loonodingle

This is one of the best lines so far. A statement and date you should all remember I think.

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/defence_team_reverse_demands_to_retest_dna_found_on_body_of_hannah_witheridge_1_4204183

http://www.edp24.co.uk/home/search?sort=publishedDate_descending&numberOfItemsPerPage=10&filterToDate=&longTo=NaN&submitted=true&freeText=hannah+witheridge&toDate=27%2F08%2F2015&excludeSiteIds=%5B%5D&longFrom=NaN&siteExternalID=yarmouthmercury.d&selectedCategories=%5B%5D&excludedCategories=%5B%5D&includeSiteIds=%5BYarmouthMercury.d%5D&distanceInMiles=0.0&fromDate=&siteId=2.970&latFrom=NaN&action=search&numberOfItemsToSearchPerPage=10&latTo=NaN&facetQueries=publishedDate%3A%5BNOW%2FDAY-7DAYS+TO+NOW%5D&facetQueries=publishedDate%3A%5BNOW%2FYEAR+TO+NOW%5D&facetQueries=publishedDate%3A%5BNOW%2FDAY-30DAYS+TO+NOW%5D&facetQueries=publishedDate%3A%5BNOW%2FDAY+TO+NOW%5D&longitude=NaN&latitude=NaN&filterFromDate=&facetFields=tree_department.categorydimension.archant&publishDateInterval=uk.co.polopoly.search.util.DateInterval%4013b7d71f

That phone in question being in their possession since the night of the murders is beyond any doubt by now, even the defense admits to it. The ownership is the only thing left to establish factually, and if it was in fact David Miller's phone it links the two Burmese directly to one of the victims; and considering the order of events the defense would have to come up with a darn good explanation over how that came to happen without the defendants looking suspicious.

If it's proven that the phone was David's and that it was not a 'plant' (two big 'IF's'), then the most it shows is that the phone was either stolen from David or given to them by David. If stolen, this becomes a case of whether one or two young men stole a phone from before or after a crime scene. I recall that very soon after the crime, a mobile phone allegedly belonging to David was found at the crime scene. Would RTP plant a phone in the hopes of framing two migrants? If you ask me, the answer is 'YES.' Remember, this is the phone that was first announced as belonging to Hannah - until social media let out a scream soon after, and RTP realized their mistake, and switched their story, to say it was David's.

Notice how, now that the "irrefutable" DNA evidence has been shown to have more holes than Swiss cheese, that a damaged phone supposedly belonging to DM and purportedly found near the residence of the suspects have suddenly become very "damning" evidence. And yet you know who claims that others are grasping at straws

The defense was offered a retesting of all the DNA evidence, the one from inside the rape victim in particular, they refused. You call that a refutation?

I'll say it again: The defense doesn't trust DNA typed/handled by subjective entities. The judge appears to exact tight parameters on everything regarding the DNA. He specifies who or what samples can be tested, and who cannot be tested (anyone connected to the headman, for example). All DNA re-examined will be handled by Thai officials. Thai officials have proven they cannot be trusted with handling DNA. As for DNA in/on Hannah: it's not even sure whether any samples remain (all used up? lost?). The only remaining hope for reliable DNA typing is with Brit forensics.

Actually your wrong on one point. They can trust the DNA taken in court in front of the judge. They sealed it as per international standards and probably escorted it to bangkok with the Forensic specialist from Bangkok. They maintained a chain all the way. And now they have their results. A copy will go to tbe court I suggest. This is prove DNA. its not been wheeled around on a shopping trolley. Its how it should be. So I suggest it doesnt match what the prosecution submitted.

I maybe wrong. .. but then there again I'm perfect... lol... no seriously. .. this is why they shelved the rest of it. Its irrelevant now.

It's all on record if you care to trawl back through the court disclosures. I'm not going to, and I do not have to justify myself to you or anyone. On a point of accuracy your assertions are false.

