Key witness says foreigner kills British tourists

[green job]

I personaly think,that you have all said enough, just now wait and watch, After the statment Davids familly has made,respect it.

[Theforeigner]

There is now a petition for an independent investigation :- 10000 signatures are needed, still 2,159 NEEDED, it will go to Mark Kent, the UK ambassador to Thailand

Please sign!!!

https://www.change.org/p/the-governm...d-miller#share

Edited October 4, 2014 by Theforeigner

[binjalin]

Has everyone seen the latest on BPost?

Former Koh Tao murder 'suspect' confirms innocence Son of island headman says false accusations ruined his life

SMH

What I fail to understand is WHY he does not give a DNA sample... if he has nothing to fear? and WHY protect his 'rights' not to? <deleted> has he NO DECENCY? it's to assist the investigation

[JoeLing]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?
Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police
knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?
So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?
Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

Edited October 8, 2014 by JoeLing

[Dogmatix]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?

Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police

knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?

So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?

Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

It was sent for DNA testing and the police have not explained why they were unable to find any DNA inside it. Even if the wearer had failed to ejaculate, he would have left samples of skin tissue and probably pre-ejaculate fluid inside the condom. The failure to find anything seems inexplicable.

Are you sure the Burmese were asked to masturbate to provide DNA samples? I saw pictures of policemen swabbing their mouths to obtain saliva samples which is more normal practice. If they had been asked to masturbate, that would, of course, not have been shown.

[ParadiseLost]

Well i take offence to that. I have alovely Thai husband. And he has a big whopper.

Well, I for one want to see a photo!

(Please note - not the whopper - a selfie from you) I don't believe you are a gal...

[StealthEnergiser]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?

Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police

knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?

So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?

Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

I would have thought that the General Practioner that was on the crime scene should answer that .

does anybody know what he was doing there with his surgical gloves on ?

[catsanddogs]

Andrew Drummond Facebook page has new post relating to the alleged key witness. Maybe it is time for Britain to employ a new Ambassador.

[catsanddogs]

See recent key witness post on A Drummonds facebook page.

[catsanddogs]

......

[catsanddogs]

An article on AD's FB page about the alleged key witness.

[ParadiseLost]

"Police said they found thongs, a pair of black trousers, a T-shirt, a pair of underpants and a used condom at the crime scene. Investigators also found traces of a struggle which indicated possible fighting near the murder scene, police said. A bloodstained hoe and a fertiliser sack were found nearby.

The semen DNA matched DNA found on the butt of an LM cigarette found beside a rock 30-50 metres from the crime scene, Surat Thani police chief Kiattipong Khaosam-ang said on Thursday. He said the DNA of two men was found on the cigarette butt and they matched the DNA found in the semen found inside the female victim's body.

Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said it seemed the two men had shared a cigarette about the time Miller and Witheridge had walked past them, heading to the sandy area of the beach where they were murdered."

Source, Bangkok Post (sorry if not allowed). Interesting that he said the 2 men shared a cigarette about the time David and Hannah walked past them, heading to the area of the beach were they were murdered. How would he guess/know this at all. It would have to have been witnessed and reported. Either that or he has made a really silly guess on a very serious murder investigation.

Seems at least one person knew how the confessions would turn out...

This was 30 September.

[mehoo]

absolutely unbelievable whats been going on with this matter and the perfect police investigation. .just so many contradictions and unexplained inconsistencies to the police evidence against the accused,

[JoeLing]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?

Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police

knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?

So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?

Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

It was sent for DNA testing and the police have not explained why they were unable to find any DNA inside it. Even if the wearer had failed to ejaculate, he would have left samples of skin tissue and probably pre-ejaculate fluid inside the condom. The failure to find anything seems inexplicable.

Are you sure the Burmese were asked to masturbate to provide DNA samples? I saw pictures of policemen swabbing their mouths to obtain saliva samples which is more normal practice. If they had been asked to masturbate, that would, of course, not have been shown.

I know that was done in other investigations here in Thailand but as I said,

I'm not sure where I read it, in which thread, but somewhere it was mentioned

the same happen to suspects in the Koh Tao investigations. I think it could have

been in the same news as the first claim of torture on the initial Burmese

suspects.

Now because I'm not sure where I read that, I asked if anyone remembers that link.

Or the link with the police statement about that condom they found.

