Bail request for Koh Tao suspects

[xylophone]

They can only be detained for 84 days and the clock is ticking......

At the moment it is all being set up for damage limitation in order to save face, these two lads will be let go and the culprits will never be judged for their crime

The problem is I still can't fully rule these two out of committing the crime, their alibi of being pissed out of their heads isn't exactly great is it?

Correct you can't fully rule them out, on the other hand............

1) They were sleeping like baby's around 5 am according to their friend, bit strange if you have seen the pictures of Hannah

2) No scratches, no bruises and no blood whatsoever was found on them, not even a tiny single drop of blood. Seems impossible IMO

3) No bloody clothes found either.

4) They didn't flee the island. Huh?

5) They came clean in the first round of DNA? (samples were given and ready to be swapped?)

6) The second round of DNA? Bingo within 24 hours? Huh?

The list goes on..........so you can't fully rule them out correct, but the above and them being the culprits is the same IMHO as snow falling on Koh Tao on Christmas Day!

You make some very good points in your post and I would like to add a couple more.

The couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

[changnaam]

Xylophone, I have. Not heard the wine bottle theory but I sure don't buy into the theory that David was killed by the hoe. I have seen too much photographic evidence that the was a smaller blade involved.

Also interested to hear answers to your questions.

[millwall_fan]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So much for the 100% "perfect" case...

Looks like the rotten and corrupt RTP has some explaining to do

Power to the people!

This would be a convenient way out for all though: The suspects 'committing suicide' is not a goer with the international publicity and a sovereign government being involved. Allowing these two unfortunates to crawl off back to Burma would at least take them out of the equation. Sadly it would also let the little F****wit who actually did it off scot free, but then he isn't going to be put in the frame anyway. The only people who would suffer from this scenario are the families of David and Hannah, but the authorities here couldn't give 25 Satangs about them anyway.

[boomerangutang]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So much for the 100% "perfect" case...

Looks like the rotten and corrupt RTP has some explaining to do

Power to the people!

This would be a convenient way out for all though: The suspects 'committing suicide' is not a goer with the international publicity and a sovereign government being involved. Allowing these two unfortunates to crawl off back to Burma would at least take them out of the equation. Sadly it would also let the little F****wit who actually did it off scot free, but then he isn't going to be put in the frame anyway. The only people who would suffer from this scenario are the families of David and Hannah, but the authorities here couldn't give 25 Satangs about them anyway.

Others who will suffer in that scenario: future victims of the men who did that sort of crime. As long as RTP refuse to consider evidence which points at non-Burmese, there will be between 3 and 6 very dangerous men strolling around Ko Tao (or wherever they've run to) who know they can get away with murder and gang rape. Shame on the RTP for not doing their jobs.

[sambum]

They can only be detained for 84 days and the clock is ticking......

At the moment it is all being set up for damage limitation in order to save face, these two lads will be let go and the culprits will never be judged for their crime

The problem is I still can't fully rule these two out of committing the crime, their alibi of being pissed out of their heads isn't exactly great is it?

Correct you can't fully rule them out, on the other hand............

1) They were sleeping like baby's around 5 am according to their friend, bit strange if you have seen the pictures of Hannah

2) No scratches, no bruises and no blood whatsoever was found on them, not even a tiny single drop of blood. Seems impossible IMO

3) No bloody clothes found either.

4) They didn't flee the island. Huh?

5) They came clean in the first round of DNA? (samples were given and ready to be swapped?)

6) The second round of DNA? Bingo within 24 hours? Huh?

The list goes on..........so you can't fully rule them out correct, but the above and them being the culprits is the same IMHO as snow falling on Koh Tao on Christmas Day!

You make some very good points in your post and I would like to add a couple more.

The couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

Come on JD - people are awaiting answers from with bated breath, and there are later posts being critical of the investigation that you haven't defended yet! Haven't changed your stance have you?

[greenchair]

Any news???

