a machete on a hellish motorcycle ride, by a Thai cop.

Regarding those three cases and others, I wonder whether any of the cops were found guilty in a court, and if so, if they suffered the same penalties that you or I would suffer if we were caught doing such dastardly things. Some might say police (and others in position of authority) should suffer more dire consequences, as they're the ones paid and trained to protect us. It's a sick irony that Thaksin was trained as a policeman, yet he's a poster boy for causing untold harm and abuse to his fellow Thais.

Ohhhhhhhhhh dear ere we go again ! sick aint it.

This is the whole point. You can play devil's advocate giving convoluted reasoning as to why any particular legal case seems to drag on. Perhaps in isolation procedural matters such as court schedules, securing witness testimony, or forensic evidence going missing could explain a case never reaching resolution. But when you multiply this several hundred fold encompassing such cases as Kanchanaburi, Kirsty Jones' murder, the death of two women in a guest house in Ko Phi Phi, the Saudi gems case etc etc then you reach an inescapable conclusion - The Thai judicial system can be derailed almost at will by even middle ranking individuals if they decide it's in their interests to do so.

Unfortunately there is zero impetus for this to change when foreign consular and embassy activity seems to be almost entirely devoted to boosting trade so no external sanction ever threatens the status quo. Same Same as they say.

[ryladie99]

I am a Canadian living in Thailand what I would have to say about this cop and the justice system in Thailand would be deleted by the moderators. I hope the cop awaits the same fate as the man he killed. Leave it at that.

You are so right. That says it all. We can not even criticize it.

I believe in Krama and justice will be served by the end. My opinion.

Happy New year...1,1, 11....

[gemini81]

I hadn't forgotten about this sad case, and some of the others:

Two Brits shot and killed by a cop in Kanchanaburi

The Thai lady had her arm lopped off with a machete on a hellish motorcycle ride, by a Thai cop.

Regarding those three cases and others, I wonder whether any of the cops were found guilty in a court, and if so, if they suffered the same penalties that you or I would suffer if we were caught doing such dastardly things. Some might say police (and others in position of authority) should suffer more dire consequences, as they're the ones paid and trained to protect us. It's a sick irony that Thaksin was trained as a policeman, yet he's a poster boy for causing untold harm and abuse to his fellow Thais.

Ohhhhhhhhhh dear ere we go again ! sick aint it.

This is the whole point. You can play devil's advocate giving convoluted reasoning as to why any particular legal case seems to drag on. Perhaps in isolation procedural matters such as court schedules, securing witness testimony, or forensic evidence going missing could explain a case never reaching resolution. But when you multiply this several hundred fold encompassing such cases as Kanchanaburi, Kirsty Jones' murder, the death of two women in a guest house in Ko Phi Phi, the Saudi gems case etc etc then you reach an inescapable conclusion - The Thai judicial system can be derailed almost at will by even middle ranking individuals if they decide it's in their interests to do so.

Unfortunately there is zero impetus for this to change when foreign consular and embassy activity seems to be almost entirely devoted to boosting trade so no external sanction ever threatens the status quo. Same Same as they say.

well in a lawless society, thats often why some take the law into their own hands if the justice system won't sort it out for you, maybe your thai in laws or some mafia for hire'll help you get revenge.

[neverdie]

And so, we've learnt 'what' from this thread?

Looks like everything is the same as it was before, or was that the point of the exercise?

[geriatrickid]

Manslaughter ? Pinto , unarmed laying on the ground, a drunken Sgt Uthai standing over him and then shooting him with his police pistol..........."Bloody hell" how can this be anything else but murder ?

Yes, manslaughter. In order to prove premeditated murder (that's the charge), it will have to be shown that there was a planned intent to cause the death of John Leo Del Pinto on that night. There will also have to be a demonstration that there was a manifestation of indifference to human life to the point that the accused recklessly brought harm causing Mr. Del Pinto's death. Without rehashing the case, it is alleged that Carly Reisig had a reputation for aggressive and confrontational behavior in Pai having allegedly struck a police officer previously in the Be Bop bar. She was known to the local police. She is alleged to have been fighting with her Thai boyfriend Fuen on the night of the Del Pinto death and was described as causing a loud disturbance in the process. It is alleged that Khun Fuen apparently was also known to the police having been reported by the media to have been arrestedfor the trafficing of narcotics. In the event that these circumstances are proven in the court, then it will provide a motive as to why Sgt. Uthai went to get his firearm when confronted with Ms. Reisig. If there was indeed a physical confrontation as several of the witness statements indicate, then it will be easier for defense counsel to counter the charge of murder.

