rockingrobin

It would be more transparent if you could cite the law , and put an end to the argument if one such law existed

Cite it from where exactly? I'm not a Thai lawyer.

If there isn't a law against convicted overseas on the run criminals from running the country, why do you think Thaksin and PTP were constantly at pains to tell everyone that he wasn't leading the country or the party, but merely advising it?

Nobody believed it, but nobody could prove otherwise, and Thaksin and the PTP knew that.

False dichotomy

"The very fact that the PTP were able to assume power in spite of the fact that the party was very obviously being lead by an overseas criminal (are you going to deny that that was the situation or deny that there are laws against that sort of thing?)"

Are there laws against such a thing? How would one write a law saying a politician or political party can't consult with anyone it wanted to?

I assume if there were such laws, there would have been many legal challenges against the PTP before, during and after the election.

To try and argue that Thaksin was merely "consulting" the party is nothing more than a sad and pathetic attempt to try and dance around the truth with semantics. Nobody believes it, not even the idiots who spout it. It's to be received with the same sort of incredulity as Bill Clinton saying that he did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinski, on the basis that his supposed understanding of the definition of having sexual relations included the giving of oral sex but excluded the receiving.

No doubt if pushed to respond on the matter of leadership in the case of a legal challenge, Thaksin would offer some similarly mealy mouthed lie, based on his own concocted and farcical idea of what was included in the definition of leadership and what wasn't.

Why embarrass yourself with all this? Why not just admit the truth?

wait a minute, YOU tried to slip by with the claim that it was against the law.

As heybruce pointed out, if there were such a law (there isn't) or even anything vaguely close to such a law, then the PTP and all their previous incarnations would have been taken to court and disbanded in an instant.

Go ahead and slam Thaksin, he's no angel. But don't just make stuff up.

Lining up to join the embarrassment now. Of course there is a law against convicted on the run criminals from running the country from overseas, and i've already explained why PTP was not taken to court over it.

Funny that on this issue your proof of a law not being broken is that nobody was convicted.

It would be more transparent if you could cite the law , and put an end to the argument if one such law existed

Sad news if correct

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1459248430&section=12&typecate=06

The OP in his first post claims that when he left, immigration paid no intention to the cancelled stamp on the visa and was uneventfull.

On subsequent posts it transpires that his passport had to be examined for his arrival and departure dates from Laos .

We, the general public, are still waiting for Brit experts to do their jobs. Maybe they're taking order from Donald Trump, "delay, delay, delay."

They did do their job, according to the article.

They proved the phone found at the b2 apartment (you know the one that Wei Phyo himself says he "found" at 4am ) conclusively belongs to the murdered victim.

They then passed that information on to the rtp, to assist in their investigation.

They helped the rtp, because they believe that the b2 are indeed the perpetrators, and were concerned about the safety of brit citizens should the b2 remain free.

So nobody wants to believe the Thai police, the Thai courts.

Now, nobody wants to believe the brit police either.

Let's face facts, all of the defense arguments have come from csi la and Thai visa.

GC your surmisation of the events is incorrect

From the article

BuzzFeed News has established that the agency received an urgent request from the Thai police for the serial number of Miller’s missing iPhone days after the young backpackers were found dead

The NCA retrieved Millers serial no and passed this onto the RTP,

At this point the mobile phone at the B2 apartment had not been found or indeed the B2 arrested . Your assertion that they believed that the b2 are indeed the perpetrators and were concerned about the safety of Brit citizens should the b2 remain free ,is just plainly incorrect.

If Mon and his cop friend were at the crime scene about 50 minutes before the next cop arrived (the one who made the claim in his report that David was found in the surf) - Did Mon and/or his friend try to revive David during that nearly an hour? The crime likely wrapped up at 5 am. Mon and his cop friend were among the first at the scene, which could have been within an hour after the crime. Added Q: would there be a reason for Mon and his friend to not want David revived? I have an answer for that (based on circumstantial evidence), but it would anger certain Thai VIP's to hear it. Those who know my posts will know my answer to whether 'Mon had reasons to not want David revived.'

If the RTP had Davids iphone serial No. (assumed to be IMEI ), what was the purpose of sending the phone to the UK to verify its owner

Had the same issue with going to Germany went and applied for visa in London on Friday took originals and copies of marriage certificate, letters from bank with address got visa back on Wednesday 3 month visa

What sort of marriage certificate? I think a British certificate is OK, but an old Thai certificate could be iffy.

