rockingrobin

Hannah's murder was one of revenge, not lust, owing to the terrible attack on her with a hoe, and how her body was left, legs spread in an unseemly manner as if sending a 'not to <deleted> with me' message.

The RTP's scenario doesn't seem logical.

I would agree that the attack on Hannah and David are different ,

berybert, on 15 Mar 2015 - 16:00, said:

jdinasia, on 15 Mar 2015 - 15:31, said:

Here's what Panya said http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/police-now-rule-koh-tao-headmans-son-murder-suspect-turn-foreign-tourists-probe

"The police have ruled out a son of Koh Tao village headman as a suspect in the murder of two British tourists after he has evidence to prove he was not on the island at the time the murder occurred."

So now you aren't just defaming people who were persons of interest, you go on to defame a senior officer who you were defending earlier (until it was pointed out that he actually cleared the people you are obsessed with blami)

So having read that article it says that 2 Thais were the first suspects and not Burmese then foreign. It also states a person of interest was cleared as he had no tattoo.

I don't recall either of the Burmese having a tattoo.

From the above article:

Since the killings, police have focused on finding Asian men of 170 centimetres tall and with a 40 shoe size, based on surveillance camera footage and footprints on Sairee beach where the couple died.

Neither of the B2 matches those characteristics.

Also, if the article is referring to the "running man" then he doesn't appear to have any tattoos either. I'm beginning to think that the RTP is in possession of CCTV images at the time of the crime which have never been made public.

The part about the tattoo and cctv suspect doesnt make any sense, I agree that the cctv of the walking or running man doesnt appear to have any tattoo, on the other hand do the RTP have clearer images

However what I find more interesting is this statement published on the 16th September

Pol Maj Gen Kiettiphong said police believe the murder was committed between 3am and 5am yesterday. Pol Maj Gen Kiettiphong said Miller and some male friends arrived in Thailand on Aug 23, while Witheridge and four female friends arrived on Aug 27.

It would be interesting to hear what the victims' family members think about matters relating to the investigation and upcoming trial. There are several family members, so they may not all think alike on these matters. One member of one family made a statement which appeared to speak for all members of both families - but did it really?

And there's still the matter of British officials, designated as 'observers only' by the Thai PM. Supposedly, those same observers reported their 'findings/conclusions' to the victims' families - though the Brits only had the briefing of the RTP to reference. Who can say, with a straight face, that RTP investigators have been doing a professional and objective job at this?

Additionally, there are two families regarding the young Burmese men who will have been in jail for a year before a verdict is read, and will likely be locked up a lot longer, while appeals get bandied around. At the end of all that, they may be killed by Thai authorities, and they may be innocent. It's issues like those which keep these threads so busy. The general public want decent investigations, but they're not getting it - not by bumbling/subjective RTP nor by Brit experts who won't announce anything to the public. Is it because the Brits don't know much about the crime, or because they're under a gag order by Thai officials, or they don't much care, or.......?

Reminder: all RTP and Brit experts are paid by taxpayers. In other words, Thais and Brits are paying their salaries, housing, work-places, equipment, travel expenses. What are taxpayers getting in return? From RTP, an unprofessional investigation and all appearances of a cover-up. From Brit experts: NOTHING.

Boomerangutang, both families made statements as noted in the OP. Your attempt to diminish those statements because they don't match your agenda is deplorable.

And your attempts to refute the fact that this investigation is not flawed is laudable???

Please elaborate on how well conducted this investigation was done. Explain to us why the initial DNA samples were having to be sent off to Singapore for analysis, but yet when a DNA sample was collected for the media, it was magically analyzed in Bangkok and there was no match. This is a prime example of the screw ups.

I have always said that the investigation was flawed, just not fatally flawed imho.

Regarding Singapore, is that a fact? However, once you have the reference DNA processed the vast majority can be quickly eliminated by others.

As far as I know the results of the Singapore dna analysis have never been made public

Aleg

The statement you quote refers to the Father and Mon

"Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen has confirmed that they have released the two prime suspects they earlier thought to be involved directly to the murder of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, stating they don’t have enough evidence to prove their connection."

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/police-release-suspects-in-murder-of-two-brits-in-koh-tao.html

You should explain that to Boomerangutang to see if he can wean off of his fixation with the "Headman's people".

Aleg

, the article states that they was still searching for the son, who the RTP claimed fled the island

It was the next day that the RTP announced he wasnt on the island

Aleg

The statement you quote refers to the Father and Mon

"Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen has confirmed that they have released the two prime suspects they earlier thought to be involved directly to the murder of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, stating they don’t have enough evidence to prove their connection."

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/police-release-suspects-in-murder-of-two-brits-in-koh-tao.html

The PM recently stated that the land tax was necessary to fund Infrastructure projects

Pleading for public understanding, the prime minister explained that the government would need funding to implement several infrastructure projects and if it could not collect enough taxes such projects would not be possible.

So are we to assume these will now be shelved, or an alternative funding sourced

Here is one of the documents that detainees have to sign to get released translated into English

http://www.thaigov.go.th/en/announcement-2/item/83709-id83709.html

The Amnesty International report 100 days under martial law gives referance to asset seizure

Basicaly if your a Brit in Thailand and get in trouble. Do not expect any help from Britain. It is called diplomacy!

I'm not clear how you reached your conclusion from this article. It states that British police have been helping with the investigation/prosecution of (non-British) individuals accused of murdering British citizens. They are helping British citizens (the families of the deceased) by ensuring that those who committed the crimes see justice. I don't see how you conclude the opposite.

Yes, justice Thai-style: with the prosecution and the full weight of Thai officialdom getting the interviews and forensics from British experts, .....but the defense stuck with nada. If that's justice, then I'm a green frog.

I must have missed a report where any forensic evidence processed in the UK has been turned over to the prosecution. I also must have missed a report where any interviews conducted in the UK were officially turned over to the prosecution.

From the Guardian article

The FCO response said Hampshire, Essex, Hertfordshire and Jersey police had been asked by Thai police to interview Britons who were on Koh Tao with Witheridge and Miller. It added: “We now understand that UK law enforcement colleagues shared the contents of these statements informally with Thai police after they had taken human rights considerations into account.

Although I agree not formally, the question then would be why informally ?

With regards to running man

And they produced video and CCTV pictures showing the three suspects on a motorcycle at about 10.30 in the evening, a suspect buying cigarettes at a 7/11 and what is claimed to be one of the suspects caught running shortly before dawn. But none of the suspects appears to have blond hair on September 15th

I understand the article cannot be linked here (I predominately use google)

I find it hard to believe that a civilised country would not provide evidence to both sides. Thai authorities haven't provided evidence to the defence but I find it hard to believe the U.K would adopt Thai practices. I think this is rubbish being spewed by the prosecution. Thais love making statements and press releases on behalf of others.

Chooka

If I have read the article correctly it is the FCO that is suggesting the information has been shared

From The Guardian

The FCO response said Hampshire, Essex, Hertfordshire and Jersey police had been asked by Thai police to interview Britons who were on Koh Tao with Witheridge and Miller. It added: “We now understand that UK law enforcement colleagues shared the contents of these statements informally with Thai police after they had taken human rights considerations into account.”

jdinasia, on 02 Mar 2015 - 18:56, said:

IslandLover

I don't think "2 puny little midgets" did it.

I think 2 adults did it. Your characterization of them is simplistic. They are both adults.

The trial will be where guilt and innocence is determined. There'll be foreign nationals from at least 2 countries and very likely more in the courtroom daily during the trial as observers. So, yes, you are wrong.

The trial will be where guilt and innocence is determined. There'll be foreign nationals from at least 2 countries and very likely more in the courtroom daily during the trial as observers. So, yes, you are wrong.

My question was actually about whether the evidence in this trial will be allowed to be reported upon and put in the public domain, or will all, or most of it, be hidden from the general public? You did not answer that.

In some S.E. Asian countries daily reporting and publication of the trial proceedings is not allowed (I cited Indonesia as an example where the taking of notes inside a courtroom is not allowed by persons other than the prosecution and the defence, nor is the presence of the press, generally speaking). I'm genuinely interested in the trial procedure in Thailand.

