Jump to content

Koh Tao rape claim dismissed by Thai police, citing lack of evidence and no DNA


webfact

Recommended Posts

On ‎10‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 9:52 PM, NanLaew said:

Fact. There is very little evidence and the t-shirt was a very, very long shot even in the best of circumstances.

 

Chances are this young lady was assaulted and I would wager it was by an opportunistic, non-Thai, drunk, stoned, gap-year, backpacking piece of sh!t.

 

Stating 'lack of evidence' doesn't say it didn't happen and handily obviates the necessity of the former head of the Tourist police following up on his obnoxious threat to prosecute the victim for lying.

No it was a Burmese.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 383
  • Created
  • Last Reply
18 hours ago, huberthammer said:

What makes you think the MET did not run a DNA test? Does it not fit into your view of the world that there might be no useable DNA traces ?

The statement from the family saying they are very disappointed that the Thai police did not find any dna.  Obviously the family wouldn't of singled the Thai police out if the MET had also found nothing.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, sumrit said:

I remember in the early days of this story where it was stated that the beach itself, in the area that the girl/her mother indicated that alleged rape took place, was actually under water at the alleged time of the rape (around 1:00am) because it was high tide so there was no area of the beach that was above sea level. 

Now, I can possibly understand her not recognizing a beach area you're not familiar when shown photos by the police but I'm sure as hell I'd remember if I was underwater when I woke up. And, after such a traumatic experience, even in a dazed state I'd be trying to remember some sort of landmark, yet (again from memory) I'm sure her/her mother named some places she'd visited, before the alleged rape, with the men she was sharing her room with, but, according to this article, she now appears not to be able to remember anywhere she had been to. 

Yes that's something that changed from the very first ST article to now. In the beginning the report was that she was raped not far from the rocks where the murders took place. So the focus then was if it would be possible given the tides. Now it appears she has no idea at all where it took place at all. 

 

That said, it might not be her fault. I wouldn't put it past ST to have made up details like that on their own. Their first article desperately wanted to tie the rape back to the murders. They even put a picture of someone in the article to make it look like he was a suspect despite no evidence at all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, hsovereign said:

The statement from the family saying they are very disappointed that the Thai police did not find any dna.  Obviously the family wouldn't of singled the Thai police out if the MET had also found nothing.  

"British police also handed over a T-shirt the 19-year-old woman wore on June 25, the day of the alleged attack, and forensic tests found the DNA of a woman and a man but no trace of the attacker’s semen, as she claimed."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30356569

 

... but how do you that that actually was the shirt she wore on the night of the alleged rape and not some dirty shirt she pulled out of her laundry basket?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hsovereign said:

The statement from the family saying they are very disappointed that the Thai police did not find any dna.  Obviously the family wouldn't of singled the Thai police out if the MET had also found nothing.  

I don't understand her statement as the Thai police said they actually did find DNA from a man and woman but no traces of the semen that was supposed to have been on the shirt. Obviously the mother couldn't be talking about her daughter's semen so I can only guess that someone told her, "the police found nothing" or something similar and she took that to mean the police found no DNA at all. 

 

As for the Met, they received the shirt weeks ago for testing. Haven't seen any update on the result, though the mother accused the British police of "whitewashing" the case for the sake of diplomacy. So maybe the family was told something they didn't want to hear. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, hsovereign said:

The statement from the family saying they are very disappointed that the Thai police did not find any dna.  Obviously the family wouldn't of singled the Thai police out if the MET had also found nothing.  

So if the Met Police have found something, why are the girl`s family keeping it quite?

 

Reason: because if any remnants of sperm were found on the tee-shirt that identified a male by name or even by race, that person would become a rape suspect that I suspect would be another western tourist, probably one of the party she was with and not the phantom smiling Thai guy or Asian guy she described.

 

The girl would have to testify in court or at least have to explain how the sperm got there and if can`t remember then she would have to divulge whoever she was involved with on that night she claimed to have been allegedly drugged and that`s not going to happen because there was no rape involved and doesn`t want to get those she partied with implicated.

