lucaswallachia

What's unfortunate is that even if the B2 are found not guilty, there still won't be any "closure" for the families of David and Hannah. The RTP will simply drop the case, and never seriously go after anyone else. They've been paid too well to do that.

I do agree with you that if the B2 are found not guilty that there probably won't be any closure on this case for the families, but not for the reasons you suggest. I feel it will because they will never be able to tie anyone else to this murder because of this DNA.

We know (or think at least) that matching DNA Samples from the accused to the victim have astronomical odds. DNA Testing takes a lot of the guess work out of the picture. But DNA Testing is also not a perfect science either.

If the Defense can show mishandling of the DNA in collection, distribution, and testing, to the point it discredits the DNA Samples, then these DNA Samples are spoiled. Not spoiled just for this case, but any others that may follow. How can you justify in a court of law that you are 100% sure that this match is the accused sitting their, then the next month say you were wrong? That now you are sure you have the right ones and right match this time.

It is nice to think that a country like Thailand has unlimited manpower and resources to solve a case, but like many other they don't. I would venture to guess (and it is only a guess) that Thailand has probably spent more manpower and resources on this case then they normally do. So I can't see them later spending more on a case that they may never be able to prove or solve. Baring new information or a confession that can be believed, which I also don't see coming this way after a year.

For the NS Conspiracy Theorists his DNA has been tested already and came up Negative. You can never get away from that now as any lawyer would bring this up. One day not him, but the next day it is??? Even if you could prove his DNA was doctored, and a bride was involved, which I highly doubt as after a year nothing of the kind has happened, you will still never be able to tie him to Hannah's DNA. As that would have been proved already that this was spoiled from this case. So even if they wanted to go after him, which I see absolutely no reason why they would or should, they would know they would never be able to prove this anyway. So why bother?

The biggest problem with the semen samples is not that they were contaminated (though that is a possible issue) but that, bafflingly, there is no residual sample left for retesting. All that is left is intermediate replicated DNA from an intermediate step in the testing. This replicated DNA cannot be confirmed to have originated with a semen sample, and degrades rapidly unlike the original semen sample. Should the remainder of the semen sample finally be found (or clothes from the victims reappear) professional forensic analysis and an objective investigation could still occur. I do not consider it probable, given the vested interests lobbying against, but it is certainly possible.

Also from this post the Defense Team doesn't seem to have a problem running "Duplicated Samples" so I was surprised, like most, why they refused to run tests on the DNA from Hannah.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/24/uk-thailand-britain-murders-idUKKCN0PY0A820150724

Because the defences job is not to prove they are innocent but to stop them from being prosecuted, so maybe there is something in the DNA from Hannah that links to the accused.

Talking about the clothes I am sure that most have seen this photo with david laying in the water in the background (sorry to both families )

But has anyone mentioned what the yellow type material is on the rocks to the right ? I was thinking maybe it was a blanket.

clothes kohtao.jpg

clothes2.jpg

But has anyone mentioned what the yellow type material is on the rocks to the right ?

It is plausibly the (unexplained) green towel. It is is about the right place.

No, it's not the green towel. Hannah's body was found to the far left of that photo (out of shot) and her head was much closer to the ground than that yellow object is.

Who put the towel over Hannah's head; the RTP or the culprits?, because if the RTP had down it then it could be the green towel before they put it over her head.

Question....Were the bracelets Hannah was photographed wearing that night ever recovered?

If you look at the crime scene photos she is still wearing them.

You can be educated as much as you want about court procedures in other countries, fact is this trial takes place in Thailand, .

Most of these arguments about 'chain of custody', evidence to be included/dismissed, back home this or that would happen etc. wont even enter the judge's mind.

There is not one murder case here (foreigners or Thais or Burmese or whoever was 'murdered') where there was a proper CSI being done, let alone the further processing by police.

The one point that really disturbs me about this case is the hundreds of pages of comments on this case, but when a Thai or Burmese is killed we get maybe 1 or 2 pages of comments. Looks like for most people here the life of a foreigner is worth so much more then the life of a local.