You claim that Mr. Del Pinto was laying on the ground and that this will support the murder charge. This opinion is large part derived from Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan's assessment that the fatal wound was caused by a bullet fired into Mr. Del Pinto's skull from an elevated discharge position. My understanding is that Dr. Pornthip did not examine the actual body of Mr. Del Pinto but instead her opinion relied upon a report made in Chiang Mai. As I understand the Alberta Medical Examiner autopsy recap, the bullet entry was in the soft tissue of the face. Another wound was to the lower abdomen causing multiple soft tissue damage including a lacerated liver. According to the Alberta Medical Examiner either of these wounds would have been fatal. I do not believe it is appropriate that an opinion be given without a proper physical inspection of the deceased since the opinion relies upon the accuracy of the initial report. If Dr. Pornthip's opinion is proven unreliable, then the forensic report needed to demonstrate an execution style murder, as has been claimed, vaporizes.

Please understand that I am not excusing Mr. Del Pinto's death, nor justifying it. it was a wrongful death. Sgt. Uthai should have been off the streets long ago. However, there are bigger issues at stake in this case which I have already identified as being the conduct of Sgt. Uthai's superiors and the actual investigation of the case by people such as Dr. Pornthip. The Del Pinto family deserves a fair hearing, but people had better be prepared to hear some disquieting allegations about Mr. Del Pinto and especially Ms. Reisig's personal behaviour while in Pai which may have been contributing factors to the death of Mr. Del Pinto.

Edited January 2, 2011 by geriatrickid

[andrewdrummond]

I rather think the evidence of the two independent witnesses and Dr.Pornthips evidence that Leo was shot while on the ground makes all the negative comments about Carly Reisig statements rather insignificant or did you not understand this point?

Mr. Drummond, you can think what you want, but the law is the law. The chorus in TVF is that the law must prevail and that if this was in the west there would have been swift justice. Wrong. Dr. Pornthip cannot be considered a reliable expert. Her conduct in the bomb detector fiasco is responsible for that. If one wanted to apply western rules, then every case that Dr. Pornthip opined upon could now be contested and questioned. (I have been consistent in that opinion ever since the bomb detector crisis arose and made the statement at the time that every opinion Dr. Pornthip ever gave could be invalidated. That's how it works in pathology and the law.) One need look no further than Mr. Del Pinto's home country of Canada to see what happens when a pathologist bungles. Look up the pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and see what impact it had on the court system. One can therefore not rely on evidence that comes from a source that can be considered flawed.

Describing Carly Reisig's statements as insignificant, is a cute and convenient way of dismissing the fact that much of the information she provided was inaccurate and misleading. When a witness provides evidence like that, the witness testimony is dismissed in its whole, even if there are some valid aspects. Thailand allows for alot more wiggle room though, so the Reisig tale might be considered. Your overlook the fact that the Del Pinto case was neither heard nor adjudicated upon. The accused had legal rights, even if people disagree. The Del Pinto case had and still has reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the courts do not convict on the speculation of ThaiVisa experts or on Andrew Drummond's opinions. There are a great many people who love Thailand because of its laissez faire attitude on some issues. Well, hand in hand with that comes people like Sgt. Uthai.

I do not dispute that Sgt. Uthai may have had a questionable history. That then speaks to the big question: Why was he on the street with a badge and a gun? why didn't his commanding officer(s) address the allegations of drinking while on duty? Why didn't Dr. Pornthip raise these questions? Maybe Sgt. Uthai is guilty of the crime, but you and the other let's hang Sgt. Uthai are no better than the locals that seek to blame one person for a serious event that involves many.

Actually you do not have to be a forensic pathologist to know how Leo was shot. All you need to do is look at the x-rays and see the entrance and exit wounds to know that he was shot from above. Hence the GT200 business is irrelevant. As you point out the only evidence from Carly Reisig which is significant is what she told the court and that was quite detailed and specific. So what she told journalists as different times is totally irrelevant to the result of the case. The 'chorus' on Thaivisa has perhaps changed because people are now more aware of the facts. The fact that the court has not been able to adjudicate whether Uthai was on duty or not speaks volumes.

