BritTim

In the light of what we now know about the fact that the British police did almost nothing during their visit to Thailand to "observe" the investigation into the Koh Tao murders, I'm beginning to understand why the victims' families put out those statements via the FCO.

I came across a post on another forum yesterday where the poster implied the families may have asked the U.K. police not to pursue the case any further because they want it all over and done with.

The poster went on to say poignantly that "they have been too silent and that's why I think they want all this to end regardless of justice" and "they have given up and walked away".

The above is only an opinion of course but it really struck a chord with me as it's what I've been thinking since I read those statements. Contrast this with the attitude of the families of Kirsty Jones and Nick Pierson.

It is apparent that the families have only seen the evidence provided by the RTP who are determined to see the B2 found guilty, despite compelling reasons to believe they are not guilty (which have been discussed at length on this forum). Personally, I think the best outcome would be for the B2 to be acquitted due to insufficient evidence and for the case to remain unsolved. Sadly, it would not provide closure for the families of David and Hannah but it would save two innocent men from a possible death sentence.

My own reading of this is a little different.

Generally speaking, the UK authorities in such situations mainly want to avoid it developing into a diplomatic incident that can affect the overall ties between the countries. Up to a point, I am happy that the wider interests of UK citizens and UK businesses in Thailand are given importance. It is just that, in this case, the instinctive reaction has gone too far.

Given the UK authorities' priorities, how will be case have been handled? First, they appointed family liaison officers whose job is to create a buffer between the families and the Thai institutions plus the media. This potentially has positive aspects as it can reduce pressure on family members at a critical time. More importantly, from the UK's point of view, it allows them to avoid conflict between the families and Thailand. Their initial advice will have been to avoid talking to the media and to leave the liaison with the Thai authorities to them.

The UK police will have been sent with instructions to be diplomatic in their dealings with the RTP and just collect what information they can without ruffling feathers. Obviously, if the Burmese kids are being framed, the RTP will have chosen to tell the UK police little. They will, however, have been charming hosts and very reassuring in their statements that everything was done by the book.

The family liaison officers probably know very little about Thailand. What they will know is that high profile crimes usually give rise to all kinds of conspiracy theories. They will have done little to check whether the doubts raised in this case are well founded. The UK police will have returned and told both the liaison officers and the families that, based on what they observed in Thailand, they cannot refute the official RTP story. The liaison officers will have been telling the families not to pay attention to conspiracy stories they read in the media.

With the best of intentions, to reduce pressure on the families to become involved (and, incidentally, satisfying the UK authorities' primary objectives) the FCO and liaison officers will have helped the families draft and issue those unfortunate statements.

The above may not be 100% accurate, but I would bet from experience that it is not far from the truth.

From reports it would seem a male and female lost out on a fight with two armed men and that the male was attacked from behind ... possibly by surprise.

Curious, where has Nomsed's height been reported and who are the experienced people who have concluded the height of the person in the video ... which I again will remind that is not somebody anyone has any proof was involved in the crime and somebody who police may have already identified and cleared.

I will take you on your word about the victim's heights and the Burmese but I question the reliability of the person in the video and the Bangkok University kid who has already been cleared and proved to not have been on the island.

From reports it would seem a male and female lost out on a fight with two armed men ...

Taking the official story at face value, two small Burmese, with no prior history of violence, armed with one hoe.

I again will remind that is not somebody anyone has any proof was involved in the crime and somebody who police may have already identified and cleared.

And I again shall reiterate that most of us have little trust in the RTP's investigation. However, I take no position on whether Nomsod was involved. I am only fairly convinced that the Burmese kids were not.

Same people who don't believe in the time stamped video clearly showing his face and that he wasn't on the island at the time.

Of course makes perfect sense to disregard clear video on numerous cameras and believe in a video that investigators have confirmed is not him and that nobody in their right mind could ever come close to identify it as being him.

Just curious, as I assume this must be known but am unaware ... How tall is Nomsed? How tall is the person in the video? How tall are the Burmese defendants?