[millwall_fan]

All gone quiet - as the RTP planned.

[millwall_fan]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And meanwhile in the real world....................

4 supercrooked Thai cops, who looted billions from the Thai people , were released on bail after less than 12 hours in the slammer!! width=19 alt=bah.gif>

Ofcourse, they were a little better connected than the B2!!

We are all awaiting the trial of these super crooks. It is my contention, that despite what the big army man says, guys like these, and guys like the headman and his son, simply do not go to trial in Thailand. If you are worth over $50,000,000US, you are above the law. Lets see if they want to make an example of these turds. The fact that they were granted bail is astonishing. More than likely they have tens of millions of dollars already parked overseas. Nobody really knows the true extent of their thievery. It was massive, and to let them out on bail shows how not serious the authorities are about this, perhaps.

I don't think you need that much - 50m BAHTt would be more than enough to place yourself above the law 10m B probably.

[spidermike007]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And meanwhile in the real world....................

4 supercrooked Thai cops, who looted billions from the Thai people , were released on bail after less than 12 hours in the slammer!! width=19 alt=bah.gif>

Ofcourse, they were a little better connected than the B2!!

We are all awaiting the trial of these super crooks. It is my contention, that despite what the big army man says, guys like these, and guys like the headman and his son, simply do not go to trial in Thailand. If you are worth over $50,000,000US, you are above the law. Lets see if they want to make an example of these turds. The fact that they were granted bail is astonishing. More than likely they have tens of millions of dollars already parked overseas. Nobody really knows the true extent of their thievery. It was massive, and to let them out on bail shows how not serious the authorities are about this, perhaps.

I don't think you need that much - 50m BAHTt would be more than enough to place yourself above the law 10m B probably.

There is a difference between being able to manipulate the system, with resources, and being completely above the law. Families like the piglets in Tao, are above the law. At $200,000,000US, in net worth, nobody will touch them. Same for many others in that same category. Nobody will touch anybody with that kind of wealth. Whether it is the judiciary, the army, or the police, they have a free ride, and can get away with nearly anything, anytime.

[xylophone]

I don't think you can make that argument in most countries

Still waiting for a reply "jdinasia".

"..............the couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

[jdinasia]

I don't think you can make that argument in most countries

Still waiting for a reply "jdinasia".

"..............the couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

I have answered you in the past.

[Gweiloman]

I don't think you can make that argument in most countries

Still waiting for a reply "jdinasia".

"..............the couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

"do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

JD believes that a hoe could have made those wounds. He said so himself.

[xylophone]

I don't think you can make that argument in most countries

Still waiting for a reply "jdinasia".

"..............the couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

"do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

JD believes that a hoe could have made those wounds. He said so himself.

If he believes that, then anything else he has posted has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

There are so many reasons why the clearly defined wounds in the back of David's head could not be caused by something like the garden hoe, and if you want to really see what a garden hoe can do, then take a look at the photographs of the head of poor Hannah.

I was an engineer and also have produced tools and implements and worked with them, not to mention having some medical training.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you look at the make up of the/typical hoe you will see that there is a heavy part at the back where the wooden shaft fits, and this gives it weight when swinging the implement. Also, the edges at the front edge are rounded.

It would be too heavy to make the clearly defined wounds already mentioned, and as there are no sharp leading edges, again there is no case for the clearly defined wounds as already seen. Those wounds were caused by a deliberate short sharp action with something akin to a small blade, because the blade of the hoe would have been too large and too cumbersome.

There is much more, but even this should become obvious to the supporters of the BIB in the woeful travesty of justice which is currently being carried out on Koh Tao.

And this from the Bangkok post about the wine bottle and the hoe....... so the hoe caused some little very well-defined punctures to the back of David's skull, yet just about took half of the poor girl's head off. Hmmmm.

