Thailand’s most senior forensic pathologist, the renowned Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, dropped a bombshell at the Teoh Beng Hock inquest today.
Dr Pornthip is the Director-General of the Central Forensic Science Institute, Ministry of Justice, in Bangkok - Photo credit: thaitsunamihelp.org
This is the latest via Twitter from Malaysian Insider:
- Dr Pornthip steps out of witness box.
- Dr Pornthip says, “I never want to criticise the police & doctors.”
- Dr Pornthip requests Azmil to make statement to media, stresses she is here to offer opinion only.
- Magistrate Azmil Munthapa Abas, acting as coroner, thanks Dr Pornthip for helping inquest.
- Dr Pornthip says will take longer time due to decomposition of body but that won’t affect her final analysis.
- Dr Pornthip tells court she is prepared to do 2nd autopsy even if have to exhume Teoh’s body.
- Dr Pornthip disagrees with Tan’s suggestion.
- Tan suggests to Dr Pornthip that she doesn’t have enough basis to conclude Teoh’s death is 80pct homicide & 20pct suicide.
- Tan reads out Dr Prashant’s nine reasons for concluding Teoh committed suicide, one by one.
- Dr Pornthip says she can’t answer Tan’s questions because the investigation is incomplete.
- Dr Pornthip says if bone fragments were found in the anal area, it’d be compatible with injury caused there by fall from a height.
- Dr Pornthip replies yes to Tan but adds its uncommon.
- Tan reads Dr Prashant’s analysis on anal injury and asks Dr Pornthip if penetration can be caused by bone fracture after a high fall.
- Dr Pornthip says strangulation signs may not always leave marks on the skin but can be detected under the skin.
- Tan shows Teoh’s photos to Dr Pornthip & asks if she spots signs of strangulations she had described earlier. She says no.
- Dr Pornthip says she didn’t get copies of all documents from the Selangor government which engaged her.
- Replying to Tan Hock Chuan, Dr Pornthip wished she had a chance to talk to the two pathologists who did Teoh autopsy on the results.
- Dr Pornthip returns to witness box for cross-examination after court resumes after lunch.
- Court allows Dr Pornthip to examine Teoh’s shoes to confirm her hypothesis that he was dragged before falling to death.
- Coroner’s court breaks for lunch and will resume at 2pm.
- DPP Kevin Morais, acting for the MACC, asks Dr Pornthip to clarify definition of strangulation.
- Dr Pornthip says Teoh’s death is 80pct homicide and 20pct suicide.
- Dr Pornthip confirms that Teoh was alive when he hit the ground but may have been unconscious even before falling.
- Dr Pornthip says skull fracture not typical of injury from fall but more compatible from blunt force applied directly to the skull.
- Dr Pornthip notes round marks on Teoh’s neck could mean ‘manual strangulation’ with fingers.
- Dr Pornthip says injury to Teoh’s anus caused by penetration with object before fall, based on pictures taken from death site.
- Dr Pornthip gives a graphic power point display based on a post-mortem pictures to show & explain Teoh’s injuries.
- Dr Pornthip tells court not all injuries on Teoh’s body consistent with fall from a height.
- Dr Pornthip explains her views are based on Teoh’s autopsy report.
- Questioned by Malik, Dr Pornthip says Teoh died from a fall about 6am to 8am on July 16, 2009.
- Dr Pornthip tells court she has conducted more than 10,000 autopsies, of which about 100 dealt with fatal falls from a high place.
- Court resumes with Dr Pornthip taking oath at witness box.
- Teoh Beng Hock’s parents, elder brother & younger sister in court to hear Dr Pornthip’s testimony.
- Court stands down until 10.15am to set up equipment for Dr Pornthip’s evidence, expected to last an hour.
- Selangor lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar introduces Dr Pornthip as expert witness for the inquest.
- AG’s lawyer Tan Hock Chuan introduces UKM forensic chief Prof Shahrom Abd Wahid to sit in for back-up explanation.
