jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.He had several blows to the head consistent with being ground and pounded unconscious and then dumped in the sea to drown.I have one of those Thai hoes in our house in Isaan. If someone is attacked from behind with a full unexpected blow then it would be fatal. There would be no reason to hit that person many times and then drag his heavy body into the sea. The blows would not leave small incisions like David has on the side of his head either. So you say. The cause of death has been reported. The other wounds were not discussed in detail. I am not a forensic pathologist and I rather doubt you are either. We don't know if the other wounds were caused post mortem or ante mortem. The question was could a smaller man overpower a larger man. Even you suggest that it is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.He had several blows to the head consistent with being ground and pounded unconscious and then dumped in the sea to drown.I have one of those Thai hoes in our house in Isaan. If someone is attacked from behind with a full unexpected blow then it would be fatal. There would be no reason to hit that person many times and then drag his heavy body into the sea. The blows would not leave small incisions like David has on the side of his head either. So you say.The cause of death has been reported. The other wounds were not discussed in detail. I am not a forensic pathologist and I rather doubt you are either. We don't know if the other wounds were caused post mortem or ante mortem. The question was could a smaller man overpower a larger man. Even you suggest that it is possible. So you haven't seen the pics of David's head wounds? So how can you be so sure of what you are trying to defend? It doesn't take a forensic pathologist to see that David did not suffer 1 huge head blow from behind. He has many small incisions of the side of his head from being hit many times with a smaller weapon. So if you are not aware of all the evidence then why are you so vehemently defending the case?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death. and the wounds in the neck? can you explain those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.He had several blows to the head consistent with being ground and pounded unconscious and then dumped in the sea to drown.I have one of those Thai hoes in our house in Isaan. If someone is attacked from behind with a full unexpected blow then it would be fatal. There would be no reason to hit that person many times and then drag his heavy body into the sea. The blows would not leave small incisions like David has on the side of his head either. So you say.The cause of death has been reported. The other wounds were not discussed in detail. I am not a forensic pathologist and I rather doubt you are either. We don't know if the other wounds were caused post mortem or ante mortem. The question was could a smaller man overpower a larger man. Even you suggest that it is possible. So you haven't seen the pics of David's head wounds? So how can you be so sure of what you are trying to defend?It doesn't take a forensic pathologist to see that David did not suffer 1 huge head blow from behind. He has many small incisions of the side of his head from being hit many times with a smaller weapon. So if you are not aware of all the evidence then why are you so vehemently defending the case?? I am sorry that you could not read what I wrote. I am also sorry that you feel the need to make statements that are so incredibly wrong. I (Sadly) have seen the pictures. Yes it does take a forensic pathologist to determine the nature of the wounds as well as when they occurred (post or ante mortem). The reported cause of death was a massive blow to the head and drowning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 he had water in his lungs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 he had water in his lungs! Yes, the cause of death was reported to be a massive blow to the head and drowning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 he was alive when he entered the water breathing why 1 sock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 a blow to the head? there are multiple wounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 (edited) He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun or someone hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Edited November 9, 2014 by KunMatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 he was alive when he entered the water breathing why 1 sock? Umm one has to be alive first to drown.The other sock came off? He only had one on when he was hit? It was a fashion statement? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun of hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Again you are asserting something you can have no idea about. An attack from behind can land anywhere on the head. That would be determined by the trajectory of the blow, and even if the victim moved at the last moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun of hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Again you are asserting something you can have no idea about. An attack from behind can land anywhere on the head. That would be determined by the trajectory of the blow, and even if the victim moved at the last moment. And you are again denying the truth to whatever realms of possibility you need to. Now you are saying that a single blow to the head didn't kill David. So how did both Burmese guys come away from a fight with 2 expats without even a scratch? You cannot explain it because it is not true. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 a blow to the head? there are multiple wounds Please try and keep up. The cause of death was a massive blow to the head and drowning. The other wounds were not discussed in detail. We don't know what caused them or when they occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BangkokHank Posted November 9, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted November 9, 2014 I don't get it why everybody here seems convinced that these 2 Burmese are not the real killers. Just last week 2 Thai duck farmers were brutally murdered by their Burmese employees to get the money for a sale of duck eggs. It happens alot about once a week I see a story. Lets not forget that Burmese grow up under a brutal military regime. This makes them hard. Its definitely possible that they are the real killers. What about the lack of motive?? Yes Myanmar nationals commits crimes in Thailand, but in 99.9% of the cases is to enrich themselves. Do you seriously think, that those two guys killed two complete strangers to get a mobile-phone?? As for the rape-motive. Nonsense!! Why go for a lady in company of a big British lad?? Besides the fact, that they probably could get laid for 20 baht in their home-village!! The violent nature (revenge?) of the killings points in another direction! (N****d) Anyone seeing the state of Hannah's face will know this was a very vicious attack, and not one that would just be used to conclude a rape. Whoever did this was a maniac and seemingly hell bent on revenge. The two suspects were found tucked up in their bed that morning by their friend. That's hardly the behaviour expected of a pair having just committed a heinous act such as this. Exactly, guys. Why is nobody focusing on the motive in this case? I have maintained from day one that the person who committed this murder was motivated - by hate. We are all familiar with the Thai concept of "face". I maintain that the murderer, whoever he was, had a prior encounter with the victims - an encounter during which he "lost face". As retribution, he made Hannah lose her face - literally. Can a motive get any more obvious than that?! I have read news reports (here, for example: http://www.thephuketnews.com/3-more-dna-results-clear-son-of-koh-tao-big-boss-49450.php) in which it was stated that there was an altercation earlier in the evening between the victims - and persons unknown (or, to be precise, persons previously known but then suddenly, retroactively unknown). So, my question: Is anyone suggesting that these two Burmese suspects were the people who had the prior altercation with the victims in the bar earlier that evening? Or perhaps that, in addition to their altercation in the bar earlier that evening, Hannah and David also had an altercation with the Burmese suspects? Because if there was no prior serious altercation between the victims and the accused, then I have a hard time believing that the Burmese suspects committed this brutal murder just as an afterthought to a spontaneous, opportunistic rape. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun of hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Again you are asserting something you can have no idea about. An attack from behind can land anywhere on the head. That would be determined by the trajectory of the blow, and even if the victim moved at the last moment. And you are again denying the truth to whatever realms of possibility you need to. Now you are saying that a single blow to the head didn't kill David. So how did both Burmese guys come away from a fight with 2 expats without even a scratch? You cannot explain it because it is not true. Scroll up. The blow to the head and drowning were the reported cause of death. People don't always die instantly from having the skull caved in. They also do not fight back after that happens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I don't get it why everybody here seems convinced that these 2 Burmese are not the real killers. Just last week 2 Thai duck farmers were brutally murdered by their Burmese employees to get the money for a sale of duck eggs. It happens alot about once a week I see a story. Lets not forget that Burmese grow up under a brutal military regime. This makes them hard. Its definitely possible that they are the real killers.What about the lack of motive??Yes Myanmar nationals commits crimes in Thailand, but in 99.9% of the cases is to enrich themselves. Do you seriously think, that those two guys killed two complete strangers to get a mobile-phone?? As for the rape-motive. Nonsense!! Why go for a lady in company of a big British lad?? Besides the fact, that they probably could get laid for 20 baht in their home-village!! The violent nature (revenge?) of the killings points in another direction! (N****d) Anyone seeing the state of Hannah's face will know this was a very vicious attack, and not one that would just be used to conclude a rape. Whoever did this was a maniac and seemingly hell bent on revenge. The two suspects were found tucked up in their bed that morning by their friend. That's hardly the behaviour expected of a pair having just committed a heinous act such as this. Exactly, guys. Why is nobody focusing on the motive in this case? I have maintained from day one that the person who committed this murder was motivated - by hate. We are all familiar with the Thai concept of "face". I maintain that the murderer, whoever he was, had a prior encounter with the victims - an encounter during which he "lost face". As retribution, he made Hannah lose her face - literally. Can a motive get any more obvious than that?! I have read news reports (here, for example: http://www.thephuketnews.com/3-more-dna-results-clear-son-of-koh-tao-big-boss-49450.php) in which it was stated that there was an altercation earlier in the evening between the victims - and persons unknown (or, to be precise, persons previously known but then suddenly, retroactively unknown). So, my question: Is anyone suggesting that these two Burmese suspects were the people who had the prior altercation with the victims in the bar earlier that evening? Or perhaps that, in addition to their altercation in the bar earlier that evening, Hannah and David also had an altercation with the Burmese suspects? Because if there was no prior serious altercation between the victims and the accused, then I have a hard time believing that the Burmese suspects committed this brutal murder just as an