Myanmar men jailed for murder of British tourists on Koh Tao taken off death row

[CorpusChristie]

Just now, Dene16 said:

I thought it was more of a rhetorical question then a genuine one. So in answer to your question no.

 

Did you follow the case since day 1  , follow the investigation and court case ?

Its been a complete travesty ever since day 2 , ever since it was announced by the top police that they had evidence ......................I am just repeating myself , I have posted this previously in this thread

[Dene16]

10 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Difficult to prove you did not do something, but there was also the lack of their DNA on the murder weapon.

I agree but the fact nothing was even suggested is very strange. No DNA on the murder weapon is definitely odd but the whole investigation was botched. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but i just don't see how people can be so adamant as to their innocence  when it is so clearly not cut and dry.

[Dene16]

7 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

Did you follow the case since day 1  , follow the investigation and court case ?

Its been a complete travesty ever since day 2

Followed it quite extensively i would say and read a lot about the trial. I cannot argue the fact that the the investigation was not a joke from beginning to end. Because of that i can never be 100% sure they are guilty.

The fact that the defence decided against the 2 Burmese giving evidence themselves, not offering any evidence whatsoever in their defence. This is only ever done where there is a risk of incriminating oneself. stories not matching up between the two of them etc. The whole defence stank and you have to wonder why,

Remember they had a fairly good team of lawyers in the end but came up with nothing to put any doubt in peoples mind 

[Walter Travolta]

2 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

Remember they had a fairly good team of lawyers in the end but came up with nothing to put any doubt in peoples mind 

I think you are very naive to think good defence lawyers can outweigh an inevitable outcome. They had to find these 2 guys guilty otherwise they would have had to release them and start bumbling around looking stupid trying to pin it on someone else, all the while knowing who did it. 

Its like saying the prosecution in the OJ case might as well not have bothered

[CorpusChristie]

7 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

Followed it quite extensively i would say and read a lot about the trial. I cannot argue the fact that the the investigation was not a joke from beginning to end. Because of that i can never be 100% sure they are guilty.

The fact that the defence decided against the 2 Burmese giving evidence themselves, not offering any evidence whatsoever in their defence. This is only ever done where there is a risk of incriminating oneself. stories not matching up between the two of them etc. The whole defence stank and you have to wonder why,

Remember they had a fairly good team of lawyers in the end but came up with nothing to put any doubt in peoples mind 

Many many people doubt the verdict .

The verdict was just a formality and the Court case was just for show .

"No Thai would ever do this" was an order, rather than an opinion 

[Dene16]

1 minute ago, Walter Travolta said:

I think you are very naive to think good defence lawyers can outweigh an inevitable outcome

Actually it's not about outweighing an inevitable outcome, it's about they didn't even try. Are you then saying that the defence were paid off also

[Neeranam]

1 hour ago, The Barmbeker said:

Yeah! Right!

"Most Thais" are not you, your familly and the 7eleven-staff in your nearest village!

What do you mean?  

[Walter Travolta]

1 minute ago, Dene16 said:

Actually it's not about outweighing an inevitable outcome, it's about they didn't even try. Are you then saying that the defence were paid off also

No, Im saying the defence lost because it was set up for the prosecution to win. The reasons they needed to win are quite apparent.

1) The police are not as powerful as the people responsible for the murders
2) They were never going to frame Thais
3) They made it clear that the 2 Burmese were 100% responsible for the murders, thus meaning, any u turn on their guilt would make the police and judicial system look like the useless organisation they are.

As said previously, why would they waste time on pretending to look for someone NOT responsible after freeing the 2 Burmese? This is why they had to find them guilty, to save face from looking foolish, all the while knowing who really committed double murder

Its my opinion how things have played out and also the opinion of most. I/we could be wrong, but I doubt it. The most shameful things about this whole debacle are that the families of the victims have not received justice, the 2 Burmese guys have basically lost anything they might have had and the real killers have got away with it, all because it was easier to 'blame someone else'

[Dene16]

2 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

Many many people doubt the verdict .

The verdict was just a formality and the Court case was just for show .

"No Thai would ever do this" was an order, rather than an opinion 

Can't argue with that and will all know that corruption rampantly exists in all levels of Thai society.

But, for me, this case had become far too high profile for them to just blame 2 innocent people with the whole world looking on

[CorpusChristie]

1 hour ago, Dene16 said:

Some people have stated ‘where is the evidence’ but the fact is the defence offered zero evidence to exonerate them, please do not say innocent until proven guilty.

What evidence is there to prove the B2 were guilty ?

The B2 may have possibly have been at the crime scene , as its unlike Thais to go and fight someone in equal numbers , anyway, what evidence is there to prove the B2 committed the murders ?

[Artisi]

18 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

Many many people doubt the verdict .

The verdict was just a formality and the Court case was just for show .

"No Thai would ever do this" was an order, rather than an opinion 

Duly delivered. 

[Walter Travolta]

5 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

But, for me, this case had become far too high profile for them to just blame 2 innocent people with the whole world looking on

This is partly my point about them having to 'stick to their guns'. As you say the whole world was watching, so can you imagine how ridiculous they would look if they released the 2 and then were under pressure to find someone else to stitch up? Then the new stitch up goes wrong and they lose even more face? Nah, was much easier to frame these 2 and stick to whatever they needed to to make it happen. 

[Dene16]

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

What evidence is there to prove the B2 were guilty ?

There was none that's why they were found guilty

I don't know why i'm even answering this but in the words of the judge

The DNA evidence is so overwhelming you are guilty. I believe he was referring to the semen found in the victim amongst other things

 

 

[Artisi]

9 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

Can't argue with that and will all know that corruption rampantly exists in all levels of Thai society.

