The twists and turns of the Percy Lapid murder continue to either vexedly amuse or befuddle us.

Initially, they paraded before the mass media the gunman owning up to the shooting of the victim, blurting out the names of his co-perpetrators and the originating place of the contract to kill their prey, thereby alerting the accomplices who made themselves scarce from pursuing lawmen.

The premature and dumb presentation to the public of the confessed triggerman unnecessarily warned the person who crafted the brutal slay to cover his trail, which includes, among others, eliminating and silencing those in the criminal conspiracy, to shield him from being identified and arrested.

Then within four hours of the publicized confession of the triggerman, the inmate at the National Bilibid Prison, who was facing murder, attempted murder and illegal possession of firearms cases, whom the gunman pointed to as the one who contracted him for the hit, suddenly ended up dead.

The mysterious death of the named middleman was not surprising at all. It was the logical consequence of his being identified as a co-conspirator arising from the premature and inane presentation of the shooter to the mass media.

To dispel the probability of the inmate dying of natural causes, a belated autopsy was conducted after his body was embalmed. The result of the post-mortem examination shows that there were no external injuries found on the body of the deceased removing the possibility of foul play. A toxicology test was also made with the result showing no sign of any lethal substance being digested.

The President, expressing disbelief at such convenient coincidental death with the medico-legal report indicating the absence of any evidence pointing to an intentional killing, ordered a deeper and more thorough investigation of the slaying. The DoJ Secretary arranged for an independent second autopsy with a private renowned forensic pathologist.

In another twist to this case, the latest autopsy result appears to be amplifying the official government's autopsy report that points to death arising from natural causes, a conclusion apparently reached, as there are "no apparent signs of external physical injury" on the remains of the deceased. A portion of the new pathological diagnosis states that "based on available information regarding the circumstances surrounding the death, the manner is homicide, xxx." I find the classification of death as homicide erroneous. If the killing is intentional, then it can not be classified as a homicide, but murder.

According to the famed pathologist, the victim died of asphyxia. She said in a press conference that the alleged middleman may have suffocated from a plastic bag placed over his head, given that his body bore no signs of injury.

Her other findings showing complications in the lungs, e.g. pulmonary congestion, edema and hemorrhages, are consistent with asphyxia.

Meanwhile, the justice chief was quoted as saying that the radioman's case is "in the last phase of the investigation," adding that police investigators are now targeting "two masterminds," whom he declined to identify. In the press briefing last Saturday with the forensic expert, he further said, "this case is almost over. It's just a matter of filing the cases and probably being able to identify the masterminds in this case." This is another interesting theory: There are now "two masterminds." The probers from their declarations appeared to have targeted a government official as the mastermind.

As pointed out by this writer in the previous column, the authorities' earlier statements in relation to the brains behind the murder, seemed to zero in on the preventively suspended Bureau of Corrections chief, whom this columnist opined as collateral damage. Or a sitting duck, having been deprived of his defenses, by those whose nefarious and illegal activities he stopped and dismantled, in the course of his official duties. He has become the nemesis of convicted criminals, who continuously operate their criminal activities behind prison walls.

The probers should consider the angle of drug lords and other criminal syndicates framing him for the crime. It's not far-fetched considering that he is a stumbling block to their illegal trade while in prison.

This inquisitive mind poses this query: What would he profit from the death of a radio commentator? It is said that there are 160 persons who were the target of biting and scathing commentaries by the murdered broadcaster, so why should he care or be affected by him when he was not singled out, plus the fact that, from what we have been told, he was not even particularly identified, but referred to only as "Cinderella" in a blind item in his commentaries. It doesn't add up.

Something is amiss with this theory.

Those involved in the investigation should leave no stone unturned in this crime. All angles must be pursued, they should not be in a hurry to file a criminal case that is half-baked. Punishment must be meted out only to the guilty ones so that justice may be achieved.