Renowned Thai pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand says that while she agrees that Teoh Beng Hock was still alive during his fall, she maintains the red marks on his neck are signs of manual strangulation.

dr pornthip rojanasunand at teoh beng hock rci Pornthip, 56, who arrived today under heavy security, told the RCI that the contusions on Teoh's left side of the neck shows there was manual strangulation.

The red marks resembling coin marks were prevalent and noticeable from the first post mortem despite the body being sewn up.

The Thai pathologist had not been present during the first post-mortem, but was present during the second.

She emphasised the three scenarios that may have caused the contusions:

  • The victim could have been manually strangled with bare hands
  • The neck was hit with a blunt object
  • or that his neck was pressed onto the object, or both

Describing the coin-like marks on Teoh's neck as having been caused by either the thumb and finger tips or rounded objects, she said the severity of the marks or injury would depend on the velocity of the pressure of the objects to the neck.

"Teoh is quite fair so these ‘handle-bruise’ marks can easily be seen,” she added.

Pornthip also showed the proceedings several examples of neck injuries resulting in manual strangulation to compare with those found on Teoh in support of her assertions.

Replying to questions from a representative from the Attorney-General Chambers' Amarjeet Singh, who said he could not see the red marks on Teoh's neck as compared to the ones that the Thai pathologist showed, Pornthip immediately replied, “That is because you are not doctor.”

Pornthip's quick comeback drew laughter from the packed court room filled by journalists and members of the public who were there to get a glimpse of the famous pathologist.

Unaware case was high profile

Pornthip when replying to questions from the Bar Council representative Christopher Leong said she did not know the case was a high-profile one when the Selangor government first hired her.

“I only knew it was high-profile when two of my assistants were to appear on my behalf, when it was supposed to be my turn to testify. They reported the matter to me saying that I was to testify in the case.

“It was only then that I knew this was a high-profile matter, which required my attendance,” she told the commissioners.

This is the third time that Pornthip is in Malaysia to testify in the Teoh case. The first was when she testified that she was 80 percent certain the cause of death was homicide.

Her second trip was after she had witnessed the second post-mortem being performed, where she maintained her opinion that Teoh's death was not suicide.

She arrived amidst tight security this morning and is expected to leave tonight or tomorrow morning after finishing her testimony at the RCI.

Pornthip's credibility challenged

MACC’s lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah tried to attack Pornthip's credibility by pointing out that the Thais had once questioned her finding in the case of millionaire and MP Hangthong Thammawattana.

In that case, the first post-mortem on Hangthong, who had been shot in the head, found that it was a suicide, while a second post-mortem by Pornthip had found foul play resulting in the charging of Hangthong's younger brother.

The brother subsequently hired 12 pathologists local and foreign, who disputed her findings, which subsequently brought about his acquittal.

Pornthip still faces a civil suit by the younger brother.

The Thai pathologist nevertheless defended herself, explaining to the RCI panel that while some colleagues had disagreed with her findings, her teacher based in Chicago had agreed with her findings that there were elements of foul play in the case.

“This was due to the position of the blood stains, which suggests the body could have been moved before the shooting took place. My findings were supported by my teacher,” she said.

Pornthip however agreed in Teoh's case that the cause of death was a result of the fall, however she could not establish whether Teoh was conscious at the time of the fall or not.

“What I am certain of is that he must have been alive. The injury on the neck and chin are not caused by the fall from a height, and the mark on the neck raises questions,” the flamboyant Thai pathologist said replying to Shafee.

Bruise not due to ‘staining’

Pornthip also rejected suggestions that the neck bruise could have been a result of staining from the first autopsy, saying she noticed the bruised neck to be more prevalent after the post-mortem was performed.

The Thai pathologist showed a photograph taken by Dr Prashant Samberkar, one of two pathologists who had performed the first post-mortem, that showed there was already a bruise mark before the post-mortem, and a scratch mark on the neck that could indicate nail scratches inflicted by Teoh if he had tried to remove the hands strangling him.

Replying to a question from another commissioner T Selventhiranathan, Pornthip said that it was not necessary that strangulation occurs only in crimes of passion, as she had seen enforcement bodies such as the police resorting to such actions.

She agreed in her line of work that sometimes the authorities, especially the high-ranking officers, had hated her but reiterated that it was her duty to find the truth for the sake of the deceased and for justice.

Following her testimony, Leong and Federal Court judge and chief commissioner justice James Foong thanked Pornthip for her testimony.

However, Foong did not allow Pornthip's counsel Malik Imtiaz Sarwar to ask her questions, explaining that the commission did not want to create a precedent where other lawyers coming with the witnesses were to be allowed to ask questions.

Pornthip investigated over breach of discipline