Fat Haggis

Summary of disturbing facts regarding the two Burmese:

1 - They drunk beer and wine. They were reportedly stole their clothes while they were swimming ???

2 - Their DNA was found in the body of the Hannah. This evidence is contested in form but not in substance. The complotiste version is that RTP falsified the results of analysis to incriminate them.

3 - They would have "found" David's phone in the night on the beach when they were probably still under the influence of alcohol. However they don't saw the victims ???

One takes the side of victim's families cannot accept this version.

We understand that the motivation of a vast majority of posters here is the unilateral criticism of investigators and by extension of Thailand in general. It was already coarser at first, it becomes farcical with these last informations.

Just by their own words they halfway to a conviction.

They were near the crime of the scene (opportunity), they were drunk (people do stupid things when drunk), their clothes were stolen (but not the guitar, what a weird thief, anyway a key piece of evidence conveniently lost), they "found" the phone of the victim and tried to destroy it to avoid being incriminated (how would they know it was related to the crime?) and last but not least they never came forward to help in any way with the investigation.

They had a full year to come up with that alibi and it's so flimsy you could knock it over with a feather.

I haven't seen any report on what the prosecution asked them during cross examination, or what their answers were but I can't imagine it going over very well.

Doesn't there many times already circulate a picture in this and other Koh Tao threads, which many posters claim is of someone wearing David's shorts?

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Or someone who's clothes were covered in blood from the horrific attack on Hannah !! That guy with the alleged David's clothes was not one of the B2... Who could it have been then !? Ask the police guy removed from the case..He knew !

Nothing to do with me, but I suggest you report to the court with your evidence before it's too late, because you clearly insinuate that you know who it is in that CCTV screenshot.

Try the opposite, most know who it isn't and it isn't either of the B2

Since you alll know who it is, so I assume you must have evidence, I suggest you get to the court before it's too late.

Maybe you can share a taxi with Nigeone, who also seem to have sufficient evidence.

Try reading it again, who it isn't you're clearly trolling now and deliberately trying to bait posters in a very blatant attempt to have this thread shut down.

Summary of disturbing facts regarding the two Burmese:

1 - They drunk beer and wine. They were reportedly stole their clothes while they were swimming ???

2 - Their DNA was found in the body of the Hannah. This evidence is contested in form but not in substance. The complotiste version is that RTP falsified the results of analysis to incriminate them.

3 - They would have "found" David's phone in the night on the beach when they were probably still under the influence of alcohol. However they don't saw the victims ???

One takes the side of victim's families cannot accept this version.

We understand that the motivation of a vast majority of posters here is the unilateral criticism of investigators and by extension of Thailand in general. It was already coarser at first, it becomes farcical with these last informations.

Just by their own words they halfway to a conviction.

They were near the crime of the scene (opportunity), they were drunk (people do stupid things when drunk), their clothes were stolen (but not the guitar, what a weird thief, anyway a key piece of evidence conveniently lost), they "found" the phone of the victim and tried to destroy it to avoid being incriminated (how would they know it was related to the crime?) and last but not least they never came forward to help in any way with the investigation.

They had a full year to come up with that alibi and it's so flimsy you could knock it over with a feather.

I haven't seen any report on what the prosecution asked them during cross examination, or what their answers were but I can't imagine it going over very well.

Doesn't there many times already circulate a picture in this and other Koh Tao threads, which many posters claim is of someone wearing David's shorts?

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Or someone who's clothes were covered in blood from the horrific attack on Hannah !! That guy with the alleged David's clothes was not one of the B2... Who could it have been then !? Ask the police guy removed from the case..He knew !

Nothing to do with me, but I suggest you report to the court with your evidence before it's too late, because you clearly insinuate that you know who it is in that CCTV screenshot.

Try the opposite, most know who it isn't and it isn't either of the B2

Not one of you RTP sycophants have come up with the biggest mystery of all....... MOTIVE!!!

I'm going to keep repeating this. Neither of the b2 DNA was found on the hoe, the weapon that was used to murder Hannah. Her blood was on the blade. Anything else is circumstantial.

LOADS OF DNA ON THE MURDER WEAPON BUT NOT FROM THE B2..

IS THAT CLEAR..............?

Feeeeeeerk the phone, the hotdog wrapper, a zillion fags on the beach, but wait.....a coke bottle had the B2's DNA on it found in BKK....Must be them......

