Supreme Court accepts final appeal in the Koh Tao murders

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

The 319 page document points to evidence that Wai Phyo and Zaw Lin had been denied justice and fairness and are innocent of the crimes of which they have been convicted.

https://www.samuitimes.com/supreme-court-accepts-final-appeal-koh-tao-murders/

 

Is some hair which is barely visible to the human eye being split here?

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

 A trial can result in a not guilty verdict which has no bearing on whether the defendant was actually calculable of the crime just that sufficient evidence to prove that fact was not submitted by the prosecution.

 

Is a verdict of "innocent" possible?  

 

Or is the choice not between being found either "guilty" or "not guilty"?

Edited September 23, 2017 by EyeOfRa

[JLCrab]

There is no need for a defense appeal to prove 'innocent' just that evidence was not provided by the Prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for conviction.

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

There is no need for a defense appeal to prove 'innocent' just that evidence was not provided by the Prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for conviction.

 

 

The above is no news to most of us.

 

Perhaps you would do better to spend your time on a cryptic crossword or two, JLCrab. 

[JLCrab]

From the MMTimes article cited above:

U Aung Myo Thant cited the example of a court ruling on a murder case six years ago in Thailand. In that case, a suspect who was sentenced to death by a court had the sentence overturned by the Supreme Court because the evidence was not strong enough, even though the suspect admitted to the murder.

“Thailand has only one law for its citizens as well as foreigners, so I believe our two migrants can escape the death sentence because there is not enough evidence of murder,” he said.

[rockingrobin]

17 hours ago, JLCrab said:

To the above: No -- insufficient grounds for conviction and 'innocent' are quite distinct legal concepts.

This seems contradictory from a legal perspective

 

If one accepts the doctrine the accused is innocent until proven guilty, then it follows if a not guity verdict is given then the prosecution have not proved otherwise.

[JLCrab]

A not guilty verdict may have no bearing on whether the defendant actually committed the crime or not.

In the current Supreme Court appeal the Judges may actually believe the B2 did commit the crimes as charged and convicted but overturn the verdict because they did not believe the Prosecution provided evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Edited September 24, 2017 by JLCrab

[EyeOfRa]

47 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

In the current Supreme Court appeal the Judges may actually believe the B2 did commit the crimes as charged and convicted but overturn the verdict because they did not believe the Prosecution provided evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

A verdict based on "beliefs" rather than evidence should be overturned, should it not?

 

Does the standard of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" not exist for precisely this purpose -- to help ensure that court decisions are based on a consistent and coherent body of verifiable information, as opposed to (scenario of your choice)?

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2017 by EyeOfRa

[JLCrab]

That assumes the Thai Supreme Court decides that proof of guilt was not provided beyond a reasonable doubt even though the 2 lower courts said that it was so provided.

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

That assumes the Thai Supreme Court decides that proof of guilt was not provided beyond a reasonable doubt even though the 2 lower courts said that it was so provided.

 

Sorry, don't understand to what exactly the word "that" refers.

 

If "that" refers to the possibility of the Supreme Court overturning the decision of the lower courts as a result of a dearth of evidence and despite the "beliefs" of the Supreme Court, then your statement is self-evident.

Edited September 24, 2017 by EyeOfRa

[JLCrab]

'That' means the Judges of the Supreme Court will do whatever they feel like doing as they are answerable to no one.

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

'That' means the Judges of the Supreme Court will do whatever they feel like doing as they are answerable to no one.

 

It would be injudicious to comment further.

 

All the same, the world is watching, and judging.

[JLCrab]

Your queries already have been injudicious.

[YetAnother]

On 9/23/2017 at 1:03 PM, Samui Bodoh said:

No matter how many times I read the details of this case, I always am left with the certainty that the Burmese boys were set up.

 

I do not have much confidence in Thai courts, but I truly hope that this is the one occasion where justice finally comes through.

 

This case and every other serious case on the island should be subject to an outside investigation; the whole place stinks.

 

Good luck and godspeed to the Burmese boys.

 

 

 

While I share your hope ,this case has too much straight line momentum to be diverted in any other direction;

The loss of face to the police department and Thailand in general ,especially the tourist industry piece of it, would be too great;

Practical nationalistic justice will prevail here

[transam]

8 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

While I share your hope ,this case has too much straight line momentum to be diverted in any other direction;

The loss of face to the police department and Thailand in general ,especially the tourist industry piece of it, would be too great;

Practical nationalistic justice will prevail here

....Tourists have no idea about the loss of face thing, but they do know that over the years there are so many question marks regarding the case that if the B2 are taken out and the tourists think the real murderers may still be stalking their holiday destination then that will do more harm to LOS, plus the "fix" stuff thought.. LOS made a big mistake regarding the B2 thinking the tourist folk/countries would think it a WOW that they solved the case, in fact many will be thinking what a stitch up.."Egg on face"..LOS...

[JLCrab]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

....Tourists have no idea about the loss of face thing, but they do know that over the years there are so many question marks regarding the case <snip>

That's if they know anything about the case at all.

[transam]

9 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

That's if they know anything about the case at all.

If the B2 are taken out the farangland headlines will be full of what actually happened and the way it was handled.....The LOS tourist industry will take a hit from those who have a holiday destination choice where the law may know what they are doing to assist those bringing cash into the country and not just assist their own.....

[JLCrab]

Well as of right now the B2 haven't been taken out ... And the Defense team has already said that if they don;t find success with the Supreme Court they will petition for a Royal Pardon.

... and at least so far the Daily Mail and BBC -- who both ran stories last month on the Defense submitting an appeal to the Supreme Court -- have not run online stories that the appeal has been accepted.

Edited September 24, 2017 by JLCrab

[Khun Han]

On 23/09/2017 at 9:45 AM, DiscoDan said:

No never set foot on there no business interests there, I just don't buy the conspiracy

 

 

 

Dan, could you ask your mate AleG why he deleted his Tripadvisor account after screenshotting and photoshopping the date on his fake review of the Koh Tao dive school he's involved with? He put the photoshopped screenshot on his sofocletus Twitter page, but won't answer my question about what happened to the original. I know you chat with him regularly on Twitter and elsewhere.

[JLCrab]

Well as long as we're asking questions how to you reconcile writing SEP 1, 2017:
"The Norfolk coroner, after performing a post mortem examination on Hannah, concluded that Hannah had not been raped. It's all about procedure and timelines Crab."

... when the BBC wrote 22 AUG 2017:

"Miss Witheridge, 23 from Hemsby, Norfolk, and Mr Miller, 24, from Jersey, had been bludgeoned to death. A post-mortem examination revealed Miss Witheridge had also been raped."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-41011208

[EyeOfRa]

Countless questions, mysteries and conundrums plague the "evidence" used in this case.

 

Quote

“The legal team asks the Supreme Court to re-examine the legal process and evidence, and whether the DNA samples collected from the crime scene really matched those of the defendants,” lawyer Nakhon Chomphuchat told The Nation.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30324491

 

One especially puzzling and troubling question is this:

 

Quote

 

Less than three days after the crime, police announced they had extracted the DNA profiles of two men from the semen. They also said these matched DNA found on a cigarette butt near the scene.

 

In court, a police officer testified those samples were received on the morning of 17 September and started DNA extraction at 08:00 local time. This seems unlikely as the pathologist only started his autopsy at 11:00. The successful profiling of two men was announced at around 22:00.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35170419

 

Of course, this purported DNA no longer exists so these claims are not verifiable.

 

Extraordinary.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2017 by EyeOfRa

[JLCrab]

Just how many scenarios have been proffered on this website over the last nearly 3 years that this was a crime of vengeance and not lust all predicated on the claim that the late Ms. Witheridge had not been raped.

[EyeOfRa]

Quote

Just how many scenarios have been proffered on this website over the last nearly 3 years that this was a crime of vengeance and not lust all predicated on the claim that the late Ms. Witheridge had not been raped.

 

Not in the least "all predicated on" such a claim! 

 

Many of us following the case have considered the crimes likely to have been motivated by vengeance for a host of reasons, which hardly bear repeating.

[JLCrab]

You were one of the 'likers' on that false report that the post-mortem revealed that Ms. Witheridge had not been raped.

Edited September 24, 2017 by JLCrab

[EyeOfRa]

Another disturbing enigma:

 

“When a garden hoe — the plaintiff’s evidence believed to be the murder weapon in the case — was inspected, the DNA of the two accused Burmese boys was not found but [the DNA] of two others was. However, the plaintiff did not seek additional suspects” 

 

Koh Tao murder case ‘mishandled,’ says legal team amid last-ditch appeal

http://www.dvb.no/news/koh-tao-murder-evidence-mishandled-says-legal-team-amid-last-ditch-appeal/76024

[Khun Han]

57 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Well as long as we're asking questions how to you reconcile writing SEP 1, 2017:
"The Norfolk coroner, after performing a post mortem examination on Hannah, concluded that Hannah had not been raped. It's all about procedure and timelines Crab."

... when the BBC wrote 22 AUG 2017:

"Miss Witheridge, 23 from Hemsby, Norfolk, and Mr Miller, 24, from Jersey, had been bludgeoned to death. A post-mortem examination revealed Miss Witheridge had also been raped."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-41011208

 

 

The beeb would have been referring to the RTP post mortem, during which Hannah's privates were damaged.

[Khun Han]

13 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

You were one of the 'likers' on that false report that the post-mortem revealed that Ms. Witheridge had not been raped.

 

Not a false report.

[JLCrab]

No -- they were referring to the FEB 8, 2016 Norfolk inquest. And if I have a choice who to believe I will take the BBC and all the other UK media who said the same thing.

Edited September 24, 2017 by JLCrab

[Khun Han]

13 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

No -- they were referring to the FEB 8, 2016 Norfolk inquest. And if I have a choice who to believe I will take the BBC and all the other UK media who said the same thing.

 

There is nothing in the beeb report you linked which references the Norfolk coroner's post mortem, nor does the article give a date. It merely refers to a post mortem report finding that Hannah was raped.That's the Thai post mortem report.

[JLCrab]

The AUG 2017 BBC report occurred well after the UK Norfolk FEB 2016 post-mortem .