- Court sets up projector system in front of witness box for evidence from Dr Pornthip.
- The Selangor government has engaged Dr Pornthip to testify as expert witness.
- Famous Thai pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand to testify today. She worked on Asian Tsunami victims & David Carradine’s death.
- Coroner’s court resumes hearing on Teoh Beng Hock’s death today.
Related posts:
Is this Gerakan K the same K who was so vocal in running down LGE and the Penang govt over the Kg. Buah Pala affair? If so it confirms what I’ve suspected all along – that his comments were not in the interest of social justice but to further his political agenda.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ken,
No doubt about. But the most obvious is that has an interest and stake in Kg Buah Pala but lost out due to LGE.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, such intellectual and well thought opinions. My question is what good is all this in the new found freedom via blogs and commentors when tomorrow for you and me just another day minus the community.
It has to start with real action and efforts without any disregard to blogs and comments. It can only happen if you are in the field, spend some time to understanding why our effort is neccessary without the typical glossary that we are used to for the escapism that haunts us.
Whether Malaysian have understood the grasp of change is still a suspect as it continues to revolve within their four walls and their own imbibed thoughts without a benefit of doubt for the society.
Why do I say this?. TBH is a forgotten episode even before it started. Today it is all that matters, tomorrow it is just another episode in Bolehland Malaysia when individually hitherland awaits you for better prospect and opportunity. Why artificially worry about the community for our own individual frustration.
What change are we talking about, for us individually or for the society?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
johanssm@Khun Pana, Is Dr Porhthip a Khunying? Not aware of that even from the Thai media like Bangkok Post, Nation…Ch.3 (govt controlled media)
Fyi, KhunYing(Female), Khun Luarng (Male) is a title bestowed upon Thai citizens by the Royal Thai King…
Then if true, she has more credibility than our local forensic experts who can be told to twist the facts according to whoever in charge. Even DNA samples provided by the authorities cannot be questioned…only in 1M’sia…
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi everyone,
I know a little about Statistics, probability theory included.
I was amused by Gerakan K’s unabashed use of 20% to override the 80% probability. Gerakan K seems to be a ‘great’ product of the political eunuch KTK’s. unashamed politics. It defies logic that 1 out of 4 chance of suicide is repeatedly highlighted by him to criticise those who hold the 80% has most probable!
I’ve avoided commenting on Gerakan K’s comments on all the previous occasions until now when I feel that enough is enough!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi everyone,
My apologies – I meant “It defies logic that 1 out of 5 chance of suicide is repeatedly highlighted by him to criticise those who hold the 80% has most probable!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
-Gerakan K- Yes,20% possibility that he commited suicide……but still 80% confirmation that he’s murdered.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, “tan, tanjong bungah 11:59am” is spot on.
Another way of looking at it is,
the odds that the late Teoh Beng Hock commited suicide is 1:4
If Gerakan K goes to the race track and bets on a horse that has a 1:4 odds of winning, he will lose his shirt and much more!
So, the next time you try to spin for your political masters (or to rationalise your support for a corrupt and (brutal) regime), don’t make a fool of yourself.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
20% = 1:5 odd
Get your figure right mr so so prof.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gerakan K,
… you have lost out in Kg Buah Pala, your stake and interest. That goes to Sugu and Steven. They deserve to live under the bridge. LGE did it right
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gerakan K, you need to pay a bit more attention in class.
1:4 is 1/(1+4) x 100 is 20%
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Folk, why are you all so caught up with Gerakan K? Just ignore him. Dont give him the satisfaction of commenting abt him… not worth it, sheer waste of time.
I felt pain when Dr Porntip described how Beng Hock died – fractured skull and bone, (some people) must have had hit, and beat and punched and kicked him hard, till he died… threw him down and faked suicide…?
Becos of power/(position), a young foreign lady (Altantuya) had to die… otherwise all things exposed?
(Becos of power (after Perak)?)… Teoh Beng Hock, a Pakatan man, (is now dead)…
How many people need to die becos of … power???
God, please intervene, I beg you… Please also protect
Dr Porntip and Beng Hock’s tomb.
Beng Hock must not die in vain !!!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is so terrible and so tragic – imagine the horror that Mr. Teoh was going through, including being raped probably! …
Look at (those religious politicians and officer) busily condemning attacking personal lives of believers, including petty ones, whilst being silent on such evil and monstrous crimes…!
But that brilliant and most brave lady, Dr. Pornthip is a rarity indeed, such a gem indeed!
Katharina Sri (former: Noor Aza)
Germany.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We need to be responsible before making a mockery on the death’s findings of Teoh. Dun take side on politics, just be truthful, because any wrongful mockery is tantamount to condemnation when you face God. Even the Malaysian Prime Minister also not making any mockery. Be careful because you will be responsible for what you are saying.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TIME TO CHALK UP WALK THE TALK
What more can anyone now openly say
With what happened between night and day
If only all the dead could still freely talk
There would be many other culprits to stalk
(C) Samuel Goh Kim Eng – 221009
http://MotivationInMotion.blogspot.com
Thur. 22nd Oct. 2009.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] to Forensic Pathologist Pornthip Rojanasunand’s testimony on October 21? We are told that Teoh’s family members were present at the inquest that [...]
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gerakan K
“A person who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool”
You don’t know what the definition of
“odds” is??
Here is a basic lesson in statistics:
Probability of getting a “6″ with one throw of a die is 1/6
The odds of getting a “6″ with one throw of a die is
1:5
Faham sekarang ??? Or you need more lessons in basic statistics??
Assoc Professor Phua Kai Lit
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Katharina Sri
Poor Mr Teoh was probably sexually assaulted in the anus with a “foreign object”. So, he was not raped in the conventional sense.
P.S. May those who did this to him pay for their
crime!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Eerrr…. A question..
Why would the good Dr. Porntip suggest a 2nd autopsy if what our “own” 2 CSI findings are right..?????
Why would she even bother..??? Perhaps photos & reports “DO NOT” add up yah….!!!
She “does” speaks on behalf of the dead. And the dead is also trying to “tell” us what happened…!!!
Then we’ll hear that the “expert” with many, many back-up dead bodies is wrong……!
Mmm……
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Folks
Some clarification as some people here seemed to be confused.I am certainly NOT the same person as Gerakan K nor I am in any way connected with this person.
Interesting case this. I am no pathologist and I don’t even watch CSI. It is hard for us to verify the actual cause as we are neither trained in this field nor we have the necessary data to make any conclussion.
However, I must say that I am puzzled by Dr Death’s conclussion since it is highly unprofessional for any professional or scientifically-trained person to make any quantitative prediction without having access to all the relevant information, what’s more in a highly difficult case such as this.
This estimate made without the benefit of an autopsy looks even more dubious when one consider the fact that she has not even visited the scene of incident. While I am not discounting homicide as the cause, what am I highlighting here is the lack of professionalism by the acclaimed Thai “expert”.
I am surprised that the lawyers and the magistrate even allowed the Dr Porntip’s considering the fact that her opinion would mean nothing since it is not backed up by facts unlike the other pathologists. I think the stunts such as these is turning the inquest into a joke and a platform for DAP to seek publicity.
However, I am not surprised that people here and elsewhere seemed have accepted this opinion by Dr Porntip since Pakatan Cheerleaders requires no fact since they are guided by blind faith.
BTW I am also hardly shocked by Asoc Prof Phua’s gleelful acceptance this wild-guess as scientific and the prof tend to be rather unscientific in matters of politics.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
K, it is not true that she had no access to all the evidences. She based her conclusions – and well reasoned conclusions – from all the evidences that was collected by our 2 pathologists. As an example both our pathologists noted that there were strangulation marks beneath the dermis but it was not obvious from the photograph. Our 2 brilliant pathologists did not comment on this vital piece of information. Why ? On the other hand Dr.PR said that such contusion is consistent with strangulation and not fall from a high place. And to extend from this I would say that they had(and Anil would add “alleged”) strangled him by choking off the blood vessel so that TeohBH would become unconscious.