Mr. Drummond, you cannot have it both ways. You first made an attempt to use Dr. Pornthip's statement(s) as a basis of support for your position. After I demonstrated why her opinion(s) should not be considered credible, you now say one does not need to be a forensic pathologist. How convenient.

Yes, Mr. Del Pinto suffered 2 wounds; One to the face and one to the lower abdomen that ricocheted about lacerating his liver and causing a fatal injury. The Alberta medical examiner's office didn't offer an opinion as to the actual circumstances leading up to the death of Mr. del Pinto did it?. Carly Reisig has made a statement to the investigators but that statement has yet to be reviewed by defense counsel, nor has she given a witness statement under oath in the court where she could be cross examined. As you well know, apparent credible witness statements often fall apart on the witness stand. I do not think anyone in TVF has any additional facts than those that were made available subsequent to the initial event. You were given access by the family to Patty Job's review right? You saw Dr. Chan's opinion, right? Oh wait, there wasn't an opinion. All the report said was that there were 2 bullet wounds, either of which would have proven fatal. There was no conclusion offered as to the full circumstances of death and yet you are offering shallow hints as to what the full events were. The family did not receive the complete autopsy report performed in Thailand, did it?. My personal opinion was that the initial autopsy was flawed, but that's a different aspect to the story and one can't criticize your beloved Dr. Pornthip.

And despite what you state that Carly Reisig's multiple different statements made to journalists and to the investigators not being relevant, you are very wrong. You have enough friends that have practiced criminal law. Go ask them what their views are on a witness that changes her version of events like a Pattaya hooker changes johns. IMO the case was blown from the start because the police commanders didn't respond appropriately, the initial forensic exam was inadequate and the key witness,Carly Reisig did not offer credible consistent statements.

I must have imagined it when I went to court in Mae Hong Son and heard Carly Reisig give evidence then. The court was arranged to take her evidence before she returned to Canada. Dechachiwat was there too along with interpreters the TNHRC and Police Colonel Sombat Panya.. The pictures on my site were taken outside the court

If a bullet enters a high point on the skull and exits lower down then there is a good chance that the victim was shot from above, pathologist or no pathologist. You do not need a certificate to work that out. I mentioned this because clearly you beliew Pornthip's comments over the GT200 scandal are relevant. . The policeman said he had fallen back and Del Pinto was on top of him.

Its irrelevant that Reisig slapped a policeman previously. If anything it probably means Dechachwat did not like her. Not grounds for, er, manslaughter.

As for evidence being flawed in Thailand that I have found to be true even in cases where defendants plead guilty! You can bet your life on it. When you say the law is the law I would be interested to hear how you feel it is applied here.

The police commanders did not respond appropriately, it has been argued, becuase they were protecting one of their own, not through incompetence.

Edited January 3, 2011 by andrewdrummond

[andrewdrummond]

I rather think the evidence of the two independent witnesses and Dr.Pornthips evidence that Leo was shot while on the ground makes all the negative comments about Carly Reisig statements rather insignificant or did you not understand this point?

Mr. Drummond, you can think what you want, but the law is the law. The chorus in TVF is that the law must prevail and that if this was in the west there would have been swift justice. Wrong. Dr. Pornthip cannot be considered a reliable expert. Her conduct in the bomb detector fiasco is responsible for that. If one wanted to apply western rules, then every case that Dr. Pornthip opined upon could now be contested and questioned. (I have been consistent in that opinion ever since the bomb detector crisis arose and made the statement at the time that every opinion Dr. Pornthip ever gave could be invalidated. That's how it works in pathology and the law.) One need look no further than Mr. Del Pinto's home country of Canada to see what happens when a pathologist bungles. Look up the pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and see what impact it had on the court system. One can therefore not rely on evidence that comes from a source that can be considered flawed.

Describing Carly Reisig's statements as insignificant, is a cute and convenient way of dismissing the fact that much of the information she provided was inaccurate and misleading. When a witness provides evidence like that, the witness testimony is dismissed in its whole, even if there are some valid aspects. Thailand allows for alot more wiggle room though, so the Reisig tale might be considered. Your overlook the fact that the Del Pinto case was neither heard nor adjudicated upon. The accused had legal rights, even if people disagree. The Del Pinto case had and still has reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the courts do not convict on the speculation of ThaiVisa experts or on Andrew Drummond's opinions. There are a great many people who love Thailand because of its laissez faire attitude on some issues. Well, hand in hand with that comes people like Sgt. Uthai.