”He said Zaw Rin and Win admitted that they had indeed committed the murders and that they confirmed that Maung had left earlier. They said they were drunk and that they bludgeoned the heads of the tourists. The first weapon was a large bottle of wine which was used by Win on David Miller. Then Win used a hoe was used to finish the job”.

“Meanwhile, Zaw Rin had taken Hannah some distance away. She resisted and screamed, so he hit her with the same hoe. Win was the first to rape her, the translator said”.

[jdinasia]

I don't think you can make that argument in most countries

Still waiting for a reply "jdinasia".

"..............the couple of things I would like to add, I would like to direct to "jdinasia" and an honest answer from him would be great rather than a few that I have seen in the past, namely "I'm not a forensic scientist", "the court will decide" and so on.

I bring this up here because I haven't been following the case of late due to friends visiting, holidays elsewhere and not to mention a dodgy computer, so here goes: –

1). Early on in the piece, it was claimed that the Burmese suspects had admitted to the murders and that they used a wine bottle to kill the unfortunate couple.

2). Later on it was "established" that they had used a hoe to commit the murders.

Thanks to the professional attitude of the BIB, pictures of the deceased bodies went viral and I have looked at those pictures, as I suspect, have many thousands of others.

The wounds in the back of David's head are clear for all to see, so the question to "jdinasia" is, "do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

Please, don't insult the intelligence of many on this thread by coming up with an answer which does not address the question, or by attacking other aspects of this post, for all intents and purposes please answer the question, and what is required is a simple, "yes or no".

"do these wounds really look like they have been caused by a wine bottle or a hoe?".

JD believes that a hoe could have made those wounds. He said so himself.

If he believes that, then anything else he has posted has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

There are so many reasons why the clearly defined wounds in the back of David's head could not be caused by something like the garden hoe, and if you want to really see what a garden hoe can do, then take a look at the photographs of the head of poor Hannah.

I was an engineer and also have produced tools and implements and worked with them, not to mention having some medical training.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you look at the make up of the/typical hoe you will see that there is a heavy part at the back where the wooden shaft fits, and this gives it weight when swinging the implement. Also, the edges at the front edge are rounded.

It would be too heavy to make the clearly defined wounds already mentioned, and as there are no sharp leading edges, again there is no case for the clearly defined wounds as already seen. Those wounds were caused by a deliberate short sharp action with something akin to a small blade, because the blade of the hoe would have been too large and too cumbersome.

There is much more, but even this should become obvious to the supporters of the BIB in the woeful travesty of justice which is currently being carried out on Koh Tao.

And this from the Bangkok post about the wine bottle and the hoe....... so the hoe caused some little very well-defined punctures to the back of David's skull, yet just about took half of the poor girl's head off. Hmmmm.

”He said Zaw Rin and Win admitted that they had indeed committed the murders and that they confirmed that Maung had left earlier. They said they were drunk and that they bludgeoned the heads of the tourists. The first weapon was a large bottle of wine which was used by Win on David Miller. Then Win used a hoe was used to finish the job”.

“Meanwhile, Zaw Rin had taken Hannah some distance away. She resisted and screamed, so he hit her with the same hoe. Win was the first to rape her, the translator said”.

I speak for myself.

I neither know the depth of the wounds nor if they were all made by the hoe. I do know that even a blunt instrument can split skin and can appear as a cut.

Not being a forensic pathologist, nor having the details of the wounds, I choose to refrain from speculation which others choose to participate in without actually having the details of.

[fritzzz25]

I speak for myself.

I neither know the depth of the wounds nor if they were all made by the hoe. I do know that even a blunt instrument can split skin and can appear as a cut.

Not being a forensic pathologist, nor having the details of the wounds, I choose to refrain from speculation which others choose to participate in without actually having the details of.

So JD, how do you "know that even a blunt instrument can split skin and can appear as a cut"? You just stated you are not a forensic pathologist. But yet you claim you KNOW what a blunt instrument could do.