This was raised sometime ago and if I recall correctly

The court is open to the public, No notes are allowed to be taken in the court, The judge/judges give a summary at the end of the session (not sure if this is after any witness statements/cross examination) by speaking into a recording machine.

No details are allowed to be published until the following day

Now I cannot confirm if this is accurate as I am going on what was posted in an earlier thread

Fayou

The video I have linked to is after the arrest of the burmese, and at the 2 min mark a fax depicting a photo purporting to be the B2 handcuffed and pointing to an iphone,

Should be the the restored iphone.

Please can we refrain from dissing other members, everybody is entitled to their thoughts and opinions and these will undoubtedly differ , however they are equally valid and deserve respect

Fayou

The video I have linked to is after the arrest of the burmese, and at the 2 min mark a fax depicting a photo purporting to be the B2 handcuffed and pointing to an iphone,

The only reason I can think that a woman (or man) might give their personal belongings to someone to look after in that situation is if they were going for a swim and didn't want to leave anything on the sand. I wonder if David had a wallet with him and if he did, what happened to it? Hannah's friend who handed her phone to the police must have given an explanation of why and when it came to be in her possession. I also wonder if when her phone was given back to her parents, all the data/photos were still on it.

All this business of phones seems strange to say the least. David's phone found smashed. Hannah's in the possession of a friend. McAnna allegedly using a phone belonging to a member of staff at the 24/7 store to ask for help. And nothing whatsoever in the public domain regards what evidence there might have been on any of them relating to the murders or lead up to the murders.

Yea, that's another oddity. If Sean was using someone else's phone, then how could he phone relatives (?), unless he had memorized all their phone numbers. Not impossible, but not likely. Also, would someone loaning a phone be ok with a (stranger?) another person making long distance calls? Sean is not the picture of politeness, but still..... and he checked/uploaded on to his FB page - still using someone else's mobile phone?

But, to me, the strangest issue with phones (more than the plant of Hannah's or David's phone at the B's dwelling) is that RTP detectives seemed to have done absolutely zero in checking up on 'persons of interest' phone logs - particularly for Monday morning's calls histories. If they did anything in that regard, we haven't heard peep. If they haven't, then I for one wouldn't be surprised, because assessing phone histories would likely implicate those who the RTP are trying to shield.

Talking about phone in the following are the burmese pointing to an unbroken phone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvYo7TGxwc4#t=136

I have also read that it is claimed the running man is one of the B2, can anyone confirm, unable to post link

Wasn't it claimed at the time that the British police were sidelined by the RTP and didn't play an effectual role in the investigation?

Now this article alleges that they did participate and have been giving "one-sided assistance" to the prosecution.

Read the article again very slowly.

Several British police forces and the Jersey police were asked to interview witnesses that had returned to Britain and Jersey.

Reprieve's beef is that the police forces and the FCO won't comment on whether assurances regarding not applying the death penalty were sought. The fact the Reprieve spokesperson states the trial is flawed before it even takes place suggests their mindset.

One sided assistance ? The British and Jersey police were responding to the RTP request. Where does it say that the defense have requested anything or it's automatically assumed they should be given copies of everything? Thai law does not require the prosecution to share all evidence before the trial begins with the defense team or presumably vice versa.

The way the article reads suggests the various forces involved and FCO were operating individually to specific requests rather than collectively. Wonder if that is so.

No doubt far more to come out at the trial.

According to article

Legal guidelines , evidence should not be provided in death penalty cases, my understanding is that Thailand is tier 3 and the UK would assert EU minimum standards

The information was passed on informally without assurances over the death penalty

The Met police refused to pass its report to Thai police due to the death penalty, and refused to give to defence

It is not clear from the article if the FCO or Met or individual forces provided the alleged evidence or not (see below)

"Hampshire police said it interviewed a witness over the case but that, as far as it knew, the information had not yet been passed on to Thai police. Jersey, Essex and Hertfordshire police referred the matter to the Met, who in turn referred it to the FCO.