I do not dispute that Sgt. Uthai may have had a questionable history. That then speaks to the big question: Why was he on the street with a badge and a gun? why didn't his commanding officer(s) address the allegations of drinking while on duty? Why didn't Dr. Pornthip raise these questions? Maybe Sgt. Uthai is guilty of the crime, but you and the other let's hang Sgt. Uthai are no better than the locals that seek to blame one person for a serious event that involves many.

As a matter or record Reisig had plenty of different versions of the same story. (In this case she spoke to Cindy Tilney then myself first)

Normally there are one or two post crime versions. In Thailand there can be many more

(1) The witness's first recollection

(2) The witnesses second recollection after speaking with other witnesses to the same incident

(3) What the witness tells the police

(4) What the police tell the witness to say

(5) What the police actually write down and the witness signs.

(6) What the witness tells the court on instructions from lawyer

(7) How he judge records the evdidence and what he says into his tape recorder (There is no such things as verbatim evidence in Thai courts)

[geriatrickid]

I must have imagined it when I went to court in Mae Hong Son and heard Carly Reisig give evidence then. The court was arranged to take her evidence before she returned to Canada. Dechachiwat was there too along with interpreters the TNHRC and Police Colonel Sombat Panya.. The pictures on my site were taken outside the court

If a bullet enters a high point on the skull and exits lower down then there is a good chance that the victim was shot from above, pathologist or no pathologist. You do not need a certificate to work that out. I mentioned this because clearly you beliew Pornthip's comments over the GT200 scandal are relevant. . The policeman said he had fallen back and Del Pinto was on top of him.

Its irrelevant that Reisig slapped a policeman previously. If anything it probably means Dechachwat did not like her. Not grounds for, er, manslaughter.

As for evidence being flawed in Thailand that I have found to be true even in cases where defendants plead guilty! You can bet your life on it. When you say the law is the law I would be interested to hear how you feel it is applied here.

The police commanders did not respond appropriately, it has been argued, becuase they were protecting one of their own, not through incompetence.

Mr. Drummond, would you please provide your final version of the bullet wounds.

Today you state; If a bullet enters a high point on the skull and exits lower down then there is a good chance that the victim was shot from above, pathologist or no pathologist. This I take it means that you are of the belief that the bullet was fired into the skull from above, correct?

However, in your blog of 20-Feb-2008 you report the court activity as follows;

Del Pinto, also 24, from Calgary in Alberta, was then shot in the abdomen and head. The final bullet entered his check and lodged under his armpit, according to forensic evidence and witnesses interviewed by the NHR. Top pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, who gave evidence to the NHRC panel, has already publicly stated that the fatal bullet which killed del Pinto was fired into his skull in a downwards direction. This was backed by witness testimony.

Which is it? Did the bullet enter the cheek, the soft tissue wound as you first reported or was it skull entry?

Dr. Pornthip did not examine the body and instead relied on the report of the staff at the CM university facility. Because Dr. Pornthip is now mired in controversy I do not believe that she can be considered a credible professional witness. I'm sorry, but when a pathologist makes a serious error in another file, the SOP is that the person must step aside until cleared. I appreciate that this is Thailand, and such protocols may not be respected, but in my view, her testimony is not reliable. Bullets can make some very strange twists and turns in a body as they deflect off bones and tissue. Not one comment is made in that regard.

The Del pinto family was given a copy of the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. They said they would make the report available to the media and public. I am very confused now as one report cites a soft tissue entry wound in the lower face,i .e. cheek and now you advise of an upper head entry wound. I am also puzzled why everyone is so quiet on the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. Didn't Mr. Fortune give you a copy as he had promised?

Thank you.

[andrewdrummond]

I must have imagined it when I went to court in Mae Hong Son and heard Carly Reisig give evidence then. The court was arranged to take her evidence before she returned to Canada. Dechachiwat was there too along with interpreters the TNHRC and Police Colonel Sombat Panya.. The pictures on my site were taken outside the court

If a bullet enters a high point on the skull and exits lower down then there is a good chance that the victim was shot from above, pathologist or no pathologist. You do not need a certificate to work that out. I mentioned this because clearly you beliew Pornthip's comments over the GT200 scandal are relevant. . The policeman said he had fallen back and Del Pinto was on top of him.