See, a blunt instrument is solid object that applies mechanical force to something. As opposed to an edged weapon that makes cuts. Blunt force trauma is caused my things like a hammer, a car, a rock. They do NOT "appear" as a cut. Inuries of this nature cause bruising and fractures, not cuts.

I guess you can head over the RTP academy and give them a lesson on what you learned here today.

The worst thing about this whole screw up, is the unknown. The unknown that Nomsod and his buddies all have to live with. They never know when someone is coming for them. They have to always wonder, "what one of a hundred, or a thousand people I walk past in my travels is watching me and waiting for me". That is the worst part. Because there is no doubt that there are people out there who are going to do the job that the RTP didn't do. Money can only go so far.....

[jdinasia]

Having been struck by wood, and having the scar from the split skin, I know from experience.

Lacerations are tears/ skin 'splits' caused by blunt force trauma.

They are to be distinguished from cuts caused by sharp force trauma – incised wounds - including stab wounds. Wounds caused by heavy-bladed implements, such as machetes and meat cleavers produce wounds that have components of both blunt force and sharp force trauma – so-called ‘chopping’ injuries.

Lacerations are caused when a blunt object or surface impacts against the skin resulting in compression, crushing and splitting, or where a shearing force tears the skin and subcutaneous tissues.

Read more: http://m.forensicmed.webnode.com/wounds/blunt-force-trauma/lacerations/

But thanks Fritz for proving my point.

Edited December 15, 2014 by jdinasia

[fritzzz25]

[jdinasia]

Beating a dead horse? Strange but my link directly refutes your claim.

As does this...

What is Laceration Wound?

A laceration is a wound that occurs when skin, tissue, and/or muscle is torn or cut open. Lacerations may be deep or shallow, long or short, and wide or narrow. Most lacerations are the result of the skin hitting an object, or an object hitting the skin with force. Laceration repair is the act of cleaning, preparing, and closing the wound.

http://www.orthopaedics.com.sg/treatments/laceration-wound

[fritzzz25]

JD, you seem to be a guy who loves to hear himself talk. I wonder if you have any time to do anything else but beat the dead horse for these topics about this case. We all know you are "buddy-buddy" with some RTP, and you believe that they have this case all cinched up and these boys are going to go down for this.

As I have stated before, the trial of the accused is merely a sideshow, and that the trial of the investigation is the main event. If you so believe that this case is as water tight as a frog's arse, you wouldn't be on here 24/7 looking to respond to every post.

[CharlieH]

REMINDER

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members,

[jdinasia]

JD, you seem to be a guy who loves to hear himself talk. I wonder if you have any time to do anything else but beat the dead horse for these topics about this case. We all know you are "buddy-buddy" with some RTP, and you believe that they have this case all cinched up and these boys are going to go down for this.

As I have stated before, the trial of the accused is merely a sideshow, and that the trial of the investigation is the main event. If you so believe that this case is as water tight as a frog's arse, you wouldn't be on here 24/7 looking to respond to every post.

Fritz,

I do have some casual acquaintances in the RTP.

I responded to a post you made to me. I provided information that directly refutes your claim. You call that beating a dead horse. In truth it was simply disproving several of your claims.

I am not on here 24/7 but I do understand your need to assert that.

[fritzzz25]

Here is a response made to your response. We can play "tennis" all day.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_instrument

A blunt instrument is any solid object used as a weapon, which damages its target by applying direct mechanical force, and has no penetrating point or edge, or is wielded so that the point or edge is not the part of the weapon that inflicts the injury. Blunt instruments may be contrasted with edged weapons, which inflict injury by cutting or stabbing, or projectile weapons, where the projectiles, such as bullets or shot, are accelerated to a penetrating speed.

Blunt instruments typically inflict blunt force trauma, causing bruising, fractures and other internal bleeding.^[1] Depending on the parts of the body attacked, organs may be ruptured or otherwise damaged. Attacks with a blunt instrument may be fatal.