 

If any credible evidence comes to light, either from Thailand or Britain or the girl herself or from any witnesses, I`ll eat my hat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

So if the Met Police have found something, why are the girl`s family keeping it quite?

 

Reason: because if any remnants of sperm were found on the tee-shirt that identified a male by name or even by race, that person would become a rape suspect that I suspect would be another western tourist, probably one of the party she was with and not the phantom smiling Thai guy or Asian guy she described.

Bear in mind that according to a previous article the Thai police got the shirt from the UK police. Not sure if this is 100% correct but in such case if no sperm was found by the Thai police it's likely none were found by the Met police too. This could explain the disappointment by the family and accusations that the British government is whitewashing the incident. 

 

The semen stain was supposedly pointed out to the girl by her roommates after she got back to the room. One discrepancy is in earlier articles (eg. The Mirror) the shirt was black. Later reports (eg. The Nation) say the shirt handed over to police was blue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hsovereign said:

The statement from the family saying they are very disappointed that the Thai police did not find any dna.  Obviously the family wouldn't of singled the Thai police out if the MET had also found nothing.  

Obviously....  the mother said in the interview she felt let down by the RTP, UK embassy and the MET  so not singled out the RTP

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, huberthammer said:

Obviously....  the mother said in the interview she felt let down by the RTP, UK embassy and the MET  so not singled out the RTP

Perhaps she was really let down by her daughter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bannork said:

Perhaps she was really let down by her daughter.

Most rape cases are a letdown for the accuser... because evidence is so often lacking and bad... the police usually got their hands tied... police cant spend countless hours wasting time on cases that will never go anywhere... 

 

police need to consider many things... among them are 

 

1. Do we have any chance of finding the assailant?

2. If the assailant is found, do we have enough evidence to present to a prosecutor? 

 

in many rape cases the answer to both those questions is no... so then even if the police really believes the victim there's not much they can do.. they have finite resources.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2018 at 3:56 PM, rkidlad said:

Point number 1 - source, please. But of course you won’t provide one. You never do. 

 

Point number 2 - again, source, please. Please show us a source where it says the bf had a fight connected to him thinking she had been unfaithful. 

 

Point 3 - she went to Kho Tao to report what? 

 

Point 4 - Did she? You have any evidence she enjoyed anything after she alleged rape? 

 

Maybe you should write a book about how women should behave and what they should do after being raped. Advice for women on how to behave if they want people to believe it really happened. 

 

Step 1 - ignore your human emotions and weaknesses. Think logically and methodically about your next steps towards having your rapist successfully convicted. Anything less just screams “liar!”. 

 

Well I did make one mistake that is that she went to phangan to make a theft report and  not a robbery 

 

 but all Tbis is already online 

 

how about showing evidence that she is telling the truth 

 

there is none. Your just one of these trash talking people who love a bit of slander and chose to live here. Why don’t you just leave if you don’t respect the laws and the judgment then you can go

 

i won’t stop you 

 

unless your one of these keyboard warriors who sit overseas judging and you have nothing to do with Thailand 

 

all the points or most of then have been provided by witnesses. If you don’t believe them then up to you

 

if you believe 1 person over about 5 people m. A policeman who went all the way to Uk to collect her statement and more then up to you

 

if you don’t like it here if it’s so dangerous then why are you here. 

 

Or you just like yepping makes you feel better about your life 

 

bore off

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2018 at 3:28 PM, ParadiseLost said:

This is what watching way too many soapies on Thai TV does to one...

 

Not one fact: more blustering bitterness and superiority complex than a televangelist!

 

Do you get some personal satisfaction by 'making a stand' and sticking to it, even in the face of - uhm - reason and common sense?

 

How you can even begin to believe this stuff is sad. What 19 year old is going to come up with such a 'diabolical plan'? Either you hate youth, you sad old git - or you hate women.