Likewise with the wounds in the anus. She pointed out that the wound could not come from the fractured hip bone. The lash marks on TeohBH was also ignored by our brilliant pathologists. Why ?
Why are you so keen on defending an injustice when you had defended the kg buah pala folks so brilliantly ?
Btw. I know that you are not Gerakan K. The writing styles are just too different.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Morning Dew
Pls do take note that I am not taking sides or ruling that this could indeed be a homicide.
My point is simple. No professional could make a conclussion especially saying that it has 80% certainity without access to all data, documents, scene of crime, body, and the results of all tests. Any conclussion cannot be based on a single supporting fact but a consistent alignment of all relevant parameters.
I can’t quite see how experienced pathologists could have missed obvious signs such as strangulation marks. Perhaps you might recall Dr Prashant to be someone of high credibility based on his work on the Kugan’s case.
As such, I support a 2nd autopsy by Dr Death and onlt then I think we can rely on her testimony. In my line of work, someone coming up with a solution for a problem he/she has only read about is the surest way of getting the boot (in some cases literally) from me.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr.PR did have access to all the relevant details. Her testmony was based on a set of documents which she recounted in court and all were on display in the attorney general’s website.
Whatever she had said were based on the findings of our own pathologists but her interpretation was very different in a number of the evidences. For eg. the anal penetration. She said it was from an external object and could not have come from the fractured hip bone. The size of the wound was just too large and the absence of bone fragments in the anus was a strong indication that he was tortured.
Bruising/lash marks on TeohBH’s thigh was also a strong indication of torture.
Head fracture was due to transfer force according to our pathologists but she said that if that was the cause then the fracture would be circular and not linear. Linear fracture with bruising on the wound is more likely due to blunt force trauma.
Why did our own pathologists ignored the strangulation marks, the bruising/lash marks on the thigh is really beyond me. And the wound due to anal penetration of an external object was interpreted as that caused by fractured bone is not easy for us to understand but for Dr.PR with so many years of experience such wounds can not be interpreted any other way.
I believe her figure of 80% vs 20% was something she plucked from the air. More like murphy’s law 80/20. But that should not be taken as absolute scientific figures. It was more an expression of her confidence. I did not question how she arrived at this magical 80/20 value because I understood that it was more an expression of her confidence. All investigative work have to involve some interpretation of data and evidences. The more years we have the more accurate we are in interpreting the data/evidences.
Why do you think Dr.prashant was roped in ? Someone who knew the going-on in the hospitals and government department found it rather strange that he was called in. …
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear “K 9:09 am”
I don’t want to post too many comments on this site.
Especially on technical stuff like statistics.
But I have to reply to your comments.
1. In statistics, 80% vs 20% is pretty high probability for the former. The usual cut-off point is 95% for acceptance of a particular hypothesis.
2. So, Dr Porntip is saying that the probability of
homicide is very high (but there is still a probability of suicide – but the probability is very much lower). You say that hers is a
“wild-guess”. I disagree with you, I would say that it is a well-informed (based on the evidence, her technical knowledge and skill, and her experience) guestimate from an expert. 80%-20% would certainly indicate more support for homicide as contrasted with 50%-50%.
3. As for politics: well, there are continuing debates over whether politics and political behaviour can be studied scientifically. There are some scholars of politics (“political scientists”)who use statistical methods in their research.
For your information, I have actually studied political science at the post-graduate level at the U of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign) for 1 year way back in the 1980s. I can see/smell ruling regime propaganda, attempted cover-up etc based on my knowledge of political science.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Phua
Well, just because you studied statistics as a subject doesn’t make you an expert in it. FYI my minor in the Uni was maths and I am able to pretty much discuss any advanced maths subjects. As such I found your comments about statistics rather amusing. Here’s my reply.
