rockingrobin

1 hour ago, AlexRich said:

Bloomberg ... time to wake up to the realities of Brexit.

 

"Britain is the supplicant in this process, and the transitional proposal shouldn't ask for favors, much less demand them. It should say, in effect, Britain will abide by EU rules until the long-term deal is done, even though it will no longer have a say in deciding what those rules are. That's the price of being granted an orderly rather than chaotic departure".

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-28/britain-must-accept-the-hard-truth-about-brexit

Would a transitional period require a new treaty , as article 50 only allows for extending the 2 yr deadline

8 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Page 11, 12 say hannah entered bar at 00.15 and david 2.08 am. 

Estimated time of death.

2.15 to 5 am

I'm not seeing they were attacked around midnight on page 19. 

It says about 1 am the 2 went to buy some more beers, later mau mau returned with a bottle of wine after that mau stayed for a while, then left again to his girlfriend. 

Then it started to rain, and 1 had a headache, so they decided to take a dip on the way home. 

How long do you think it would take to go buy beer come back sit down drink some with mau, probably at least an hour or more. 

Yes, that makes sense. 

It's after 2 am raining, I'm drunk and I have a headache, let's go for a swim in the sea.

Then after all that, he got back to the room and decided to return to the scene. 

Reading between the lines the only reason mau mau is not in prison is there was no dna found with the victims. Doesn't mean he wasn't there 

Ok you may have it at page 22 or 23

' After reviewing the evidence and witnesses of both parties, plaintiffs and defendants, it has been concluded that, on the 14th September 2014, around midnight, an unknown number of criminal(s) had brutally attacked the First Deceased, Mr. David William Miller on his head and face with a blunt object, and the Second Deceased Miss Hannah Victoria Witheridge, until she was severely injured and subsequently passed away at Sairee beach, Moo 1, Tambon Koh Tao'

1 hour ago, mommysboy said:

I just reasoned that most of the remain vote would prefer to stay in the single market, since they dont want to leave EU at all.  And, as we know, the leavers are split around 50/50.  65% was a remarkably good guess.  I would agree opinion polls are a waste of time, in fact I'm beginning to think they favour the underdog, yet I just believe a big majority want to be part of the single market and this is not subject to whim.

 

Whatever, sooner or later a government with a very fragile hold on Parliament, and faced with an opposition which appears to have captured the popular vote, will have to face this awkward issue.  The Government thus far has denied reality in a way that a redder than red government would find breathtaking.  No point trying to hoodwink or bludgeon their way past the electorate, as they are well and truly encircled.

 

I don't think the Brexit 'winners' could have handled this any the worse.

 

 

A comres poll in July 2016 showed 35% of leave voters expected to leave the single market

54% of leave voters expected to stay in SM with FOM modifications

48 minutes ago, greenchair said:

The beginning of the judgement says hannah entered the bar at 1.15 and david at 2.08 they left by the back door so it is presumed they died anywhere between 2.15 and 5 o'clock. I didn't see your time. 

The discrepency you are talking about is the testimony of Mau Mau and defendant 2.

Mau Mau says he found them asleep and later says he woke 2nd defendant up to go and look for guitar. 

2nd defendant says he met Mau Mau on the way back to the room. 

Obviously one of them is lying. 

It would be the prosecution job to call on that, but it looks like he did not bother with their hearsay testimony and focused on the other evidence and cctv. 

In my opinion mau mau tried to leave out the bit that he was back down the beach with the 2nd defendant after they had gone back to the room. 

Who knows. To me it just shows 1 of them lied. "Again"

Hannah walking into the bar 00:15 page 11 or 12

Attacked around midnight page 19

It was not hearsay testimony , MM testified during a pre-trial hearing

16 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

right,

but keep in mind that Norway's and Switzerland's relations with the EU is quite different.

 

Switzerland deals with EU on a issue by issue / sector by sector basis.

It works, although several red-tapers in Brussels complain that it is a mvery manpower intensive

way of dealing.

 

Norway is one of the EFTA countries in EEA (as opposed to Switzerland).

Single market, yes. But as far as courts/regulations/legislation/jurisdictions/sanctions are concerned,

pretty much the same as for UK today. (some differences though)

Doesn't sound as being to the taste of Farage or Brexiters.

 

The Swiss way is in practice what UK is doing now through the divorce talks, sector by sector.

 

 

Norway adopts 20% of EU law

2 hours ago, greenchair said:

The court documents start with an unknown number of people attacked the first and second deceased. 

It also says they could not press charges against Muang Muang because even though his dna was on the cigarettes there was none on the victims. So therefore, difficult to prove he was there. 

The same could be said of Sean. 

The interview shows he is lying. The original reports said an Englishman was on the log playing English songs. 

The court judgement states that the attack took place around midnight, which contradicts the evidence, Hannah entered AC bar at midnight, whilst it would be another 2 hours before David was seen entering the same venue.