You wrote a check you couldn't cash, got found out and now you run to the "I don't have to justify myself" escape door.

If you are going to call people dishonest and despicable for allegedly spreading misinformation, when you are caught doing what you accuse others of, yes, you have some justification to do; at the very least to yourself.

Okay, remind me what I need to justify with your alternative theories. Truth. The RTP said everything was available to the defence. Untrue - the key, critical Hannah DNA samples weren't. Been used up or (in the case of the blond hair found in her hand) was lost. Really? Only the profiles remained.

That is a matter of record. Do I need to go on?

The defence team issued a statement that they didn't need to check the crap that was left behind - hence their reliance on the B2 samples obtained in court. probably everyone and their brother would reason that any DNA samples freely given would indicate that the givers were innocent.

Using your phraseology, it is damning evidence.

Here Here!!

Don't know why we are bother engaging this ~'#'@'#''~'##

If you are going to correct people at least try to have a passing acquaintance with the facts. The "all DNA evidence is used up" disinformation has already been disproved for weeks. The defense was allowed to retest all the DNA evidence, including the one from inside the body of the rape victim:

“The court said that lawyers are free to request all the DNA samples for independent DNA testing at any time,”

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

Besides that, you just made up the "fact" that the defense has a non-match of the DNA, didn't you? If not provide a cite for that claim. Also those other pieces of evidence that you say there's no need to retest, they have already been sent to retest:

"Mr Chomphuchat said that the alleged murder weapon, a garden hoe, which had never been properly forensically examined by police, and some clothing found at the scene, had already been retested by government forensic officers but no results had yet been forwarded to the defence lawyers."

Funnily enough, I am the one being accused of telling "porkies".

That's incorrect. the DNA samples had been used up or lost. That's factual. What was remaining was the profiles. I think you need to be aquainted with the facts. If you read the reports from court it is made quite clear that the defence counsel doesn't need any more re-testing on what's left. He has enough to prove the B2's innocence. That's also a factual statement.

And yes, you may not be telling porkies, but you don't have any grasp on factuality.

I noticed something distinctly lacking on your response, citations; that being third party account that supports your claims; you know, like I did to disprove your claims.

Even your own post disproves your claims, this "the DNA samples had been used up or lost" directly contradicts this "the defence counsel doesn't need any more re-testing on what's left", which one is it? all gone or something left?

So go on then, where is your source that there are no DNA samples left to test and that the defense has already obtained a negative match... presumably as compared with those DNA samples that don't exist, nice feat that.

I see that in a subsequent post you complain about people posting misinformation... so once again, you claimed the defense already has DNA results that clear the men on trial, source?

Yell AleG can you explain this

Mr Chomphuchat said that the alleged murder weapon, a garden hoe, which had never been properly forensically examined by police, and some clothing found at the scene

Why in nearly a year have the police failed to forensically examine the murder weapon FF Sake Why????? Can you in all your days tell me why???

Cut your cr@p digging and tell me WHY oh WHY oh Why.......

You cant can you..... Nobody can....... Nobody knows...... The weapon that was handled by the KILLER NOT tested forensically.

The defense was offered a retesting of all the DNA evidence, the one from inside the rape victim in particular, they refused. You call that a refutation?

Correction: the defence had requested retesting of all DNA, the court eventually agreed, and the RTP responded by saying it had all been used up or lost - the critical DNA, that is. Once the defence had received information from the UK that countered that of the RTP, they staged (yes they staged) B2 DNA samples by forensic pros to be taken inside the court, where chain of custody couldn't be contested.

Once they had the non-match - they told the court that it wouldn't be necessary to re-test the remaining pieces of evidence, like the hoe, a few socks and shoes and other items.

In my book that's a proven refutation of the RTP's case. And it's about time you and Tony 121 accepted it.

If you are going to correct people at least try to have a passing acquaintance with the facts. The "all DNA evidence is used up" disinformation has already been disproved for weeks. The defense was allowed to retest all the DNA evidence, including the one from inside the body of the rape victim:

“The court said that lawyers are free to request all the DNA samples for independent DNA testing at any time,”

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

Besides that, you just made up the "fact" that the defense has a non-match of the DNA, didn't you? If not provide a cite for that claim. Also those other pieces of evidence that you say there's no need to retest, they have already been sent to retest:

"Mr Chomphuchat said that the alleged murder weapon, a garden hoe, which had never been properly forensically examined by police, and some clothing found at the scene, had already been retested by government forensic officers but no results had yet been forwarded to the defence lawyers."

Funnily enough, I am the one being accused of telling "porkies".

That's incorrect. the DNA samples had been used up or lost. That's factual. What was remaining was the profiles. I think you need to be aquainted with the facts. If you read the reports from court it is made quite clear that the defence counsel doesn't need any more re-testing on what's left. He has enough to prove the B2's innocence. That's also a factual statement.

And yes, you may not be telling porkies, but you don't have any grasp on factuality.

Yell -AleG uses selective passages to distort the facts but you do feed him. With the exception of an occasional post I wonder what keeps his/her brain functioning sometimes and if its legal.

We must all remember we only eat what we are fed through the news channels. However it does appear that way....... The fact that Sky News has bailed out since their translator was warned by the Mafia to do a runner.

Looks like Jonathan Samuels has lost his bottle and gone the same way. As well as the BBC Guy. This surprises me considering its by far the most high profile case involving British Citizens to come out of Thailand for years.

Strange in my honest opinion. Very Strange. they spend millions following Oscar case but cant afford a ticket to this one

I guess khaosod have abandoned also ?

Well not sure, I was referring to the UK media outlets. BBC and Sky who was all over this like a rash when it broke. then they send their reporters to the trial. But now nothing Not even a tweet really...

I don't think Khaosod are to pleased considering they got their info from a copper. Mr Panya

Who says all the evidence has been fake and torn to shreds? The same people that have been claiming the phone was planted per chance?

As for what the two defendants will say, I'm pretty sure they won't change their previous testimony regarding the phone.

So the trial has been going well for the prosecution has it? Is this how a perfect case goes when it's brought to court?

You know that the trial has been shambolic for the RTP and the defense hasn't even started yet!!

Isn't it strange that everyone who is following this case, whether in Thailand or abroad would strongly agree with your post bar the few remaining shills?

We must all remember we only eat what we are fed through the news channels. However it does appear that way....... The fact that Sky News has bailed out since their translator was warned by the Mafia to do a runner.

Looks like Jonathan Samuels has lost his bottle and gone the same way. As well as the BBC Guy. This surprises me considering its by far the most high profile case involving British Citizens to come out of Thailand for years.

Strange in my honest opinion. Very Strange. they spend millions following Oscar case but cant afford a ticket to this one

Lets see what the cat drags in.

As far as the Phone goes the defence has had an opportunity to discredit it.

The phone being confirmed as belonging to David Miller is very damning evidence; the people complaining how that was established are showing their hand over whether they want the truth to come out and justice be served versus simply wanting the case to collapse.

To recap, they two men on trial have already admitted the just happened to find the phone on the night of the murders. To me it beggars belief that these men would be a pair of scapegoats that by sheer coincidence turned out to had found that phone on that night. Not to mention that instead of keeping an expensive phone they smashed and tried to dispose of it.

And kept it at their abode...............gawd.............

I will say its surprising what the Police find at peoples homes. They don't seem to realise its the first place they check. The Uk is the same. How many postman have been nicked because of years and piles of open letters are found in their cellars or under the stairs.

Its a low IQ I think. Jails are full of dumb criminals. The smart ones are on the loose.

They could have chucked in a bin, flung it over a fence, but they took it home..........

Correct , its claimed they gave it to their mate who then chucked it around the back.

Its just claims and lets see what the witness reveals. I want to know if the UK actually confirmed the phone was David's first. They had time to check and so did the defence

Yes they have, many months ago they testified during a pre-trial hearing that they found the phone in question on the night of the murder, also two witnesses testified that the accused had given them that phone to dispose of it.

Interesting. Let's see what they say when they are actually in trial then.

So will the prosecution cross-examine the B2 or not?

That phone in question being in their possession since the night of the murders is beyond any doubt by now, even the defense admits to it.

The ownership is the only thing left to establish factually, and if it was in fact David Miller's phone it links the two Burmese directly to one of the victims; and considering the order of events the defense would have to come up with a darn good explanation over how that came to happen without the defendants looking suspicious.

I don't very often agree with you but I do in this case.

However there's many different ways that the phone came to be at the back of the bungalows.

To build a case they need to add evidence. So DNA and an item that belonged to a victim is a start. Its not midway through the case so lets see what the defence has found out with regard to the phone etc. they had the case file.

You're fast! I've been on Twitter all day refreshing and didn't see that, Of course when I decide to post Andy tweets..

How, at this point could they not know if it's David's phone or not? All they had to do is show it to the Ware guy.. David's phone likely had photos from in the bar... Doubt the human trash who killed him would have left his phone.

The phone was smashed, so using it to show pictures is out of the question.

That the police asked Interpol for help on the matter obviously points at the SIM card being checked at the country of origin.

Not necessarily out of the question. The phone quite likely had a memory card in it considering the duration of David's travels.

I phone doesn't have a card does it, and the phone they found was

4S IPhone Black 16GB

The phone being confirmed as belonging to David Miller is very damning evidence; the people complaining how that was established are showing their hand over whether they want the truth to come out and justice be served versus simply wanting the case to collapse.

To recap, they two men on trial have already admitted the just happened to find the phone on the night of the murders. To me it beggars belief that these men would be a pair of scapegoats that by sheer coincidence turned out to had found that phone on that night. Not to mention that instead of keeping an expensive phone they smashed and tried to dispose of it.

And kept it at their abode...............gawd.............

I will say its surprising what the Police find at peoples homes. They don't seem to realise its the first place they check. The Uk is the same. How many postman have been nicked because of years and piles of open letters are found in their cellars or under the stairs.

Its a low IQ I think. Jails are full of dumb criminals. The smart ones are on the loose.

This must be another one of those sessions where the Officer gives testimonies for hours and says roughly nothing other than "I dunno". After this many days passed with nothing to indicate guilt of the B2 what is there to say?

Maybe things are a bit slow because the court is having to knock up a makeshift extension to house all the officers that are yet to testify. I think only around 12 of the 65 have so far testified over the course of the hearings, so that means they have to have to make some room for the other 53 that have yet to tell the court what they don't know and what they have lost.

Give them a chance... this is about a fair trial. Also this is the police on trial. The more who cock up the better if it really is a stitch up with the B2 as we think possibly is... its not over until the fat lady songs as they say..

This in itself is deplorable. The police are NOT allowed to assist in a death penalty case. They have broken their agreement and as such those police should be hauled over the coals.

Further, as the evidence shows they helped the prosecution then all bets are off and they should comply with any and all defense requests.

I hope this gets reported in mainstream papers in the UK and authorities made to explain.

It then would not surprise me to find out that witness just lied.

Your last sentence is most likely true. That wouldn't surprise me, either. The whole case against the B2, IMO, is one big lie. So what difference does another one make?

It has proved the UK judge was wrong when he said there was no exculpatory evidence.

I said that he would not know the tactics of defense and could not make such a judgment.

The witness saying the police confirmed who the phone belonged to can very well be exculpatory evidence found in the report. Perhaps he should have waited until the end of prosecution evidence before deciding that point. He may easily now come to a different conclusion.

Actually he said to assist their case. Revealing the phone part doesnt help. However they have previously said they never checked it. Today they change there tune.

lets see if they get the confirmation from ..............