1. Making an estimate of 80% / 20% in this case is not statistics but a joke. Statistics involve data that can be analysed and the result proven quantitatively. In this case, the figure was based not on data but some nebulous concept called “past experience”.
2. This is a joke, surely. No court of law (unless it is the kangaroo court) will allow an evidence of an expert who had no access to data, documents, place of death,etc. This is not just inadmissible in law but goes against the very spirit of science and justice. That Dr Death even making such a guess is highly unprofessional. If this is the trend then we might as well don’t do any autopsies in the future and let the pathologies make their conclussion based on Malaysiakini report and Sinchew’s photos of the victim.
To say that the two pathologies had made such mistake after their extensive investigations and analyses not just mean that we have incompetent people but that Dr Death is so good that she can make correct accessment even without data and accesss to the body. There is no pathologist in the world would claim to have such knowledge.
If you know her background, I am sure you are aware that she is more of a celebrity pathologist who prone to media publicity than a gritty professional who is only focussed on uncovering the truth. Expect her to be taken apart by her fellow professionals in the trial.
3. You also might be aware of the fact that people will believe even the most unbelievable fact if they are blinded by greed, political & religious faith,etc. The fact that pyramid scheme and black money scheme masterminds are raking in millions each year is the living proof of this.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear K 2:16 pm
My last message to you on this topic: :
You minored in maths at uni?
Well, I teach stats at university level, my friend.
(I don’t claim to be an expert though, my area of expertise is public health of which biostatistics is
a major component)
Again, statistics is all about probability, my friend. If you remember your statistics and hyppothesis testing and all that, you reject your null hypothesis and accept your research hypothesis using certain decision rules. If you accept your research hypothesis, there is still a small possibility that you are wrong (given by the
p-value).
I said that Dr Porntip’s 80%-20% figure is a
“guestimate”. You know what a GUESTIMATE is?
It is an INFORMED guess. So, what she is saying is that it is much more likely to be homicide than suicide. The “80%-20% figure” is just something she used to help laypersons realise that it is more likely to be homicide than suicide. She could just as easily have said “85%-15%. If she is unsure, she would have said “50%-50%”.
In your comments, you make yourself sound as if you are not only very knowledgeable about statistics but also law and even pathology and forensic science! Come on! What exactly is your profession?
From your comments, you sound like
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Phua
There is a huge difference between “estimate” based on available and verifiable data and one based on some vague concepts called “past experience” and “guest”. As I had said earlier, no professional will make a quantitive estimate without access to all data, documents, body, scene of crime,etc. If he / she does that, then the person is no better than the pasar malam snake oil peddler.
Even if we use a layperson’s concept of probablity, the chances of 2 eminent pathologists missing out such obvious signs of homicide must be very low indeed. As I had said no pathologist in the world would venture to make such quanitative estimate and comments especially in a court of law. Perhaps allowing such testimony shows that this inquest has descended into a farce.
As for myself, I am neither a pathologist or a medical professional. But the facts of this issue are so simple if one allows common sense and logic as be the guide rather than letting political allegiance to blind oneself.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t quite understand how you had concluded that Dr.PR had no access to the evidences ? If she had no access to them then how could she be so specific about her comments. What is even more damning was how wounds not consistent with a fall from height was dismissed, ignored or not commented on by our brilliant pathologists.
These were the documents that was available to her :
1) Autopsy Report (I 42)
Evidence of Dr Prashant Samberkar (SI15)
2) All photos in I 43 (a thick bundle of photographs)
3) All photos in I 55 (scanned photos from the original)
4) All photos in I 57 (also a thick bundle of photographs)
5) Crime scene photos (I 1)
6) X-Ray of the deceased {I73 (a) – (j}
7) Evidence of Dr Khairul Azman (SI10)
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Morning Dew
Well, this case is not a straight-forward death like a car accident but a death in a suspicious circumstances. As such, to verify the cause, the pathologists needs to access to all physical and all other direct and indirect supporting information.
