loonodingle

Definition: making you upset, nervous, worried, etc.

Perhaps a look at dictionary may help you if u cant work it out

http://i.word.com/idictionary/unsettling.quote name=

"jdinasia" post="9779920" timestamp="1440586706"]

The judge in the UK put many claims made by members of TVF to rest.

Nothing exculpatory.

The BP article offers the best understanding so far, of why the UK police were only observers.

That is actually a Reuters dispatch which is posted here:

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/article/idUKKCN0QU1YA20150825

Ridiculous, the UK police team didn't investigate anything themselves. They were essentially on a paid junket being chaperoned by the RTP top brass, and a report that came out from the fco said that they didn't see any evidence that they could verify in terms of source and credibility.

They had to take the RTP brass at their word, but it is very unlikely that the brit cops were bowled over by the cutting edge investigative prowess of the RTP. The likely reason for not disclosing the contents of this latest report is that it's very reasonable to assume that the appraisal of the RTP is far from complimentary.

The judge said he found the report pretty unsettling, that would tend to point to shock and dismay at the methods and conclusions reached by the RTP. This is a senior judge, the nature of facts of deceased's injuries etc will very much be like water off a duck's back.

So what else do you think a man of his experience would have found so unsettling about the report? Very keen to see how you spin this one

Huh?

How do you get anything but unsettling from "unsettling"?

A look at dictionary perhaps would assist you if u cant work it out.

UK authorities have nothing to do with this case. They should never have been "invited" in the first place. If thai nationals where murdered in UK would the Thai authorities be welcome over there to have a squiz at the evidence

If thai nationals where murdered in UK would the Thai authorities be welcome over there to have a squiz at the evidence

Actually, yes, they would, if they showed an interest in the case.

Can you please provide one example of say a murder in say UK or USA or AU where the police have "invited" police for the victims country to come over have check how things are going. UK police should never have been involved. As for making public their findings....what's the point. The findings cannot be questioned in the court here in Thailand. Also who cares what UK police think about the evidence. It ain't their country!

Quite right. It was allowed due to pressure from a petition delivered to 10 Downing Street. Public opinion outweighed normal diplomatic protocol.

However it was announced it was to verify evidence. By the time the officers arrived Khun Somyot had announced that there would be No Verification. Not by the British. Not by the Singapore labs. Not by the USA labs. And certainly not by the Thai forensic authorities. He would have absolute control on all evidence retrieved. Including CCTV and Weapons.

This is where it all started to smell bad... why would you do that if you wanted to show the world what a great host nation you are. How your rights would be protected and your families could rest assured when their offspring went to full moon partys and got smashed they would always find the perps if they ended up in a body bag or raped etc.

Well, I hope that Mr Justice Green will fly out to Thailand to witness their executions, if the worst comes to the worst. That might help confirm the unease he felt in reaching his judgement.

I also hope that the British government will not waste any more taxpayers' money to send any police on similar trips abroad again, if they are to serve no useful purpose in advancing the cause of justice for British murder victims but are just boondoggles for British police to hobnob with their corrupt colleagues in third world countries. Also the FCO should be asked to refrain from making statements that could be prejudicial to criminal cases in foreign countries, particularly when they are unwilling to reveal any evidence to support their statement.

An all round disgrace from the British establishment. I am ashamed to be a citizen and angry that I pay taxes for this garbage.

He has said theres nothing to help the case. Revealing the file though would cause huge embarrassment to the met police. It was written to be kept in house. The family wouldnt have read it either just fed Information from it through there local family liason officer. So the accuracy of what they had been told would also depend on the ability of the officer to honest and objective. In the circumstances it maybe that the officers felt they needed to give the families an assurance that all well dont worry. They have confessions etc. Rather than say what they really felt. Also 3rd or 4th hand Information can be jazzed up. You know how people take one thing and embellish it. Many of yiu on here are guilty of that...lol.....

As far as the UK Gov well they are shysters. Limp wristed uni boys who havent done a proper days work In their life. Hugo Swire is iinterested in trade deals not your rights. In fact the British embassy is very lax o support for UK citizens. Its renown for it.

The family's haven't had to withdraw their statements either which is very unfortunate given what the have seen now. Personally if I was the father of either victim I would speak up if I had seen enough evidence to question the police case.

I am pretty sure the Witheridge family, who have always shown a touching faith in their Home Office minder, will still be broadly following the advice, which right now is to reserve any statement until after the trial is over.

Yes I agree. They will be towing the line. However it doesn't make I right.

I am informed they are not attending the trial judgement, I don't know if this is true but would speak volumes

One more thing.

I don't know as none of you do if they are guilty of this crime.

What I would say is wouldn't be better if we had open files and true transparency so the world can see that if you die in Thailand police can remember things or that the officers are trained. Or that suspects aren't taken to a remote shop house for interrogation. We aren't daft none of us. I have allegiance to Andy Hall or anyone else. I just think Hannah and David are owed justice. When I laid Flowers on her grave earlier this year I said to her if I can do anything to help you get justice I will. I have done what I can as one person. Its far over my head now. I did send the link of the BBC recording to the lawyers and reprieve in case they have missed it. Other than that there's little more any of us can do.

The people who need to speak up wont. They know who they are and what they could do but other than torture which I don't condone it will be difficult to prise it out of them. If I had been given 6 months to live with terminal cancer or the like I would be doing more with impunity. However I probably have 30 years left I hope and more. This case will not go away and the perps will get justice meted out.

The judge in the UK put many claims made by members of TVF to rest.

Nothing exculpatory.

The BP article offers the best understanding so far, of why the UK police were only observers.

This a side show based around the statements the family released..

First let me remind every member here what the police actually said because that's the thing to remember, what we can actually see in words.

READ IT..

"In any event, the report is being prepared for the MPS purposes only, and it will not be shared with the Royal Thai Police"

"On the basis that the MPS does not hold any evidence in this case, it cannot provide any assistance in response to your clients requests"

So there you have it in BLACK AND WHITE. They hold no evidence.

So why take them to court???

Well that's simple. It was because of the family's statements not the police statements. The defence wanted to show that the support the family offered the prosecution was based on a flawed report. A report that contained no evidence just a list of things they had been told.

Remember this is what the police said

" The UK Police officers who deployed to Thailand operated within the parameters specified in a section 26 Authority issued by the home office. They did NOT conduct any investigations into the murders of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller"

So the police have saved face here. it would have set a new standard in disclosure unseen before.

The family's haven't had to withdraw their statements either which is very unfortunate given what the have seen now. Personally if I was the father of either victim I would speak up if I had seen enough evidence to question the police case. If I didn't and a wrongful conviction was made I would feel like I has been an accessory to murdering 2 innocent people. Not what my son or daughter would have approved off I am sure.

Dont put to much weight to this report.

The MPS has already stated they where not allowed any verification of evidence. And only had limited access.

Someone told me yesterday they think Hannahs family are not attending any more court hearings and have washed their hands of the trial. ....

I cant guarantee thats going to happen , but she is normally right...

If that is the case and the report contains nothing of benefit to the defendants, why do the prosecution (who presumably have seen it) not introduce it as evidence?

Surely the defence are also entitled to see reports and evidence which the prosecution have seen. Maybe not in Thailand.

This report was an internal police report compiled by the police on their return from Koh Tao. They will not share it with the Thai police. If any its critical of the Thai Police so it would be embarrassing if it was made public. It was written last year prior to the families statement published by the FCO. The uk lawyers and Reprieve argued that tbey should see it to see how the families came to make their statements on tbe back of the report. In essence they are claiming it was baseless as they had had limited access to evidence. No verification as promised etc etc. This has rolled on since then and the polices refusal has ended with a request to tbe court for its release.

Theres nothing in the report to assist the case. On the polices own admission they think it will hamper the reciprocal arrangements they have going forward with other police forces if defence teams can get copies of confidential files. On the basis it contains nothing of substance to assist the B2 then theres nothing lost.

they have argued under data protection laws for the disclosure. Unfortunately its not a valid reason and the evidencecontained within doesnt warrant an eexception.

If the police are critical of the RTP then it would have been very embarrassing. ...

Hannah Witheridge murder trial: Defendants denied access to secret UK police report http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_defendants_denied_access_to_secret_uk_police_report_1_4208581

this is a good lesson. Don't talk to the

police

https://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc

mmmm latest news from the UK

Thailand tourist murders: Accused men's bid to access Met report rejected

The men accused of the murder of two British tourists on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand have failed in a High Court bid in London to gain access to a confidential report prepared by the Metropolitan Police.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/thailand-tourist-murders-accused-mens-bid-access-met-124942675.html#CaNq2bP

The solicitors have been trying to get this for months. Shame on the British justice system thats complicit in fitting people up.

So now the British are in on the cover up? Come on. A British judge read it and decided it would not benefit the defendants' case.

"There is nothing in the report which is exculpatory or would be of material assistance to the claimants in the operation of their defence in the course of the trial."

