AleG Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Moving the goalposts again, first you say: "No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing." Now you say: "I have no need to prove anything" I believe that is the result of you being completely unable to prove anything and attempting to save face. "***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***" And you have the chutzpah to call my posts "bumbling rubbish". It's very, very simple, berybert, you said: "They were cleared they took the tests and they were cleared." Provide a source for that "fact"; <deleted> <deleted> You babble on about these tests, the trousers that were pants that were shorts. Now you prove to me (being as you seem to think proof is so important on a forum) that they didn't take the first round of tests and they were not cleared. <deleted> berybert, proving not one, but two negatives like that is a logical fallacy. A negative proof (known classically as appeal to ignorance) is a logical fallacy which takes the structure of: X is true because there is no proof that X is false. If the only evidence for something's existence is a lack of evidence for it not existing, then the default position is one of skepticism and not credulity. This type of negative proof is common in proofs of God's existence or in pseudosciences where it is used to attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the skeptic rather than the proponent of the idea. The burden of proof is on the individual proposing existence, not the one questioning existence. You claim something, you prove it; you even said there is at least one photograph proving what you claim, why so reticent to show it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Guys and Gals............ We all have our opinions and some use an odd snippet from a newspaper to justify their claims and others take pleasure in De-Bunking their answers. You are all failing to look at the whole picture. And this is based on FACTS not fiction written in the news papers. A police expert forensic witness has stated he took 3 yes THREE different DNA samples from Hannah The Roti man states that they said they hit David with a wine bottle in his interview. So these guys are tortured to the point of confession but still no 3rd person??? The Police do a reconstruction..... NO Wine Bottle...........NO 3rd Person......... These are unquestionable facts. No Iffs Or butts its out there. Something doesn't add up does it.. Debunkers come on!!!!!! I am waiting for you all... Edited January 14, 2015 by loonodingle 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chetzee Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 CHETZEE, Can you answer this question... No , really not sure that can ..... In the same way I am flummoxed as to why not finger prints picked off David dis guarded shoe ( in today's London news , in a bid to stop the killing of birds of prey , a technique for taking finger prints off bird feathers was announced . ) Similarly I can not tell you how it is possible to anal rape a terrified victim in silence , .... Tension is the last thing required n'est par !! Perhaps she had a gun to her head , hey who knows ? Perhaps that gun went off by mistake , but that could without doubt cause the Hate reaction that undoubtedly followed . Let's not talk about the third DNA , Can't we pretend it was just a slip of the tongue ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenchair Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 There is a new thread in the news section. Helping to promote the defense fund. For some reason it has not been moved to this busy forum. It might help if a few posters posted a comment to make it popular. I am sure it would do well in this busy forum. Hope you guys can help out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieH Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Post with colored font removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 What's the title greenchair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krenjai Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 FACT = The B2 were tested early in the investigation, and were NOT arrested, yet it took the RTP 10 more FULL DAYS (if the test was done on the 23rd) to get a match! WOW! All other tests came back within days! It don't have to be a genius to see what is going on here...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krenjai Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 FACT = The B2 were tested early in the investigation, and were NOT arrested, yet it took the RTP 10 more FULL DAYS (if the test was done on the 23rd) to get a match! WOW! All other tests came back within days! It don't have to be a genius to see what is going on here...... Another few quotes (I suggest Google to verify) Thursday Sep 18th "Royal Thai Police adviser Jarumporn Suramanee has reported to the press that DNA of 12 people had been tested, including nine samples from Myanmar workers and one from Mr Ware. The tests found none of the DNA matched that collected from semen found in the female victim’s body, he said." Tuesday Sep 23rd "DNA tests on 30 out of 64 samples collected mostly from migrants on the island did not match" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 What's the title greenchair Just found it http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791489-defense-fund-created-for-migrant-workers-accused-of-koh-tao-murders/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieH Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Soliciting donations is not permitted without prior approval. 22) Members are forbidden to ask for or accept donations, gifts or commissions from other members, any charities must contact support for approval before joining. before joining to be approved.http://www.thaivisa.com/contact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison blue Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 my apologies Charlie as the coconuts article was about the same defense fund. how do I go about getting approval please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison blue Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I did put links with it. and, as I said, TVF ran a coconuts article regarding donating to the defense fund. can I link to the coconuts article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Yes, they were very likely tested in the first or 2nd batch of dozens of Burmese migrants tested. They were involved with AC bar (and playing guitar on the beach late on Sunday), so they would have been at the top of the list of migrants sought for testing. They were all cleared, and I distinctly recall breathing a sigh of relief when reading the official RTP statement clearing all Burmese who were tested. At least one of them provided a sample a few days before the arrests, along with 100/200 other people, the results were expected by the 30th of September (Bangkok Post article "Murder probe DNA testing ‘nearly done’"), they were arrested on the 2nd of October, for all you know they were finally arrested based on the DNA test results. I know you're not directly addressing me, but they were arrested primarily because they ran off when cops tried to arrest all migrants playing a sepak tekraw game on the beach. That made the cops angry. But more to the point, the DNA results (B2 matching) wasn't announced until awhile after the 3 Burmese were taken to a 'safe house', interrogated with threats, without legal counsel, and compelled to sign a document they couldn't read. Meanwhile, Nomsod was still refusing to provide a sample for DNA (he's rich and well connected, so that's ok by RTP). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 JD, the defence will have the pictures of the B2 queuing and the first police general's statement to the effect that the initial tests didn't identify a suspect, So it will be up to the prosecution to respond to that. I surmise they will say not all of the results had come back - and there will be further challenges to put doubt on the veracity of the subsequent DNA test results. And to respond to your post, I am sure the defence will use this to show how incompetent the RTP were. Why take a sample if you're not going to test it? And possibly, if there was a testing delay, the taken samples could have been wrongly labelled or contaminated. The defence's aim re the DNA is to cast doubts, as I'm sure you realise. It will be fairly easy to produce the documents proving when the samples were taken, when and where the tests were run, and what the results were. The prosecution has stated that the DNA was solid from the first time the case was presented to them.Its also fairly easy to falsify documents or results and that's the international concern and one of the prime concerns of the British Government to get extra "independent verification'The conspiracy theorists are claiming that. There's no proof that those fears are based in reality.Not only the British gov't and reasonable observers on T.Visa, but also Thailand's top forensic scientist also alludes to that (the importance of getting independent verification of DNA trail). When the shielders run out of deflections, they devolve to tossing out the phrase 'conspiracy theorists' right and left. Welcome back JDinasia. BTW, to do independent verification of DNA, Brit experts would need to have samples from all suspects, prior and current. That would spook the RTP to no end, so expect them to put up every type of resistance to that happening. They already declared they won't share Nomsod's DNA. It goes without saying they similarly won't share any other Headman's peoples' DNA (Mon's, Stingray Man's, Mon's cop friend, M). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. don't duck the question.. everyone on here is pulling snippets of news and saying they prove this or that. Why cant each and everyone of the posters answer in their own words What about the 3rd DNA What about the wine bottle. 2 very factual points.... everyone is ducking.. rambling on about what order the DNA was taken.. totally irrelevant waste of time. Focus on the facts as we see them. There is an interview with a pancake seller where he states they said they hit David with a wine bottle There's and interview with the Forensic poleee officer who says 3 DNA. well why wasn't a 3rd person in the reconstruction.????? A Huge piece is missing of the puzzle......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. don't duck the question.. everyone on here is pulling snippets of news and saying they prove this or that. Why cant each and everyone of the posters answer in their own words What about the 3rd DNA What about the wine bottle. 2 very factual points.... everyone is ducking.. rambling on about what order the DNA was taken.. totally irrelevant waste of time. Focus on the facts as we see them. There is an interview with a pancake seller where he states they said they hit David with a wine bottle There's and interview with the Forensic poleee officer who says 3 DNA. well why wasn't a 3rd person in the reconstruction.????? A Huge piece is missing of the puzzle......... I doubt there will be any reference by the defense re; the wine bottle. The deputized Pancake seller is probably the one who brought it up (or one of the cops in the 'safe house'?). Regardless, anything the Pancake guy mentioned which doesn't dovetail with the frame-up can readily be discounted by the RTP if/when it's mentioned at trial. I see it more as a red herring. The RTP can dismiss whatever he said by saying something like "he's not an official part of the investigative team, so....." As far as a 3rd man not being in the reenactment: I think it's a similar dynamic: the cops can just say, "we think there may have been a 3rd perpetrator, but we don't at this time have a 3rd suspect." Again, anything which doesn't dovetail nicely with the frame-up of the B2 can be dismissed, and the judge will likely go along. Similarly, it wouldn't surprise me if anything mentioned at the trial which implicated any of the Headman's people will be dismissed right away. Reason: The Burmese are on trial, not anyone else. It's an assumption, so I could be wrong about that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thailandchilli Posted January 14, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. don't duck the question.. everyone on here is pulling snippets of news and saying they prove this or that. Why cant each and everyone of the posters answer in their own words What about the 3rd DNA What about the wine bottle. 2 very factual points.... everyone is ducking.. rambling on about what order the DNA was taken.. totally irrelevant waste of time. Focus on the facts as we see them. There is an interview with a pancake seller where he states they said they hit David with a wine bottle There's and interview with the Forensic poleee officer who says 3 DNA. well why wasn't a 3rd person in the reconstruction.????? A Huge piece is missing of the puzzle......... The DNA and its origins and trail is very important. It constitutes a major piece of the evidence held by the prosecutors. The fact that the crime scene was invaded, the DNA collected by non specialists and then the farce of the DNA sample collections of suspects and others all leads to enormous concerns that I am sure the defense team will be using as a major part of the case to defend the accused. But to your points. 3rd DNA - Yes this has been discussed many times in the treads and of course leads one to suspect at least a 3rd person is involved, however I also remember some posters in the threads who said the 3rd DNA sample that he was referring to was actually the same DNA type only not from sperm. So could have been saliva but from one of the same people, but I'm only going on memory on that it also may be completely wrong and there is in fact a very different DNA stamp that belongs to a 3rd person. If that is the case then that of course is a massive floor in the whole case against the B2 Wine Bottle - Yes this has also been discussed before but what more can you do or say? There was no glass or glass shards found at the crime scene that we know of, there was no glass or glass shards found in David or his wounds that we know of, so if its true we would expect to see that. Of course its also possible this has been covered up but then that would mean David was killed in a separate place and also the autopsy was forged to not include any glass shards found, and to be honest I do doubt this and the wine bottle scenario. I know a different weapon was used on David but its more likely to be some form of knife? For all we know it may have been as simple as the pancake seller telling lies? Edited January 14, 2015 by thailandchilli 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 ....the gist of the story is that regular folks proved helpful in a breakthrough in the case, which cops couldn't untangle. In contrast, we have the KT case, where the cops don't want any outside input, unless it's something which might further implicate the Burmese. They don't want to hear or see anything which could implicate the Headman's people.Perhaps I read Wiki wrong, but there was no break through. Deciphering the coded messages written by the killer was a breakthrough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. don't duck the question..everyone on here is pulling snippets of news and saying they prove this or that. Why cant each and everyone of the posters answer in their own words What about the 3rd DNA What about the wine bottle. 2 very factual points.... everyone is ducking.. rambling on about what order the DNA was taken.. totally irrelevant waste of time. Focus on the facts as we see them. There is an interview with a pancake seller where he states they said they hit David with a wine bottle There's and interview with the Forensic poleee officer who says 3 DNA. well why wasn't a 3rd person in the reconstruction.????? A Huge piece is missing of the puzzle......... I doubt there will be any reference by the defense re; the wine bottle. The deputized Pancake seller is probably the one who brought it up (or one of the cops in the 'safe house'?). Regardless, anything the Pancake guy mentioned which doesn't dovetail with the frame-up can readily be discounted by the RTP if/when it's mentioned at trial. I see it more as a red herring. The RTP can dismiss whatever he said by saying something like "he's not an official part of the investigative team, so....." As far as a 3rd man not being in the reenactment: I think it's a similar dynamic: the cops can just say, "we think there may have been a 3rd perpetrator, but we don't at this time have a 3rd suspect." Again, anything which doesn't dovetail nicely with the frame-up of the B2 can be dismissed, and the judge will likely go along. Similarly, it wouldn't surprise me if anything mentioned at the trial which implicated any of the Headman's people will be dismissed right away. Reason: The Burmese are on trial, not anyone else. It's an assumption, so I could be wrong about that. They have already admitted no DNA from David on Hoe but offer no explanation other than Roti Man who was left alone according to the RTP to interview them. SO where is the re-construction?? Where is the Evidence. The weapon?? This is full of holes. There was 3 DNA so they cannot side step this. They haven't made a case. Its incomplete. It doesn't fit with the forensics offered by their own expert. Its simple either they have put a solid case together or they haven't. There is vital elements missing. this wouldn't stand the scrutiny required in an English court. DNA kept in House. No independent verification either. I have been on Brandon Lewis case this week. He is the MP for Great Yarmouth... He has of yet failed to provide an Explanation why we didn't do what we set out to do. His reply: Monday 9:26 I have replied to this directly on my feed, I will not comment further as I hope you will understand, i am working with FCO and PM office and the family and their police liaison officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thailandchilli Posted January 14, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2015 Here's a thought, maybe the 3rd DNA found on Hannah was the one they were going to pin on Muang, but because he obviously had a strong alibi they decided to try and forget it and hope everyone else forgets about it!! Pure speculation of course!! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison blue Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 What happened to going here instead? http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791489-defense-fund-created-for-migrant-workers-accused-of-koh-tao-murders/?view=getnewpost&utm_source=notification&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=forum 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Here's a thought, maybe the 3rd DNA found on Hannah was the one they were going to pin on Muang, but because he obviously had a strong alibi they decided to try and forget it and hope everyone else forgets about it!! Pure speculation of course!! That's a MAJOR Trait of Thai Society..... Time forgets... Delays and Delays...a memory like a goldfish.. They poured Boiling Water on that Young man to get him to be the 3rd person... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 There is vital elements missing. This wouldn't stand the scrutiny required in an English court. DNA kept in House. No independent verification either. Except it will be tried in a Thai court (whether or not it resolves with a foregone conclusion). The Brits have intentionally been kept out of the loop, and are under orders by top Thai officials to not do any investigating. Besides the fact Thailand is currently under martial law, Thailand is a paternalistic society, as in 'father knows best' or 'do as I say, not as I do.' It's a country with a rote education system where questioning of elders/teachers is considered rude and out-of-place. In this crime non-investigation, the RTP brass are like the elders in a Byzantine household. I have been on Brandon Lewis case this week. He is the MP for Great Yarmouth... He has of yet failed to provide an Explanation why we didn't do what we set out to do.Thanks for staying on top of that aspect of - seeking truth and justice. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction A question for the prosecution and one they will need to answer and evidence. don't duck the question.. everyone on here is pulling snippets of news and saying they prove this or that. Why cant each and everyone of the posters answer in their own words What about the 3rd DNA What about the wine bottle. 2 very factual points.... everyone is ducking.. rambling on about what order the DNA was taken.. totally irrelevant waste of time. Focus on the facts as we see them. There is an interview with a pancake seller where he states they said they hit David with a wine bottle There's and interview with the Forensic poleee officer who says 3 DNA. well why wasn't a 3rd person in the reconstruction.????? A Huge piece is missing of the puzzle......... Not ducking the question. I just don't have the answer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Ok if you all want to help go to the page of the MP Brandon Lewis. https://www.facebook.com/BrandonKennethLewis?fref=photo On the first page down is a picture as per photo on here expand and take a read of what I wrote. The initial post is very respectful. He responded to me privately and on the stream. He has not responded further .... However its his duty to. He costs the UK tax payer in excess of 250,000 Pounds per year to run his office and salary. He represents the Cons in Power now. Its is his duty to explain why is it that David Cameron secured approval from the Leader of Thailand to send our officers to Verify DNA to work with the RTP investigation team and to Look at the Human rights issues that