 

Either way it is quite unbelievable you dare speak such filth about someone and something you know nothing of; nobody here knows if it happened or not - including you!

I  don’t hate women I don’t hate youth I just believe in the truth 

 

they even got the DNA t-shirt which even the UK police couldn’t find and DNA

 

when there is  no evidence that means no evidence but there are allot of witness saying other things

 

so your accusing everyone else of lying accept her

 

well who’s the hater then ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2018 at 3:15 PM, Crash999 said:

If there was evidence to prove it the police would likely have come out with it by now instead of flying all the way to London. 

 

Are the first two points confirmed? Definitely seems like something could be up given she broke up with her BF and was traveling around with the new guy. But I can't recall her admitting it. 

All I know is what is online. If I was a police investigator or a witness then I could confirm but I can only judge on what I have read and seen. If that’s wrong then blame the media not me. 

 

The police had to

fly to UK to collect evidence because she refused tk come to Thailand and refused to hand the t shirt in herself

 

you cannot say that the police haven’t done enough on this case looks like they have put everything into this possible 

remember they didn’t have to proof that she was lying by flying all the way to Uk but looks like they wanted to find the truth. They could have just said she was lying and that’s that

 

they have fully investigated this and the victims are the people that were falsely put online false accused of rape with  no evidence 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigC said:

Well I did make one mistake that is that she went to phangan to make a theft report and  not a robbery 

 

 but all Tbis is already online 

 

how about showing evidence that she is telling the truth 

 

there is none. Your just one of these trash talking people who love a bit of slander and chose to live here. Why don’t you just leave if you don’t respect the laws and the judgment then you can go

 

i won’t stop you 

 

unless your one of these keyboard warriors who sit overseas judging and you have nothing to do with Thailand 

 

all the points or most of then have been provided by witnesses. If you don’t believe them then up to you

 

if you believe 1 person over about 5 people m. A policeman who went all the way to Uk to collect her statement and more then up to you

 

if you don’t like it here if it’s so dangerous then why are you here. 

 

Or you just like yepping makes you feel better about your life 

 

bore off

She's made an allegation. 

 

You keep saying she did this and that without ever providing information or sources to back it up. That discredits people. That's deliberately misleading people. 

 

I've never once said she was telling anything. I've only ever asked for a proper and fair investigation. As soon as Big Joke said he couldn't find evidence of a rape (he was looking in a spot she never stated) and then he said she'd be arrested and blacklisted if she was lying, we knew the investigation wouldn't be fair or taken seriously. 

 

Would you like me to supply you with that link where he said it? Here you go, anyway; 

 

 

Please feel free to back up what you say; otherwise, it's nothing more than propaganda. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically the police went to the UK for.... a free vacation? They could've arrived at this "conclusion" while sitting on their behinds in Thailand instead of using taxpayers' money to fly to the UK. 

 

Also: one person speaks. The other 5 sitting at the table at the press conference are what? Decoration, I guess.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Who did you ask?

The very people who accused her of being a liar and/or thought it was perfectly okay to look for evidence of rape in a spot that was never stated by the accused. The same people who thought it perfectly acceptable to then threaten her with arrest and blacklisting just after that said 'wrong spot' was declared as a no-proof-of-rape-here zone. 

 

They are quite literally the people I asked. Next? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

They told me that people like themselves, 'JustWeird' and 'BritManToo', etc, couldn't possibly be wrong. 

Gee ask a literal question you get a literal answer, literally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rkidlad said:

The very people who accused her of being a liar and/or thought it was perfectly okay to look for evidence of rape in a spot that was never stated by the accused. The same people who thought it perfectly acceptable to then threaten her with arrest and blacklisting just after that said 'wrong spot' was declared as a no-proof-of-rape-here zone. 

 

They are quite literally the people I asked. Next? 

 

It was the Samui Times that identified the spot of the alleged rape, that's all the police had to go with because the alleged rape was not reported in Thailand.
They go, check, find out the spot was underwater from the tides at that time and what is the reaction? "Stupid cops checked the wrong place!"