Some sorts of blunt instruments are very readily available, and often figure in crime cases. Examples of blunt instruments include:

• Personal implements such as walking sticks
• Tools such as hammers or wrecking bars
• Parts of tools, such as pickaxe handles
• Sports equipment such as cricket or baseball bats, hockey sticks, pool cues, golf clubs, etc.
• Weapons such as nightsticks, bâtons français, axes (using the back of the blade), spears (using the haft), or guns (see firearm as a blunt weapon)
• Other items, such as millwall bricks or tree branches

[AleG]

Here is a response made to your response. We can play "tennis" all day.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_instrument

A blunt instrument is any solid object used as a weapon, which damages its target by applying direct mechanical force, and has no penetrating point or edge, or is wielded so that the point or edge is not the part of the weapon that inflicts the injury. Blunt instruments may be contrasted with edged weapons, which inflict injury by cutting or stabbing, or projectile weapons, where the projectiles, such as bullets or shot, are accelerated to a penetrating speed.

Blunt instruments typically inflict blunt force trauma, causing bruising, fractures and other internal bleeding.^[1] Depending on the parts of the body attacked, organs may be ruptured or otherwise damaged. Attacks with a blunt instrument may be fatal.

Some sorts of blunt instruments are very readily available, and often figure in crime cases. Examples of blunt instruments include:

• Personal implements such as walking sticks
• Tools such as hammers or wrecking bars
• Parts of tools, such as pickaxe handles
• Sports equipment such as cricket or baseball bats, hockey sticks, pool cues, golf clubs, etc.
• Weapons such as nightsticks, bâtons français, axes (using the back of the blade), spears (using the haft), or guns (see firearm as a blunt weapon)
• Other items, such as millwall bricks or tree branches

May I just point out that a hoe is not a blunt object because it has an edge? I mean, you know what a hoe is, right?

[jdinasia]

Here is a response made to your response. We can play "tennis" all day.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_instrument

A blunt instrument is any solid object used as a weapon, which damages its target by applying direct mechanical force, and has no penetrating point or edge, or is wielded so that the point or edge is not the part of the weapon that inflicts the injury. Blunt instruments may be contrasted with edged weapons, which inflict injury by cutting or stabbing, or projectile weapons, where the projectiles, such as bullets or shot, are accelerated to a penetrating speed.

Blunt instruments typically inflict blunt force trauma, causing bruising, fractures and other internal bleeding.^[1] Depending on the parts of the body attacked, organs may be ruptured or otherwise damaged. Attacks with a blunt instrument may be fatal.

Some sorts of blunt instruments are very readily available, and often figure in crime cases. Examples of blunt instruments include:

• Personal implements such as walking sticks
• Tools such as hammers or wrecking bars
• Parts of tools, such as pickaxe handles
• Sports equipment such as cricket or baseball bats, hockey sticks, pool cues, golf clubs, etc.
• Weapons such as nightsticks, bâtons français, axes (using the back of the blade), spears (using the haft), or guns (see firearm as a blunt weapon)
• Other items, such as millwall bricks or tree branches

May I just point out that a hoe is not a blunt object because it has an edge? I mean, you know what a hoe is, right?

He is using wiki. My sources were a bit more professional in nature. But hey, wiki is awesome!

Wiki - blunt trauma

Blunt trauma, blunt injury, non-penetrating trauma or blunt force trauma refers to physical trauma to a body part, either by impact, injury or physical attack. The latter is usually referred to as blunt force trauma. The term refers to the initial trauma, from which develops more specific types such as contusions, abrasions, lacerations, and/or bone fractures. Blunt trauma is contrasted with penetrating trauma, in which an object such as a bullet enters the body.

Note -lacerations

From Fritz's link to wiki you will find the reference site. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680107-overview#aw2aab6b3

In this you will be able to note lacerations clearly mentioned.