But, for me, this case had become far too high profile for them to just blame 2 innocent people with the whole world looking on

Not only corrupt but completely devoid of any concept or interest on what the world thinks. 

[CorpusChristie]

23 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

There was none that's why they were found guilty

I don't know why i'm even answering this but in the words of the judge

The DNA evidence is so overwhelming you are guilty. I believe he was referring to the semen found in the victim amongst other things

 

 

No, DNA from the B2 were not found in the victims .

Try to post facts, rather than just what you believe .

Try to post genuine quotes as well .

The DNA wasnt overwhelming at all , it wasnt even a match to the B2

There was no DNA evidence linking the B2 to the murders

[Dene16]

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

Try to post genuine quotes as well

The first one said believe as for the quote that is exactly what the judge said 

You obviously didn't follow the trial as closely as you state

 

[CorpusChristie]

10 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

The first one said believe as for the quote that is exactly what the judge said 

You obviously didn't follow the trial as closely as you state

 

Could you provide a link to that ?

[Orton Rd]

1 hour ago, Dene16 said:

I agree but the fact nothing was even suggested is very strange. No DNA on the murder weapon is definitely odd but the whole investigation was botched. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but i just don't see how people can be so adamant as to their innocence  when it is so clearly not cut and dry.

If it's not cut and dry they should have been found innocent, they would never have been found guilty in most western countries with a jury. Their guilt had already been decided before the trial, claims of forced confessions were entirely believable. 

[CorpusChristie]

3 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

If it's not cut and dry they should have been found innocent, they would never have been found guilty in most western countries with a jury. Their guilt had already been decided before the trial, claims of forced confessions were entirely believable. 

Has this been in a Western Country , The Police, the prosecution , the Judge and many other people connected with the case would have found themselves in Court on charges of wrong doing

[Dene16]

14 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

Could you provide a link to that ?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/thailand-burmese-british-murder-1.3379518

DNA evidence showed that the semen of both men was found inside Witheridge, the court said.

Still looking for a link to the Quote which i know to be true 

what is your problem don't you think your being rather pedantic 

 

[CorpusChristie]

4 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/thailand-burmese-british-murder-1.3379518

DNA evidence showed that the semen of both men was found inside Witheridge, the court said.

Still looking for a link to the Quote which i know to be true 

what is your problem don't you think your being rather pedantic 

 

From your link :

 

 

A Thai court on Thursday sentenced two Burmese migrants to death for the murder of two British backpackers on a resort island last year, in a case that raised questions about police competence and the judicial system in Thailand.

Human Rights Watch called the verdict "profoundly disturbing," citing the defendants' accusations of police torture that were never investigated and questionable DNA evidence linking them to the crime. 

[Dene16]

8 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

If it's not cut and dry they should have been found innocent, they would never have been found guilty in most western countries with a jury.

I have never said they should of been found guilty i have merely stated the actions of the accused and the defence are not the actions of innocent people and a defence not allowing them to testify for that reason

 

[Dene16]

10 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

From your link :

 

i could go to numerous links to verify what i have said. everyone knows that the the DNA evidence has come under scrutiny because they wanted to retest it and they declared it had all been used up so your ridiculous attempts to vindicate your previous statements don't wash

Again why are you being so pedantic are you one of those people that will not except that you don't actually know everything you claim

Edited August 16, 2020 by Dene16
addition

[Sujo]

10 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

I have never said they should of been found guilty i have merely stated the actions of the accused and the defence are not the actions of innocent people and a defence not allowing them to testify for that reason

 

You obviously havent been in a criminal trial.

 

In more enlightened countries, when a defendant does not give evidence, a judge will instruct a jury that the defendant is clothed in innocence and they must make no prejudicial inference about not giving evidence.

 

One good reason a defendant does not give evidence is when the prosecution have failed to provide their evidence to reach the standard of reasonable doubt.

 

This case should be taught in law school that for judge alone trials money and face is more important than law.

 

Their case simply didnt meet the high threshold of reasonable doubt.

[Sujo]

9 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

i could go to numerous links to verify what i have said. everyone knows that the the DNA evidence has come under scrutiny because they wanted to retest it and they declared it had all been used up so your ridiculous attempts to vindicate your previous statements don't wash

Again why are you being so pedantic are you one of those people that will not except that you don't actually know everything you claim

They were sentenced to death. It is.reasonable to be pedantic when you are to be killed upon evidence that is not verified and very dodgy.

[Dene16]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

You obviously havent been in a criminal trial

I am not going to answer that on the grounds i may incriminate myself

[Dene16]

2 minutes ago, Sujo said:

They were sentenced to death. It is.reasonable to be pedantic when you are to be killed upon evidence that is not verified and very dodgy.

We were talking about a statement made in a court that had no actual relevance to the subject matter being discussed. Pedantic overload  

[mike787]

How do we know they did it?????  Are we sure???  Where is the evidence???  A GOFUND could help vindicate these poor souls.

Edited August 16, 2020 by mike787

[Artisi]

2 hours ago, Dene16 said:

It just amazes me how naive and short sighted people can be, they only see what they want to see

The only defence offered in the trial, was that it was a forced confession. Literally nothing else.

Don't you find that strange?

 

 

 

If you have done nothing, what defence do you have other than saying it wasn't me/us, of course that would be a waste of time anyway as the decision was pre-purchased and ordained from the top. 

[Sujo]

11 minutes ago, mike787 said:

How do we know thy did it?????  Are we sure???  Where is the evidence???  A GOFUND could help vindicate these poor souls.

No it wouldnt. Only a real police force presenting evidence using internationally approved guidelines would help them. Not going to happen.

 

No one should be given a traffic fine nevermind a death sentence on the shoddy work done by the police.