Took 20 yr old Thai certificate with english translation (and copies of each ) , to the Norwegian VFS office in London 2 yrs ago , accepted with no problems . The agent looked at and returned original certificate making a note on the photocopy of the original seen . Visa issued 3 days later.

Woulld assume similiar in other shenghen countries

What worries me is that there appear to have been some basic ground rules set in this trial: you can argue that the defendants are not guilty, but not at the expense of producing evidence or witnesses that will point to the involvement of other people.

That's the make-believe story, the reality is that from the outset the judge was prepared to hear about any other people supposedly involved in the crime:

"Koh Samui court head judge just asked both Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo: ‘If u not involved in this crime, tell us who is. Don’t be scared.’ Zaw Lin/Wei Phyo both replied strongly to the judge’s question: ‘We really don’t know. We were drunk, just went back home. We know nothing.’"

Absolutely rubbish , the judge asked a leading question ,

‘If u not involved in this crime, tell us who is. Don’t be scared.’

If they are not involved how would they know who is

"you can argue that the defendants are not guilty, but not at the expense of producing evidence or witnesses that will point to the involvement of other people."

The judge's question proves Kun Han's statement to be a fantasy, he specifically asked them if they could provide evidence or testimony about other people's involvement.

Of course you have no problem whatsoever with what he said being demonstrably false, you just have to defend your side, regardless of anything else, like I said, a complete immunity to see reality as it is.

Though it is funny how in your rush to post a response you and iReason tripped on each other, you saying that how could they know if anyone else was involved, and him pointing pointing out that they claimed to be the victims of influential people... It's one or the other, they know more than they were telling or they don't know anything at all.

NO

The question assumes one of guilt or knowledge of the crime

Mon was very much involved, so why did the defence not call him?

Under Thai law are they entitled to call him?

What worries me is that there appear to have been some basic ground rules set in this trial: you can argue that the defendants are not guilty, but not at the expense of producing evidence or witnesses that will point to the involvement of other people.

That's the make-believe story, the reality is that from the outset the judge was prepared to hear about any other people supposedly involved in the crime:

"Koh Samui court head judge just asked both Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo: ‘If u not involved in this crime, tell us who is. Don’t be scared.’ Zaw Lin/Wei Phyo both replied strongly to the judge’s question: ‘We really don’t know. We were drunk, just went back home. We know nothing.’"

Absolutely rubbish , the judge asked a leading question ,

‘If u not involved in this crime, tell us who is. Don’t be scared.’

If they are not involved how would they know who is

I well agree lucky. They were bamboozled as we all were, into believing the defense was going to produce the magic revelation that would show their innocence and walk them out the door.

Instead the one witness they called for the defense of dna, found a 25 percent match on the hoe ,that the rtp themselves did not even know about . Then andy called himself, which no offence

I know he was trying to help but what could he contribute. They could have called Mon, they could have called mm. They could have called the gait analyse guy to come here. But like you say there was so much, it just got to hard to explain away.

They certainly were robbed. Even though they did a terrible thing, I can have compassion that they are very young.

Someone should advise them to drop the not guilty plea. So they will be eligible for the kings pardon. Get on with their sentence and out st 35 years old.

Assumptions based on a lack of knowledge

Mon was called by the prosecution in the early days of the trial

GC you state you dont understand why MM was let go , are you suggesting that there was some kind of conspiracy

That same hoe that didn't have DNA or fingerprints of the supposed killers on. But still had DNA of as yet unidentified people on. So surely wouldn't the next step be trying to find out if there are any ways to check whose DNA / prints could be on the hoe.

And also interesting to note that the british docs / coroner specifically stated that the body was dragged / moved at some point. I wonder by who exactly? I am not sure if there was ever a video of the re enactment, does anybody know if the B2 claimed they dragged the body during their dubious confession / re enactment

That would be the hoe that, when Montrivet Tuvichien turned up at the crime scene to 'assist' the attending police officers, Mon noticed was missing (huh???), and instructed the gardener to find and return it to it's correct position at the scene.

If ten year olds were making up a school play they would more convincing.

Who photagraphed the hoe in the vegatable garden ,

More importantly, how did Mon know it had been moved back to the vegetable garden?

The beach cleaner during the hours of darkness

The Trolls have been presented with actual facts and what the police claim. (Along with their countless contradictions)

Crucial evidence has been "lost" and "used up" and plainly, made up.

The Trolls know all this.