You are highly articulate, and you are correct that the individual pieces of evidence pointing at perpetrators other than the Burmese kids are flimsy. However, nothing I have seen so far that is verifiable points at the Burmese kids being guilty. Indeed, their physical stature lack of anyone suggesting they have been violent in the past, and their behavior in the aftermath of the crime makes me almost sure they are innocent. Meanwhile, you ask,

How tall is Nomsed?

Reported to be around 1.58m

How tall is the person in the video?

Estimated by some with experience in such matters, and by the RTP, as 1.60m to 1.70m

How tall are the Burmese defendants?

One is only 1.44m (tiny even by Burmese standards), the other 1.52m

Worth remembering that David and Hannah were around 1.90m and 1.70m respectively. According to the official story, they lost out in a battle to the death to the Burmese kids, half their weight, without suffering any injuries themselves.

By the way, do you have an explanation for why both Hannah and David were found naked? This has always seemed a curious aspect of the case that matches the theory that the crime scene was stage managed, but is hard to reconcile otherwise.

On the right track? I thought a major reason for the new initiative is that Thailand is currently on the wrong (narrow-gauge) track!

The minister said the issue of citizenship should be separated from access to basic education.

This is hugely important. I am convinced that the issue of stateless persons would be largely solved in a generation if the younger generation was able to acquire an education.

So a response at last from the UK police just announced by Andy Hall. Confirms the UK police did very little and raises serious questions about the statements from the families: https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

One part of the response strikes me as especially bizarre. They state that no help for the defense (in potentially avoiding the execution of the accused) could be offered because, under Thai law, the charges potentially carry the death penalty!

Apparently, though, it is fine to facilitate statements (by the families) that make a guilty verdict more likely.

This is UK diplomacy at its worst. They will do nothing that risks the larger relationship with Thailand.

This is what gripes me.

The families say the evidence is convincing yet the UK police have told the lawyers defense team that they didn't really investigate much. This stinks to high heaven.

The evidence is convincing? This is probably what the Thai Police relayed to the UK Detectives.. hence the quote from the victim's families..

Total waste of time... UK Detectives going to Thailand... -IMO

This clip is interesting...

I watched this discussion when it first appeared. My Thai is reasonable so I followed the drift then. It is relaxing to be able to see the subtitles on this snippet. The full discussion is much longer, and contains various other allegations. What is really interesting is that no defamation suit has been instigated. I assumed this would happen and be the opportunity for a proper investigation. To allow these allegations to go unanswered speaks volumes IMHO.

Note to those who are unaware. View the clip on YouTube and click the appropriate icon bottom right to enable subtitles.

So a response at last from the UK police just announced by Andy Hall. Confirms the UK police did very little and raises serious questions about the statements from the families: https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

One part of the response strikes me as especially bizarre. They state that no help for the defense (in potentially avoiding the execution of the accused) could be offered because, under Thai law, the charges potentially carry the death penalty!

Apparently, though, it is fine to facilitate statements (by the families) that make a guilty verdict more likely.

This is UK diplomacy at its worst. They will do nothing that risks the larger relationship with Thailand.

I read the linked above report the other day:

“We can’t designate that every witness is important. Their testimony should take affect over the case. If we have that kind of witness ..."

NB: IF

Let's look at this quote in context:

“We can’t designate that every witness is important. Their testimony should take affect over the case. If we have that kind of witness, we can ask the government to provide security and expenses,” said lawyer Aung Myo Than.

The true meaning is that the promised support is only for the most important witnesses, not every witness the defense might like to use.

Meanwhile, this snippet from the article is, perhaps, more significant:

“Five Myanmar workers returning from Thailand came from Koh Tao. Thailand told witnesses to stay away from the case and bribed them not to make telephone conversations. That’s why some workers are afraid to testify,” said Aung Myo Than.

I have not seen this reported anywhere else.