I would have to say a few more things but I'm sure to get enough flames about the above already, so ... .

Well the reason this case has become such a topic of discussion is because the police immediately put the crime scene photos on the internet and so naturally people are going to speculate themselves what happened, especially because of the way the police have handled the case, it happens with any case that gets intense media coverage i.e. OJ Simpson, Zimmeran Trial etc.

Thumbs up for Dr Pornthip, looks like a typical loony scientist but proved her honesty, technical skills, knowledge and impartiality at the trial for the sake of real justice.

Ms Pontip's expertise is appreciated, and it was heartening to see the photo of her and AH standing alongside the scapegoats' mothers and offering support. However, I can't help but think Ms Pontip could have done a bit more. She mentioned findings of the two mystery mens' DNA found on the murder weapon, but did she demand there be a search for who those men are? OK, this is Thailand, so 50% of most conversations are inference (things not plainly stated, but instead inferred). Did Ms Pontip mention DNA related to that found on Hannah or on any of the clothing/items found in/around the crime scene? On second thought, the court put a tight clamp on what could or could not be tested. Plus RTP didn't expend any calories looking for clothes/items outside the crime scene. Indeed, RTP didn't even care about where Hannah's skirt or blouse may have gone. So, I guess if items don't exist, then they can't tested, eh? ....oh, and why David's clothing at the crime scene looked newly laundered, ....not even any blood splatter, despite blood all over the sand. ....and none of the blood on the sand was tested. The mind reels at how the investigation was so profoundly inept.

Because maybe David wasn't wearing his clothes when he was attacked.

Yet they were photographed taking a swab:

“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.

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

Felt this needed re-posting. Her statement reminded me of the discussions concerning the possible editing and date discrepancies related to the CCTV in Bangkok (original suspect).

It's a shame we don't know more about what exactly was edited. Just the dates? What sort of significance would have? Because, ultimately, the key is the DNA sample. Altering a date on a document would not affect the test results (unless the samples were switched).

I believe the CCTV in Bangkok is genuine. But it proves nothing other than that the individual in question was walking out of his apartment sometime after 9 am. It does not prove that he was in his room from the previous midnight. Videos of him entering his apartment would have been conclusive but does that exist????

The whole video was photo shopped. Also he was reported to be on his way to uni class ...........No note books etc ? nothing, usually students have got all their papers etc with them.

The problem i have with it is if he had made the trip from Koh Tao surely he would be too tired to being going to classes first thing?

So the b2 had their clothes stolen, and they had bought beer and wine so wouldnt they have had money or a wallet in their clothes?

No, it's that they were there on that night, that they said they just happened to find a phone identical to one of the one taken from one of the victims and that there are DNA results, that so far have not been contested, that link them to the crime.

Their explanations of what they did on that night leave a lot to be desired, from what they've said so far it sounds like a string of very convenient coincidences.

As for the bottles, I don't remember any mention of bottles being found at the place were they had been sitting, on the other hand cigarette butts were found and checked for DNA and that's one of the clues that led to their arrest; according to their account they drank three bottles of beer and one of wine on that spot.

Ok, so what do you think of what they said they did that night are a coincidence?

They claim they just happened to find a phone identical to the one that was missing from one of the victims near the scene of the murders (without otherwise noticing anything else), also that the clothes they were wearing on that night were stolen when they went for a swim. So the first coincidence is that of all of the people on the island the police would have picked these two "scapegoats" that just happened to have found that phone on that night at that place, and the second that when, presumably, asked about the clothes they were wearing on that night, that if they took part in the murders would probably be bloodstained, they just happened to had been stolen when they went for a swim on that night.

Ok, good points. If their clothes got stolen then i wonder if they would of had wallets, phones, scooter/bike keys etc in the pockets that would of been stolen along with them?

So the only thing that makes the b2 suspects is they that they were at the beach that night/morning ?

No, it's that they were there on that night, that they said they just happened to find a phone identical to one of the one taken from one of the victims and that there are DNA results, that so far have not been contested, that link them to the crime.