The court does not adrress the discrepency that Muang Muang stated he arrived home to find the defendants asleep , whilst WP testifies that he met him on the way home 

12 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I would tell my family that we are going to visit their grandmother in Kalamazoo Michigan never to return to Koh Tao and then sell my eye-witness story to one of the tabloids in the UK who has run multiple stories on the evils of Koh Tao however 'no one is willing to talk'.

Then at least if a Royal Pardon is in order there would be something on the record as to what an eyewitness account of the two murders would reveal.

But that's if I or anyone else would actually be a viable eyewitness.

It would account to no more than hearsay.

The court would not be able to guage the eyewitness credibility , as the statement would be made not under oath and without being able to be cross examined

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I don't have any kids .. and I unlike those with an angel's voice, I don't sing.

But if one of my hypothetical kids was charged with a murder he didn't commit when I knew that there were eyewitnesses who could prove that he didn't do it, I don't know how I would've dealt with the complacency that everyone seems willing to be content with on here.

According to Mon there was an eyewitness , was that not the reason they chased sean into the supermarket

4 hours ago, JLCrab said:

 

Well that was silly since most everyone on ThaiVisa will tell you that, when big money is involved, there is no such thing as an honest Court in Thailand. Maybe the Supreme Court will see things differently but most on here also don't see much chance in that -- you know that 'face' thing etc.

 

The judgement has wider ramifications beyound this case

As the original court commented , the lack of chain of custody was irrellevant , being a matter of differing administrative procedure ,although it failed to address the issue of missing and lost evidence.

If the court had ruled that the procedures was not equivalent to the standards required, then it would leave the justice system open to numerous challenges from previous decisions that had used forensic evidence as a basis for its judgements

31 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Yet another "isolated" attack by a fanatical Muslim  - with more to come, as promised by Islamic fundamentalist groups who have taken advantage of lax European immigration laws to plant unknown numbers of terrorist sleepers in our midst.

 

Love him or hate him, Trump was right about a nation's duty effectively to control its borders. Our failure to do so can be laid at the feet of the same inept and mendacious political leaders who dragged us into the US's phony War on Terror and are now utterly failing to protect us as the murderous chickens come home to roost.

 

Shame on the lot of them.

 

 

 

 

Honestly , there is no difference between the likes of Trump, the far right and ISIS, they all feed off terrorism to achieve the same goal. To create hatred and division among society

29 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

... and it seems the Court could care less unless you think the Supreme Court is going to reverse the decision based on chain of custody mistakes.

Hardly can be classified as chain of custody mistakes.

In the case of the murder weapon the court used the lack of chain of custody and possible contamination to the detriment of the defence. Whilst with regards the dna the lack of chain of custody to support the prosecution

20 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

No one doesn't

Basic summary of prosecution and court judgement

B2 playing guitar on the log

Hannah and David walk by

B2 decide to follow

B2 commit crime

How did the guitar end up with the Chef.

16 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Yes but they told the Samui Court that they went for a swim that early morning and managed to lose their clothes.

One as to wonder why the guitar wasnt seized at the crimescene

2 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

You are right -- a guilty verdict in this case requires that the prosecution provide proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the the Court in this case and its appeal have decided that the Prosecution provided proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

That is the ruling of a Court in Thailand -- it makes no difference how a Court in some other country or under a different judicial process might have ruled. At least in Thailand there is a chance for a Royal Pardon should the Supreme Court not be of any help to the 2 convicted.

I cannot disagree

However the courts purpose is to serve the people of its jurisdiction. If it convicts when doubt exist then it as failed its duties. If innocent people are convicted then this places the population at risk because it leaves a criminal free to reign

5 minutes ago, cumgranosalus said:

I can't see how the government can come out of this with anything but egg on their faces.

They will use section 44 to ban eggs

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

 

Debunking the prosecution's case requires one to believe there has been extreme incompetence/collusion/corruption throughout all branches of the legal system involved and top to bottom. 

 

The allegations of torture seem to have been corroberated by the accusations of others who seemingly have the marks to prove it. 

 

But it all really rests with the forensic evidence since all else is circumstantial.  If you believe it has been corrupted or introduced later then of course you will believe in their innocence.  The judges clearly thought otherwise.

The onus is on the prosecution to prove its case, 

The debunking does not require one to believe that there as been extreme incompetence, etc. It requires the notion of reasonabe doubt, coud there be another explanation

11 hours ago, GOLDBUGGY said:

In Theory this would be correct, but in Practice I doubt it happens that way all the time. For example if the Accused had an Air Tight Alibi, is this not an example of the Accused proving his own innocents? 

 

On one side you have the Prosecution with Signed Confessions from both of the Accussed. Witnesses, DNA Testing of Cigarette Butts and the Accused themselves, placing them at or near the Crime Scene on the night in question and the last known suspects to be in that area during this crime. The Accused having (or had) in their possession a Cell Phone, which the Accused said they gave it to a Friend and claimed they never saw David Miller that night, which the Prosecution claim belonged to David Miller. DNA taken from the Victims Body (Hannah)  matching in a Lab the DNA taken form both of the Accused, who they both claim never saw her that night at all.