Their lawyer, while disappointed, said "But they are reassured that at least a British judge has now looked at the information held by the Metropolitan Police, applying anxious scrutiny, and determined that it would not assist them in their ongoing proceedings in Thailand."

The conclusion from the judge is completely in line with has been known for almost a year based on statements from the family regarding the strength of the case against the men on trial.

I wonder if this was the big break the defense was expecting from the UK.

Nope it was not the break as they hadn't had it had they!!!..

This has been in the system since last year and in the end the solicitor took it to the high court as the Met wouldn't hand it over.

Its a side show and of no importance other than to clarify what they told the family. The police has already issued a statement to say the evidence is weak and it was broadcast on the link about posted by another TVF member.

May I remind you that if a case was in trial in the UK and anyone published such a statement then they would be hauled into court and jailed for contempt. This is the argument why publish this statement when its in trial. its Bad ethics.

I've been saying since late December that Brit authorities are complicit in the cover-up. Late December was when the Brit Coroner changed her mind and nixed her prior promise to release the Coroner's report on January 6. When she cancelled, she said, "maybe October, I don't know."

They judge who made the recent decision to deny info to the defense is right to feel uneasy (as he says). He should feel as bad as a person should feel who is contributing to the skewed trial which may lead to a death sentence for two young poor men who are likely innocent. Shame on him and all others who are too cowed to stand up for what's right.

You're WRONG

Sorry I was at the hearing. It was an interim hearing to decide when they hold the main Inquest. The Coroner decided she would adjourn it until October because of the time line of the Thai courts.

They will not complete it until the end of the trial. Its the same if it was in the UK court.

The Coroner is separate to The police and the FCO. They have given the Autopsy report to the Defence. Trust me

mmmm latest news from the UK

Thailand tourist murders: Accused men's bid to access Met report rejected

The men accused of the murder of two British tourists on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand have failed in a High Court bid in London to gain access to a confidential report prepared by the Metropolitan Police.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/thailand-tourist-murders-accused-mens-bid-access-met-124942675.html#CaNq2bP

The solicitors have been trying to get this for months. Shame on the British justice system thats complicit in fitting people up.

So now the British are in on the cover up? Come on. A British judge read it and decided it would not benefit the defendants' case.

"There is nothing in the report which is exculpatory or would be of material assistance to the claimants in the operation of their defence in the course of the trial."

Their lawyer, while disappointed, said "But they are reassured that at least a British judge has now looked at the information held by the Metropolitan Police, applying anxious scrutiny, and determined that it would not assist them in their ongoing proceedings in Thailand."

let Me CLARIFY my comment.

The police and FCO office would be in contempt of court if they published the statements from the familys and the trial had been in a UK court. Theres NO way in the world they could do this and Leigh and Days argument has always been that.

Further they argued that the should show the basis on which the Police had led the family to believe that that the evidence is their and on that basis the Familys produced their carefully worded statements.

Now it shows they had Jack Sh!t in their report. No evidence.

End OFF.....

So on that basis I sat the Met Police have assisted in misrepresentation of the facts.

mmmm latest news from the UK

Thailand tourist murders: Accused men's bid to access Met report rejected

The men accused of the murder of two British tourists on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand have failed in a High Court bid in London to gain access to a confidential report prepared by the Metropolitan Police.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/thailand-tourist-murders-accused-mens-bid-access-met-124942675.html#CaNq2bP

The solicitors have been trying to get this for months. Shame on the British justice system thats complicit in fitting people up.

It appears to me that the defense strategy not to retest the DNA under the court's conditions makes sense- why retest unless you can use an independent source. there is no chain of custody on the DNA. Therefore it is tainted and should hopefully be ignored. The same with the confessions and reenactment- too much doubt as to possible mistreatment and beating of the B2. In addition, the 'translator' has no credibility. As an outsider looking in- the Prosecution case is collapsing piece by piece.

I still want to know what happened in the AC bar. To me- that is the central piece to establishing why the two young visitors might have been killed. Was there an altercation? Did someone try and flirt with Hannah and were they rejected? Right now, I cannot wrap my head around any motive the B2 may have had to kill the deceased. Without a motive, there is no reason to believe they did it. However, a larger motive may exist if someone can find out what happened in the AC bar. Has anyone gone to the bar, asked questions or even attempted to find a witness or witnesses? Normally, a defense team will have a private investigator retrace all the steps of the people in the case.Many questions-no answers yet.

This may be the closest you can get at least for now:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/838898-koh-tao-trial-opens-for-2-accused-of-killing-british-tourists/page-185#entry9660041

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/838898-koh-tao-trial-opens-for-2-accused-of-killing-british-tourists/?view=findpost&p=9659889

Perhaps JL, but then that was just a random post by some dude with a history of 7 posts, so his word on what transpired is subject to the same speculation as everything else I guess.

I doubt we'll ever get any factual information about what really went on that night.

He was in the AC bar the evening of September 14, 2014 which sets him apart from everyone else on here. Just because he had the sense good or otherwise to not answer everyone who questioned his report at the time doesn't mean his report was not factual.

I could quite easily set up a new account and make this statement in an effort to take the heat off MY Bar couldn't I... Or you as some of you do.. Get banned and get a new name.

It appears to me that the defense strategy not to retest the DNA under the court's conditions makes sense- why retest unless you can use an independent source. there is no chain of custody on the DNA. Therefore it is tainted and should hopefully be ignored. The same with the confessions and reenactment- too much doubt as to possible mistreatment and beating of the B2. In addition, the 'translator' has no credibility. As an outsider looking in- the Prosecution case is collapsing piece by piece.

I still want to know what happened in the AC bar. To me- that is the central piece to establishing why the two young visitors might have been killed. Was there an altercation? Did someone try and flirt with Hannah and were they rejected? Right now, I cannot wrap my head around any motive the B2 may have had to kill the deceased. Without a motive, there is no reason to believe they did it. However, a larger motive may exist if someone can find out what happened in the AC bar. Has anyone gone to the bar, asked questions or even attempted to find a witness or witnesses? Normally, a defense team will have a private investigator retrace all the steps of the people in the case.Many questions-no answers yet.

You do understand that the defence are still proceeding with the DNA taken from the B2 in the court In front of witness's that they have a chain of custody for ???..

Regarding Hannah well I think theres a few things to consider.

She came from a small village in Norfolk Hemsby. She went to Small schools in a rural setting where your protected in a way from many things. Violence for example. She probably trusted people easily. She was training to be a speech therapist so she was a helper. A giver.. someone who wanted to do something for society. A generally decent human being.

she did have a boyfriend for some time I believe however they had broken up a few months before she went on her trip with 2 other Hannahs and Emma.

I believe she had met someone perhaps the night before maybe at the pub crawl? Remember they had only been there a couple of days and she had possibly arranged to meet them in the AC bar. I think she didnt want to be disturbed either as she left her mobile phone with her friend. Something you may only do if u wanted no distractions? ?

They met at the AC bar and over a period of time there was some friction between her and a Thai person?... David Intervened and they left. With a pack of angry people headed by one man. The man she had fallen oit with and possibly the person she went to meet, heading the pack.

They had nearly reached their rooms perhaps running along the way. The pack split and some attacked David whilst others restrained Hannah. Perhaps the main perpetrator raping her while his gang watched on. David having been knocked out they pulled some of his clothes of to arrange it like he was making out with Hannah. One his helpers who was nearby picked up the hoe and when he had finished the helper bashed Hannah brutally and killed her.

This crime scene contains massive violence and anger. Anger at rejection maybe?? Anger at David for protecting Hannah...

Whatever took place I think it was several people. Not 2... if u have seen Thai's fight you will know they go mob handed. If you have been in Thailand for a while u may have seen them kick off. I have many times having lived in villages as well as towns.

As for the B2 and a motive. ... welI don't think they had one.

The source of the motive comes from that bar. As sure as the sun will rise tomorrow I am sure it started in there and finshed in murder 300 metres along the beach.

Well everyone back to the topic....

(I cant be joining the Tony show today)

Next hearing is Thursday I wonder if the defence will show their hand at all. As the most senior officer's are attending it would be a good time to ramp the pressure up. Also these breaks give them good time to regroup reconsider and prepare their questions

Is using a roti seller really the best the Thai courts could do? Was that done to humiliate the defendants? Was it intentional that they used men with no former experience as interpreters? Does the court deem the fairness of the trial to be such a low priority?

Because, like has been said before, the police never expected the B2 to have any defense team to call them on their practices so all they needed to show was that they used a Burmese translator to the trial. They never expected an international backing team for the defense to scrutinize their every step of the investigation and point out that he didn't speak Thai or even Burmese!! This is fundamentally why the case the prosecution has been left with has looked so shambolic during their time in court.

Now imagine how many thousands of cases have gone ahead in Thailand without an all star defense team over the last few decades where the police have acted with complete impunity and made up and won cases against whoever they wanted to.

And that's the crux of this case.... Unprecedented scrutiny.

This is why the Polee scolded the lawyers after they left the court complaining about being questioned. They have had it heir own way for far to long.