[Pattaya46]

Andrew Drummond Facebook page has new post relating to the alleged key witness.

Maybe it is time for Britain to employ a new Ambassador.

"I did not think my friends could have done that" said the witness

Yes, and ?

Who cares what he think? We just want to know what he made and saw.

He confirmed he left and then know knothing about what happen after that.

[ParadiseLost]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?

Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police

knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?

So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?

Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

I would have thought that the General Practioner that was on the crime scene should answer that .

does anybody know what he was doing there with his surgical gloves on ?

Keeping his hands clean?

[inutil]

Andrew Drummond Facebook page has new post relating to the alleged key witness. Maybe it is time for Britain to employ a new Ambassador.

To be absolutely honest, Britain CANNOT and WILL NOT get involved in a matter of Thai state affairs. This is right and proper. I want the truth to come out as well. But Britain is not the avenue. The most the foreign office will do (in public) is express concern at the handling of the case. And they did exactly this in their comments yesterday in the Daily Telegraph.

(While im on the subject of things that are right and proper. It is also right and proper that the Thai Government (or any government) should not be able to arbitrarily demand a DNA swab in some kind of trawling expedition. I would refuse them as well. And i am thankful i can do that. People should not be calling for this to be reneged upon. It undermines key civil protections.

Also, the British government does not need to intervene in this anyway, because the British government has one of the most ruthless, amoral real-politik machines in the world: the British tabloid press).

The reason this case has any momentum at all is because the THAI people are pressing it. Not because expats on a message board are. But because Thai people are questioning the official story. And that is exactly how it should be for an issue that is clearly a sovereign Thai issue. It is a Thai story about Thai internal affairs, domestic migrant relations and of course, 'corruption'. And this is why the Foreign Office CANNOT and SHOULD NOT get involved. This is not a colony. These are not our subjects. Any heavy-handed intervention in this instance would do more to harm this fragile situation than help it. It would distract attention away from where it currently needs to be.

Edited October 8, 2014 by inutil

[Mzungu]

Andrew Drummond Facebook page has new post relating to the alleged key witness. Maybe it is time for Britain to employ a new Ambassador.

To be absolutely honest, Britain CANNOT and WILL NOT get involved in a matter of Thai state affairs. This is right and proper. I want the truth to come out as well. But Britain is not the avenue. The most the foreign office will do (in public) is express concern at the handling of the case. And they did exactly this in their comments yesterday in the Daily Telegraph.

(While im on the subject of things that are right and proper. It is also right and proper that the Thai Government (or any government) should not be able to arbitrarily demand a DNA swab in some kind of trawling expedition. I would refuse them as well. And i am thankful i can do that. People should not be calling for this to be reneged upon. It undermines key civil protections.

Also, the British government does not need to intervene in this anyway, because the British government has one of the most ruthless, amoral real-politik machines in the world: the British tabloid press).

The reason this case has any momentum at all is because the THAI people are pressing it. Not because expats on a message board are. But because Thai people are questioning the official story. And that is exactly how it should be for an issue that is clearly a sovereign Thai issue. It is a Thai story about Thai internal affairs, domestic migrant relations and of course, 'corruption'. And this is why the Foreign Office CANNOT and SHOULD NOT get involved. This is not a colony. These are not our subjects. Any heavy-handed intervention in this instance would do more to harm this fragile situation than help it. It would distract attention away from where it currently needs to be.

Guess, the days when we were invading other countries are over...?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9653497/British-have-invaded-nine-out-of-ten-countries-so-look-out-Luxembourg.html

Edited October 8, 2014 by Mzungu

[Dogmatix]

Andrew Drummond Facebook page has new post relating to the alleged key witness. Maybe it is time for Britain to employ a new Ambassador.

To be absolutely honest, Britain CANNOT and WILL NOT get involved in a matter of Thai state affairs. This is right and proper. I want the truth to come out as well. But Britain is not the avenue. The most the foreign office will do (in public) is express concern at the handling of the case. And they did exactly this in their comments yesterday in the Daily Telegraph.

(While im on the subject of things that are right and proper. It is also right and proper that the Thai Government (or any government) should not be able to arbitrarily demand a DNA swab in some kind of trawling expedition. I would refuse them as well. And i am thankful i can do that. People should not be calling for this to be reneged upon. It undermines key civil protections.