 

Now "If" (and please notice I use the word "If") you can believe that what the Prosecution have is true and accurate, then one would have to agree they would have a pretty Rock Solid Case against them. "If" on the other hand you believe the Accused that there Confessions were given under duress and torture (with no visable signs of abuse) they fund this Cell Phone on the Beach that night and did not see either of the Victims that night, and the DNA collected was flawed, then I guess you could say they have a strong Defense. 

 

So I don't think it is really a question of proof beyond reasonable doubt here. You can find that on both sides. I think it all boils down to who you beleive the most here.   

There is no such thing as an air tight aibi, it is possible to be thousands of mile away from a crime and stil be guilty,

The court judgement acknowledges that dna did not match the defendents

The caims of torture was supported by an independent witness at the time

The cell phone argument is implausible, why would somebody after commiting rape and double murder, stealing a phone from the victims, casually give it away knowing it would implicate them.

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Thaksin has several outstanding arrests warrants on various cases.

 

However, they have yet to issue any Interpol notices! 

I was responding to the case you put forward of how the red bull heir was different because he had not attended any meetings or court. The same applies to Thaskin in the defamation case, but the court still issued the warrant.

17 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Indeed. But the Red Bull boy, who if I remember correctly you used to post seeing regularly moving freely around Bangkok, never even attended any court proceedings and avoided those requested little chats with the BiB. Hardly under the magnifying glass.

 

Yingluck has attended, presented her final statement and this was the verdict. Looks like she did a runner but at the 11th hour whereas he never got past 1! 

 

Issuing is one thing, enforcement quite different. Should be easy since, they confiscated her passport, have kept her under constant observation, and even the slowest, most uninterested immi officer should recognize her. 

 

All arranged and agreed maybe?

Did a court not issue an arrest warrant for Thaskin in 2015 for failing to show up following a defamation case after a South Korea interview he gave in 2014

3 hours ago, greenchair said:

Well yes, I guess that's what the meant, when he told the b2, their story was absolutely unbelievable. 

What is implausible is that no witnesses have come forward from the nightime enterntainment venue,

After being seen entering at midnight to leaving at gone 2am (assuming that this time is correct), Hannah must have had some interactions with other people.

45 minutes ago, greenchair said:

My apologies. 

Still , the same arguments through 3 courts have not won. 

Now it's down to the wire. 

Eat humble pie, lose face and plead guilty. Beg for forgiveness and a pardon for the death sentence. 

They should have done that at appeal 1. At least they should have changed tactic at supreme. 

Insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. 

They at least could argue their innocence when they got out in a few years. 

I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances. 

 

Its nonsense

What you are suggesting is that everybody who is charged with a criminal offence should plead guilty, because they might lose the case

12 minutes ago, greenchair said:

No, if I remember correctly it said absolutely unbelievable. 

Page 55 of final judgement (page 37 of unofficial translation) , unusual for normal people, thus their testimonies not credible. 

8 minutes ago, wakeupplease said:

greenchair

 

knowing your boys as I do up close I would say their story is fully believable. I would like you to explain to me why the DNA was convenient lost or misplaced at best. In civilized country's they keep it did you not know that and in some countries like the UK and the USA they are retrieving it now 25 years after the case and retesting it and convicting the criminals. That is because DNA techniques have moved on and testing can deliver better results today.

 

Do you know how to become a judge locally I do and its easy for a former con to get a job.

 

Life may mean nothing to some but in the better part of the world it does.

 

Keep throwing the sidelines, I for one will not read and more of your posts.

Wakeupplease

With regards the dna , you missunderstand. The explanation is given by a police statement following the analysis on sep17 2014

The police identified 2 dna on the cigarette butt, however they could not say if the semen dna matched the dna on the cigarette butt. In order to accomplish this they would require fresh samples from the unidentified persons.

From this 2 main and 1 subsequent questions arise.

Why the dna from cigarette butt and Semen cannot be compared 

Why do they need fresh samples

and which dna sample did they use to clear the 12 suspects at that time

6 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Well yes, I guess that's what the meant, when he told the b2, their story was absolutely unbelievable. 

I dont think the judgement said unbelievable, more like not normal behaviour

1 hour ago, greenchair said:

Now if I was interested I would just go and visit those innocent "lads"

And tell them to get down on their knees ,  apologise and beg the king for a royal pardon based on their age and crappy legal advice. 

I would tell them to stop all this crap and fess up 

But no, these lawyers will rave on right to the royal pardon, 

The chain of custody was broken, therefore please don't sentence them to death. 

They will not win supreme with the same arguments. 

 

I can understand your stance , if the relevance of the chain of custody , and its ensuring purpose of safeguarding justice bypasses you..

However even forgoing this there is still doubt raised of the seminal dna