afterthought to a spontaneous, opportunistic rape. Motive of rape and theft while not sober. The altercation in the bar is just rumor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 he could have been hit when in the sea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun of hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Again you are asserting something you can have no idea about. An attack from behind can land anywhere on the head. That would be determined by the trajectory of the blow, and even if the victim moved at the last moment. And you are again denying the truth to whatever realms of possibility you need to. Now you are saying that a single blow to the head didn't kill David. So how did both Burmese guys come away from a fight with 2 expats without even a scratch? You cannot explain it because it is not true. Scroll up. The blow to the head and drowning were the reported cause of death. People don't always die instantly from having the skull caved in. They also do not fight back after that happens. Lol, you are getting desperate huh? You cannot wish away the photos of David's head wounds which clearly show he was not hit by a Thai hoe. I've used that type of tool many times even to break up rubble and cement and there is no way he was struck on the head by one. The fact that you have to agree that he was without even a slightest possibility of any other explanation shows your true agenda. You are only here to adamantly defend the RIP without question. The fact that you are at ease with this is worrying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 but he would have heard the approach of the attacker and turned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 instinct would raise your arms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 the wounds and the weapon used don't match the reenactment doesn't match the wounds something is wrong 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooner Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 a blow to the head? there are multiple wounds Please try and keep up. The cause of death was a massive blow to the head and drowning. The other wounds were not discussed in detail. We don't know what caused them or when they occurred. Cop out!! The other wounds were not discussed in detail by the Thai police but were by the roti/translator man on national tv and the fact he has no facial injuries on the CCTV footage and photos tells us that they happened at the incident scene. The drag marks in the sand tells us he was hit by the hoe and dragged to the sea, presumably unconscious. Those marks to the chin and face area were caused by another weapon and not a hoe and that is obvious just by size and depth of the wounds. By memory I believe there were 4 or 5 wounds exactly the same size (about an inch wide) A hoe as we all know is much larger and shows that we are looking for another weapon. You don't need to be a forensic specialist to work that out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 but he would have heard the approach of the attacker and turned On a beach, with ocean waves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 then the women either did not see and shout out or was already dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He received a massive blow to the head. That blow and drowning were the reported cause of death.and the wounds in the neck?can you explain those? No I am not a forensic pathologist You are a truth denier. Sleep well. No, the truth is that neither I nor you are forensic pathologists, and that you admit a small man can overpower a larger man with a blow to the head. I do sleep well. A small man can overpower a large man if he had a gun of hit him from behind with a large weapon. But David was not hit from behind with a large weapon therefore you are wrong and denying the truth. Again you are asserting something you can have no idea about. An attack from behind can land anywhere on the head. That would be determined by the trajectory of the blow, and even if the victim moved at the last moment. And you are again denying the truth to whatever realms of possibility you need to. Now you are saying that a single blow to the head didn't kill David. So how did both Burmese guys come away from a fight with 2 expats without even a scratch? You cannot explain it because it is not true. Scroll up. The blow to the head and drowning were the reported cause of death. People don't always die instantly from having the skull caved in. They also do not fight back after that happens. Lol, you are getting desperate huh? You cannot wish away the photos of David's head wounds which clearly show he was not hit by a Thai hoe. I've used that type of tool many times even to break up rubble and cement and there is no way he was struck on the head by one. The fact that you have to agree that he was without even a slightest possibility of any other explanation shows your true agenda. You are only here to adamantly defend the RIP without question. The fact that you are at ease with this is worrying. Last time to deal with your willful ignorance. There were 2 causes of death. The massive head wound which did not instantly kill, and drowning. There was a blow to the head. We know that. The 2 Burmese men accused of being the killers could have easily overpowered a larger man with a blow to the head. (That was the question) Regarding the other wounds. We don't know when they happened. There is a chance that we may find out during the inquest. Claiming that a hoe could not cause the head wound after saying you have used one to break up concrete makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 then the women either did not see and shout out or was already dead Or or or or Was afraid, was attacked by the other one at the same time etc etc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 then the women either did not see and shout out or was already dead Or or or or Was afraid, was attacked by the other one at the same time etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts