Thailand to 'allow' second DNA test for British murder accused

[jdinasia]

I spoke to soon. Welcome in. Without opposition there is no debate. Without debate there will be no conclusion. As much as it pains me to say I'm glad one of you is here to stir things up and provide stimulus.

Back to back meetings in the morning, but I will do my best to point out the lies and inconsistencies from the tin foil hat brigade.

You do realize that most of them have put you on their ignore list. So you are only talking to a few here.

But please blabber on, we are part of the tin foil hat brigade and you belongn to the corrupt and bought brigade. All is well...

A few years ago it was possible to have interesting and educated exchanges of ideas here, but now this forum has truly gone to the dogs.

Yeppers, way too many people that think flaming is acceptable..most are quite new

[boomerangutang]

This will only be of help to find out the truth if an independent British team has taken their own samples of body fluids found inside Hannah.

At this point I would also like to remind everyone of the story where some innocent hilltribe men were charged and executed for a rape and murder in Chiang Mai, despite the fact that they were more than one km away from the crime scene at the time of the murder and had a substancial alibi and witnesses... In that case the RTP tried to jerk one of the accused off in a failed attempt to extract semen that would be placed inside the victim at the morgue. The RTP will do whatever necessary to cover their backs and to keep that 120m hush money.

I agree with the gist of what you're conveying, but the hill triber was not executed. Luckily, he got an attorney (pro bono) who helped him get out of his scapegoat role. But you're right, if a Burmese or a hill triber can be framed to take a rap for a guilty hi-so, it will be done. It's not common in Thailand, but even if it just happens once a year, it's too often. RTP are used to getting away with a lot of nefarious things. I think our big social media uproar over the current Ko Tao case will (hopefully) give pause to the RTP next time they try to frame a scapegoat. Either way, their credibility quotient is in tatters.

[wilcopops]

This will only be of help to find out the truth if an independent British team has taken their own samples of body fluids found inside Hannah.

At this point I would also like to remind everyone of the story where some innocent hilltribe men were charged and executed for a rape and murder in Chiang Mai, despite the fact that they were more than one km away from the crime scene at the time of the murder and had a substancial alibi and witnesses... In that case the RTP tried to jerk one of the accused off in a failed attempt to extract semen that would be placed inside the victim at the morgue. The RTP will do whatever necessary to cover their backs and to keep that 120m hush money.

I agree with the gist of what you're conveying, but the hill triber was not executed. Luckily, he got an attorney (pro bono) who helped him get out of his scapegoat role. But you're right, if a Burmese or a hill triber can be framed to take a rap for a guilty hi-so, it will be done. It's not common in Thailand, but even if it just happens once a year, it's too often. RTP are used to getting away with a lot of nefarious things. I think our big social media uproar over the current Ko Tao case will (hopefully) give pause to the RTP next time they try to frame a scapegoat. Either way, their credibility quotient is in tatters.

One thing I notice with many expats is that no matter how long they've lived in Thailand they still underestimate the extent of corruption graft and nepotism....and the existence of sakdina class system relics.

The truth is that MANY poorer people are easily persuaded to take the rap for wealthy people. They see their wealth as a signifier of their inherent merit and therefore helping them out is also a source of merit......they get guarantees as to how they will be prosecuted and treated in prison and then are let out without too much of a fuss, their families having received either a lump sum or support for that period or more. they believe that keeping someone more important then them out of prison is good for their own merit and good the the harmonious running of society.....driving offences are particularly popular for this kind of treatment but there are no limits to what crime may be attributed to a "lock-up boy", in the interests of a more "important" family.

[jdinasia]

Wow..

Now it is sakdina? Please explain how this applies in a case that would cause damage to someone of higher "na"?

Edit - specifically the damage done to people much higher.

Like top echelon police. The PM etc

Edited October 30, 2014 by jdinasia

[maxme]

I spoke to soon. Welcome in. Without opposition there is no debate. Without debate there will be no conclusion. As much as it pains me to say I'm glad one of you is here to stir things up and provide stimulus.

Back to back meetings in the morning, but I will do my best to point out the lies and inconsistencies from the tin foil hat brigade.

You do realize that most of them have put you on their ignore list. So you are only talking to a few here.

But please blabber on, we are part of the tin foil hat brigade and you belongn to the corrupt and bought brigade. All is well...

A few years ago it was possible to have interesting and educated exchanges of ideas here, but now this forum has truly gone to the dogs.

Yeppers, way too many people that think flaming is acceptable..most are quite new

Perhaps if you followed suits and stopped calling rumor mongerers as you don't have any substantial evidence to prove people otherwise or do you have a contact inside the RTP because it's just like everything else... Speculations and assumptions.

The investigation is either very sloppily done which could be possible or a cover up but writing the wrong date in the autopsy report shows that the people involved are neither reliable or professional.

Edited October 30, 2014 by maxme

[ABCer]

Many CSI LA reports are unsubstantiated so we can't use them on Thai Visa. If those reports become substantiated and reported by the papers or television, we can use that material. No problem.

We cannot post unsubstantiated rumours on the Thai Visa news forum. We can only report and discuss what the papers, television are reporting, or official government (UK as well) releases.

I wonder how far this road is taking us away from the 'freedom of speech'?

We are allowed to 'parrot' what the official Gov'ts officially publish? But not think for ourselves.

Am I in breach of your rules when I say things unsubstantiated:

- the 'samples' could have been tempered with;

- 'evidence' could have been tempered with;

- the missing persons who should have been suspects were allowed to escape;

- I believe the poor Burmese sods are the scapegoats;

- the investigators lost all credibility in the eyes of many Thais and non Thais;

In short, am I a rumor monger subject to penalties?

Because 'rumors' are formed by such and similar unsubstantiated thoughts expressed by people.

If the answer is 'yes' - welcome to the 'Darkness at Noon' in the post 1984 era!

I hope this post is not found 'unrelated to the topic'.

Edited October 31, 2014 by ABCer

[MJP]

Many CSI LA reports are unsubstantiated so we can't use them on Thai Visa. If those reports become substantiated and reported by the papers or television, we can use that material. No problem.

We cannot post unsubstantiated rumours on the Thai Visa news forum. We can only report and discuss what the papers, television are reporting, or official government (UK as well) releases.

I wonder how far this road is taking us away from the 'freedom of speech'?

We are allowed to 'parrot' what the official Gov'ts officially publish? But not think for ourselves.

Am I in breach of your rules when I say things unsubstantiated:

- the 'samples' could have been tempered with;

- 'evidence' could have been tempered with;

- the missing persons who should have been suspects were allowed to escape;

- I believe the poor Burmese sods are the scapegoats;

- the investigators lost all credibility in the eyes of many Thais and non Thais;

In short, am I a rumor monger subject to penalties?

Because 'rumors' are formed by such and similar unsubstantiated thoughts expressed by people.

If the answer is 'yes' - welcome to the 'Darkness at Noon' in the post 1984 era!

I hope this post is not found 'unrelated to the topic'.

Nah, just use reliable sources of news this being the news forum.

Don't like it? Well, post your rumours to the newspapers and if they print it then post it up here by all means.

This is a topical news forum not a rumour mongering site.

[MJP]

Many CSI LA reports are unsubstantiated so we can't use them on Thai Visa. If those reports become substantiated and reported by the papers or television, we can use that material. No problem.

We cannot post unsubstantiated rumours on the Thai Visa news forum. We can only report and discuss what the papers, television are reporting, or official government (UK as well) releases.

I wonder how far this road is taking us away from the 'freedom of speech'?

We are allowed to 'parrot' what the official Gov'ts officially publish? But not think for ourselves.

Am I in breach of your rules when I say things unsubstantiated:

- the 'samples' could have been tempered with;

- 'evidence' could have been tempered with;

- the missing persons who should have been suspects were allowed to escape;

- I believe the poor Burmese sods are the scapegoats;

- the investigators lost all credibility in the eyes of many Thais and non Thais;

In short, am I a rumor monger subject to penalties?

Because 'rumors' are formed by such and similar unsubstantiated thoughts expressed by people.

If the answer is 'yes' - welcome to the 'Darkness at Noon' in the post 1984 era!

I hope this post is not found 'unrelated to the topic'.

No, unsubstantiated rumour is just that. Unsubstatiated.

Anyone could come up with any old theory. But when it's based on he said she said and I reckons, it's based on not very much at all.

Need the British police report for this to get sorted out.

[expat_4_life]

Many CSI LA reports are unsubstantiated so we can't use them on Thai Visa. If those reports become substantiated and reported by the papers or television, we can use that material. No problem.

We cannot post unsubstantiated rumours on the Thai Visa news forum. We can only report and discuss what the papers, television are reporting, or official government (UK as well) releases.

I wonder how far this road is taking us away from the 'freedom of speech'?

We are allowed to 'parrot' what the official Gov'ts officially publish? But not think for ourselves.

Am I in breach of your rules when I say things unsubstantiated:

- the 'samples' could have been tempered with;

- 'evidence' could have been tempered with;

- the missing persons who should have been suspects were allowed to escape;

- I believe the poor Burmese sods are the scapegoats;

- the investigators lost all credibility in the eyes of many Thais and non Thais;

In short, am I a rumor monger subject to penalties?

Because 'rumors' are formed by such and similar unsubstantiated thoughts expressed by people.

If the answer is 'yes' - welcome to the 'Darkness at Noon' in the post 1984 era!

I hope this post is not found 'unrelated to the topic'.

No, unsubstantiated rumour is just that. Unsubstatiated.

Anyone could come up with any old theory. But when it's based on he said she said and I reckons, it's based on not very much at all.

Need the British police report for this to get sorted out.

Take it easy on the mods, difficult job at best .... me thinks they are doing a fine job here.

Unmentioned by MJP is the tightrope they walk especially in such a controversial case. Are you

unaware of the criminal defamation and computer crime laws here? If so take a look at recent

cases involving foreigners, notably, Andy Hall, AD and one of the Phuket online news sources.

With the influential family vowing to sue sources of accusatory statements on social media, TV

has every right to draw a few lines on what they consider proper. It would be seriously imprudent

of them not to do so.

Edited October 31, 2014 by expat_4_life

[BngkkB]

No slander, no false accusation. Here is a link to an interesting Q & A about forensic DNA testing:

http://www.esr.cri.nz/competencies/forensicscience/dna/Pages/DNAfaq.aspx

Maybe a little background information on Forensic DNA testing will help people to understand what is going on and how tough of a job it really is. Especially how long it takes to get results of a forensic DNA test. I think the police are doing a great job despite all the hurdles they have encountered. It showed a well greased machine to be able to take DNA samples and have final results back so quickly.

[wilcopops]

Wow..

Now it is sakdina? Please explain how this applies in a case that would cause damage to someone of higher "na"?

Edit - specifically the damage done to people much higher.

Like top echelon police. The PM etc

who says it does?

traditionally the testimony of those of higher Na hold more weight than the lower ranks....it was part of the Thai legal system. High/low na of accused and perpetrator affected the penalties imposed and the judgements made.

Edited October 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[wilcopops]

No slander, no false accusation. Here is a link to an interesting Q & A about forensic DNA testing:

http://www.esr.cri.nz/competencies/forensicscience/dna/Pages/DNAfaq.aspx

Maybe a little background information on Forensic DNA testing will help people to understand what is going on and how tough of a job it really is. Especially how long it takes to get results of a forensic DNA test. I think the police are doing a great job despite all the hurdles they have encountered. It showed a well greased machine to be able to take DNA samples and have final results back so quickly.

certainly a well "greased" machine!

[jdinasia]

Wow..

Now it is sakdina? Please explain how this applies in a case that would cause damage to someone of higher "na"?

Edit - specifically the damage done to people much higher.

Like top echelon police. The PM etc

who says it does?

traditionally the testimony of those of higher Na hold more weight than the lower ranks....it was part of the Thai legal system. High/low na of accused and perpetrator affected the penalties imposed and the judgements made.

You are missing the point. When the actions of people lower than you make you look bad....

[jdinasia]

I spoke to soon. Welcome in. Without opposition there is no debate. Without debate there will be no conclusion. As much as it pains me to say I'm glad one of you is here to stir things up and provide stimulus.

Back to back meetings in the morning, but I will do my best to point out the lies and inconsistencies from the tin foil hat brigade.

You do realize that most of them have put you on their ignore list. So you are only talking to a few here.

But please blabber on, we are part of the tin foil hat brigade and you belongn to the corrupt and bought brigade. All is well...

A few years ago it was possible to have interesting and educated exchanges of ideas here, but now this forum has truly gone to the dogs.

Yeppers, way too many people that think flaming is acceptable..most are quite new

Perhaps if you followed suits and stopped calling rumor mongerers as you don't have any substantial evidence to prove people otherwise or do you have a contact inside the RTP because it's just like everything else... Speculations and assumptions.

The investigation is either very sloppily done which could be possible or a cover up but writing the wrong date in the autopsy report shows that the people involved are neither reliable or professional.

I got the term rumor mongering from the TVF position.

If it is a conspiracy theory, it is by definition rumor mongering to spread it.

[boomerangutang]

Maybe a little background information on Forensic DNA testing will help people to understand what is going on and how tough of a job it really is. Especially how long it takes to get results of a forensic DNA test. I think the police are doing a great job despite all the hurdles they have encountered. It showed a well greased machine to be able to take DNA samples and have final results back so quickly.

I wish I could agree about your opinion; "police are doing a great job." But I can't, for several reasons. Regarding DNA: It's not so much the testing which is suspect, IT'S HOW THE RESULTS MAY BE GETTING SKEWED. In other words, if the police (who hold the DNA results) want to skew the labels on the samples, it's not hard to do. All they'd have to do to get the results we've been seeing thus far, is make a photocopy of the Burmese boys' DNA and label it as 'DNA taken from the female victim.' Doing that would implicate the Burmese and also clear Nomsod from having a match, which could explain why he and Thai officialdom were so confident yesterday, that his DNA would not match the victim.

We've all (except perhaps JD and JTJ and police brass and the headman's family) been pleading for independent non-Thai DNA verification. Until we get that, the DNA trail is suspect. Ms Porntip said much the same recently.

I got the term rumor mongering from the TVF position.

If it is a conspiracy theory, it is by definition rumor mongering to spread it.

You and JTJ have been tossing those terms; 'rumor mongoring' or 'conspiracy theory' ...like crows in a bird bath. It's subjective. If someone tells me, "it looks like it will rain" I could call that 'rumor mongering'

If someone says; "Wall Street bankers are sly" I could call that 'conspiracy theory'.

More realistically, the people offering opinions on social media about this crime, are usually concerned about justice, and are doing what our species often does: putting forth opinions, and making suggestions about how the investigation could be improved. There are some posters, like JD and JTJ who get annoyingly repetitive (with their constant accusations of others using the phrases; 'rumor mongoring' and 'conspiracy theory') , but most of us tolerate that in the interest of allowing varying opinions.

Edited October 31, 2014 by boomerangutang

[Thai at Heart]

JOC, on 29 Oct 2014 - 11:14, said:

harleyclarkey, on 29 Oct 2014 - 10:57, said:

I really hope this brings and end to all the speculation. This should be conclusive.

It seems that the unfortunate woman was raped before being brutally murdered. If so this is where the DNA sample of the perpetrator(s) will come from.

I doubt if the Myanmar guys "fluids" can be placed after the event.

I also doubt the British police will allow any sample to be analysed outside their control. Otherwise why bother?

Allow me a stupid question!!

Would there any difference in the DNA tested from fluids, skin or hair??

What I mean is, would it be possible to get a DNA swab from the suspects saliver and claim it was retrived from the sperm found in the victim??

DNA is DNA (i.e. the same) wherever it is taken from, even from bones. Experts can establish the familial relationships of 4,000 year old Egyptian skeletons through DNA from the bones. It's how it is tested and compared which is important.

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

By international law and convention the bodies should be embalmed. Someone shit experience pointer this out on another thread.

It almost shows the requirement for the embassies to have sampling kits for DNA available to attempt to keep the police honest.

I wonder if legally they can request or take their own samples.

[mikiea]

Why "allow" in quotes?

[mikiea]

yea.... and who is "we" you must understand you are not trusted, (who ever we "is") dam double speak would do nasty ol bill clinton proud :-)

[boomerangutang]

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

[jdinasia]

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

They have not pled guilty. They confessed.

[boomerangutang]

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

They have not pled guilty. They confessed.

boy, you are a prickly pear. Good thing we're not married.

[IslandLover]

boomerangutang, on 31 Oct 2014 - 12:48, said:boomerangutang, on 31 Oct 2014 - 12:48, said:

IslandLover, on 29 Oct 2014 - 18:43, said:IslandLover, on 29 Oct 2014 - 18:43, said:

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

All that was said by the BBC was that post-mortem(s) had been carried out by a Home Office pathologist, which would indicate full forensic tests given the nature of this crime. I'm not sure if this meant just for Hannah, or also for David. I can't find the article now on the BBC website so I can't check it. I read about it just before Hannah's funeral a few weeks back. Nothing further has been said in the British press so I guess we will have to wait for the inquest.

Just to be specific a "Home Office" (government) pathogist is used in serious crimes, and they are forensic specialists.

Edited October 31, 2014 by IslandLover

[jdinasia]

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

They have not pled guilty. They confessed.

boy, you are a prickly pear. Good thing we're not married.

They have yet to be charged. A plea is entered in court. The report from the HRC rep was that they denied murder but admitted to rape. Later they officially recanted.

The judges will weigh the merits of the confessions against the recantation if the case goes to trial.

[jdinasia]

boomerangutang, on 31 Oct 2014 - 12:48, said:

IslandLover, on 29 Oct 2014 - 18:43, said:

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

All that was said by the BBC was that post-mortem(s) had been carried out by a Home Office pathologist, which would indicate full forensic tests given the nature of this crime. I'm not sure if this meant just for Hannah, or also for David. I can't find the article now on the BBC website so I can't check it. I read about it just before Hannah's funeral a few weeks back. Nothing further has been said in the British press so I guess we will have to wait for the inquest.

Did they mention if the corpses had been embalmed?

[Number 3]

Having tried to read and digest all the news and postings on this case I've come to the conclusion that these 2 Myanmar guys may have been selected to be scapegoats at a very early stage in the chain of events. It seems everyone knew they played guitar, smoked, drank beer and frequented the beach in close proximity to where the bodies were found. They were also bar workers and illegal immigrants who fled the police when they played takraw with their friends. They were an easy target for a 'frame up' especially if the local cop/bag man was involved. When I watched the re-enactment charade they came across as being in a total daze, if not in a state of shock to the extent they had to be 'directed' by the RTP. I'll eat 'humble pie' if I'm wrong, but I think I'll be eating fried rice instead when this whole unsavoury casee is solved.

This is what I don't understand. Why weren't they the first to be dna tested if they were hot suspects? Yet their results supposedly cam several weeks after the murder. They also appear to be in the first batch who were tested, and deemed cleared - this was roughly 200 persons. Surely they were in that first group. Then their dna is supposedly found positive in world record time (were they tested again, and somehow found positive the second time. No wonder the prosecutors have a major headache!

That extremely inconvenient photo showing at least one of the Burmese suspects and the third Burmese "star witness" (fail) in the early lines to get DNA-tested suggests they were tested. They were smiling unworried in the queue and they stuck around the island thereafter. I expect also that any and all staff of the vital bar would have been prioritised for testing when the police were so focused on that bar on and around Sep 24.

Another great news story from the early days (after they'd given up accusing farang friends of homosexual jealousy and placing stained pants in the wrong luggage, but before they were very briefly pursuing the headman's son) was the following article about 3 Burmese guys detained and suspected purely because they'd been on the beach. A subsequent report cleared and freed them because their DNA did not match. Would be great to know if these are the very same 3 Burmese guys that the police circled back to a few weeks later under Plan D or E:

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/surat-police-detain-three-myanmar-workers-questioning-connection-britons-murder/

Would indeed, as we were advised early on there was "a" group on the beach singing and strumming their guitar.

Curiouser and curiouser.

[Dogmatix]

For all those asking again, yes, post-mortems were carried out on Hannah, and presumably David, as soon as the bodies were returned to the U.K., by a "Home Office" pathologist no less (source: BBC News), in other words, a forensic specialist. I have no idea whether the bodies were embalmed or not before repatriation, or what effect that would have had on these 2nd post-mortems, as there has been no official statement on this.

I realize that it's considered routine to do a forensic investigation of Brit Subjects when (or just before) they're returned to Britain. Did the BBC News mention it as being 'protocol' (should happen, in a general sense) or whether it specifically took place re; this Ko Tao crime? It's key to these many allegations of Thai police skewing DNA evidence. If Brit authorities have DNA results, then I think they should announce it sooner than later. If it's put off (some say until January), then it might be too late to save the Burmese 2, who I still think are scapegoats.

Note: when they pleaded guilty on the 1st day they were held, they were probably told something like, "you plead guilty and you'll get a prison sentence. If you plead not-guilty, and we find you guilty in court, you're going to get the death penalty." Such coersive talk (to plead guilty) is common in such scenarios, and could explain why the Burmese were reluctant, even when they had lawyers, to retract their forced confessions.

They have not pled guilty. They confessed.

It's obligatory for an inquest and a post mortem when bodies of residents of England and Wales are returned to the UK, if they died in suspicious circumstances. Their families may also request a British police inquiry into the circumstances surrounding their deaths but this must take place in the UK, if authorities in the country the murder took place don't allow British police to investigate there (many European countries cooperate on this). This doesn't apply in Scotland and Northern Ireland, nor does it apply in Jersey where David is from, as they are not strictly speaking British. However, Jersey has its own laws which may be similar and certainly it applies in Hannah's case. In Thailand the families of murder and rape victims are entitled to request an independent investigation by the DSI which could order new forensic tests to be done by the Khunying Pornthip's forensic team which is also under the Ministry of Justice, but I don't know, if this still applies once the case is under the jurisdiction of the court, once the police have wrapped up their investigation. Also it is now up to the DSI's board to decide whether to accept cases or not after the latest revamp of their rules following several years of political involvement when the DSI chief could order investigations by himself.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Dogmatix

[TheRealTruth]

The biggest problem that Westerners have with understanding the situation, is to ever believe that there is any real interest in the law, or even justice. Like many other multi-billion dollar companies, employing thousands, where the only thing that matters is the bottom line and the people at the very top will do anything to protect their bottom line, no matter how dirty things get at the lowest levels.

Of course the really dirty jobs have to be outsourced, just like those operating using slave labour, so there can be no direct connection back to the major players, but they in turn are protected and that is why no matter how much pressure is ever applied from the West, nothing will ever really change.

Once you understand human nature, without any form of conscience, then you can understand why brutal murders will continue to go unsolved and why the slave trade is both alive and flourishing.

In my opinion, the lowest of the absolute low, are the people who try to defend this type of regime.

[IslandLover]

Dogmatix, on 31 Oct 2014 - 21:14, said:Dogmatix, on 31 Oct 2014 - 21:14, said:

It's obligatory for an inquest and a post mortem when bodies of residents of England and Wales are returned to the UK, if they died in suspicious circumstances. Their families may also request a British police inquiry into the circumstances surrounding their deaths but this must take place in the UK, if authorities in the country the murder took place don't allow British police to investigate there (many European countries cooperate on this). This doesn't apply in Scotland and Northern Ireland, nor does it apply in Jersey where David is from, as they are not strictly speaking British. However, Jersey has its own laws which may be similar and certainly it applies in Hannah's case. In Thailand the families of murder and rape victims are entitled to request an independent investigation by the DSI which could order new forensic tests to be done by the Khunying Pornthip's forensic team which is also under the Ministry of Justice, but I don't know, if this still applies once the case is under the jurisdiction of the court, once the police have wrapped up their investigation. Also it is now up to the DSI's board to decide whether to accept cases or not after the latest revamp of their rules following several years of political involvement when the DSI chief could order investigations by himself.

You are not quite right in some of what you say. Scotland and Northern Ireland are as much a part of the United Kingdom as England and Wales but when it comes to the law, there are some differences. Scotland and Northern Ireland, because of a certain amount of devolution, have their own laws. England and Wales are lumped together and share the same legal system. Jersey, although part of the Channel Islands, is a separate entity from all the others, legally speaking, and in other ways. David Miller was a Jersey resident and as such was subject to their laws. Hannah Witheridge was from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, England and was subject to the laws of England and Wales.

Regardless of what the law for England and Wales states about repatriation, post-mortems and investigations of deaths in suspicious circumstances abroad, the point I made was that Hannah's post-mortem was carried out by a Home Office pathologist, i.e. a forensic specialist, who will be more thorough than an ordinary pathologist. I don't know what happened with David because he will come under Jersey law. I have not seen anything mentioned about David's post-mortem in the British press and his inquest may well be separate from Hannah's.

Edited October 31, 2014 by IslandLover

[JLCrab]

The biggest problem that Westerners have with understanding the situation, is to ever believe that there is any real interest in the law, or even justice. Like many other multi-billion dollar companies, employing thousands, where the only thing that matters is the bottom line and the people at the very top will do anything to protect their bottom line, no matter how dirty things get at the lowest levels.

Of course the really dirty jobs have to be outsourced, just like those operating using slave labour, so there can be no direct connection back to the major players, but they in turn are protected and that is why no matter how much pressure is ever applied from the West, nothing will ever really change.

Once you understand human nature, without any form of conscience, then you can understand why brutal murders will continue to go unsolved and why the slave trade is both alive and flourishing.

In my opinion, the lowest of the absolute low, are the people who try to defend this type of regime.

Once you understand human nature ... Thank you ... it is nice to have the contribution of someone who understands human nature.

[phuketandsee]

The biggest problem that Westerners have with understanding the situation, is to ever believe that there is any real interest in the law, or even justice. Like many other multi-billion dollar companies, employing thousands, where the only thing that matters is the bottom line and the people at the very top will do anything to protect their bottom line, no matter how dirty things get at the lowest levels.

Of course the really dirty jobs have to be outsourced, just like those operating using slave labour, so there can be no direct connection back to the major players, but they in turn are protected and that is why no matter how much pressure is ever applied from the West, nothing will ever really change.

Once you understand human nature, without any form of conscience, then you can understand why brutal murders will continue to go unsolved and why the slave trade is both alive and flourishing.

In my opinion, the lowest of the absolute low, are the people who try to defend this type of regime.

A brilliant summation of the whole stinking edifice - and in your first post sir (or madame). Welcome.

You are right about nothing changing with pressure from the outside. It will only change from the inside and that change is coming soon, ironically probably expedited by the coup. It may even be advanced by this case. If so perhaps it will in time bring a small measure of comfort to the victims family.

The big question is how nasty the change will be.

Tick - tock

Edited November 1, 2014 by phuketandsee