I found this interesting. It gives some new insight into the progress being made by the defense to line up witnesses to testify on the B2's behalf:

http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8443

All indications are that Myanmar really is going to do its utmost to try to ensure a fair trial.

I found this interesting. It gives a little more insight on the defense's progress in lining up witnesses to testify of the B2's behalf:

http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8443

Free unhindered movement of people across borders is a death sentence to the sovereignty of that country and is a silly fantasy that some people ignorant of history - including recent history bathe in ... Just look at the migrant invasion into the U.K. Just look at the Hispanic - Mexican - Central American migratory invasion of the USA...

Well, the native Americans might agree with you, but I do not.

Immigrants, in general, are a self selecting group of highly motivated, ambitious individuals. Recipient countries tend to resent new immigrant arrivals, only recognizing the immense economic benefits they bring in retrospect.

I shall not pretend there are no downsides. Local culture certainly comes under pressure from the different ideas of the arrivals. However, "death sentence to the sovereignty of that country"? No way. For all the immigration into the UK of the last 5,000 years, the UK armed forces remain firmly under Westminster control and Ireland, Jamaica, Pakistan, India, Poland, Nigeria, Hong Kong and all the other sources of immigration into the country have no influence whatsoever on how they are used.

As I understand it, the Acmecs (Single Entry visa for Cambodia and Thailand) is worthless for almost everyone. First, it does not save visa fees. The way it operates, is that you must pay on entry to the country whose embassy you did not use to apply for the visa. This means, say you applied at a Cambodian embassy, that on entry to Thailand you must queue up in the visa on arrival lane to pay your 1,000 baht. Further, if you are in Thailand and leave for a short visit to Cambodia, the visa is no longer valid for your return to Thailand. The only saving is a bit of space in your passport. This is sad, as it could be very convenient if it provided what it sounds like it provides.

200 hundred witnesses ?

Even the most ardent CTs are going to have trouble defending this one.

I'm sorry but the defence is doing their clients no favours with some of their tactics and statements.

That depends on what they are testifying to. The RTP and marine police were aggressively pursuing Burmese on Koh Tao and on boats that could have visited Koh Tao. Their "inquiries" may have extended to threats and violence aimed at creating suspects and/or witnesses of the murders. I find it credible that 200 Burmese could testify to this kind of background. The question is: would this be admissible in court? That is up to the judge, so I suspect the answer is "no".

http://www.irrawaddy.org/burma/koh-tao-suspects-innocent-govt-investigation-team.html

Your comments doesnt make sense. If the witnesses are back in their native Myanmar , then why dont they talk to the Myanmar defence team ? If they have information to share that will give us other suspects than B2, of course they will speak , they are safely back in Myanmar and have nothing to lose. .

More correctly stated, they probably have nothing to lose as long as they never intend setting foot in Thailand again. That is a major proviso when they can earn far more working in a place like Koh Tao than they can back home.

Anyway, say they were willing to talk openly to the defense team, even give videotapes interviews, how much impact would this have on the court proceedings? Most likely none. The prosecution would claim (with justification) that the statements should not be admissible with no chance for cross examination. Sure, if leaked to the press, such statements might be embarrassing. However, the Thais would just laugh them off.

From Deutsche Welle English:

Evidence , please show us some evidence that they are not guilty, its hardly a surprise that Myanmar found them to be innocent.....

The way I read it: the Burmese investigators have been convinced of the B2's innocence for weeks, based on what they have been told by the Burmese community on Koh Tao. No one with first-hand knowledge is willing to come forward officially, giving the reason that they are fearful of retaliation. This makes sense to me, but the claimed first-hand accounts might not be truthful. I doubt the B2's guilt, but the defense is sounding desperate.

So in the video around 2:00 it says that the investigators have interviewed 40 Burmese witnesses now in Myanmar who may have witnessed the attacks. Don't the 40 potential Burmese witnesses know if they witnessed the attacks or not?

Yes, they know. However, the people who interviewed them must allow for the possibility that their testimony is false, aimed at helping their worker friends.

So why didn't they just say that?

Perhaps, they felt a single word rather than a multiple sentence explanation fitted better for a statement where sound bites are all important. There was nothing obviously dishonest in what they presented. Quite the contrary: I think they believe what they said.

So in the video around 2:00 it says that the investigators have interviewed 40 Burmese witnesses now in Myanmar who may have witnessed the attacks. Don't the 40 potential Burmese witnesses know if they witnessed the attacks or not?

Yes, they know. However, the people who interviewed them must allow for the possibility that their testimony is false, aimed at helping their worker friends.

And of course, had the police said the toxicology reports showed the victims had drugs in their systems before their deaths, then that would open up another crate load of worms that they would have to deal with.

(No, I do not believe the B2 are guilty, but ...) if David had really been strung out on drugs, it would be slightly more credible that the B2 could overpower him without suffering any injury themselves. Just maybe, the RTP pitched this to the British cops and made them believe it. This would tie in with the statements by the families.

Why do so many British citizens leave it until the last minute to renew an expiring passport.

Time left on an existing passport is added to your new one up to a maximum of 9 months.

If you have at least 3 blank pages left you can also extend your current passport for 12 months.

https://www.gov.uk/renew-adult-passport

The complication is that you cannot travel on the old passport once you apply for the new one. I postponed renewing a fast filling passport when the horror stories about 9-12 weeks started, and was considering a trip to the UK only to renew my passport. Hopefully, this will not now be necessary.

What does it mean to be exocuted? Could someone give me the meaning of this word. Please, pretty please.

The word is "executed". It means that a person or persons has decided that your life is of no value, and they want you to die. They acted accordingly. In civilized societies, this barbarism is limited to those outside the law. In some countries (and in the past most) such killing is also carried out by the state.

8 floors=3 years

Not so if you bring over experts from Australia.

I can arrange that.

Reducing from 24 floors to 8 (removing 16 floors). Is the remaining building going to be worth the cost of the dismantlement? What happens if the owners just decide to abandon the hotel to cut their losses? Can the owners sue the BMA for negligence?

You just bit you lip:

I said 100% sure, not I think, not 99% sure, but 100% sure. Read my post again. You are day dreaming about serious shit here. Mistakes, misunderstandings, blah, blah, blah. Stupid Joke, Huh? There are no misunderstandings or mistakes because these individuals have been suspects for a long time, even with supporting Intel from from other Countries. Next time you're in swampy, tell the security there not to check your bag because it has a bomb in it. Yeah, that's a stupid joke, that will get you beat senseless, if that were possible. There are very, very few mistaken identities regarding possible terrorist suspects. Governments know who they are because they have been on watch lists a very long time. Are you aware that up to 40% of "supposedly innocent" Gitmo releases have returned to terrorist activities? So, stop day dreaming and let's not say if, "I was picked up by a foreign intelligence service." Look what's going on right now in the Lindt Cafe in Sydney. 40 innocent hostages taken by a suspected terrorist with a black flag. (ISIL?) Some how he fell through the cracks in order to pull this off. Failure in Intel? "Our approach is to resolve this peacefully. It might take a bit of time but that is our approach,"Deputy NSW Police Commissioner Catherine Burn told journalists .Authorities want to resolve this peacefully? Dealing with terrorists, peacefully? Not me. 1) Qualified Sniper 2) H ead Shot 3) Bang 4) Hostages released unharmed 5) Perp to the Morgue. You day dream with your fantasies. I'll stand by my Post.

There are many sources that confirm, sadly, that many "known" terrorists are eventually cleared and released after years of mistreatment. Here is a short article that may encourage you to check facts rather than stating what you want to believe without evidence:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/former-state-department-official-team-bush-knew-many-at-gitmo-were-innocent/275327/

I walked right through the 'danger zone' this afternoon. Didn't see a single copper.

I was in the Asoke Sukhumvit area yesterday afternoon and had the same experience. It is probably too soon to say the harassment is over, though.