Their explanations of what they did on that night leave a lot to be desired, from what they've said so far it sounds like a string of very convenient coincidences.

As for the bottles, I don't remember any mention of bottles being found at the place were they had been sitting, on the other hand cigarette butts were found and checked for DNA and that's one of the clues that led to their arrest; according to their account they drank three bottles of beer and one of wine on that spot.

Ok, so what do you think of what they said they did that night are a coincidence?

I dont remember the DNA on the hoe ever even being discussed. I thought the DNA was from the condom? IF Porntip could dispute that evidence then that would be something. This just seems like media hype.

The condom and the cig butt are non-issues. Beam yourself up to what's been happening. Even the glass is a non-issue. We didn't hear mention of glass being found at or near the crime until recently. The only significance of glass-used-as-weapon is it's proof the B2 were tortured, because they wouldn't have admitted to using glass if they weren't tortured. Reason? Because there was no glass, broken or whole, at the crime scene, and the first mention of glass was when the roti-seller (and/or an RTP'man) introduced the idea at the interrogation. Since there are so many issues and bits of evidence that do or could point to the real culprits, let's not get sidelined (and wasting time) with items which are unimportant to solving the crime.

Well they said they had beers and a wine bottle so did they b2 say what they did with the empties?

So the only thing that makes the b2 suspects is they that they were at the beach that night/morning ?

So i wonder does the prosecution have any of these items still:

Well they did test the hoe originally:

So The senior investigating officer insisted there was no evidence to suggest she was followed from the bar. This might actually be true.

But what about the possibility the person she had an altercation with, together with some buddies, left the bar earlier?

what about the possibility this gang headed to the ocean view, weaponizing themself with let´s say a garden hoe and a hammer from the ocean view yard?

What about the possibilty of them knowing the best spot for an ambush between AC-BAR and ocean view, waiting their some 30 meters away, smoke a cigarette while waiting and charge on Hannah and David, who were simply returning to their accomomodation?

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I had a quote of one of Hannah's friends, i think it was Emma, saying David was 'smitten' with Hannah, so i do think they were most likely doing that.

So is this pic not right, with the clothes as they were at the crime scene on the right and the left and center pics of them piled neatly on the rock? Were the clothes supposed to be even more scattered than they are in the right pic?

If you do a search "Koh Tao policeman challenged over killings " they speak about how the clothes were found piled neatly nearby.

cl1.jpg

I assume the picture on the right is how they were found first. Theres David's shorts and Hannahs panties in the foreground and David's tshirt in the middle and his show, though i wonder what the white thing is to the upper right.

I distinct absence of the phone that was found at the crime scene in that pic, it was reported in court the rtp found one there but they would not confirm who it belonged to

I was wondering if the thing on the right, above David's shoes is a phone?

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

Almost naked (still wearing one sock) with his clothes strewn around according to initial photos. This is, indeed, a great question. One possibility is that the perpetrators removed his clothes and washed them in the sea to remove their blood. At the trial, I believe the prosecution showed only later photos with the clothing neatly placed together, so this question may not be answered at the trial. As no forensic examination of the alleged murder weapon was done, it is fair to assume that the clothing was not carefully examined either.

The released CCTV and photos from the crime scene circulating in the web indicate a mismatch (Hannah´s sandals and Davids trouser). Since the guest house was close and I assume they had their keys with them, it might also be possible the culprits took fresh clothes from there and planted it at the crimescene (underwear, sandals, Davids trouser).

I think if the clothes were washed in the sea they should be wet in the crime scene fotos, which they don´t look for me...

I have my problems with Davids shirt though, i could imagine him having two similar trousers, but twice the same shirt? But than, he came from the beach bar, it was warm... he maybe had just taken it off for his walk home. (as we have seen from the running man video others we´re also moving around topless this night)...

David was sharing the same room with his friend, so i dont think anbody could of entered his room with his friend noticing.

If you do a search "Koh Tao policeman challenged over killings " they speak about how the clothes were found piled neatly nearby.

cl1.jpg

I assume the picture on the right is how they were found first. Theres David's shorts and Hannahs panties in the foreground and David's tshirt in the middle and his show, though i wonder what the white thing is to the upper right.