They have chosen to "believe" the police.

For their own reasons...

While continuing to avoid addressing Somyot's claim about the hoe:

"We still have specific DNA samples from the hoe," he said, without elaborating. (Samples. That would be plural)

http://www.nationmul...f-30264238.html

And Trolls, please read Post #506 re: Definitions of Sexual Assault

"Dr Cary also said there were signs that Miss Witheridge had been dragged and sexually assaulted."

Would this be the hoe that wasnt forensically tested by the RTP, along with the condom with Hannah's dna on the outside

That same hoe that didn't have DNA or fingerprints of the supposed killers on. But still had DNA of as yet unidentified people on. So surely wouldn't the next step be trying to find out if there are any ways to check whose DNA / prints could be on the hoe.

And also interesting to note that the british docs / coroner specifically stated that the body was dragged / moved at some point. I wonder by who exactly? I am not sure if there was ever a video of the re enactment, does anybody know if the B2 claimed they dragged the body during their dubious confession / re enactment

That would be the hoe that, when Montrivet Tuvichien turned up at the crime scene to 'assist' the attending police officers, Mon noticed was missing (huh???), and instructed the gardener to find and return it to it's correct position at the scene.

If ten year olds were making up a school play they would more convincing.

Who photagraphed the hoe in the vegatable garden ,

The DNA on the hoe is from two men, one David Miller, the other profile is incomplete, but is a match with a quarter of the profile of one of the Burmese.

But that's changing the discussion away from the fact that the public was misled (to put it delicately) about the contents of the UK report, as it was about other issues.

The UK pathalogist report has not been made public

Tomorrow we will find out, if, as Andy Hall has stated, there are serious discrepancies between the Thai autopsy and the Norfolk coroner's report regarding Hannah Witheridge. My thoughts are with the Witheridge family as they undergo yet another traumatising life event in this never ending saga of sadness and confusion.

It will certainly be sad but interesting to see if they back up andys claim that Hannah was not raped.

The Norfolk coroner has ruled that Hannah was sexually assaulted. She did not say she was raped, and as you will likely be aware, not all sexual assault is rape.

.......but you wouldn't disagree that it can be!!

No defensive injuries, leaves a question mark about the blond hair in Hannahs hand

If she was being held down by 2 males, while a 3rd. ...

Why would there be defense injuries. she was small lady, 3 guys holding her with out injury would not be that hard. She had also been drinking, which would have weakened her. It's also possible that she was punched unconscious in the beginning, which would have been covered up by the hoe injury.

She was torn down below and it bled, which proved she was alive at the time, but I don't think that proves she was conscious. With my limited knowledge, I read that they could not get dna because of the embalming, so could neither confirm nor rule out rape. But can confirm sexual assault because of the tearing. The Thai police did however collect semen, though there is some controversy about who it belongs to. I think it is very disrespectful to this young lady, to minimise her final horror by saying she was not raped.

It still leaves the Blond hair in her hand, how did it get there

There is a lovely cartoon that andy has posted about donation of funds. In the b2 case is a perfect example of how funding can be used in a variety of ways that does not benefit the beneficiary that the money was intended for. I do suspect at the very least, these 2 were involved in some way. Who can say how much. ...

But with money they had available and the lawyers and resources they had available, guilty or innocent, the end result was quite a surprise to me. And what is going to change in their appeal ?

Is it going to be as feeble as the first attempt?

GC the above is just contradictory nonsence ,

You feel the B2 are involved and then surprised they are found guillty considering the lawyers , resources and funding, yet you go onto to suggest the defence team are woefull.

May I suggest if as you think the defence team are woefull the result should not have been a surprise

There you go again dm0 something. Nothing useful to contribute, so attack other posters that have interesting things to discuss. By all means criticise or challenge, but pllease contribute something to discussion of the topic.

Bless

GC ditto

Tomorrow we will find out, if, as Andy Hall has stated, there are serious discrepancies between the Thai autopsy and the Norfolk coroner's report regarding Hannah Witheridge. My thoughts are with the Witheridge family as they undergo yet another traumatising life event in this never ending saga of sadness and confusion.

It will certainly be sad but interesting to see if they back up andys claim that Hannah was not raped.

The Norfolk coroner has ruled that Hannah was sexually assaulted. She did not say she was raped, and as you will likely be aware, not all sexual assault is rape.

.......but you wouldn't disagree that it can be!!