Gawd.....................

Clearly the fact that there was no b2 DNA found on the hoe that was used to murder Hannah escapes some posters. The constant deviation of a phone is typical of misinformation deliberately used by trolls.

"Dr Pornthip, Thailands most famous forensic scientist, told the court that DNA would have been left on the hoe by anyone who handled it for more than 15 seconds."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11857706/British-backpacker-murder-trial-DNA-on-murder-weapon-does-not-match-accused.html

So maybe they didn't hold it for more than 15 seconds.

Very true - explains why they didn't find DNA from the perpetrators of the crimes on the hoe!!

Dr Porntip has held a grudge with the RTP for a long long time and just doesn't she love being in the limelight with her 'rainbow hair' - it just say's 'look at me'. She was irked about being left out of the initial investigation (how can they do this to me, snubbing such an important and valuable resource) and so I believe she fabricated her findings to discredit the RTP. I wouldn't trust her with a barge pole and disregard her DNA evidence as being falsified just to undermine the police investigation.

And the British coroners report over the Thai coroners inconsistencies? Not to be trusted either?

What makes the Thai version correct and the UK one wrong then? You must be some sort of expert to be able to stand fast over one version and not the other?

UK pathologist states no evidence of rape, but you have repeated there was one, and you know this to be true how?

Confessions made under duress? I can guarantee you that within 30 minutes of torture I could make you claim to be Elvis Pressley, these two know they're going to the rope, the powers that be have seen to this. So why did they not just go for a plea bargain ?

Your comments about an eccentric experts smacks of, well smacks of your own agenda to be honest.

Now your deliberately trying to close the thread cruncher, it's very odd you "turning up " like this as you've been pretty inconspicuous in all the other Koh Tao threads

You're not offering anything new, just stoking the embers, where have you been all through the trial ?

Suspicious indeed.

I am a TV member same like all the others, and are entitled to my opinion, which doesn't need to be the same as your regardless of how much you regret that.

If you try to blame me, why don't you talk to your friend Gweiloman for baiting me?

Nothing wrong with an opinion, just wondering where it has been over the past year and in the various other topics that were locked?

My opinion is moot, I have stated since the trial started its nothing more than a show trial, way too many incosistencies presentedby the prosecution.

Failure to provide crucial documents with regards to chain of custody, failure to provide motive, using up all DNA, not processing DNA, dismissing DNA, producing the worlds fastest DNA results that even surprised their own witnesses.

Now your deliberately trying to close the thread cruncher, it's very odd you "turning up " like this as you've been pretty inconspicuous in all the other Koh Tao threads

You're not offering anything new, just stoking the embers, where have you been all through the trial ?

Suspicious indeed.

looks to me like there an effort to bait posters and get this thread locked again.

It was his phone as the British end confirmed that it was, categorically David's phone - now I want to know how he (Wei) ended up with his phone (before asking his friend to smash it up and dispose of it for him seemingly in panic fashion) when he claimed he never entered what became the crime scene and knew nothing of the murders until the following morning.

Considering that he said he went to bed at 2.00 AM or was it 4.00 AM and he was with friends, just how did he get hold of this phone? I think that I have the answer!!

He is telling 'porkies' and doing it not very well.

Why do you keep asking this? It's in his testimony he found it, what's so hard to understand?

Have you never found anything in your life, and thought " cool, look what I found? "

What is much more intriguing and alarming is the blonde hair found in Hannah's hand that has never ever been explained nor investigated why is that?

Says who? That is nonsense, it takes whatever time it takes to get skin cells to be removed from the skin and transferred to whatever substrate; for example if you get hit by a wooden club (or the handle of a hoe for that matter) more likely than not there will be transfer even if the contact time is a fraction of a second.

This idea that either of the victims wielded the hoe because their DNA was found on it is nothing but hot air.

Dr Pornthip says a minimum of 15 secs, would you like to tell her thats nonsense, I'll go with her opinion not yours

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11857706/British-backpacker-murder-trial-DNA-on-murder-weapon-does-not-match-accused.html

Dr Pornthip, Thailands most famous forensic scientist, told the court that DNA would have been left on the hoe by anyone who handled it for more than 15 seconds.

How about you think for a second before simply deciding what to accept as true or not?

Have you ever scrapped yourself against something, a wall for example? How long it took for your skin to be scrapped and therefore leave traces on the surface it was in contact with? A lot less than 15 seconds I'm sure.

Claiming that finding DNA from both of the victims on the hoe is evidence that they handled it defensively (or at all) is nothing but wishful thinking.

The hoe was handled multiple times that we know, after a year the touch DNA of Hannah & David was still found, logical assumptions follow from logical minds

So AleG is now more of an expert than Dr Porntip in the field of forensics? I don't profess to be as much of an expert as AleG, but surely what Dr Porntip is referring to is "touch" DNA. In other words, not "scrapping" (scraping?) DNA which obviously is totally different.

He's also an expert on gait

He's also very disrespectful to experts in their field by dissing their expertise, but pretty normal from him really.

The question of motive has always intrigued me, as it's never been presented as far as I'm aware in the court.

If Wei was at the scene and observed the murder , wouldnt it work in his favor to tell the court who he saw that night on the beach ?

If he is innocent and set free he will go back to Burma anyway so he shouldnt worry about his life will be in danger if he talks.

This is exactly what I said. Why are they not saying their side of the story? Just saying he found it on the beach at 4am doesn't make sense to me.

errr finding something on the beach doesn't have to make sense, unless it's a mermaid !!

And of course the BIB changed the IMEI of the phone to David's phone IMEI, however it would have been impossible to know that IMEI without having David's phone.

As you say, it is POSSIBLY David's phone, but I think BIB cleared that up almost a year ago already, and there are posts about on this forum.

Other then that I can post a hundred pictures of a phone the LOOKS like David's phone.

I agree it may not be his phone hard to tell but my point is if they had davids phone it would be easy to damage it and say it was found in the bushes.

The other question needs to be asked did the RTP ask for the IMEI number or did they give the IMEI number to the family.

I would think they would ask for the parents to give them the number then it would be easy as fritzzz demonstrated to change the number.

To many unanswered questions at the moment .

More IF's.

Why would the bib ask the family for David's IMEI? Is it it normal that parents know the IMEI's from their children's phone?

you must be missing the news

Mr Miller's family claimed to have secured the identifying number of their son's phone and passed it to the Thai Embassy, after there was conflicting testimony as to whether the British authorities had helped the prosecution confirm ownership.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/british-family-intervenes-in-thai-murders-trial

No I didn't miss the news, in fact they came up with that almost a year after the phone was found, and that sounds to me as if they stumbled by coincidence on the IMEI number by going through Davids pc.

Do you have children and know the IMEI numbers of their phones?

David was an adult, not a child, why would his parents need to know the IMIE number of their adult son?

The IMIE number is also on the iphone box, mine was on the side, it's possible that the parents found the box, and sent the IMIE number to Thailand for verification/confirmation, as it's already been pointed out to you, and oddly enough it's been pointed out many times here by posters, the IMIE was never confirmed, now it has.

Does it prove murder? no all it proves is nothing really, and it's also been shown that an IMIE number can be changed with software, pretty much the same as a single still from a CCTV isn't proof of being in a place at a certain time.

Would I be in the least bit surprised that certain information contained within every single Koh Tao thread doesn't make its way to the RTP investigating this case? Not in the slightest, people here who are in denial, have interests with the more darker side of Koh Tao.

Don't be surprised in the slightest that the RTP have been using these threads via their proxies and the contents to "assist them" in their dismal initial investigation.

I'm very very very surprised that not a single person hasn't picked up on the fact that not one of the accused had any defensive wounds on them, if Hannah and David were using the hoe to protect themselves.

I thought the hoe was supposed to be the murder weapon. On account of this, It's really not surprising that you were the only one to pick up on this, you are a genius, well done!!

The murder weapon that didn't have any of the accused DNA on it? But had both victims DNA, but only Hannah's blood but not David's?

The DNA was from when both victims held the hoe, not when they were killed with it.

They never presented David's murder weapon as far as I recall.

Actually I'm pretty sure with regards to the iIMIE number the iPhone has to be connected to the computer/iTunes via the data transfer cable, otherwise no technical aspects of the phone shows.

I'm very very very surprised that not a single person hasn't picked up on the fact that not one of the accused had any defensive wounds on them, if Hannah and David were using the hoe to protect themselves.

Could police have 'planted' the phone? Initially, they said the found phone belonged to Hannah, then they changed their story.

When the defendant (note: one defendant, not two) claims he found the phone on the beach, what time did that happen ....before the crime? after?

If he made that claim during torture, than it means absolutely nothing. He could admit to being The Pope under torture.

The worst the phone incident shows, is one of the defendants might be a petty thief who took something off a beach.

He admitted it in court. It is now PROVEN that one of the accused took he murder victims phone, and that makes it highly likely that he was at the scene of the murder or close enough to know what happened. He also admits to theft and vandalism (stealing the phone and breaking it). The police work has been super shabby and unprofessional, but that doesn't mean that they have the wrong men. We will never know for sure, because the Thai police can't be trusted, but sometimes they get the right results, and the FACT that one of the accused took the phone, is huge.

There is a huge difference in the words "took", and "found".

So how many arrest warrants are now in force?

Any country, other than Thailand would be investigating ways / methods of extraditing a criminal - especially when you know where the bolthole is and said criminal is flitting around the world more than likely into countries that have extradition agreements with Thailand.

Another slow news day.

Maybe because these countries just don't give a rats arse about what Thailand wants under its current guise?

If the truth be known, it's more than likely Thailand doesn't really give a rats arse what Thaksin is doing, and the further away he is the better.

As for his name popping up all the time - not entirely a function of the junta -- the news media thinks it sell papers and will take every opportunity to run headline.

Every article published about him in recent weeks is due to conflicts with the junta. And they then pass this onto the press, the press are heavily sanctioned these days, the sacking of the PBS team who apparently refused to air a junta propaganda piece, and the Nations reporter tells most people that the junta are behind his name kept up there, and not the press.

You're right though, Thailand doesn't give a rats arse, the junta, however do

So how many arrest warrants are now in force?

Any country, other than Thailand would be investigating ways / methods of extraditing a criminal - especially when you know where the bolthole is and said criminal is flitting around the world more than likely into countries that have extradition agreements with Thailand.

Another slow news day.

Maybe because these countries just don't give a rats arse about what Thailand wants under its current guise?

under the leadership of professionals, but of other occupation.

says it all ...

The wheels are wobbling

The junta sure do seem to be keeping Thaksin very much in he public eye, despite telling the press otherwise!!

Citing he damaged their reputation 555555

They had one to begin with? The clown show continues, they really are such a sensitive bunch this Army, how they'd ever cope in a time of real conflict amuses me.

"Stop shooting bullets at us, they hurt"!!

And the insanity continues! This could easily have been dealt with by using article 44 to reprimand the guy and let him off with a warning !

It's not all down to these dodgy real estate agents, there are plenty of farangs who know full well what they're doing isn't kosher.

There's probably quite a few who are Thai visa members too. ?

The semi-annual crackdown....must have popped up on some govt official's calendar...allows them to get a little media attention.

Semi-annual crackdown schedule for 2016 is Apr and Oct...each crackdown will only last one week because of short media (and govt) attention span.

Yes the annual alert popped up on their dodgy copy of Windows 10 !!

having the phone isn't necessary a sign of guilt of murder, just like having a DNA sample with all the public fanfare doesn't clear one of murder

all they are doing is dragging things out till a certain day arrives, then the real nasty shit will start to show.

Yes I think this back and forth of details is just to pass time until the day comes. But I have no clue what will happen then.

It doesn't bear thinking about but people need to be prepared for all sorts of shit when it does

If the negative comments on here by foreigners who have no say in Thai politics is any indication of how the Thai populace feels than it's a safe bet that their is very little support for this non elected government.

I am probably going to regret asking this question and I don't really expect to get a sensible answer, but why would the negative comments on here by foreigners have anything whatsoever to do with how the Thai populace feels ?

Seriously have you read that much red propaganda on this forum that it has become fact in your mind ?

If so I not only feel sorry for you but I also have a new found respect for the power of the written word.

Seriously Mike? And the negative comments with regards to Thais and democracy by the kool aid drinkers is a reflection on how the Thai populace thinks?

You have several posters who consistently state that the population were sick of the PTP and they would have been voted out, without a single shred of evidence to back that up other than their opinion, the election was sabotaged to prevent any "surprise" reversal in their "opinions".

The propaganda jibe is lame, both sides of the divide have been ramping propaganda up, it's down to individuals to believe what they're hearing or reading.

At the end of the day, Johnny Foreigner has zero impact on Thai opinions on political matters.