Just confirmed No Witheridge family in court...

What hacks me off is "informal interviews" taken by the police forces in Essex Hampshire and Hertfordshire. Because they are informal they dont need to diclose the information.

What a load of B011ocks...

You dont do Informal work for another police force in another country with death penalty punishment.

But hey whats informal. Meet down the pub with your notes on the back of a fag packet... Or listen we have been told to come andtell you dont show your holiday pictures to the newspapers as it may show a potential witness we are tracking.... nudge nudge wink wink... and we dont want him to get wind of our investigation. .. Ok Na Kup...

Its a murder case and they are doing informal work for the bloody thai police... ff. Sake..

When will the Forensic Institute have the results from the DNA they took from the defendants in court last week?

Ha..... dont you think they had them already. Last Friday when Nakhon said its ok we don't need anything else checked. We have the DNA taken in court with witnesses. And a comment that we have enough to prove our case or words to that effect. .. they have had the results. .. I would have money on it...

So to avoid the trolls....any updates from the court?

Zilch from Andy Hall. And sorry, I did respond to AleG who must be wearing his 'serious' hat today. [/quote

I think AleG has had 6 cans of RedBull today as he/she is bouncing of the walls... worse than me today....lol..]

So to avoid the trolls....any updates from the court?

Not yet, my guess is we need to wait for the lunch break for A.H. to tweet

You can also try Heidi Anna Facebook.

Miller family in court. No mention of the Witheridge family. I get the feeling they have seen enough. But hey what do I know!

Extract from DogM that paraphrases the judges report - British police will even interview witnesses in the UK at UK taxpayers' expense and agree to only disclose the results of this investigation to said 3rd world police.

Bearing in mind the interviews were probably held early in the investigation, and the Brits probably considered that they were helping to find the murderers, it seems a reasonable course of action. Now with the trial taking place, I would have hoped that the Brits would have shared this information with the defence IF it was clear that the witness statements did not accord to the B2 being involved.

I wonder if the defence do have these witness statements, perhaps from re-interviewing them privately, as they seemed keyed-up about important info coming from the UK.

I'm not going to delve into what the RTP did with the information, because that would open up a new can of worms. Let's see if the senior investigating officers making statements today, can shed some light. It would make my day if the defence's cross examination can trip them up...

...so during your investigation you received witness statements from the uk?

Correct.

Was one of these from John Smith?

Don't remember.

Well let me help you. Mr Smith said he saw Nomsod in the AC bar threatening the female victim. Do you recollect, now?

No.

So what happened to these statements?

I don't know.

Well you are the senior investigating officer, so I repeat, what happened to these statements?

Don't know.

So who does know?

....SIO shakes his head stays silent.

The defence did contact witnesses. Thats how they found out the local police forces had already Interviewed them

I have now waded through all 38 pages of Mr. Justice Green's judgment and I must say paragraph 108 is rather interesting, hypothetically speaking. In it, the judge describes a hypothetical scenario which could well apply to this case. Was it deliberate, or merely a coincidence?

But, be thankful for small mercies. The Defence may not have access to the Met report, but then neither does the Prosecution.

Just to elaborate, the hypothetical case involves the UK forensic team knowing that the DNA samples have been "mixed up" by foreign forensics personnel such that the wrong DNA sample is being used against those foreign defendants and the Judge asks whether the pubic interest of UK would still outweigh the private interest of the foreign defendants who have brought the case that any such info should be released to the foreign defendants legal team.

Well this is what has possibly happened which is why they wanted the DNA taken in court with witnesses. That was a game changer I think.

http://www.gofundme.com/HannahWitheridge

As many of you know, the trial into the horrific murder of our beautiful Hannah will begin in July this year. As a family we are extremely keen to travel out to Thailand to represent Hannah and to, hopefully, see justice done. The trial is scheduled to run on for many months so we hope to go out on 2 occassions- at the beginning of the trial and again at the end to witness the verdict.