No defensive injuries, leaves a question mark about the blond hair in Hannahs hand

So let's ask the question, are these men being helped or exploited?

If the mumbo jumbo team didn't come along the b2 would have received a life sentence. If the case is finished, they would immediately be entitled to apply for the kings yearly sentence reduction. With good behaviour and reductions they would be out by the time they are about 35 years old. They would possibly marry and go on to have a normal life. Now, with the death penalty , they must wait around 2 years for the appeal. Then anywhere from 3 to 5 years for supreme appeal if they lose. Then another 3 to 5 years to appeal for a kings pardon of the death penalty. So 10 to 12 years later, if commuted their life sentence reductions can begin.

So they will be lucky to be out by the time they are 50.

They are very young, I do question the advice they are being given by the mumbo jumbo team that got all of their defense stories off the Internet with absolutely nothing to back it up.

The "mumbo jumbo team" that put them in jail for life, consists of RTP, judges and the Thai- judical system!

Do us all a favor and ask no more questions, please!

And then to make matters worse, the mumbo team of "nomsod did it and paid off almost the entire country to cover it up " that they heard about on the Internet, could not leave well enough alone. "Oh no" they had to drum up some publicity for the MWRN fund, and complain about the b2 living and have them transferred to bkk. There they were, happily serving their sentence together supporting each other, while they watched tv in their chains. Now, they have been separated and sent to a large overcrowded high security prison. I imagine the day they were moved and separated was probably the worst of their lives. I do wonder if they regret the day the mumbo jumbo team ever came into their lives.

I do say this with great sadness for them.

More mumbo jumbo from Mr greenchair

"Both accused said they initially felt conditions at Bang Kwang the best of all 3 prisons they have been held at so far and they were satisfied with the conditions. Both accused were suprised and worried at the sudden transfer from Nakhon Si Thammarat Prison on 25th Jan early morning but now are at ease"

It wasnt to long ago that Greenchair was claiming the Mumbo Jumbo team consisted of 7 top lawyers

Greenchair posted

'That is exactly my point. Many of us did donate to the b2. We were told there will need to be witnesses flown in from all around the globe. Experts in dna, experts in gaet analysis, all manner of tests and investigating would need to be funded. More than 2 million baht was given to those b2. Call me disgraceful.

Here's disgraceful.

The dna expert paid her own air fare and contributed all of her time for free.

There were no witnesses that might have helped flown in.

All of the lawyers were free.

The person that could have testified about gaet analysis, wasn't even at court.

How much of that 2 million actually went towards the b2 getting witnesses and experts flown. NOTHING. '

GC

If i remember correctly back in Oct 2014 you were of the opinion the B2 were guilty or at least complicit and as such you would not donate to their cause

Robin, I fought fiercely against aleg and many others believing the b2 innocent. Then I wavered for a short time when I found out.

A.they went for a swim in the early hours.

B.the shoe (that I thought was mm) was left bloodied at site where the hoe was found.

Then after listening to posters, that a swim was nothing unusual.

And being left unsure about the shoe .I again defended the b2.

I certainly did donate to them , with the intention they would get the best experts and criminal lawyers . what did we get. Human rights lawyers going on about torture. No defense of the case. No experts, no magic witnesses, I feel, guilty or innocent, those boys were robbed.

GC to claim you wavered is just not true , once the B2 had been arrested your opinion was one of guilt or complicity, and you stated that you would not donate to their cause.

I will have to accept that you did contribute but will have reservations due to an earlier post stating you would not.

Your knowlege of the shoe again leaves me confused , as you now state it was bloodied , I have no knowledge of the unidentified shoe being bloodied

You then go on to state 'No defense of the case. No experts, no magic witnesses, I feel, guilty or innocent, those boys were robbed.'

But are a willing supporter to see them condemned not on the bassis of guilty or innocence , but on your own feelings of being cheated

It amazes me the amount of humanitarian agencies and individuals, that use the b2 case as a means to promote their cause and drum up donations.

This case is not about human rights. It is about 2 brutally murdered British citizens and the guilt or innocence of the 2 accused. People on the forum, should stay focused.

Can you clarify Muang Muang shoe being at the crime scene

Police tell Thai court vital DNA evidence 'used up'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-33457383

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-33492790

<snip>

Thai justices are already allowing murderers to roam free. That should answer your question.

Koh Tao is per Wikipedia abut 21 sq. km -- not much room to roam.