Again I am not a forensic pathologist. It is obvious that Fritz is not either. Can blunt force trauma (or even Fritz's "blunt object" cause lacerations / splitting of the skin / cuts? Yes.

Edited December 15, 2014 by jdinasia

[Mooner]

Here is a response made to your response. We can play "tennis" all day.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_instrument

A blunt instrument is any solid object used as a weapon, which damages its target by applying direct mechanical force, and has no penetrating point or edge, or is wielded so that the point or edge is not the part of the weapon that inflicts the injury. Blunt instruments may be contrasted with edged weapons, which inflict injury by cutting or stabbing, or projectile weapons, where the projectiles, such as bullets or shot, are accelerated to a penetrating speed.

Blunt instruments typically inflict blunt force trauma, causing bruising, fractures and other internal bleeding.^[1] Depending on the parts of the body attacked, organs may be ruptured or otherwise damaged. Attacks with a blunt instrument may be fatal.

Some sorts of blunt instruments are very readily available, and often figure in crime cases. Examples of blunt instruments include:

• Personal implements such as walking sticks
• Tools such as hammers or wrecking bars
• Parts of tools, such as pickaxe handles
• Sports equipment such as cricket or baseball bats, hockey sticks, pool cues, golf clubs, etc.
• Weapons such as nightsticks, bâtons français, axes (using the back of the blade), spears (using the haft), or guns (see firearm as a blunt weapon)
• Other items, such as millwall bricks or tree branches

May I just point out that a hoe is not a blunt object because it has an edge? I mean, you know what a hoe is, right?

He is using wiki. My sources were a bit more professional in nature. But hey, wiki is awesome!

Wiki - blunt trauma

Blunt trauma, blunt injury, non-penetrating trauma or blunt force trauma refers to physical trauma to a body part, either by impact, injury or physical attack. The latter is usually referred to as blunt force trauma. The term refers to the initial trauma, from which develops more specific types such as contusions, abrasions, lacerations, and/or bone fractures. Blunt trauma is contrasted with penetrating trauma, in which an object such as a bullet enters the body.

Note -lacerations

From Fritz's link to wiki you will find the reference site. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680107-overview#aw2aab6b3

In this you will be able to note lacerations clearly mentioned.

Again I am not a forensic pathologist. It is obvious that Fritz is not either. Can blunt force trauma (or even Fritz's "blunt object" cause lacerations / splitting of the skin / cuts? Yes.

So are you going back to David's injuries were caused by a hoe theory despite none of his DNA being on it?

A few weeks ago when you were bombarded with replies to what caused David's injuries you conceded that there seemed another weapon was used on him you replied "It seems so, apparently".

[AleG]

What is interesting is some while back in the maze of threads concerning this horrific crime the possibility of an enraged homosexual attack was mooted. Now as the matter stands why has there been no comments concerning that theory.

The reputation of a couple of people involved in the investigation one uniformed person at least and the posts of some of characters here who so stoutly support the RT.P. give rise to the fact that there may well be strong motives and pressure for concealing the truth and protecting the real culprits who it seems may well mix in a very tight ''happy'' social circle.

As an ex policeman I would leave no stone un turned and those that create such a massive groundswell of support that the B2 are the guilty parties would indeed bring those proponents of guilt under the microscope of investigation.

The term ''vexatious litigants''comes to mind concerning those particular posters

Ah, argumentum ad homophobia, how classy.

[siampolee]

AlecG post # 87

Ah, argumentum ad homophobia, how classy.

Indeed as classy as your contentious comments

Now where does it state I am homophobic?

I made a comment concerning a comment that was made earlier, that matter included a sexual gender. I never stated I was homophobic did I ?

One could say that you are anti Myanmar citizens from the tone of your posts.

All I did was open or suggest the opening of another avenue motive wise in the investigation.

Two lives are at stake thus no angle should be ignored,I speak as a retired middle ranking police officer not an armchair Sherlock Bones.

