Fat Haggis

The crime scene management was the first issue that has come to haunt the cops as it was never done properly.

The Judges themselves must be aware that procedures were not carried out correctly.

The crime scene and the bodies themselves were not subject to forensic pathologists, which Dr. Porntip highlighted on several occasions, it would have taken a couple of hours to get one on scene, why didn't the coppers request one, unless they already know that an "outside agency" would be all over it like a tramp on chips, and thier "theory/stories/version of events" would possibly have been blown out of the water, pretty much like it has been already.

The decision to not produce the chain of custody documents must also have the judges question why not?

If this was as watertight as the police and the prosecution claimed, they would have been producing these documents in triplicate and ramming it down the defence's throat.

Just like the DNA match, it's nothing more than RTP hearsay, no chain of custody documents, is really the final unraveling of the charade of a watertight case, I feel sorry for the families of the victims as whatever "evidence" it was that they felt comfortable in releasing theses statements with regards to the accused having a case to answer to, with compelling and overwhelming evidence to support this.

The RTP clown show continues!!

The sad thing is there were posters here who hailed Somyot as being a coppers cop, and he would shake up the RTP and was painted as a Golden Child, when he's been nothing more than a damp squib.

His handling of Koh Tao and this case have been utter shambolici, the guy couldn't run a bath never mind an effective Police Force, he's been a huge disappointment and to be quite frank, a complete failure and opposite to what the members here praised him for.

Corruption is rife still, and even Prayuth needs to take a part in how this has all unfolded. It's no wonder the majority of Thais see the cops for what they really are, criminals in uniforms!!

I'm sure Mr Moon can sleep well tonight after hearing that

Mr Moon, as you put it, is one of the worst if not the worst boss that the UN has had.

Whatever he feels or not feels is of no interest, as the guy is just a muppet.

No decision skills, no assertiveness, no charisma,.....

So in other words he and the General are cut from the same cloth and should fully understand each other!!

Thank God Somyot is out of here in a few more days, apparently he's taking over from Ronald MacDonald, what a clown!!

And yet there will be people here who believe him too !!

It is hard to avoid coming to the conclusion that:

- Hannah was not raped, since the Home Office pathologist found nothing consistent with that. Therefore Thai police cannot have found any semen traces in her body.

- Police took DNA saliva samples from the 2B and divided each into two parts: one labelled semen sample and the other labelled saliva sample.

If this is the case, it is very easy to understand why police have:

- Failed to provide the semen samples for independent retesting, claiming they were all 'used up'.

- Failed to provide documentation relating to DNA collection, testing and the chain of custody.

- Failed to provide copies of their crime scene photographs, citing the pathetic excuse of lack of budget to print them.

- Claimed to have 'Lost' Hannah's clothing.

- Failed to test the hoe.

- Didn't even attempt to explain how David's wounds could have been inflicted with the blade of the hoe, as they claimed.

- Provided only limited CCTV footage.

- Used illegal stateless immigrants who are totally illiterate in both Thai and Burmese and have only a limited verbal command of both languages as official translators.

- Etc, etc.

Some good points which certain people are bound to trivialise! Just one comment regarding your first point - Hannah's body may have contained semen, but that does not mean she was raped. Perhaps you are implying that there was NO semen, so the police took saliva samples and divided them into 2 sets and called one of them "Semen"?

Unfortunately we only have the word of the Thai coroner there was semen taken, however that coroners report has been noted as having discrepancies from the report the UK coroner took.

One of my questions is in regards to the toxicology results, if they contained traces of nicotine, to support the RTP theory that the victims shared a smoke with the accused before they allegedly raped and murdered her, no traces would certainly blow that theory out of the water too, again questioning RTP motives to fabricate such a scenario.

if there are traces of nicotine in her blood, and in her lungs, it may very well be that Hannah was a secret smoker, but this is something her absent friends should have been able to confirm or deny right from the off.

Didn't the RTP also state that the accused DNA was sent to 2-3 different locations for analysis, which surely would mean 2-3 different physical results on different institutions report forms?

Again, surely they can out of all the places they "allegedly " sent these samples to provide a complete "chain of custody"?

How credible is the RTPs statement that a certain individual had his DNA taken, and was proven to be no match?

I will remind a certain individual using his own analogy that an absence of a sexual assault doesn't mean a rape hasn't taken place with

The absence of DNA doesn't clear that person of murder!!

A single frame from a cctv video camera is also not proof of presence either!!

It is hard to avoid coming to the conclusion that:

- Hannah was not raped, since the Home Office pathologist found nothing consistent with that. Therefore Thai police cannot have found any semen traces in her body.

- Police took DNA saliva samples from the 2B and divided each into two parts: one labelled semen sample and the other labelled saliva sample.

If this is the case, it is very easy to understand why police have:

- Failed to provide the semen samples for independent retesting, claiming they were all 'used up'.

- Failed to provide documentation relating to DNA collection, testing and the chain of custody.

- Failed to provide copies of their crime scene photographs, citing the pathetic excuse of lack of budget to print them.

- Claimed to have 'Lost' Hannah's clothing.

- Failed to test the hoe.

- Didn't even attempt to explain how David's wounds could have been inflicted with the blade of the hoe, as they claimed.

- Provided only limited CCTV footage.

- Used illegal stateless immigrants who are totally illiterate in both Thai and Burmese and have only a limited verbal command of both languages as official translators.

- Etc, etc.

Excellent post, it would also, in my opinion cast doubts on the Thai coroners "estimated time of death"

It's pretty obvious the crime scene was very carefully staged to make it look like there was a horrific sexual attack on Hannah, that takes someone with a bit of "knowledge" about Crime scenes and how they can/will be interpreted.

That smell you are getting is the smell of bullshit emanating from the RTP and prosecutions mouthes !!

This is from the thai autopsy. as you will see they have not said she was raped.

The autopsy report indicates that Ms. Witheridge had engaged in sexual intercourse prior to her death, but it is unclear whether the act was consensual or forced. A number of media agencies previously reported that she was raped.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761319-koh-tao-autopsy-of-murdered-britons-shows-struggle-drowning/

The police have stated she was raped by the accused on many occasions, so are you now in agreement that they have been wrong in this case, in that the defendants did not rape the deceased?

In other words the RTP have fabricated evidence, based on what you've just said, to support their basis that they raped then murdered the deceased.

Would you care to explain how it's possible that neither the accused 's DNA is present on the alleged murder weapon, however the victims DNA is present?

Would you care to explain how the Thai coroner could come to that conclusion and how did the RTP arrive at that conclusion also, when a distant lack of the accused DNA is on the very instrument they allegedly killed their victim?

Why would they kill Hannah if she participated in consensual sex with either of the accused, what possible motive could they have had, after an act of consensual sex?

I'm all ears as this will be very interesting to hear, as it's going to be a complete contradiction as to the version of events the RTP and the prosecution are pushing!!

Just because there are not signs of rape doesn't mean she was not raped.

Also there is DNA on the hoe that could or could not be one of the B2 but it is not a full profile, so the defense only proved the prosecution right. as they have never claimed there was DNA from the suspects on the hoe.

Jesus just saw this post from you! Have you not read the previous posts? The dna on the hoe that was not identified could also have shown the same results from any man dragged off the street! If your clinging to that then desperation has set in for you that has transformed into delusion.

As for no signs of rape does not mean there was no rape, your correct, that is possible, however we are not talking one single act of violence here but multiple and I will not go into details. For that it would be highly unlikely to not have signs and thats why the UK report is so relevant along with Dr Pornthips report.

Yeah, it's a slam dunk there was no rape, thus no semen, otherwise the RTP would put the sealed and dated test-tube, plus the results on the defence's table at the outset of the trial and tell them to disprove it.

The absence of ANY such evidence or RTP's willingness to produce same is absolute proof there is none. Read that again. There is none. It's been a fit-up from day one they arrested the B2 and tortured them into confessing to crimes they did not commit. I applaud the UK coroner for seeking natural justice by condemning the Thai autopsy as being false.

The sad thing is that there are some here who believe the opposite in that he UK coroners report is false, making it some kind of "conspiracy" amongst the defence team, and that they're manipulating the press, amongst others.

" I saw you steal that Apple"

" prove it"

" I can't , you ate it"

" what Apple? "

To use the words of Jordan Belfort as in " sell me this pen"

To those who firmly believe in the B2s guilt unequivocally

"sell me their guilt !!!"

Feel free to PM me if you don't wish to discuss how you have arrived at your conclusions on the open forum

Which explains why the rtp have acted to protect Thais. They probably are furious with the defence for not supporting them. No one dare question a Thai authority. It's ingrained in Thai society.

I've posted before about Andy Hall not being a very popular individual in the eyes of the Thai establishment. This was exemplified by him being berated by senior Thai policemen outside the Samui courthouse on the 1st day of the trial. They were annoyed by the fact that he had the sheer audacity to support the B2 and not their corrupted version of justice.

Actually the confrontation was, according to Andy Hall, for "disrespecting the families of the victims", and from what I've hear it has something to do with events described at the end of this article.

And we know the editor of the Samui times has a "beef" with Andy, so it is no surprise he is slagged off there........

There are many off limit "beefs' anyone who seeks justice could raise about the TVF postings of the Thai police puppets, but one thing they keep repeating ad nauseum is their accusation that the defence is desperately seeking media attention. They say this is because there are only Tweets by Andy Hall and conclude from this that reporting of the trial is one-sided and unreliable.

Sorry guys and gals, this simply doesn't 'cut the mustard' with those of us who live in the world where truth, justice and freedom of thought and speech don't play second fiddle to the bank balances of any establishment be it either police, civil service or government.

Stop crying 'crocodile tears' and blaming the defence for one-sided reporting, because the lack of concise direct media coverage of the trial is exactly what your paymasters have deemed necessary to protect any remaining shreds of credibility in a greatly flawed investigation/cover-up.

Sadly, press freedom in LOS is subject to 'attitude adjustment', and the editors also have to carefully balance their reporting so as not to jeopardise advertising income by reporting the unpalatbe truth, which might also be damaging to the country's image (income from tourism). In these situations truth is an inconvenience to be avoided at all costs, even if it means convicting and executing 2 innocent persons.

Why do you think there's some sort of a gag order and that no reporters are allowed to take notes?

Thailand authorities don't want this case being the focus of the outside world, they have done the same thing with regards to the erawan shrine bombing.

Idle threats by Somyot about reporting innacuracies and false information are nothing but a joke as the bigger disseminates of false and innacurate information are the cops themselves.

Face, not justice is what this trial is about. Do they care if they execute innocents ? Not in the slightest, it's all about Face.

This is from the thai autopsy. as you will see they have not said she was raped.

The autopsy report indicates that Ms. Witheridge had engaged in sexual intercourse prior to her death, but it is unclear whether the act was consensual or forced. A number of media agencies previously reported that she was raped.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761319-koh-tao-autopsy-of-murdered-britons-shows-struggle-drowning/

The B2 are charged with rape not sexual assault

"Ms. Witheridge had engaged in sexual intercourse prior to her death, but it is unclear whether the act was consensual or forced."

So its for the defense to prove they had Consensual sex and the prosecutions job to prove it was rape.

Nope, it is solely the word of Thai coroner that the victim had sexual intercourse prior to her death, the prosecution states rape, the U.K. Coroners report stated there was no evidence of sexual assault.

In between all 3 there is the truth, there was no evidence left other than replicated DNA that allegedly supports the RTP and prosecution claim, the Thai coroner clearly states bite marks, the U.K. Coroner said nope.

These are only 2 of the discrepancies that we have been made aware of, there may well be many others that have not been released to the public yet.

Can you please explain how you can come to believe the Thai coroners results over the UK coroners results please ?

I will ask you the same thing as I asked AleG, convince me based on what YOU know, that the B2 are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt and I will change my views accordingly.

Let's put something to bed here in regards to certain "witnesses"

When any prosecution present evidence or data, the defence will bring in "expert witnesses" they are not related to the trial per say, they are brought in as subject matter experts to "question/confirm/deny" the prosecutions own expert witness.

These witnesses should be significant people within their field, whether they are surgeons, motor mechanics or forensic analysts, they are not brought in because they don't know anything, they tend to be brought in because of the opposite, in that there's not much they don't know.

All they are doing is providing the judge with knowledge he/she himself doesn't posses, and therefore he has to rely on their "professional opinions". You would never see or hear of a judge question that opinion either, he shouldn't unless he is in possession of a knowledge that he himself can be questioned on.

Expert witnesses are used the world over, it is the job of the defence to get the best people they can, or the accused can, to be able to counter the prosecutions evidence and witnesses.

Dr.Porntip is very eccentric, she does clash often with the establishment but there is no doubts to her expertise, sure she was lambasted over the GT200 detectors, but there is a person amongst other senior people, who were also involved in that procurement and they now running the country !! So shall we leave credibility out of this ?

Running your mouth off about people who are leads in their field smacks of ignorance and jealousy, if the people who doubt their backgrounds and experience, feel free to hop over to Samui, and ask to be put on the stand and refute that subject matter experts and close with " in your professional opinion" and see what the judge actually makes of your said " professional opinion".

There is nothing sinister in what the defence are doing, it's big standar procedures, it's a defence teams job to get their clients aquitted by any means necessary within the confines of the law.

To come away in a serious murder trial and state they cannot give documents to the defence due to some " public law" is an obstruction to many, I also believe the judges asked for them too, whether this has been done, nobody here knows, unless they are getting inside information.

Does everyone remember when they were very small, their parents convinced them on nothing more than their word and hearsay, that Santa Claus was real, and year after year you kept believing it, till it became apparent later on it was all a lie, shock horror wasn't it, it was one of the greatest lies your parents ever told you, and you beleieved that lie so much, that once you had kids of your own, despite knowing it's a lie, and make believe you still subjected your own kids to the very same lie and deceive them and convinced them Santa is real?

That's what's goin on here with some posters. That they're falling for the same sort of thing here.

The greats trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

I would love nothing more than to see the B2 guilty of everything they have been accused of doing, and be punished accordingly, but the antics and investigative techniques used by the RTP, the constant switching and changing of their version of events cast doubt early on the my had the right people in custody, nothing presented by the courts for the prosecution has convinced me they have the right guilty party.

What have the members that are supporting the prosecution and the RTP investigation seen that nobody else here seems to have seen, or the defence have not seen?

I was convinced that the case was so watertight that I really was thinking that it would have been better for the B2 to change their please to guilty and ask for clemency, again NOTHING presented makes me believe they're guilty, and I don't seem to be alone in my thoughts.

AleG, convince me from what you know, that the B2 are as guilty as sin, and I will gladly change my opinion of their guilt.

I think you have all said enough now. What ever you write will not change anything that happens in the Thai court. Personly i find most of your comments

offensive and disgraceful. The Miller family have stated in the JEP ( Jersey evening post ) that they were hoping that the press and forums such as these

would have respect.and leave the matters to the lawyers and other people involved.

But you still took your time to come here and read all these disgraceful and offensive comments though?

You didn't need to read them, you could have just stayed out of these threads altogether, and now you're voicing an opinion about it too.

Pot-kettle-black

There has been nothing but respect shown towards the victims here and their families and a great deal of sympathy shown too.

But your naievity when it comes to Thai Justice is very clear indeed.

Sorry you feel this way, the majority of us here simply want to know what the truth is, and the majority here also know that the RTP are not exactly a shining example in law enforcement.

From a link previously posted:

What is sexual assault?

Sexual assault is a crime of power and control. The term sexual assault refers to sexual contact or behavior that occurs without explicit consent of the victim. Some forms of sexual assault include:

• Penetration of the victims body, also known as rape
• Attempted rape
• Forcing a victim to perform sexual acts, such as oral sex or penetrating the perpetrators body
• Fondling or unwanted sexual touching

Which of this 4 is compatible with the following?

Quote

4.1.2. The area of the *omitted* exhibited signs of sexual assault.

Don't fly too close to the light, I'm also guilty of this by engaging in dialogue, none of the "they're as guilty as sin" crowd seem to answer why they have dismissed the UK Home office autopsy result as a load of shit, and that the Thai version is correct. Without seeing the photographic evidence to back up that version, pretty sure the judge will have seen both reports, one extremely detailed with over 400 pages compete with photographs, and the Thai version with allegedly no accompanying photos, due to budget issues!!

This is from the thai autopsy. as you will see they have not said she was raped.

The autopsy report indicates that Ms. Witheridge had engaged in sexual intercourse prior to her death, but it is unclear whether the act was consensual or forced. A number of media agencies previously reported that she was raped.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761319-koh-tao-autopsy-of-murdered-britons-shows-struggle-drowning/

The police have stated she was raped by the accused on many occasions, so are you now in agreement that they have been wrong in this case, in that the defendants did not rape the deceased?

In other words the RTP have fabricated evidence, based on what you've just said, to support their basis that they raped then murdered the deceased.

Would you care to explain how it's possible that neither the accused 's DNA is present on the alleged murder weapon, however the victims DNA is present?

Would you care to explain how the Thai coroner could come to that conclusion and how did the RTP arrive at that conclusion also, when a distant lack of the accused DNA is on the very instrument they allegedly killed their victim?

Why would they kill Hannah if she participated in consensual sex with either of the accused, what possible motive could they have had, after an act of consensual sex?

I'm all ears as this will be very interesting to hear, as it's going to be a complete contradiction as to the version of events the RTP and the prosecution are pushing!!

Just because there are not signs of rape doesn't mean she was not raped.

Also there is DNA on the hoe that could or could not be one of the B2 but it is not a full profile, so the defense only proved the prosecution right. as they have never claimed there was DNA from the suspects on the hoe.

You mentioned previously she may have consented to sex, now your retracting this, by saying there's no signs of rape, it doesn't mean she wasn't.

So in other words your basing your opinions on RTP hearsay?

The RTP state she was raped, the Thai autopsy also indicates she was raped, the prosecution states she was raped, but just a few post above, you posted that the victim may have had consensual sex, based on another report.

These are the inconsistencies that are calling into question what really happened and whose version of events to actually believe.

Why would you take the report of the Thai coroner as accurate but dismiss the UK coroners report that states there was no evidence of rape?

Which one holds more credibility?

Does Kirsty Jones name ring any bells with some posters?

This is from the thai autopsy. as you will see they have not said she was raped.

The autopsy report indicates that Ms. Witheridge had engaged in sexual intercourse prior to her death, but it is unclear whether the act was consensual or forced. A number of media agencies previously reported that she was raped.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761319-koh-tao-autopsy-of-murdered-britons-shows-struggle-drowning/

The police have stated she was raped by the accused on many occasions, so are you now in agreement that they have been wrong in this case, in that the defendants did not rape the deceased?

In other words the RTP have fabricated evidence, based on what you've just said, to support their basis that they raped then murdered the deceased.

Would you care to explain how it's possible that neither the accused 's DNA is present on the alleged murder weapon, however the victims DNA is present?

Would you care to explain how the Thai coroner could come to that conclusion and how did the RTP arrive at that conclusion also, when a distant lack of the accused DNA is on the very instrument they allegedly killed their victim?

Why would they kill Hannah if she participated in consensual sex with either of the accused, what possible motive could they have had, after an act of consensual sex?

I'm all ears as this will be very interesting to hear, as it's going to be a complete contradiction as to the version of events the RTP and the prosecution are pushing!!

The approach to justice that irks someone happens all the time in Thailand and has happened recently with the suspicious death of a millionaire who died of blunt force trauma when the car he was a passenger hit a tree at less than 40 kph it was alleged by the driver that the passenger wasn't wearing a seatbelt.

The driver of the car.... A former Policeman and MP, the family wanted the investigation reopened as there were several " irregularities " with the case, including video evidence that the passenger habitually put his seatbelt on due to a prior accident!!

The airbags failed to go off. And that's also being questioned as to why this didn't happen, the initial investigation team stated it was just a "tragic accident " when it's become more apparent there was collusion and cover ups involved and it all centred once again around the RTP.

So yes, the actions of the people involved perverting the course of justice would irk me too.

It's the defences job to discredit and refute the evidence presented by the prosecution, and that's what they have been doing, and doing pretty well too, nothing sinister about it, what's more sinister is the approach certain posters have maintained since day 1.

So let me get this right, a DNA expert analyst for the defence even stated she was surprised that the results came so quick, and very early on it was alleged that Thailand didn't have the ability to have results yielded so quick, in some cases less than 48 hours.

It was then alleged that the samples were sent to Singapore to be independently verified, would I be right them is stating that the claims that the RTP processed these DNA samples in several different places of theirs is also a fabrication ? This would mean that if they sent the DNA Analysis to several different locations there should be several sets of "chain of custody" documentation to accompany these results then?

Who received the samples in Singapore ? If they were ever sent there in the first place.

Given that Thailand and the RTP labs seem to be able to process DNA with such efficiency and speed, are they not being asked to analyse DNA from outside the country seeing as they're now the Hub of rapid DNA results?

The RTP clearly stated that they recovered DNA samples of the accused that matches DNA samples found on the victims breast, rhey are the ones, along with the Thai coroners who made the statement about "bite marks".

Upon close examination of the victims return to the UK Home office pathologist found ZERO evidence to support the claims about a serious sexual assault, in direct contradiction to the original Thai version.

Why would they feel the need to lie? Several posters here have been very vocal about conspiracies and cover ups, and yet an extensive official document from the country of the victims is being dismissed by these people as "irrelevant" surely that is also supporting their own theory of a conspiracy?

They lambasted and ridiculed posters here because of their stance against the Island influential person asking if it was possible such a cover up can go so high.

It seems that the UK coroners results would be an answer to that question, yes it can, and it possibly has. Why believe the Thai autopsy result and not the UK pathologists report? Surely one would have an open mind if your only seeking out justice, never mind the truth because the truth is that prosecution witnesses have clearly lied in their testimony.

Using a translator that can't speak Thai in interrogations that were not recorded, who even admitted he didn't fully understand the Rakhine dialect himself, so how can that interrogation and what was said between the accused, the RTP and the accused be taken as gospel and good enough?

A single entry mix up of dates on documents can be excused as a clerical error, but not when it's been allegedly repeated on several parts as highlighted by Dr. Porntips.

That's sloppy work, or fabricated work no matter which angle you look at it.

Clerical errors have got cases thrown out before !!!

Lying is endemic within the RTP, all you need to do is look at recent high profile cases, they are simply not anything close to the majority of our own National Poice Forces/services and that's where we are all failing, it's like comparing a Shetland pony to a shire horse, sure there's the odd copper dedicated to his job, but sadly there are more with vested interests and questionable wealth, all part of the current establishment.

The fact that we're are constantly made aware that others are entitled to their opinions that differ, it's not their opinions that are questionable, it's there manner in which they do it.

One announcing they were a gait expert without so much as a shred of evidence to back this claim up. Why say such things? When you have a person like Partington who clearly knows his/her stuff about DNA, they are shot down in flames with the same old mantra.

The same people stating that the conspiracy people are only listening to hearsay, when that's exactly what the evidence th prosecution have presented.

Then it's deflection time by calling out the defence witnesses backgrounds all whilst sitting there on their keyboards hiding behind an anonymous name, without so much as a pubic hairs worth of experience nor expertise in that witnesses background, it's laughable really if it wasn't so tragic, and 94-98% members can see that the RTPs version of events are about as accurate and reliable as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest!!

Opinions sure, agendas definitely!!

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridges clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.The documents have been edited. The dates are not right, Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

Just about says it all if you read it.

If your given an exam paper and it has 10 pages missing you would say the same thing

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

Sorry no more explaining from me, if you don't understand English I cannot teach you.

When I see questions like that it makes me think certain people may be actively involved with prosecution side and they just keep digging and digging then pass the info on.

Another example of this is when Andy Hall kept being questioned by the prosecution this week about financial info that people have raised on thai visa before.

Andy Hall has been made aware of the comments about himself, and the professional subject matter experts within the defence team and how their professional backgrounds have been called into question by anonymous internet experts

There are certain posters don't understand the parts about "incomplete " or "edited" it's a bit like say for example falsifying the entries in your dive log book to make them appear different or that the dive actually took place. Or even ommiting key parts of it to make it look like you have participated in a dive to get your numbers up, when you haven't done the dive itself.

Happens a lot with skydivers to make it appear they're "current" so they don't have to do "check out jumps" as 99% of the time they know nobody bothers checking if the ghost jumps ever took place!!

There are serious discrepancies that the defence have highlighted and want explanations for, what's wrong with that? Isn't that normal?

Again a bit like making an insurance claim and you falsify parts of the claim, and the investigators want proof before handing over large sums of money?

Any one who takes things at face value through word of mouth, without having a paper trail to back it up deserves to be ripped to shreds when things are not what they seem!!