Its irrelevant that Reisig slapped a policeman previously. If anything it probably means Dechachwat did not like her. Not grounds for, er, manslaughter.

As for evidence being flawed in Thailand that I have found to be true even in cases where defendants plead guilty! You can bet your life on it. When you say the law is the law I would be interested to hear how you feel it is applied here.

The police commanders did not respond appropriately, it has been argued, becuase they were protecting one of their own, not through incompetence.

Mr. Drummond, would you please provide your final version of the bullet wounds.

Today you state; If a bullet enters a high point on the skull and exits lower down then there is a good chance that the victim was shot from above, pathologist or no pathologist. This I take it means that you are of the belief that the bullet was fired into the skull from above, correct?

However, in your blog of 20-Feb-2008 you report the court activity as follows;

Del Pinto, also 24, from Calgary in Alberta, was then shot in the abdomen and head. The final bullet entered his check and lodged under his armpit, according to forensic evidence and witnesses interviewed by the NHR. Top pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, who gave evidence to the NHRC panel, has already publicly stated that the fatal bullet which killed del Pinto was fired into his skull in a downwards direction. This was backed by witness testimony.

Which is it? Did the bullet enter the cheek, the soft tissue wound as you first reported or was it skull entry?

Dr. Pornthip did not examine the body and instead relied on the report of the staff at the CM university facility. Because Dr. Pornthip is now mired in controversy I do not believe that she can be considered a credible professional witness. I'm sorry, but when a pathologist makes a serious error in another file, the SOP is that the person must step aside until cleared. I appreciate that this is Thailand, and such protocols may not be respected, but in my view, her testimony is not reliable. Bullets can make some very strange twists and turns in a body as they deflect off bones and tissue. Not one comment is made in that regard.

The Del pinto family was given a copy of the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. They said they would make the report available to the media and public. I am very confused now as one report cites a soft tissue entry wound in the lower face,i .e. cheek and now you advise of an upper head entry wound. I am also puzzled why everyone is so quiet on the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. Didn't Mr. Fortune give you a copy as he had promised?

Thank you.

The blog is correct. The bullet entereted his head and and lodged in his armpit. He was not handstanding at the time.

Don't take it from me that the skull is a high point on the body, that the cheek is part of the skull, and that the armpit is lower. Take a look.

PS: I hope my impatience is not showing. :-)

Edited January 3, 2011 by andrewdrummond

[Wallaby]

Geriatrick Kid.

I'm just wondering in what country's rules of evidence you are basing your argument on?

In my country, Australia, If a person gives evidence and it is found to conflict with other evidence that does not mean that the whole of that persons evidence cannot be considered. In actual fact the judge, when summing up, will direct a jury that it can accept all of that person's evidence, disregard all of that persons evidence, or accept some of that person's evidence. They don't just disregard it because some of the evidence is proved incorrect.

The same goes for Dr Pornthip's evidence. If the defence think there is something wrong with her evidence in THIS case then they can challenge it. Just because she may have been wrong in previous cases means bugger all. It may be brought up in court but if her testimony in THIS case is not in question then they will have to accept it. If there are question marks about the evidence then it is up to the jury what they want to accept and what they don't. Again, the whole evidence is not simply disregarded.

Of course this is what would happen in my country, which means bugger all as it didn't occur here. Is your questioning of the rules of evidence based on what is allowed in Thailand?

In my view I would think that in the majority of democartic countries, once an officer of the law has been charged or is under investigation for such a serious crime he/she is stood down pending such investigation and that's what I think should happen.

Edited January 3, 2011 by Wallaby

[harrry]

Geriatrick Kid.

I'm just wondering in what country's rules of evidence you are basing your argument on?

In my country, Australia, If a person gives evidence and it is found to conflict with other evidence that does not mean that the whole of that persons evidence cannot be considered. In actual fact the judge, when summing up, will direct a jury that it can accept all of that person's evidence, disregard all of that persons evidence, or accept some of that person's evidence. They don't just disregard it because some of the evidence is proved incorrect.