So why are you so touchy over a subject content that you only seem to see?

Edited December 15, 2014 by siampolee

[jdinasia]

Here is a response made to your response. We can play "tennis" all day.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_instrument

A blunt instrument is any solid object used as a weapon, which damages its target by applying direct mechanical force, and has no penetrating point or edge, or is wielded so that the point or edge is not the part of the weapon that inflicts the injury. Blunt instruments may be contrasted with edged weapons, which inflict injury by cutting or stabbing, or projectile weapons, where the projectiles, such as bullets or shot, are accelerated to a penetrating speed.

Blunt instruments typically inflict blunt force trauma, causing bruising, fractures and other internal bleeding.^[1] Depending on the parts of the body attacked, organs may be ruptured or otherwise damaged. Attacks with a blunt instrument may be fatal.

Some sorts of blunt instruments are very readily available, and often figure in crime cases. Examples of blunt instruments include:

• Personal implements such as walking sticks
• Tools such as hammers or wrecking bars
• Parts of tools, such as pickaxe handles
• Sports equipment such as cricket or baseball bats, hockey sticks, pool cues, golf clubs, etc.
• Weapons such as nightsticks, bâtons français, axes (using the back of the blade), spears (using the haft), or guns (see firearm as a blunt weapon)
• Other items, such as millwall bricks or tree branches

May I just point out that a hoe is not a blunt object because it has an edge? I mean, you know what a hoe is, right?

He is using wiki. My sources were a bit more professional in nature. But hey, wiki is awesome!

Wiki - blunt trauma

Blunt trauma, blunt injury, non-penetrating trauma or blunt force trauma refers to physical trauma to a body part, either by impact, injury or physical attack. The latter is usually referred to as blunt force trauma. The term refers to the initial trauma, from which develops more specific types such as contusions, abrasions, lacerations, and/or bone fractures. Blunt trauma is contrasted with penetrating trauma, in which an object such as a bullet enters the body.

Note -lacerations

From Fritz's link to wiki you will find the reference site. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680107-overview#aw2aab6b3

In this you will be able to note lacerations clearly mentioned.

Again I am not a forensic pathologist. It is obvious that Fritz is not either. Can blunt force trauma (or even Fritz's "blunt object" cause lacerations / splitting of the skin / cuts? Yes.

So are you going back to David's injuries were caused by a hoe theory despite none of his DNA being on it?

A few weeks ago when you were bombarded with replies to what caused David's injuries you conceded that there seemed another weapon was used on him you replied "It seems so, apparently".

No. I was answering questions, and refuting assertions by a self professed expert.

The trial and the UK inquest will reveal more. Feel free to read the questions and responses.

Edited December 15, 2014 by jdinasia

[Mooner]

Really. My records seem show otherwise.

Well ill offer you another go.

Do you believe the small 6 or 7 wounds to david's face and neck were caused by a hoe or a blunt object? Or will your lack of a forensic experience give you a reason not to commit to a simple opinion?

Mooner, on 13 Nov 2014 - 07:14, said:

jdinasia, on 09 Nov 2014 - 10:11, said:

Mooner, on 09 Nov 2014 - 10:03, said:

So are we all agreeing that another weapon was used on David?

May have been, apparently.

[AleG]

AlecG post # 87

Ah, argumentum ad homophobia, how classy.

Indeed as classy as your contentious comments

Now where does it state I am homophobic?

I made a comment concerning a comment that was made earlier, that matter included a sexual gender. I never stated I was homophobic did I ?

One could say that you are anti Myanmar citizens from the tone of your posts.

All I did was open or suggest the opening of another avenue motive wise in the investigation.

Two lives are at stake thus no angle should be ignored,I speak as a retired middle ranking police officer not an armchair Sherlock Bones.

So why are you so touchy over a subject content that you only seem to see?

Ramblings about a gay conspiracy to hide the truth and protect the real (gay) killer.

Nope, nothing homophobic about that.