[Napoleon Porlumpar]

In The 1979 Geylang Bahru murder case, is very obvious that malaysian neighbour is the murderer. The circumstantial evidence is very strong.

1)No forced sign of entry, hence must be someone known to the murdered children.

2)The murderer knows that on 3 days from Mondays to Fridays, an elderly woman will be along the corridor washing her hair and he chose a day that the old woman does not wash her hair along the corridor to commit the murder, this proves the murderer is a resident in that same block.

3)The kid's parents left the house at 6.30am and by 7.10am another neighbour came to knock the door, hence the time to commit the murder is very short, hence again proving the murderer should be someone staying in that same block.

4)A taxi driver correctly identified the malaysian neighbour with bloodstains in his clothes and a knife banging against his taxi door on the same day that the murder occured.

I think in Singapore in the 1960s and 1980s also got another 2 case whereby the murderer was charged with murder based solely on circumstantial evidence.

This 1979 Geylang Bahru murder case the circumstantial evidence is very strong, hence it is very strange why that IO handling this murder case release that malaysian neighbour after the taxi-driver already correctly identified him out at the police station.

My personal guess is and I want to emphasize this is my personal guess, My personal guess is why the IO release the malaysian neighbour was becos the IO himself was also a malaysian-chinese or he himself was a former malaysian-chinese that migrated to singapore and maybe he was reluctant to detain and proceed to charge the malaysian-chinese guy for murder based solely on circumstantial evidence and his thinking maybe was to release the malaysian first until if more physical evidence surface then go arrest him again.

Because throughout the past 30 years, I got came across some singaporean-chinese that are born in malaysia or ex-malaysians, these ex-malaysians/malaysia-born singaporean-chinese are very defensive and biased towards those malaysian-chinese that had committed evil acts or offences or crimes in singapore.

The circumstantial evidence in this 1979 Geylang Bahru murder case is very strong, pointing the malaysian neighbour as the murderer. The IO handing this case should not had released the malaysian neighbour. The IO made a mistake.

The IO should had proceeded to charge the malaysian neighbour for murder based on the very strong circumstantial evidence and should not had released the malaysian.

I think in Singapore there are 2 other cases in 1980s and 1960s whereby the murderers are charged for murder based only on circumstantial evidences only.

And it was later revealed the malaysian neighbour moved out from the block and returned to malaysia

so Sherlock................any idea why the kids never scream or cry ...............or neighbours all heard the screaming but heck care ?