It is easy to pick one piece of evidence and then use it to support your theory. If you recall the pathologists’ testimonies earlier, they did say that while they cannot discount homicide but most wounds are consistent with suicide.
In this case, Dr Death claims Teoh was strangled but upom questioning she was unable even to show the signs of strangulation on the pictures claiming she didn’t have all the pictures.
She claimed Teoh was tortured before killed, but when someone is tortured, there bound to be a host of other signs that would point out this. Dr Death also gave no evidence to back this claim.
The basis for any professional assessment are facts and verifiable data. Dr Death produced neither. She quoted 80% confidence which I think is taken out of the thin air. I must say that when a professional makes such guesstimate, he/she loses her respect since only an amateur will make such prediction without facts and data.
I have no doubt that the 2 pathologists would have discovered such obvious signs such as strangulations and torture. I could have been persuaded that these 2 experts missed had a more unusual method was used to kill the victim such as lethal injection or sophisticated poisoining that are sometimes used by Intelligence agencies such as KGB/FSB, MI6, CIA, Mossad,etc.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Would you not agree that the documentations of all relevant evidences were already present within the documents given to her ? A physical examination will only confirm and perhaps also result in further discovery. But for all intents and purposes the evidences are already available to her and all who wish to examine it.
The strangulation comment was a result of our own 2 pathologists observation of sub-dermal contusion. The 2 earlier pathologists chose to ignore this piece of very VITAL information. Why ? And why do you kept harping on this while your objection was already demolished earlier on ?
Evidences of torture recorded by our 2 pathologists and confirmed by her were :
a. Strangulation
b. Anal tear
c. Lashes on the tie
And I suppose you are an expert ?
Geez, K your spots are really showing…
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, a guess from reports is still a guess from reports. From my understanding, Dr Death was just saying that, based on the reports, it is more likely to be a homicide than suicide. ‘No professional makes a quantitive estimate without access to all data, documents, body, scene of crime’? Is this a fact? I’m not too sure. Once proven it becomes 100%? So what are the other figures for? I personally don’t think it’s unprofessional to make a guestimate. But I personally believe the chances of 2 eminent pathologists ‘missing out’ such obvious signs of homicide is not low in this case, but I do not want to comment further on this.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, Dr Pornthip’s 80/20 conclusion is based on conclusions derived from informed findings by the two local pathologists and her years of experience on this topic.
In the realm of statistics, this conclusion was arrived from her extensive involvement in over 10,000 forensic and high rise suicide cases and the factual findings from our local pathologists.
She had access to voluminous documents provided.Hence the probability of her conclusion is beyond any shadow of doubt.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s not 80:20, it’s 80:(20+2×95), or well over 2(suicide) to 1(murder) isn’t it? Nice of Dr Porn to give us odds. How ‘probably’ did the other pathologists put it?
I am /jolly/ impressed by the credentials of my fellow commenters, I can tell you.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think they will claim that since there is a 20% probability so this is not convincingly conclusive as there is a 20% shadow of a doubt. Enough to throw away the expert opinion….?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Morning Dew @ 11.05pm
The “facts” that you have presented is not something new but been presented in some other blogs that I have seen.
Let me re-state that I am not saying this is not a homicide or suicide. All I am saying is that without a 2nd autopsy and further analysis, Dr PR has way of making such claims.
The arguments of Dr PR are deeply flawed and her predictions are unprofessional since she did not :
1. conduct an autopsy
2. visit the scene of crime
3. speak to the 2 pathologists
4. there is absolutely no empirical base /data to support her “80%” confidence level
I am no expert but even I can see the flaw in her argument. Let’s look at one by one.