So who is at fault here? The police or the people who gave the wrong location to begin with?
There's three possibilities how that happened, 1) the girl told her mother where it happened, 2) the mother came up with the location by herself or 3) the Samui Times (which then became the source for other media covering the case) conjured up the spot themselves. (*)

And then they doubled down.

They, the mother, Samui Times and CSI_LA racked the RTP for checking the wrong place, now they said it happened in some other spot.
So which one is it, was it the first spot they said or the second? One or the other, either way they peddled misleading information, police was misled, and of course the problem is not the people pushing misleading information, it's the police acting on it.

And then it got worse.

After raking the RTP for going to the wrong place, after claiming it happened on that other spot (in front of a building under construction North of the bar the alleged victim and her friend left to walk on the beach), after that the RTP goes to the UK to directly ask the girl where did it happen. Her answer "I don't know"
So, when they first said "it happened there", and then "actually it happened in that other place", in the is "we don't know where it happened".

It's farcical, but you just see fault on what the police did not on the people changing the story on every occasion it came to verify it.

You can't have it both ways, if you are going to grill the police for following misleading information you can't just ignore where that information came from.

(*) Possibility 1, the girl named the spot, the problem then is that now she says she doesn't know where it happened, so unless she suddenly developed amnesia there's at least one lie within those two statements.

Possibility 2, the mother is the source of the supposed location, how would she know if not from her daughter? Someone else perhaps, why that someone else didn't provide testimony when the RTP went to the UK then?

Possibility 3, the Samui Times made it up, I think that's the most likely because it's patently obvious that they tried really hard to frame the alleged rape as connected to the 2014 murders. This possibility begs the question, why would the alleged victim, and her mother, still hang around these people if they have twisted the case to suit their own agenda? A few days ago I saw the mother still using the Samui Times as her means to make public statements.
Personally I would be livid if I had a daughter raped and saw people publishing misleading information that does nothing but derail any investigation into the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, AleG said:

It was the Samui Times that identified the spot of the alleged rape, that's all the police had to go with because the alleged rape was not reported in Thailand.
They go, check, find out the spot was underwater from the tides at that time and what is the reaction? "Stupid cops checked the wrong place!"

So who is at fault here? The police or the people who gave the wrong location to begin with?
There's three possibilities how that happened, 1) the girl told her mother where it happened, 2) the mother came up with the location by herself or 3) the Samui Times (which then became the source for other media covering the case) conjured up the spot themselves. (*)

And then they doubled down.

They, the mother, Samui Times and CSI_LA racked the RTP for checking the wrong place, now they said it happened in some other spot.
So which one is it, was it the first spot they said or the second? One or the other, either way they peddled misleading information, police was misled, and of course the problem is not the people pushing misleading information, it's the police acting on it.

And then it got worse.

After raking the RTP for going to the wrong place, after claiming it happened on that other spot (in front of a building under construction North of the bar the alleged victim and her friend left to walk on the beach), after that the RTP goes to the UK to directly ask the girl where did it happen. Her answer "I don't know"
So, when they first said "it happened there", and then "actually it happened in that other place", in the is "we don't know where it happened".

It's farcical, but you just see fault on what the police did not on the people changing the story on every occasion it came to verify it.

You can't have it both ways, if you are going to grill the police for following misleading information you can't just ignore where that information came from.

(*) Possibility 1, the girl named the spot, the problem then is that now she says she doesn't know where it happened, so unless she suddenly developed amnesia there's at least one lie within those two statements.

Possibility 2, the mother is the source of the supposed location, how would she know if not from her daughter? Someone else perhaps, why that someone else didn't provide testimony when the RTP went to the UK then?

Possibility 3, the Samui Times made it up, I think that's the most likely because it's patently obvious that they tried really hard to frame the alleged rape as connected to the 2014 murders. This possibility begs the question, why would the alleged victim, and her mother, still hang around these people if they have twisted the case to suit their own agenda? A few days ago I saw the mother still using the Samui Times as her means to make public statements.
Personally I would be livid if I had a daughter raped and saw people publishing misleading information that does nothing but derail any investigation into the case.

Like I said from the very beginning - when the story came to light, the police should have said nothing. Until they speak to the girl, they can’t do anything. After all, she needs to make a formal complaint. They actually had no need to read a newspaper and look for evidence of rape. Well, no other reason than going there and saying “There’s no evidence of rape here.......oh, and if you’re lying, little lady, we’ll arrest and blacklist you”. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it legal to have sex with blacked out drunk chicks in Thailand? 

 

Imagine being a girl, you get black out drunk or drugged. You wake up without underwear on and a guy smiling next to you. You don't remember what happened etc. Personal belongings missing.

 

You know you gotta report the stuff missing.. but you also wonder if you got raped or not... Because you don't remember if you agreed to having sex... And could you agree since you were so drunk? Not sure.. tricky situation...

Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

Like I said from the very beginning - when the story came to light, the police should have said nothing. Until they speak to the girl, they can’t do anything. After all, she needs to make a formal complaint. They actually had no need to read a newspaper and look for evidence of rape. Well, no other reason than going there and saying “There’s no evidence of rape here.......oh, and if you’re lying, little lady, we’ll arrest and blacklist you”. 

you to hold the police to every word they have said or cherry pick quotes , yet ignore the changing story form the girls side.

seems to me the police cant win either way.....they are at fault!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

you to hold the police to every word they have said or cherry pick quotes , yet ignore the changing story form the girls side.

seems to me the police cant win either way.....they are at fault!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What changing story? Give some credible sources where she’s changed her story. Please do. 

 

The police are at fault for not conducting themselves properly. What kind of police force takes information from newspapers about a rape allegation and then acts on it by declaring they can’t find any evidence.  They hadn’t even spoken to her. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, rkidlad said:

 What kind of police force takes information from newspapers about a rape allegation and then acts on it by declaring they can’t find any evidence.  They hadn’t even spoken to her. 

 

Our kind.... :1zgarz5:

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, rkidlad said:

What changing story? Give some credible sources where she’s changed her story. Please do. 

 

The police are at fault for not conducting themselves properly. What kind of police force takes information from newspapers about a rape allegation and then acts on it by declaring they can’t find any evidence.  They hadn’t even spoken to her. 

"the police are at fault for not conducting themselves properly.."

 

What a strange remark and (obviously) not pertinent to the highly professional behaviour of the police.

 

They are the kinda ne plus ultra of law enforcement.😎

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AleG said:

It was the Samui Times that identified the spot of the alleged rape, that's all the police had to go with because the alleged rape was not reported in Thailand.
They go, check, find out the spot was underwater from the tides at that time and what is the reaction? "Stupid cops checked the wrong place!"

So who is at fault here? The police or the people who gave the wrong location to begin with?
There's three possibilities how that happened, 1) the girl told her mother where it happened, 2) the mother came up with the location by herself or 3) the Samui Times (which then became the source for other media covering the case) conjured up the spot themselves. (*)

And then they doubled down.

They, the mother, Samui Times and CSI_LA racked the RTP for checking the wrong place, now they said it happened in some other spot.
So which one is it, was it the first spot they said or the second? One or the other, either way they peddled misleading information, police was misled, and of course the problem is not the people pushing misleading information, it's the police acting on it.

And then it got worse.

After raking the RTP for going to the wrong place, after claiming it happened on that other spot (in front of a building under construction North of the bar the alleged victim and her friend left to walk on the beach), after that the RTP goes to the UK to directly ask the girl where did it happen. Her answer "I don't know"
So, when they first said "it happened there", and then "actually it happened in that other place", in the is "we don't know where it happened".

It's farcical, but you just see fault on what the police did not on the people changing the story on every occasion it came to verify it.

You can't have it both ways, if you are going to grill the police for following misleading information you can't just ignore where that information came from.