No Burmese suspects I doubt have ever had the same support as these 2.

Good lord! How anyone could have thought the B2 committed this crime and still continue to do so when the trial is more than halfway through is either blinkered beyond words or stubbornly sticking to their own personal agenda.

Or acting under orders to keep trying to derail the thread.

To be honest with you Stealth I don't think this thread makes a blind bit of difference to the outcome of the case. For the people who have taken a side its just their daily sport winding some of us cynics up.

They may well have some allegiances to certain people but it makes no difference to what happens in the future. Mostly is just boredom IMHO.

I don't know -- but if you listen to some on here of the reach of powerful persons n Surat Thani Province, the Appeals Court Judges know there is a slush fund n Vanuatu awaiting for which ever Judges handle the appeal.

This is the Biggest concern and I know exactly where u r coming from.

To win this case they must prove 200% that the case is false. Major revelations that some might say are "Fantastic" need to be revealed. Anything less and they will swing so to speak.

Longest hand of poker I have seen for a long time though. Sat on the edge of my seat waiting for this.

In the Watergate burglary the 2 Washington Post reporters were able to 'follow the money' back to President Nixon's 11972 re-election campaign because the burglars were arrested in the Watergate complex with large amounts of cash in their possession.

Where are these large amounts of cash that were 'probably' paid in this case? Whether they were paid or not, I don't know of any proof of such a claim other than everybody knows that large amounts of cash changed hands to scuttle any genuine investigation.

Prior to the verdict of the Court, the Court is required by Criminal Procedure Law to present their findings as to how and why they reached their verdict. What are the Judges going to say: We have not seen any evidence presented in this Court that would justify a guilty verdict but we've been paid off to determine otherwise?

they could say the reenactment and witnessed confession is enough to convict. Pass a guilty verdict and send the case to the appeals court.

The Court could also say that, while the Defense has suggested that evidence be disallowed because the chain of custody of such evidence is questionable, unless the defense is willing to make a specific claim and demonstrate that such evidence has been compromised, we're going to allow it.

I think they have Crabby.

read the posts from Andy earlier today from Andy. We wanted their DNA taken in front of witnesses so that its irrefutable. A chain of custody all the way to Bangkok in front of the WHOLE court.

Results that you cant ignor. Case demonstrated.

You watch

In the Watergate burglary the 2 Washington Post reporters were able to 'follow the money' back to President Nixon's 11972 re-election campaign because the burglars were arrested in the Watergate complex with large amounts of cash in their possession.

Where are these large amounts of cash that were 'probably' paid in this case? Whether they were paid or not, I don't know of any proof of such a claim other than everybody knows that large amounts of cash changed hands to scuttle any genuine investigation.

Prior to the verdict of the Court, the Court is required by Criminal Procedure Law to present their findings as to how and why they reached their verdict. What are the Judges going to say: We have not seen any evidence presented in this Court that would justify a guilty verdict but we've been paid off to determine otherwise?

they could say the reenactment and witnessed confession is enough to convict. Pass a guilty verdict and send the case to the appeals court.

They Could Stephen.

They could also say not guilty and the prosecution could appeal. In fact the Judge has already suggested to the prosecution should get there Sh!t together in the event of an appeal.

Whilst people immediately suggested that it means he is going to find them guilty. The persons he made this comment to was the prosecution and not the defence. His thought process steered him towards the prosecution. If I was a psychologist I would take some prompts from this. Just like people always say honestly before they lie or they look left before they lie or swear on their kids life. If you get my gist..

Theres lots of nuggets like this, Andy and his "Fantastic" comment. You DO NOT say this without having a massive boost to your case. What would you say later when the press says "Well Andy we reported your words but you have failed to show us the Fanstastic news from UK" He would look a right Dummy.

Someone involved, and close enough to the investigation, had David's phone, and it was obviously planted behind the B2 workers shack when the set up targets of 'who had been near the beach' were narrowed down.

No one would steal a iPhone from a murder scene and just throw it away behind their own house, when it's value would be 3 months pay if sold off island, and it's incrimination value would be death or life in a Thai prison. Even the biggest fool would not do this, they were set up.

Your missing the point here.

The Polee failed to make the checks to see IF it WAS Davids phone and admitted that in the trial.

Dozens and dozens of people loose their phones on that beach every week. Handbags stolen by people in the shadows waiting for them to take a skinny dip.

I suggest to you that the phone did not belong to David and you will note they have provided nothing to support their allegation

There u go just as I said....

They don't need anything else they have the profiles.