Where is Nomsod? If he's the easily-offended quick-to-violence person, he could just as easily do harm in Bangkok or anywhere else. Are Mon and Stingray Man and 'big ears cop' and 'Hoe Man' still hanging out at KT bars every night like they did before the crime? If you have a teenage daughter or sister, would you want her partying late at night at In Touch or AC bars at KT? I'll venture this: None of Mon's tough-guy buddies are wearing weaponized shark tooth rings like the did (including several grinning photos on FB) up until the day of the crime.

If Thailand wants to be taken seriously by the international community with this case (and I'm not sure if they are bothered), they have to stop using their corrupt, lying police forece as the sole basis of evidence, and start allowing International experts to testify. And they need to take on board those international experts' testimonies, ant treat them with the respect and gravitas that they are due. Anything less will see the case forever being viewed internationally as it is now: a stitch up of two scapegoats in order to protect the 'connected' real culprits. And Thailand will continue to be treated as a third world country that dishes out third world justice.

That paragraph hits the bullseye. Good post Han.

Oct 29th 2014

"If the DNA results turn out to match with the samples taken from the crime scene, Mr Warot will become an accomplice. If the DNA doesn't match, then society must give justice to Mr Warot's family too," the national police chief said - See more at: http://www.thephuketnews.com/phuket-koh-tao-murder-suspects-offered-2nd-dna-tests-49403.php#sthash.Kr0ApNo9.dpuf

The investigation is already closed , and Nomsods alibi proven

Therefore how could he become an accomplice

@ Lucky11

Please answer a question for me. If these murders happened in the UK, in your opinion, would the B2 be prosecuted for murder wit the crap evidence the police put forward, and the lack of some evidence put forward.

If yes......Why..?

If no.....Why..?

Also you stated "anal" stuff, did I not read that the UK revealed there was none...? Please let me know your knowledge on that point..

Few murders have witnesses. Almost all murder cases are based on a large accumulation of circumstantial evidences, that by themselves mean nothing. accumulated together these evidences increase the probability that this person was in the realm of possibilities to have committed the crime. Such as.....

Was person in vicinity of crime.

Did person have any belongings of victim.

Did person leave any belongings at or near crime scene.

Did person have a reasonable alibi.

Were there any suspicious reasons to doubt persons story.

Even Jane taupin said dna is useless circumstantial evidence if not supported by other evidences.

Since the b2 (or at least one of them ) would fail on each of these points. The answer to your question is yes they would have been convicted in a western court. The judge is not going to set free a brutal rapist, murderer just because a policeman in his stupidity failed to dot the i.

We hope.

No, most murders, and I have been involved in many on prosecution side, are not done on an accumulation of probability. Probability is only considered in civil matters.

Most murder cases are considered on a LOT of circumstantial evidence but only when that is backed up with provable evidence. Murder is a criminal case and will not be considered provable by cirmstantial evidence alone when there is provable other evidence available.

Therefore, if provable evidence is there but prosecution is negligent then the circumstantial evidence is nothing.

So in this case there is provable evidence such as dna and the blonde hair and the clothes. Rtp has it, prove it.

They have failed and a REAL court understands this.

If they RTP failed, then why are they still behind bars?

Maybe there is no rule of law

@ Lucky11

Please answer a question for me. If these murders happened in the UK, in your opinion, would the B2 be prosecuted for murder wit the crap evidence the police put forward, and the lack of some evidence put forward.

If yes......Why..?

If no.....Why..?

Also you stated "anal" stuff, did I not read that the UK revealed there was none...? Please let me know your knowledge on that point..

Few murders have witnesses. Almost all murder cases are based on a large accumulation of circumstantial evidences, that by themselves mean nothing. accumulated together these evidences increase the probability that this person was in the realm of possibilities to have committed the crime. Such as.....

Was person in vicinity of crime.

Did person have any belongings of victim.

Did person leave any belongings at or near crime scene.

Did person have a reasonable alibi.

Were there any suspicious reasons to doubt persons story.

Even Jane taupin said dna is useless circumstantial evidence if not supported by other evidences.

Since the b2 (or at least one of them ) would fail on each of these points. The answer to your question is yes they would have been convicted in a western court. The judge is not going to set free a brutal rapist, murderer just because a policeman in his stupidity failed to dot the i.

We hope.

The case would never have reached the court in a western country,

No due process , that is even before we actually consider any other factors

Since you are back you may have missed my post earlier requesting to clarify how you know it is Muang Muang shoe left at the scene of the crime.