Sean said David had returned to the guesthouse but then gone out for some cigarettes.

Sean never saw David that night. If you know different, this is huge new evidence: contact the defense team. Also, as David was a non smoker, it is unclear who he would buy cigarettes for.

Reports that are credible have the Ware brothers he was rooming with saying David left to look for Hannah. CCTV subsequently sees him enter AC Bar some time after Hannah.

It was the Ware brother he was staying with that said that David said he was going out to get smokes, but ended up looking for Hannah instead. Im pretty sure i saw a picture with David smoking, but did one of David's friends say he was a non-smoker?

Because with the amount of blood on the ground and david's injuries, if he was wearing his clothes at the time of the assault then his top and shorts which arfe both light coloured would of have visible blood on them which they dont.

Seems that Tom Wood needs to be in court then to give this information first hand. 'Hannah and David went their separate ways' reads to me like Hannah and David separated but it sounds like he means they left the bar together. So Tom Wood could tell the court what bar they were in, approximate time they left and why he assumed they went to the beach. He might also be able to tell the court if he witnessed any altercation that evening/morning. This information coming from a man who only met Hannah and David that night? If that's the case then the victims friends should hopefully be able to fill in many more details about when they left, whether they were together when they left, whether there was an argument of any sort and if they did actually leave by the back door. Maybe Tom's statement will be read in court by the defence and shed some light.

I very much doubt the defense would bring that up since it supports the narrative from the prosecution, at least in terms of there not being a fight at the bar before the murders.

"Meanwhile, during the hearing yesterday afternoon Police Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha said he and other officers had not investigated rumours that Miss Witheridge had been involved in an argument with a Thai youth on the night of her death.

The officer said he was aware of rumours that the university graduate had an altercation inside the AC Bar while there with friends.

But he said neither he, nor his officers, actively followed up that line of inquiry. The senior investigating officer insisted there was no evidence to suggest she was followed from the bar."

That, I presume, came up during cross examination of the witness by the defense, so it stands to reason that it is a line of attack the defense has used (or at least tried) to cast doubt on the investigation.

So The senior investigating officer insisted there was no evidence to suggest she was followed from the bar. This might actually be true.

But what about the possibility the person she had an altercation with, together with some buddies, left the bar earlier?

what about the possibility this gang headed to the ocean view, weaponizing themself with let´s say a garden hoe and a hammer from the ocean view yard?

What about the possibilty of them knowing the best spot for an ambush between AC-BAR and ocean view, waiting their some 30 meters away, smoke a cigarette while waiting and charge on Hannah and David, who were simply returning to their accomomodation?

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

An outrage. Not just te scapegoat side of it. But the fact that they think we're ALL stupid enough to believe them

I certainly don't regard myself as stupid but as for you the amount of support you got for your post says it all.

I've asked before but will asked again

If these guys are innocent and have been set up why are they not shouting their heads off claiming they have been set up?

I do't agree with re-enacting the crime but if they show how they did it and that fits in with what forensic say what happened then their confessions hold more water.

What possible reason would you have to say they have been set up?

Let me answer for you.

you're a kfukin troll

They may be getting paid to admit it and be out when it all goes quiet.

Yes, if they got a lenient sentence after that guy got the death penalty for the train murder, then that would be pretty suspect.

keep finding journalists to reprint this to their reports, use titter, thai visa, bkk post, everywhere the are following the story is a contact person and an editor

twitter is good

google plus is good

faceook is good

the Thai message boards, best!

The thing to keep in mind is errors of translation and also media organisations just making stuff up to complete their stories.

Can anyone here contact Hannah's friend and ask if they really had a fight or a row at the bar before they left?

I'm friends with the girls she was with. Does it say there was an argument?

There was a lot of speculation / rumors / theory that they had got into an argument with some Thai that caused them to 'lose face' thus why the nature of the injuries to Hannah and David but has never been verified.

I remember a report saying she was getting unwanted attention by a Thai? guy while she was there as well.