The Bhutanese Leading the way.
Sonam Norbu is portrayed as model human being by his family but Namgay Dolkar’s father disagrees
The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) will be appealing the Voluntary Manslaughter conviction of Sonam Norbu (39) for killing Namgay Dolkar (24) and will be asking for a murder conviction. This was communicated to the father of the deceased, Singye Wangchuk, by the OAG recently after the father went to see the OAG lawyers to find out what will happen next.
The basis of the Thimphu District Court giving a Voluntary Manslaughter conviction, and not a murder conviction, was that after Sonam picked up Namgay, a violent altercation ensued, during which Sonam, acting under sudden passion and provocation, strangled and smothered Namgay killing her.
Based on this paper’s interview with Namgay Dolkar’s father, the grounds of the appeal are likely to be that the District Court has not established any reason for Sonam to react or if the provocation ever happened at the spot, but instead there is evidence through messages from her threatening to expose the relationship. This was the provocation for Sonam, according to the OAG, and so, Sonam Norbu, in a pre-meditated manner planned their meeting and her murder.
As per the appeal process in the High Court, the OAG will have to submit its entire basis for appeal which will largely be a replication of its main arguments and evidences which are also listed in the District Court verdict.
As per the argument in the Thimphu District Court, the OAG, on the basis of CCTV evidence, said Sonam picked up Namgay near the Shopper’s Store, and from there drove to Yusipang in a vehicle with tinted windows. The cameras at the Semtokha roundabout above RIM show that it was 45 minutes for Sonam to go and come back from Yusipang to the roundabout.
Sonam, after initially saying he never met Namgay and instead drove to Pamtsho to see his wife’s mother who was sick, and then went home to Changzamtog, later changed his statement when police showed him the CCTV footage of his car. He claimed to the police that he never picked up Namgay but went to look for her in Yusipang.
OAG maintained that he picked up Namgay and then took her to Yusipang for a long time, and this was when Namgay’s phone also went dead, as per the Telecom records. It was expressed in court that this may have been the moment that Sonam had killed Namgay.
An OAG team did multiple drives to Yusipang at various speeds and back to the Semtokha roundabout re-enacting Sonam’s claimed search for Namgay, but even the slowest speed took 20 minutes, leading to the question, what was Sonam doing for another 25 minutes in Yusipang ‘looking for her’? OAG maintained that Namgay was in the car but the tinted windows hid that.
After Yusipang, Sonam headed to Serbithang and then he exited the Thimphu Gate towards the evening headed for the Kariphu bridge from where Sonam dumped Namgay’s body into the swollen river. His car was recorded coming back to the Thimphu gate around 9 pm.
Given the District Court arguments, the likely submissions in the appeal will be Sonam’s changing statements from not meeting her to meeting her, and finally to his claim of her suicide. The other evidence will be the forensic report which showed her death due to strong pressure on the neck along with strong pressure over her mouth, and that her death happened before her body even hit the water.
The third evidence will be the CCTV footage showing Namgay heading towards Sonam’s car on the fateful day above the NPPF colony near the Shopper’s Store. After Namgay’s body was found, Sonam claimed he picked her up from below the Postcard Dewa Hotel, but the CCTV footage from two cameras above the NPPF colony show his presence in the area.
OAG initially presented footage from the two cameras saying that Namgay is seen in one camera entering the road, but not exiting as she must have entered Sonam’s car which came two minutes after she exited the house as she did not even exit five minutes later.
Here, the OAG made an error as the time between the two cameras were not synced and so had around 15 minutes difference. The defense team which got a copy of the video watched till 12 minutes and found Namgay exiting on the other side. The defense team seized on this, and said Sonam had driven off and Namgay had exited the camera.
Panic set into the OAG, but they looked at the full length of the video and found that while Namgay exited the second camera she went towards Shopper’s Store and then exited the store and crossed the road and was headed towards Sonam’s car parked at the side.
Additional evidence as presented in the District Court will also be the messages between the two. One of the messages between the two show Sonam to be very possessive of Namgay and not liking that she was going out with friends.
It has been learnt that Sonam’s family members including his siblings had even visited the OAG office pushing the suicide story before the OAG filed charges.
Family says Sonam is innocent and Namgay’s father says not so
After the Thimphu District Court convicted Sonam of involuntary manslaughter, his family and siblings continue to maintain his innocence and even published a lengthy statement on social media making accusations against the court, police, OAG and The Bhutanese, and also alleging Namgay Dolkar of being suicidal.
The statement talks of Sonam’s background as a teacher and him helping mobilize teachers under Volunteer Teachers of Bhutan (VTOB) during the COVID lockdown that broadcast lessons on TV, which later became a for profit separate organization headed by him as he resigned from the civil service. The statement talks of his various educational initiatives and calls him a ‘caring and responsible family man, a passionate educationist, environmentalist and a social worker’.
Here, Namgay Dolkar’s father, Singye Wangchuk, said, “If he was really a good person, he would not have killed my daughter. His family members will support him, but the truth is something else.”
The family and siblings’ statement maintains that Namgay Dolkar committed suicide by jumping into the river.
Singye Wangchuk said, “The messages show that my daughter wanted to expose the relationship, and he was scared that she would reveal it to his wife, as admitted by him to the police. Scared that his wife would know, he made a plan to kill my daughter and carried it out.”