Also, the British government does not need to intervene in this anyway, because the British government has one of the most ruthless, amoral real-politik machines in the world: the British tabloid press).

The reason this case has any momentum at all is because the THAI people are pressing it. Not because expats on a message board are. But because Thai people are questioning the official story. And that is exactly how it should be for an issue that is clearly a sovereign Thai issue. It is a Thai story about Thai internal affairs, domestic migrant relations and of course, 'corruption'. And this is why the Foreign Office CANNOT and SHOULD NOT get involved. This is not a colony. These are not our subjects. Any heavy-handed intervention in this instance would do more to harm this fragile situation than help it. It would distract attention away from where it currently needs to be.

I think you're getting a bit hysterical. British police can and do help with investigations of murders of their nationals in foreign countries at the invitation of the foreign governments. They have been out twice to help with the investigation into the rape and murder of Kirsty Jones. British courts have even tried and convicted people for murders of British nationals abroad when they were able to arrest the culprit in the UK.

What the British ambo has so far offered the Thai police in terms of cooperation is help with the DNA testing. There are also a lot of witnesses of what happened leading up to the murders who could be interviewed in the UK which is something the Thai police cannot do by themselves.

Obviously the Thai police will not request help now they have buttoned up the case and sent it to the AG but, if it falls apart before it gets to trial, who knows?

Quite apart from that there will be inquests held in the UK in several months' time into the two deaths.

[Dogmatix]

Couple of questions, someone might even find the references to those posts.

Am I right with the understanding, the police found a condom with Hannah's DNA on it but no other DNA?

Am I right to assume, if there was only Hannah's DNA, that condom was otherwise "empty"?

If the information is correct that that condom has not been send for forensic testing, how comes, the police

knew there is any DNA on those condoms?

Have I rightly understood, DNA can be obtained by saliva, blood, hair or any other tissue on our bodies?

So why were the burmese suspects ask to masturbate in order to get "DNA samples"?

Am I right that those suspected or accused people didn't, couldn't masturbate in order to get DNA samples?

Could I be right with my assumption, the reason that condom has not been send for forensic testing,

is the lack of masturbation willingness of the various suspects?

It was sent for DNA testing and the police have not explained why they were unable to find any DNA inside it. Even if the wearer had failed to ejaculate, he would have left samples of skin tissue and probably pre-ejaculate fluid inside the condom. The failure to find anything seems inexplicable.

Are you sure the Burmese were asked to masturbate to provide DNA samples? I saw pictures of policemen swabbing their mouths to obtain saliva samples which is more normal practice. If they had been asked to masturbate, that would, of course, not have been shown.

I know that was done in other investigations here in Thailand but as I said,

I'm not sure where I read it, in which thread, but somewhere it was mentioned

the same happen to suspects in the Koh Tao investigations. I think it could have

been in the same news as the first claim of torture on the initial Burmese

suspects.

Now because I'm not sure where I read that, I asked if anyone remembers that link.

Or the link with the police statement about that condom they found.

Yes, asking men to masturbate to provide semen samples in rape and murder cases is a well known Thai police investigative technique that is probably taught in the police academy. During the Kirsty Jones case investigation in Chiang Mai, while police were attempting to fit up a Karen hilltribe man they allegedly asked him to masturbate to provide a semen sample that they were presumably planning to plant in the corpse. When the Karen unsurprisingly declined, the police apparently tried to perform the job themselves without success. There were also stories that police in that the investigators attempted to pay an unsuspecting ladyboy to masturbate in front of them for the same purpose. Even though no one was successfully fitted up for the crime the police investigation remains successful in its main objective, i.e. the killer remains at large.

[inutil]

To be honest, i didnt think that needed to be said. So let me clarify the point:

Without the express invitation of the Thai authorities, Britain cannot and will not get involved in this situation. And it is right and proper that they should not.

Not sure why you find that particularly hysterical. Its fairly standard protocol.

[Dogmatix]

To be honest, i didnt think that needed to be said. So let me clarify the point:

Without the express invitation of the Thai authorities, Britain cannot and will not get involved in this situation. And it is right and proper that they should not.

Not sure why you find that particularly hysterical. Its fairly standard protocol.

It was the shouting in capital letters and the stuff about Thailand not being a colony etc. Anyway never mind. Let's cool it. I think we are on the same page.