Last updated 5 months ago I think. Certainly not since Tony Witheridge and his son attended the opening of the trial. Leaving early in a distressed state and failing to return. Just 2 of them went.

This whole issue of the report is ridiculous.

Firstly, the Brits did not fly out to Thailand out of the goodness of their hearts, nor were they there from a sense of obligation to ensure that justice be served in this case. The reason the Brits sent a team there was purely political - 100,000 people put their names to a petition demanding an independent investigation into the murders and publicly handed it to the British government at 10 Downing Street, at a time when (and here's the clincher...) a general election was just around the corner. Cameron had no choice.

According to Mr. Justice Green's report (Quoted text from the report is in bold and I have underlined what I think is worth highlighting):

9.The misgivings raised were sufficient for the Prime Minister to engage in discussion with the Prime Minister of Thailand with the consequence that the two reached agreement that The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (MPS) would send a team led by a senior officer to Thailand to conduct an independent inquiry.

Sounds good, right? An independent inquiry... just what the petitioner's had been asking for and the Thai PM has agreed to it... but wait...

The power [to send such a team to another country] can only be exercised with the express authority of the Secretary of State subject to such conditions as the Minister might consider appropriate.

So, it's the UK Secretary of State who authorizes such a trip and who decides upon the conditions...

10. In the present case the authority granted by the Minister took account of the fact that Thailand maintained the death penalty and that in the absence of assurances about the possible punishment that might be imposed at the end of the trial the officers assigned to go to Thailand were to undertake, in essence, a listening or observer role.

So that role was decided by the uk Sec. of State and was clearly understood before the UK cops left the shores of Blighty... is that the way it was reported at the time? i got the impression the Brits were headed there with the expectation of doing some investigating but were denied by Thai authorities... apparently not...

and on the the subject of confidentiality:

The report highlights the importance of confidentiality so as to not harm the relationship between the Thai and UK governments and so as not to tarnish the highly-esteemed reputation of the Met & Scotland Yard. At the same time "The Commissioner of the RTP had sought and obtained express agreement from DCI Lyons at the outset that his observations of the deployment, as set out in the Report, would only be shared with the Miller and Witherbridge families, and would not be disclosed any further”. So I guess when DCI Lyons showed the report to the Witheridge family he forget to mention the fact that confidentiality was of the highest priority and they should not make mention of it to anyone... and so giving a statement to the press that suggested his report indicated that the 2 Burmese lads were guilty was a definite no-no... Oops...

But screw the report of a bunch of UK cop voyeurs that apparently is so wishy-washy that it wouldn't have any effect on the outcome of the trial even if it was released, what i would like to know is why no-one is kicking up a huge stink about the fact that: "four English police forces conducted interviews about the case at the request of their Thai counterparts and passed on the information" (Source: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/01/capital-punishment-concerns-hannah-witheridge-david-miller-murder-thailand).

What is going on here...? Why was that information, which was not bound by the condition of confidentiality that the Met's jolly-up in Thailand was subject to, not released to the defense team whilst it was given freely to the RTP for use by the prosecution in a death sentence case?

I hope to see Justice Green's report justifying such actions...

Excellent post, particularly this bit:

and on the the subject of confidentiality:

The report highlights the importance of confidentiality so as to not harm the relationship between the Thai and UK governments and so as not to tarnish the highly-esteemed reputation of the Met & Scotland Yard. At the same time "The Commissioner of the RTP had sought and obtained express agreement from DCI Lyons at the outset that his observations of the deployment, as set out in the Report, would only be shared with the Miller and Witherbridge families, and would not be disclosed any further”. So I guess when DCI Lyons showed the report to the Witheridge family he forget to mention the fact that confidentiality was of the highest priority and they should not make mention of it to anyone... and so giving a statement to the press that suggested his report indicated that the 2 Burmese lads were guilty was a definite no-no... Oops...