(*) Possibility 1, the girl named the spot, the problem then is that now she says she doesn't know where it happened, so unless she suddenly developed amnesia there's at least one lie within those two statements.

Possibility 2, the mother is the source of the supposed location, how would she know if not from her daughter? Someone else perhaps, why that someone else didn't provide testimony when the RTP went to the UK then?

Possibility 3, the Samui Times made it up, I think that's the most likely because it's patently obvious that they tried really hard to frame the alleged rape as connected to the 2014 murders. This possibility begs the question, why would the alleged victim, and her mother, still hang around these people if they have twisted the case to suit their own agenda? A few days ago I saw the mother still using the Samui Times as her means to make public statements.
Personally I would be livid if I had a daughter raped and saw people publishing misleading information that does nothing but derail any investigation into the case.

Do you guys not tire of pumping the same agenda every chance you get - "the girl was lying".

 

You carry on and on about the location, what do you expect? As far as I know this was her first visit to the island, it was night and she had been drugged (or very drunk, you will no doubt claim). Do you really expect her to give a precise and detailed description of anything? Location, times, people - all would be distorted under the circumstances. You have absolutely no way of knowing she is lying.

 

In your Possibility 1, Why is there at least one lie there? As I stated above, the most likely explanation is she was confused. Very different from a lie. Again, you have not one iota of proof she is lying, but you just have to inject that into every post.

 

Lastly, please decide if Samui Times is a quote-worthy news source, or not. You and the other deflectors are quick to discount everything reported in it, shout about them as 'fake news' but you seem to follow every word they publish and quote them to embellish your attacks on a 19 year old girl, or anyone who dares suggest she just might be telling the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AleG said:

It was the Samui Times that identified the spot of the alleged rape, that's all the police had to go with because the alleged rape was not reported in Thailand.
They go, check, find out the spot was underwater from the tides at that time and what is the reaction? "Stupid cops checked the wrong place!"

So who is at fault here? The police or the people who gave the wrong location to begin with?
There's three possibilities how that happened, 1) the girl told her mother where it happened, 2) the mother came up with the location by herself or 3) the Samui Times (which then became the source for other media covering the case) conjured up the spot themselves. (*)

And then they doubled down.

They, the mother, Samui Times and CSI_LA racked the RTP for checking the wrong place, now they said it happened in some other spot.
So which one is it, was it the first spot they said or the second? One or the other, either way they peddled misleading information, police was misled, and of course the problem is not the people pushing misleading information, it's the police acting on it.

And then it got worse.

After raking the RTP for going to the wrong place, after claiming it happened on that other spot (in front of a building under construction North of the bar the alleged victim and her friend left to walk on the beach), after that the RTP goes to the UK to directly ask the girl where did it happen. Her answer "I don't know"
So, when they first said "it happened there", and then "actually it happened in that other place", in the is "we don't know where it happened".

It's farcical, but you just see fault on what the police did not on the people changing the story on every occasion it came to verify it.

You can't have it both ways, if you are going to grill the police for following misleading information you can't just ignore where that information came from.

(*) Possibility 1, the girl named the spot, the problem then is that now she says she doesn't know where it happened, so unless she suddenly developed amnesia there's at least one lie within those two statements.

Possibility 2, the mother is the source of the supposed location, how would she know if not from her daughter? Someone else perhaps, why that someone else didn't provide testimony when the RTP went to the UK then?

Possibility 3, the Samui Times made it up, I think that's the most likely because it's patently obvious that they tried really hard to frame the alleged rape as connected to the 2014 murders. This possibility begs the question, why would the alleged victim, and her mother, still hang around these people if they have twisted the case to suit their own agenda? A few days ago I saw the mother still using the Samui Times as her means to make public statements.
Personally I would be livid if I had a daughter raped and saw people publishing misleading information that does nothing but derail any investigation into the case.

you guys on death island dont let a post go by with out mentioning the ST , you are obsessed .

Is this the orders you have been givern?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...