She claimed that there was sign of strangulation but she couldn’t point it out in the picture and later claimed that she did not have all the document. If there has been a strangulation, then it would certainly leave marks and other side effects on the throat and also in the blood. And there would certainly other signs of struggle and also DNA.
Blunt trauma on the head. This is another amateurish work by Dr PR since any trauma inflicted by causes other than the fall would have been picked up by the pathologists. This is so elementary. Again, an attack on the head would lead to many other physical symtoms that easy to pick up.
Anal tear. Again, if this was caused by factors other than the fall, the pathologist would have seen it easily. Heck, even layperson would able to detect this. Again, this would also cause other physical symptoms.
It is quite easy to see what she’s trying to do. Since she’s acting on behalf of Selangor PR govt (and obviously the DAP), she (could be) trying to pick up some signs and make wild, speculative and highly sensational accusations.
I do hope that she gets to exhume the body and perform an autopsy so that she will be forced to justify her wild accusations. And that would be fun.
Morning Dew, I am all for a heathly debate and I do hope personal attacks can be excluded from this.
My stand on this issue is, let the justice dictated by truth and facts and not wild accusations that have no basis. Until and unless Dr Death produces facts to support her “finds”, the report of the first two pathologists must stand. For me, I keep an open mind until Dr Death can convince me other wise.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t see any accusations with Dr Death’s statement. I don’t know much about autopsy, but I don’t think it’s wrong to draw an inference from reports. It’s just one of the many phases of investigation isn’t it? If she has conducted an autopsy, visited the crime seen, and possess all empirical data (K’s criteria), it doesn’t have to be 80% anymore isn’t it? Come on, it’s just one of the many phases of investigation isn’t it? Even doctors provide provisional diagnoses based on the patients’ history before he/she arrives at the definite diagnosis after physical examination and lab investigations. According to K, ‘any trauma inflicted by causes other than the fall would have been picked up by the pathologists’. I totally agree with him. But don’t you see it K, that’s the big joke people are laughing about! Is it that difficult to differentiate a death from fall or causes other that fall?! That’s what we Malaysian laymen are laughing about from the beginning. That’s why we are skeptic. I wonder is K with us out here all this while, or is he inside somewhere?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear layman
I think you are missing the point here. Let me lay out the key issues :
1. Dr PR cannot make a guess at 80% level based purely on the documents and photos alone especially when this new theory is completely at odd with 2 other pathologists. A responsible pathologist would have made more physical analysis and investigation to support this new theory.
2. Dr PR didnt provide any emprical data on how this “80%” confidence level was arrived at.
3. The evidences and proofs for homicide cited by Dr PR were so simple that any pathologists would have easily discovered them in a routine autopsy.
4. If Dr PR’s charges were true, then why there were no corroborating evidences ?
Yes, there are many Malaysians readily accept Dr PR’s wild guesstimate even without a shred of evidence and logical arguments. This sadly is a damning reflection of Malaysians’ proclivity to allow their political allegiance rather than facts and logic to dictate their thinking process.
These people are highly skeptical of the professionalism and impartiality of the first 2 pathologists while accepting blindly the integrity of the Thai one.
In my view, Dr PR fatally compromised her credibility and professionalism when she made this wild, speculative accusations. In my mind, only a bomoh and certainly not a pathologist, would speak with “80% confidence level” when he/she has limited access to the data and evidence.
Dr PR, unlike many people here would like to beleive, is not universally acclaimed even in Thailand. My Thai friends tell me that Dr PR’s reputation is higher among the foreign press than locally as she was known to be partial to sensation and media exposure rather than cold, hard professionalism in tackling her cases.
Her self proclaimed more than 10,000 autopsies carried out was also disputed. A basic calculation would show that this is impossible even she works 24/7/ 365 days all her working career.
She is said to be much more familiar with drowning cases than real investigative ones.
But having said that I also would like to see her doing the autopsy and provide the evidence to support her claim of homocide. I will gladly accept her findings if she can furnish the necessary data and proofs.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0