The same goes for Dr Pornthip's evidence. If the defence think there is something wrong with her evidence in THIS case then they can challenge it. Just because she may have been wrong in previous cases means bugger all. It may be brought up in court but if her testimony in THIS case is not in question then they will have to accept it. If there are question marks about the evidence then it is up to the jury what they want to accept and what they don't. Again, the whole evidence is not simply disregarded.

Of course this is what would happen in my country, which means bugger all as it didn't occur here. Is your questioning of the rules of evidence based on what is allowed in Thailand?

In my view I would think that in the majority of democartic countries, once an officer of the law has been charged or is under investigation for such a serious crime he/she is stood down pending such investigation and that's what I think should happen.

Not quite true. Khunying P would be testifying as an expert witness and there would be enough doubt able to be cast on her expertise that she may not be allowed to give any opinion just report what she saw. Expert witnesses are the only ones able to give opinions.

Edited January 3, 2011 by harrry

[chiman]

Guess I won't be going to Pai, I had been wanting to go up there for a visit but if they have a murderous police officer running around... who know's what else. It's a shame for Pai tourism... I heard it was a beautiful place.

[Ulysses G.]

You might even have to take a piss test when you are innocently walking down the street. They have done a great job of scaring awy foreigners, but lots of Thais like to go because of a movie that took place there.

[geriatrickid]

The blog is correct. The bullet entereted his head and and lodged in his armpit. He was not handstanding at the time.

Don't take it from me that the skull is a high point on the body, that the cheek is part of the skull, and that the armpit is lower. Take a look.

PS: I hope my impatience is not showing. :-)

Let's try one more time. Where exactly did Dr. Pornthip state that the bullet entry was? Was it an area of the cranium or was it in fact through the areas proximate to the ramus or below the mastoid process? Did any teeth show injury?

Now, what did the Alberta medical examiner's report state was the probable entry point and journey of exit point? What did the Alberta report state in respect to the teeth?

And again I ask,

The Del pinto family was given a copy of the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. They said they would make the report available to the media and public. Didn't Mr. Fortune give you a copy as he had promised? Why are you so quiet on the Alberta medical examiner report?

All very simple questions that I am sure you can answer for a simple guy like me.

Unfortunately, I wasn't there when Dr. Pornthip gave her opinions based upon the autopsy performed by a third party and, I don't think she would be willing to discuss the case with me.

Thank you for your patience.

[jbrewer]

From Drummond's full story:

"A major obstacle to the progress of the proceedings has been the chief of Pai police himself, Police Colonel Sombat Panya, who immediately after the shootings, put out the story that Sergeant Uthai was acting in self-defence while being attacked by Del Pinto, and then proceeded to instruct witnesses as to what actually happened."

unbelievable, unacceptable, Thailand...

[Wallaby]

You might even have to take a piss test when you are innocently walking down the street. They have done a great job of scaring awy foreigners, but lots of Thais like to go because of a movie that took place there.

I don't suppose you know the name of the movie? I'd like to have a look.

[andrewdrummond]

The blog is correct. The bullet entereted his head and and lodged in his armpit. He was not handstanding at the time.

Don't take it from me that the skull is a high point on the body, that the cheek is part of the skull, and that the armpit is lower. Take a look.

PS: I hope my impatience is not showing. :-)

Let's try one more time. Where exactly did Dr. Pornthip state that the bullet entry was? Was it an area of the cranium or was it in fact through the areas proximate to the ramus or below the mastoid process? Did any teeth show injury?

Now, what did the Alberta medical examiner's report state was the probable entry point and journey of exit point? What did the Alberta report state in respect to the teeth?

And again I ask,

The Del pinto family was given a copy of the Alberta Medical Examiner's report. They said they would make the report available to the media and public. Didn't Mr. Fortune give you a copy as he had promised? Why are you so quiet on the Alberta medical examiner report?

All very simple questions that I am sure you can answer for a simple guy like me.

Unfortunately, I wasn't there when Dr. Pornthip gave her opinions based upon the autopsy performed by a third party and, I don't think she would be willing to discuss the case with me.

Thank you for your patience.

My patience may be slightly assuaged if you can confirm that you were totally wrong when you said Carly Reisig had not given evidence rather than pedalling your obsession with Dr. Pornthip