is the cornerstone of the UK Gov policy. This was why we sent a team to Thailand and it appears on the face of it to have been a failure No Investigations. No verification of DNA. No investigations into the torture of the suspects No advice given to the Thai police No assistance given to the Thai Police This was what the UK Gov promised and yet they done nothing,. He needs to step upto the plate and do his duty... Perhaps some like s and further comments asking him Ok what are you doing Brandon will get him on the blower. We cant all sit and bang on about clippets of news come on everyone who cares.. lets get it moving. Edited January 14, 2015 by loonodingle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Yes, they were very likely tested in the first or 2nd batch of dozens of Burmese migrants tested. They were involved with AC bar (and playing guitar on the beach late on Sunday), so they would have been at the top of the list of migrants sought for testing. They were all cleared, and I distinctly recall breathing a sigh of relief when reading the official RTP statement clearing all Burmese who were tested. At least one of them provided a sample a few days before the arrests, along with 100/200 other people, the results were expected by the 30th of September (Bangkok Post article "Murder probe DNA testing ‘nearly done’"), they were arrested on the 2nd of October, for all you know they were finally arrested based on the DNA test results. I know you're not directly addressing me, but they were arrested primarily because they ran off when cops tried to arrest all migrants playing a sepak tekraw game on the beach. That made the cops angry. But more to the point, the DNA results (B2 matching) wasn't announced until awhile after the 3 Burmese were taken to a 'safe house', interrogated with threats, without legal counsel, and compelled to sign a document they couldn't read. Meanwhile, Nomsod was still refusing to provide a sample for DNA (he's rich and well connected, so that's ok by RTP). "They were all cleared" Prove it, don't bother with anything else, show me were the DNA analysis from the two murder suspects was declared not a match. "but they were arrested primarily because they ran off when cops tried to arrest all migrants playing a sepak tekraw game on the beach" Since one of the two was arrested after fleeing the island on a ferry I'm going to call BS on that one too. "Meanwhile, Nomsod was still refusing to provide a sample for DNA (he's rich and well connected, so that's ok by RTP" The police did not request a DNA test because he provided a verifiable alibi that he wasn't on the island at the time. Why don't you try for once to make one single post not plagued with demonstrably false "facts"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 There is vital elements missing. This wouldn't stand the scrutiny required in an English court. DNA kept in House. No independent verification either. Except it will be tried in a Thai court (whether or not it resolves with a foregone conclusion). The Brits have intentionally been kept out of the loop, and are under orders by top Thai officials to not do any investigating. Besides the fact Thailand is currently under martial law, Thailand is a paternalistic society, as in 'father knows best' or 'do as I say, not as I do.' It's a country with a rote education system where questioning of elders/teachers is considered rude and out-of-place. In this crime non-investigation, the RTP brass are like the elders in a Byzantine household. I have been on Brandon Lewis case this week. He is the MP for Great Yarmouth... He has of yet failed to provide an Explanation why we didn't do what we set out to do.Thanks for staying on top of that aspect of - seeking truth and justice. Boomer This is where I disagree with your version. firstly we had this https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fco-minister-summons-thai-charge-daffaires-to-foreign-office Followed by this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thailand-beach-murders-uk-police-head-to-koh-tao-to-join-investigation-after-junta-leader-drops-objections-9803418.html So to get a timeline 13 October 2014 FCO Minister summons Thai Chargé d’Affaires to Foreign Office Saturday 18 October 2014 UK police head to Koh Tao to join investigation after junta leader drops objections 19th Dec. Statement from the Metropolitan Police Included the following paragraph: The UK Police officers who deployed to Thailand operated within the parameters specified in a section 26 Authority issued by the Home Office. They did NOT conduct ANY investigations into the murder of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller. The Thai authorities permitted the UK Police to have observer status only in relation to LIMITED parts of the Royal Thai Police’s Investigation and the UK police officers did not provide ANY advice or assistance with that investigation. They did NOT take possession of any physical evidence, forensic evidence, exhibits interviews or statements. The Royal Thai Police provided and interpreter who verbally translated documents that formed LIMITED parts of the prosecution case. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nobody can answer this can you. Where is the 3rd person and why no wine bottle in the re construction What third person? Were is it claimed there was DNA from three different people? There was no hoe in the reconstruction neither, so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts