Ensure 'fair probe' for suspects, says Thein Sein

[smokie36]

Getting rid of evidence of people there....who might be able to finger others who were also there perhaps....?

[Number 3]

Why would Sean lie about his cut saying it came from a motorbike accident? Why did he not wash off the blood on his guitar? Why was he allowed to leave Thailand on the same day? How did they manage to do a DNA test on him within 24 hours? What about this employee at the AC bar who helped him to wash off a lot of blood on his body, arms, legs & face? Why was he chased & targeted by Mon & Co.?

It is all very very very obvious, he was an (unwanted) witness of the attacks, got in the way and got cut! Very very very simple! He knows or partially knows who did it. He holds the key and therefore needed to be eliminated or shipped out on the next plane. The guy is a fruitcake with blood on his hands and the only true thing he said so far is: " I know you (David) tried to save her".

I would personally start looking for the NO DNA guy who happens to be the son of Mon & Brother (Mayor of Koh Tao). Forget the (manipulated) CCTV, get the DNA of this NO DNA guy!

I repeat, GET THE DNA OF THE NO DNA guy!

Hello Krenjai...A wee bit off topic...sorry. Quoting you as you mention the AC Bar. I am wondering why the facebook page for this bar would have been altered? I was perusing this page a few days ago and it was up-to-date, recent pictures, including the evening of September 14th. As of today I find that everything has been deleted back to December 2012. Rather odd.

Kind Regards,

~E~

Curiouser and curiouser .....

[jacksam]

love the smug contented grin on his face. Strutting around like a peacock thinking to himself who care about or what these stupid Burmese think. if we want to stich someone up on murder charges we will. He is so proud of the job his police have done and rewarded them for their corruption.

Another ridiculous statement !

[JLCrab]

From #166:The British authorities are more than entitled to do their own tests and either affirm or decry the Thai police's test results.

The UK government is totally entitled to do any DNA analysis they want on DNA recovered from the 2 bodies returned to the UK and/or any DNA evidence in possession of the government of Myanmar that Myanmar chooses to give them. That's it. The government of the UK has no authority whatsoever to conduct any investigation with the territory of the Kingdom of Thailand unless they are so requested by the Royal Thai government.

Edited October 11, 2014 by JLCrab

[SICHONSTEVE]

you have well and truly achieved that already so why not let this take its natural course now and if you are unhappy about how it is going THEN start a petition whereby it would have more of an effect.

[stephen terry]

Thai law question: does anyone know when a signed confession is recanted (a normal occurrence) is the original confession still regarded as evidence?

Better to avoid complicating the matter with related topics.

The only irrefutable evidence is the correspondence of the DNA found in the body of the victim and that of two Burmese.

Everything else is just chatter futile

As far as I am aware (apart from the capture of DNA in a less than forensic manner, which questions the suitability) is the police evidence of rape only. There is no DNA evidence or fingerprints against the suspects to support the charge of murder (from the reports issued). David's DNA is not on the murder weapon (the hoe). If the RTP have eye-witnesses to the murder, that has not been revealed to the media. That is why I asked the question.

The RTP have stated that the DNA matches, albeit they haven't been specific in naming what matches, but there is also the DNA of a reported (by the RTP) third person as yet unaccounted for. That puts this person at the scene of the crime, which is contrary to the re-enactment scenario.

Now what were you saying about DNA?

And another question. Are the lawyers representing the suspects permitted to contend the RTP's evidence, and cross examine any witnesses? Or does the judge rely solely on the prosecutor's evidence?

[wackybacky]

Thai law question: does anyone know when a signed confession is recanted (a normal occurrence) is the original confession still regarded as evidence?

Better to avoid complicating the matter with related topics.

The only irrefutable evidence is the correspondence of the DNA found in the body of the victim and that of two Burmese.

Everything else is just chatter futile

As far as I am aware (apart from the capture of DNA in a less than forensic manner, which questions the suitability) is the police evidence of rape only. There is no DNA evidence or fingerprints against the suspects to support the charge of murder (from the reports issued). David's DNA is not on the murder weapon (the hoe). If the RTP have eye-witnesses to the murder, that has not been revealed to the media. That is why I asked the question.

The RTP have stated that the DNA matches, albeit they haven't been specific in naming what matches, but there is also the DNA of a reported (by the RTP) third person as yet unaccounted for. That puts this person at the scene of the crime, which is contrary to the re-enactment scenario.

Now what were you saying about DNA?

And another question. Are the lawyers representing the suspects permitted to contend the RTP's evidence, and cross examine any witnesses? Or does the judge rely solely on the prosecutor's evidence?

Their lawyers have every right to contest evidence.... That is their number one job isn't it?

A defence lawyer is tasked with destroying the prosecution evidence. They can also cross examine prosecution witnesses, but only in the court room.

However, contesting prosecution is a defence lawyer's prime function.

It is actually illegal for a defence lawyer to represent a client whom he knows to be guilty based of a code of ethics that their practising license is issued under.

Edited October 11, 2014 by wackybacky

[SICHONSTEVE]

Fair enough I suppose - but don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might actually be guilty of these crimes despite your views on this matter

[Eirene]

My apologies. There are two AC Bars? Have found the one I was at...small letters. I was sure there were photo's from the 14th. though....perhaps I was wrong.

[metisdead]

Posts lobbying members to sign a petition have been removed as well as the replies. While the petition(s) may be for a very noble cause, they are not allowed on here:

5) You will not use Thaivisa as a platform to gather support to effect changes on religious, political, or governmental issues.

[stephen terry]

Thai law question: does anyone know when a signed confession is recanted (a normal occurrence) is the original confession still regarded as evidence?

Better to avoid complicating the matter with related topics.

The only irrefutable evidence is the correspondence of the DNA found in the body of the victim and that of two Burmese.

Everything else is just chatter futile

As far as I am aware (apart from the capture of DNA in a less than forensic manner, which questions the suitability) is the police evidence of rape only. There is no DNA evidence or fingerprints against the suspects to support the charge of murder (from the reports issued). David's DNA is not on the murder weapon (the hoe). If the RTP have eye-witnesses to the murder, that has not been revealed to the media. That is why I asked the question.

The RTP have stated that the DNA matches, albeit they haven't been specific in naming what matches, but there is also the DNA of a reported (by the RTP) third person as yet unaccounted for. That puts this person at the scene of the crime, which is contrary to the re-enactment scenario.

Now what were you saying about DNA?

And another question. Are the lawyers representing the suspects permitted to contend the RTP's evidence, and cross examine any witnesses? Or does the judge rely solely on the prosecutor's evidence?

Their lawyers have every right to contest evidence.... That is their number one job isn't it?

A defence lawyer is tasked with destroying the prosecution evidence. They can also cross examine prosecution witnesses, but only in the court room.

However, contesting prosecution is a defence lawyer's prime function.

It is actually illegal for a defence lawyer to represent a client whom he knows to be guilty based of a code of ethics that their practising license is issued under.

Exactly what I was hoping to highlight. And hopefully it applies in Thailand.

[stephen terry]

Fair enough I suppose - but don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might actually be guilty of these crimes despite your views on this matter

And don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might not. I'm sure we agree on both those possibilities.

[JLCrab]

For all the talk on here of DNA, CCTV video, telephones, etc. this could be a case that will largely turn on circumstantial evidence.

[SICHONSTEVE]

Fair enough I suppose - but don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might actually be guilty of these crimes despite your views on this matter

And don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might not. I'm sure we agree on both those possibilities.

I haven't - my view though is that they are guilty, as they have admitted to.

[SICHONSTEVE]

If that is the case (and I am not refuting it) then how can they get a defence lawyer for someone like Ted Bundy and his ilk?

[outre99]

This seems to be a sad pattern among Thai leaders regardless of the color of their shirts. A complete tone-deafness to basic PR management. They seem to be their own worst enemies when it comes to dealing with these episodes. The proper way for the good general to have dealt with this would have been to take advantage of this unfortunate event in order to strengthen his position as a different kind of Thai leader by having DSI take over investigtation and invite Scotland Yard to participate, which would have demonstrated to the world that the new government is very serious about tourist safety and their fight against corruption. Instead he left the Koh Tao somchais to do their best at being the worst and bungle this beyond any recognition and make Thailand and him the laughing stock once again.

Don't they have a PR team to advise PM on these matters? It seems like this would be taught in politics 101. It's not about reality but perception of reality and they need to pay attention to that.

They've done a fairly good job of it in Phuket by going after the taxi mafia and the beach encroachers and publicising it in a favorable light. This would have been such a slam dunk for them in terms of international PR, a good excuse to clean up Koh Tao and Samui mafias (they already started it in Phuket), not to mention doing the right thing by the unfortunate young victims and their families.

I swear any decent PR firm from New York or London or Singapore would be worth their retainer in gold for the PM. Thaksin's got several working for him. No wonder he's winning the public opinion war.

Edited October 11, 2014 by outre99

[stephen terry]

Fair enough I suppose - but don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might actually be guilty of these crimes despite your views on this matter

And don't totally dismiss the possibility that they might not. I'm sure we agree on both those possibilities.

I haven't - my view though is that they are guilty, as they have admitted to.

I think you'll find that there are many historical accounts where people admit to murders they didn't commit. It is now western police practice not to reveal key pieces of evidence to filter out those who know nothing about the crime scene happenings. It's the Defence's duty to contest the timings and circumstances in how the admissions were obtained. That should include separately cross-examining the roti seller and the police officers present in their interrogation of the suspects. I am sure they would be quite capable of legally ascertaining the veracity of such admissions.

However, you've stated your view, okay fair enough. As they say in Thailand 'up to you'.

[stephen terry]

If that is the case (and I am not refuting it) then how can they get a defence lawyer for someone like Ted Bundy and his ilk?

Because the lawyer would say I don't want to know whether you're guilty or not, my job is to defend you. It's a neat cop-out. And, before you raise it, yes, it could have happened here. And to be fair, it's not the lawyer's job to judge whether the person they are defending is guilty or not, that's up to the court.

Edited October 11, 2014 by stephen terry

[JacknDanny]

Why is the emphasis being put on whether these guys were slapped about or not.

From documentation, I wouldn't call the torture, including the use of boiling water, inflicted on these ALLEGED SUSPECTS, as being "slapped around."

What evidence do you have on this torture having taken place??

Photos!

The real truth of this case is we have a confession which has been rescinded.....a murder weapon which was only used on one of the victims.....a botched together re-enactment.....oh and DNA evidence taken by plod rather than proper forensics people.

I'd like to know the truth of what happened that night as I'm sure many others would Steve and if they are guilty so be it but I don't at this time see how they can convict these two Burmese when it appears the police have got at best half a story.

Half a fairytale many would suggest. Meanwhile the rest of us await the next move....probably heavily leaning on the Samui prosecutor as we speak......

Agree with everything in your post - this investigation was cocked up right from the beginning.

To avoid sounding like a parrot - where is this proof of torture?

Murderer suspects (the accused) are bound to say this, especially with the encouragement of their defence lawyer. Everyone has jumped on the band waggon and assumed that they were tortured, on their word. Well I take this with a pinch of salt - until that is, someone shows me proof that this occurred! A far as I am concerned they freely admitted (without force from the Thai police) that they committed the rape and murders. It was only when the defence lawyer came on board that they rescinded their confessions and there was all this talk of torture all of a sudden.

That's my position and I'm sticking with it!

Don't forget, they have openly admitted the rapes by accident (even insisting that they did it, to their 'own side') so there is no defending that aspect and they must stand trial for rape.

You clearly have had no dealings with the police, no involvement with lawyers and no court experience and seem to no very little about how Thailand "works".

All your arguments are framed around your western experiences and perceptions .. Stick to whatever you like, you seem a bit obsessive about this subject..with zero empathy for the victims something you have in common with the above Thai institutions .

How can you ignore the fact that they have openly admitted that they raped her (not rescinded by the way), you just can't!

Why are you people protecting rapists, that's what I want to know!

Is that not a fair question to ask? Do you do this kind of thing often. Rescinding their confession is meaningless, it means nothing and is a huge red herring. This happens all the time - especially once the defence lawyer is up to speed. He is trying to correct the fact that they made the confessions through ignorance as they are not terribly bright little boys.

I bet it went like this - DL what have you admitted to BB this, this and this. DL oh!, right, this is what we need to do - rescind everything you said and claim torture was used to get it out of you. Then put on you're innocent little-boy faces and seek sympathy from as many people as possible in order to throw the BIB's case into array.

This ploy seems to have worked.

Maybe one day you will be sitting in the chair facing the prospect of a cattle prod electrocution, and I'm sure you will openly admit to whatever they tell you to admit to.

Not me! I'm as honest as they come and have never, in 57 years, even come close to getting in trouble with the law so no prods for me my friend. No doubt you would like to be holding it if it ever it did happen but I'm going to have to disappoint you on that as it is highly unlikely.

Now you understand. You don't actually have to be guilty to be forced to admit, just in the general proximity to the crime.

I make it a habit not to be around crime scenes when the happen

What a ridiculous statement!!!

What, you blame the victims do you??

You insensitive *******

[JLCrab]

According to an unnamed newspaper source the Police have until Thursday to submit a final report to the Surat Thani prosecutor.

[SICHONSTEVE]

No

You've got the wrong end of the stick - I didn't mean that at all.

If you read the rest of the thread you will understand. I might be controversial and not everyone's cup of tea but I am not heartless!

[wandasloan]

UK EMBASSY Bangkok.... does nothing...and continues to do nothing...and will continue in the future to do nothing

The problem here, though, is that most (I hope all) decent people are quite outraged about the course of the investigation.

BUT that specific course of investigation doesn't really concern the UK. That is, in legal and diplomatic terms, police were on the case in minutes, they have made arrests and in a while, the cases are scheduled to go before the courts where, over months and months, they will be considered by duly appointed judges.

The UK government really can't demand anything but that. Sure, British government and diplomatic people can be as outraged as you and I on a personal level. But what could the UK actually DO, that it's not doing?

I'd like to hear a little more outrage and a little more suggesting and pushing from the large crowd that thought on May 23 that Their Hero was In Charge and everything was right with the world. They and concerned Thais can push this man to Do Something that is right, for a change. Will they? I don't see it in this thread or this forum or on Thai Visa. Too bad.

The president of Burma has more guts than the coup supporters around here. He does what is right even though he admires the coup and hopes the usurper succeeds.

.

[dieseldave1951]

i have tried this link you can get on to UK goverment web site,

if you try to read the security advise it directs you to booking,com or agoda or another booking agency

i suspect that there some clandestine operation going on to block UK official web site

can some oun in Thailand check this out i dont think its my PC

the UK gov web site worked this morning and the security report was preety daming i thinking some interference for some source in thailand

trying to block information maybe

Thein Sein obviously telling Prayuth that they are being watched.

What Prayuth and his police chiefs have also forgotten is that there 'human rights' behaviour is also being scrutinised by the US with regards to mistreatment of migrants and their human rights, and now add Amnesty International to that list.

If they decide to carry on with this charade, then I think they will not escape punishment this time. They got off lucky a few months ago when they were downgraded to the lowest tier for human rights abuses yet managed to escape tangible sanctions. They were lucky to get away with a slap on the wrist.

I hope they get a hard kick up the arse next time...... The world is watching.... continue to be stupid, and you may well see CIVILISED countries marking Thailand down as an unsafe destination.

That would wipe that smarmy look off your face.

I believe the UK Government has a duty of care for British subjects and should revise Foreign Office travel guidance in light of the frequency British subjects have been victims of murder, "suicides", rape and other violent crime in Thailand over the past five years.

UK travel advice now updated "Western tourists including British nationals have been victims of vicious, unprovoked attacks by individuals and gangs in Koh Samui, Koh Phangan and Koh Tao (the Samui archipelago)."

https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/thailand/safety-and-security

[smokie36]

For all the talk on here of DNA, CCTV video, telephones, etc. this could be a case that will largely turn on circumstantial evidence.

They were on the beach that night therefore they are guilty?

Really its up to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

I'm not seeing that level of evidence myself.

[SICHONSTEVE]

i have tried this link you can get on to UK goverment web site,

if you try to read the security advise it directs you to booking,com or agoda or another booking agency

i suspect that there some clandestine operation going on to block UK official web site

can some oun in Thailand check this out i dont think its my PC

the UK gov web site worked this morning and the security report was preety daming i thinking some interference for some source in thailand

trying to block information maybe

Thein Sein obviously telling Prayuth that they are being watched.

What Prayuth and his police chiefs have also forgotten is that there 'human rights' behaviour is also being scrutinised by the US with regards to mistreatment of migrants and their human rights, and now add Amnesty International to that list.

If they decide to carry on with this charade, then I think they will not escape punishment this time. They got off lucky a few months ago when they were downgraded to the lowest tier for human rights abuses yet managed to escape tangible sanctions. They were lucky to get away with a slap on the wrist.

I hope they get a hard kick up the arse next time...... The world is watching.... continue to be stupid, and you may well see CIVILISED countries marking Thailand down as an unsafe destination.

That would wipe that smarmy look off your face.

I believe the UK Government has a duty of care for British subjects and should revise Foreign Office travel guidance in light of the frequency British subjects have been victims of murder, "suicides", rape and other violent crime in Thailand over the past five years.

UK travel advice now updated "Western tourists including British nationals have been victims of vicious, unprovoked attacks by individuals and gangs in Koh Samui, Koh Phangan and Koh Tao (the Samui archipelago)."

https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/thailand/safety-and-security

Are they going to release a similar one for New York??

[Andre0720]

Thein Sein obviously telling Prayuth that they are being watched.

What Prayuth and his police chiefs have also forgotten is that there 'human rights' behaviour is also being scrutinised by the US with regards to mistreatment of migrants and their human rights, and now add Amnesty International to that list.

If they decide to carry on with this charade, then I think they will not escape punishment this time. They got off lucky a few months ago when they were downgraded to the lowest tier for human rights abuses yet managed to escape tangible sanctions. They were lucky to get away with a slap on the wrist.

I hope they get a hard kick up the arse next time...... The world is watching.... continue to be stupid, and you may well see CIVILISED countries marking Thailand down as an unsafe destination.

That would wipe that smarmy look off your face.

I believe the UK Government has a duty of care for British subjects and should revise Foreign Office travel guidance in light of the frequency British subjects have been victims of murder, "suicides", rape and other violent crime in Thailand over the past five years.

I would think that if the US actually makes punitive moves against Thailand, the 'usual suspects' will follow suit, and that includes the UK and Australia.

The only thing that has come out of Prayuth's mouth that is accurate, is that the investigation has been 'transparent'..... Oh yes, it has been transparent alright..... Everyone with two brain cells to rub together has seen straight through the whole 'botch and patch up job'.

it has been an absolute insult to people's intelligence.

And here I always thought that an intelligence that is insultable was kind of an handicap...

[bernard75]

Great! Thats the militaries response to the local mafia and corrupt police and judges?

Come to Koh Tao, where you will be watched 24/7!

[kaobang]

https://www.facebook.com/events/285972508258835/

[RickBradford]

I had a long bus ride in which to read a full-page article in today's Thai press about the case, with numerous police and politicians quoted, including 'Big Two', which is the Thai nickname for General Prime Minister Prayut.

The main point made was: this is such a big case, under the scrutiny of the local and international press, not to mention the online world, that no police would have dared to frame some scapegoats.

Cynics might say that a) it is precisely because it is such an important case that scapegoating was seen as a good option or, b ) the case only came under massive public scrutiny because of the botched investigation and consequent likelihood that scapegoats were being framed. However, that's the General's line.

"I do not believe that anyone would have dared to do this, or that the defendants who were arrested would have allowed themselves to be forced into accepting responsibility for a crime of this magnitude," he said.

He also suggests that online media, who don't know the facts, keep quiet and leave it to the officials.

Another senior policeman absolutely rejected suggestions that the Burmese were subjected to any physical or psychological torture in order to force a confession. In any case, the policeman said, the arrest was based on evidence, not the confessions, and it is the suspects' right under Thai law to retract those confessions if they so choose.

One point that Big Two made was that foreign observers were welcome to monitor the process, and he added some not very veiled threats that if it was discovered that police had created scapegoats, there would be hell to pay in police ranks.

I make no comment either way, just reporting what was said in the article.

Edited October 11, 2014 by RickBradford

[bernard75]

The "BIG TWO" being corruption and incompetence?