According to research done by the OAG for the District Court trial, the prosecution lawyer drove several times to the bridge around the time that Sonam drove there. It was found that it would be a really inconvenient place for a suicide, given that it was pitch black at night and the bailey bridge would have hit Namgay on her head or body if she tried jumping from the sides. There was no such mark on her body. The build of the bailey bridge and its wide breadth on the sides is also inconvenient for someone trying to jump off and that too in pitch dark.
In an attempt to explain Sonam’s changing statements to the police, the family statement said that Sonam was confused due to the suicide of Namgay, his own father’s death four months ago, his mother being referred for treatment and his wife finding out about the affair in the police station.
Singye, here, said, “If he was confused then why did he hide the fact that he met my daughter and took her to Yusipang where her mobile signal died, and that was the last point of contact from the mobile. If it was not him, then who was it?”
The family statement stated that the defense lawyers had submitted to the Court evidences of the deceased undergoing some form of mental struggle grappling with the issues in her personal life where she had considered taking away her own life. It said that while working for VTOB Foundation, a concerned coworker of the deceased had, indeed, advised her to seek counseling and even consult a psychiatrist.
The statement then quotes a Kuensel article talking of depression surging by 252% between 2019 and 2023 and another Kuensel article linking mental health to suicides.
Here, Singye said, “Namgay was very happy and there were zero percent chances of her committing suicide. She had no mental health issues and she was a very happy and stable girl who helped her family. She even had made plans to go out for further studies.”
Earlier, a close female friend who worked along with Namgay in an Education Consultancy that helped students to head to Australia said Namgay was bright, confident and excited about her life.
Namgay’s close friend had said, she was excited about their travel plans to Nepal in September 2023 and she was also exploring options to study outside in USA, Canada, Europe and Australia. In fact, five days before her death, she contacted a mutual friend of theirs in Australia and said she was exploring on ways to come there.
The family statement alleged that The Bhutanese collaborated with the RBP and the OAG, and almost assumed the role of a prosecutor and had exclusive access to documents like the forensic report. The statement also alleges that reporting by The Bhutanese on the forensic report took a heavy toll on the mental wellbeing of Sonam Norbu’s wife and two teenage children.
However, records show that the first reports on the case were done by Kuensel and BBS. On 16th August 2023 Kuensel reported on the body of Namgay being found and foul play being suspected due to which the boyfriend has been detained. On the same day, BBS reported on the same with the additional detail being of bruises on the woman’s neck and hand with suicide being ruled out due to no water in the lungs.
The next report on the case was by BBS on 30th August, and this report had access to the post mortem report saying the post mortem report shows she was murdered and died due to fatal pressure on her neck. RBP even told BBS that they will charge the boyfriend with murder.
A 31st August 2023 report by Kuensel went even deeper into the forensic report identifying asphyxia caused by fatal neck pressure as the actual cause of death and examination of the woman’s body revealed wounds indicative of injuries inflicted around the time of death. There were other details too.
The first story of The Bhutanese on the case came out only on 2nd September 2023 and the paper had the same access to the information and forensic report as BBS and Kuensel, with the difference being that The Bhutanese went more in-depth into the story and talked to Namgay’s close friend and her father and shared Namgay Dolkar’s picture on the request of the father, in case there were any more eyewitnesses.
In line with its investigative nature, The Bhutanese took initiative to look at more aspects of the case in different follow up stories all based on facts and evidences.
Here, Singye Wangchuk, said, “The police, OAG and The Bhutanese were only doing their duty as per the facts and truth.”
Regarding the impact made on Sonam’s family, Singye said, “How can they talk of the impact on them when it is my child who was murdered by him. I felt like dying myself, and even a year later, I am still deeply impacted and almost bed ridden. I cannot get the thoughts out of my head, and I try and pray but I keep thinking about my daughter. If any impact is felt by their family, then it is entirely the murderer’s fault and not anybody else. He did this to them and not anybody else.”
The family’s statement is also contradictory, as in the beginning it says the wife found out about the case and extra marital affair in prison where Sonam was being questioned (long before The Bhutanese reported on the case), but later below tries to pin the blame on The Bhutanese for any impact on the wife and her two teenage children stemming from the case.
Sonam’s defense lawyers are from the prestigious Garuda Legal Services with a top-notch senior criminal lawyer formerly of OAG and of great repute defending him. The main reason why the OAG could not make the murder charge stick in the District Court was due to this senior Garuda lawyer poking holes and questioning even strong evidences with skillful arguments creating enough doubt in the court’s mind.
A legal expert the paper talked to said the statement ‘From the Family and Siblings of Sonam Norbu,’ timed strategically, just a few days before OAG’s appeal, is an attempt to cast doubt over the RBP, OAG, The Bhutanese, the District Court judgment and Namgay Dolkar, and in the process, gain public sympathy for Sonam Norbu. It is also an effort to strengthen his legal chances to prove that Namgay Dolkar died by suicide and was not killed by Sonam, despite the many evidences and the District Court verdict.
In the High Court, the OAG, as per its communication with the father, is expected to ask for a murder charge while the defense will keep pushing the suicide story.