But screw the report of a bunch of UK cop voyeurs that apparently is so wishy-washy that it wouldn't have any effect on the outcome of the trial even if it was released, what i would like to know is why no-one is kicking up a huge stink about the fact that: "four English police forces conducted interviews about the case at the request of their Thai counterparts and passed on the information" (Source: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/01/capital-punishment-concerns-hannah-witheridge-david-miller-murder-thailand).

What is going on here...? Why was that information, which was not bound by the condition of confidentiality that the Met's jolly-up in Thailand was subject to, not released to the defense team whilst it was given freely to the RTP for use by the prosecution in a death sentence case?

I hope to see Justice Green's report justifying such actions...

The double standards of the British authorities are clearly evident.

So now it is clear that Cameron's foreign secretary ordered the British police to undertake observation only, after Cameron had already made his political capital by pretending to order an 'independent enquiry' in response to the petition. It is also very clear to most of us that the Thai government and RTP would in no way have allowed an independent enquiry by foreign police on Thai soil. Thus the British government deliberately misled the British public into believing that British police were going to Thailand to be involved in genuine investigative work, after the British government had expressly forbidden that. This was a cynical act of deception and an abuse of taxpayers' money. An honest response to the petition would have been to explain truthfully that neither the British nor Thai governments are willing to permit an independent enquiry by British police. Therefore a police jolly out to Thailand would serve no purpose at all and would be a complete waste of taxpayers' money as well as create unrealistic expectations for the families of the victims.

The point about British police agreeing with the RTP not to keep confidential the results of their own investigations in the UK simply beggars belief. Thai police would do whatever they felt like with any information they obtained from investigations on Thai soil. Similarly, British police are entitled to conduct investigations in the UK into the deaths of British citizens abroad without waiting for instructions from foreign police and without having to make undertakings of confidentiality to them. 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".

Whose human rights exactly did they take into account? Those of Thai police.

The behaviour of British police in this case is so shameful that Justice Green would do well to call for an investigation into the assets of the officers involved to see, if they have received any recent gratuities from the Far East, rather then cravenly succumbing to political pressure to go along with what was at best an abuse of taxpayers' money and possibly something much worse.

Its good you have highlighted that and I quote

"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"

On that basis it shows the Thai police have tried to gain extra information that they can try to pin on the B2.. that's commendable ........ You will also note that they haven't gained in information so far.

There's been no evidence submitted that links the B2 except for DNA they claim is from the B2. Nothing from the UK submitted. Nothing to confirm the phone was Davids. No letter from a phone company was there?? Nope nothing.. they have achieved absolutely Zilch. So what does that tell us??

I would argue that it goes to prove the case is a crock of sh!te so far.

Barking up the wrong tree perhaps

In view of the seriousness someone needs to pull their finger out and get a move on finding evidence. Not from torture but decent detective work. Transparent work.

I think any RTP investigation would look as bad if under the spotlight.

Actually, RTP sometimes get things right. Once in awhile there is a crime solved by RTP who actually look closely at the clues, follow leads, use some outside-the-box thinking - and nab the culprits. They have the capabilities, it's mostly a matter of whether they have an agenda which supersedes doing real detective work. I think that's the situation in this KT case.

Also who cares what UK police think about the evidence. It ain't their country!

I hope you're joking.

Good that we can agree on something , RTP does a good job , sometimes...

Here in Pattaya we see alot of crimes solved on a weekly basis , at least what we read about in the news.

And yes we have the bad cops too.

The question remains if every local police officer that worked on the KT case are bad guys or just do it the Thai way without "thinking" too much .

Not sure how long u have lived there but at one point the Mayor ordered the newspapers to report no more than 2 murders a week there.

My friend who had sold his home and was leaving Thailand in 4 days turns up dead. By hanging himself. The police said it was suicide. End of story. No investigation or anything. I could write a book about Pattaya