The FCO said it could not assist the defence: “The evidence to be presented to the court was and remains in the possession of the Thai police and prosecutor. Decisions about what and how this will be presented at any trial are for the Thai authorities to make.

“The British government cannot interfere in Thailand’s judicial proceedings, just as other governments are unable to interfere in our own judicial processes." "

With regards the British government and foreign affairs an article called "Saudi Babylon" gives an insight into their workings

So ?and? you are saying that these 3 times on the left are not actually the time. But belong to the camera taking a picture of the video.

post-223227-0-99399500-1419216051.png

post-223227-0-38272800-1419216065.png

post-223227-0-74164500-1419216100.png

The guy in picture 1 and 2 , there is no visible signs of the white logo on the t-shirt,(picture 3)

Going on to the video where the images came from , there is a screen capture showing 2 people on a motorbike( 01:20ish the time is not clear) , both with white tops but 1 bare leg is visible. Now I dont Know the significance of these 2 people as it is unclear who they are, but if the burmese swapped tops , then it cannot be them, or if it is he burmese then the tops could not have been swapped

Personally I dont think he will be impeached , the repercussions will be wide and be unpalatable to the current situation

My take on the following

" He insisted that he had adjusted strategies to avoid casualties but it was not easy because armed men were mingling among the protesters "

Is this an acknowledgement that he was aware that innocent people and protesters would be put in danger,

By firing live ammunition into the group then it is more than reasonable to assume that innocent people would be killed, It then would follow that the generals giving the command are also responsible

For Obvious reasons this cannot be the case

Of course he was aware, and so were the "innocent " protesters. The message was loud and clear "Go Home!" Free transport was even provided.

Those that are aware they are in a dangerous situation and refuse to leave evoke very little sympathy when they get hurt. There is a thing called Personal Responsibility, apparently you can buy it for B500/day.

They didnt get hurt, some got killed,

It doesnt detract from the fact it was the result of firing live ammunition , knowing that deaths would occur.

If your statement

" Of course he was aware, and so were the "innocent " protesters. The message was loud and clear "Go Home!" Free transport was even provided "

is correct,

Then his actions are as a minimum is negligent ,

The foreseeable likelihood that the conduct will result in harm, the foreseeable severity of any harm that may ensue, and the burden of precautions to eliminate or reduce the risk of harm

Sean McAnna's statement contradicts Mon's employee statement,

Sean was asleep, employee helped to wash blood off McAnna now obviously both these cannot be correct

The conclusion to draw

Both lying - why

one telling the truth the other lying - who is telling the truth

employee mistaken - ?

Personally I dont think he will be impeached , the repercussions will be wide and be unpalatable to the current situation

My take on the following

" He insisted that he had adjusted strategies to avoid casualties but it was not easy because armed men were mingling among the protesters "

Is this an acknowledgement that he was aware that innocent people and protesters would be put in danger,

By firing live ammunition into the group then it is more than reasonable to assume that innocent people would be killed, It then would follow that the generals giving the command are also responsible

For Obvious reasons this cannot be the case

I am not sure what the article is about

It describes the prisoners as Political, now to me a political prisoner is somebody who is being incarcerated for their political view. Is Thailand admitting it has political prisoners in the classic sense

If they are politicians who have committed a crime then they are just prisoners.

Without knowing the details how can we judge

I believe the guy in black walking is Maung Maung and he is wearing Win's t-shirt. It is the same shirt that Win is wearing in the store, I thought at first it wasn't as in the store it looks as though the shirt has short sleeves. However, on the bike you can see it is three quarter lenghth sleeves. The time stamp on the left is from a compilation video of all CCTV images not the actual CCTV time stamp which is on the right. The walking man is the middle man on the bike.

Maung Maung.jpg Bike.jpg

In the police TV interview with the pathologist. The senior policeman I think Somyot also said that they had an cctv of the 3rd Burmese in a shirt previously worn by one of the B2.

I not quite sure where the switching of shirts is significant, The last video sighting of David is around 2am , the 3rd burmese with the changed shirt is over 1 hour earlier