DNA results from Ko Tao village head’s son don't match traces on slain British tourists

[thailandchilli]

I think most people in society accept the fact that when evidence is tampered with and false information is given to hide the people who committed this crime, then whether thats done now, in the future or immediately after the crime pales into insignificance. Those who refuse to take this as credible even when its stated from an official source are ignorant or part of the conspiracy to hide the truth, no other reason is available.

It would be better to know exactly what evidence was tampered with, DNA, CCTV, phones, blood, fingerprints on the hoe there are so many possibilities, the missing weapon? And the false information given to divert attention. One can only speculate, but its a damning statement and a direct admission from the RTP that an attempted coverup was in progress from the start.

If the case moves on then thats irrelevant, the acts of the cover up have already been done and those responsible should be held accountable. The implications can lead to any number of suspects

Edited November 25, 2014 by thailandchilli

[DennisF]

spot on.

[JLCrab]

I will still say that the people own and who run the 4 & 5 star resorts on Koh Tao would not be happy knowing that clan-type persons are responsible for the murders and the case is yet to be resolved.

which resorts are those?

and, are they not a part of the same "mafia?"

They have never been mentioned as having the same ownership but forget that one. This case -- if it ever comes to trial regardless of who is charged -- will be tried in the Surathani Provincial court on Koh Samui. Do you really think the billionaire hotel operators on Samui -- who would be beholden to the same court in a criminal or civil matter should such arise -- would be happy to know that such court could be manipulated by a bungalow operator on Koh Tao?

I am happy you have begun to debate, you have some interesting viewpoints.

The hotels on the island, 1 star or do not own the land they are on and probably pay an annual lease fee to one of the families as they are the only people who can lease out land.

Not sure which hotels you are referring to but the up[per market hotels have absent shareholders and I know you know how corporate entities are set up in Thailand so the owners may be between a rock and a hard place.

It makes no difference who owns the land -- some of these people have spent tens of millions of dollars developing those properties and have influence in Koh Samui, at the Provincial level, and nationally. They are not going to be jerked around on their leases just because they pressure those authorities ex-Koh Tao to resolve this case if that's where all the evidence points.

[jdinasia]

And again, they were looking at Burmese. Only some DNA had been tested. Etc

and again whats that got to do with the evidence that was destroyed by the Thai's to divert attention to those who were really involved

Your statement "evidence that was destroyed by the Thais "

When the actual statement was "tried to destroy".

This conspiracy theory predicated on leaving out the word "tried"

Note that all of this was later proven wrong when he was cleared by alibi.

[DennisF]

@ JLCrab

I would have come to the same conclusion other than the subliminal support the people of interest have received from someone much higher than the provincial level.

He is a monk, allegedly.

Had a quick visit to the island at the height of the 'interest' in his possible subordinate, whose son refers to him as uncle.

It's a minefield!

[SteveFong]

you mean,

False Alibi

this case isn't over

[catsanddogs]

And again, they were looking at Burmese. Only some DNA had been tested. Etc

and again whats that got to do with the evidence that was destroyed by the Thai's to divert attention to those who were really involved

Your statement "evidence that was destroyed by the Thais "

When the actual statement was "tried to destroy".

This conspiracy theory predicated on leaving out the word "tried"

Note that all of this was later proven wrong when he was cleared by alibi.

Which 'he' are you referring to here please JD?

[JLCrab]

@ JLCrab

I would have come to the same conclusion other than the subliminal support the people of interest have received from someone much higher than the provincial level.

He is a monk, allegedly.

Had a quick visit to the island at the height of the 'interest' in his possible subordinate, whose son refers to him as uncle.

It's a minefield!

I don't care who is powerful monk or otherwise -- there is always someone more powerful when these types of monies are at stake.

[SteveFong]

forgot about Uncle Sutep

[DennisF]

@ JLCrab

I would have come to the same conclusion other than the subliminal support the people of interest have received from someone much higher than the provincial level.

He is a monk, allegedly.

Had a quick visit to the island at the height of the 'interest' in his possible subordinate, whose son refers to him as uncle.

It's a minefield!

I don't care who is powerful monk or otherwise -- there is always someone more powerful when these types of monies are at stake.

I hear where you are coming from and could not agree more.

I am trying to be as subtle as possible here:

This orange clad individual has a direct line and it does not get any higher.

He protects his down-line.

A billion dollars would make no difference.

I hope not as clear as mud!

[SteveFong]

@ JLCrab

I would have come to the same conclusion other than the subliminal support the people of interest have received from someone much higher than the provincial level.

He is a monk, allegedly.

Had a quick visit to the island at the height of the 'interest' in his possible subordinate, whose son refers to him as uncle.

It's a minefield!

I don't care who is powerful monk or otherwise -- there is always someone more powerful when these types of monies are at stake.

[JLCrab]

@ JLCrab

I would have come to the same conclusion other than the subliminal support the people of interest have received from someone much higher than the provincial level.

He is a monk, allegedly.

Had a quick visit to the island at the height of the 'interest' in his possible subordinate, whose son refers to him as uncle.

It's a minefield!

I don't care who is powerful monk or otherwise -- there is always someone more powerful when these types of monies are at stake.

I hear where you are coming from and could not agree more.

I am trying to be as subtle as possible here:

This orange clad individual has a direct line and it does not get any higher.

He protects his down-line.

A billion dollars would make no difference.

I hope not as clear as mud!

So what you are saying I guess is that even if Suthep knows for sure that a KT clan member committed the murders he will scuttle any prosecution because he is a friend-of-the family?

[boomerangutang]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

[jdinasia]

Suthep doesn't have the juice right now. He is on the outside looking in, and relying on the robes to keep him safe (that's the cynical view)

The less cynical view is that he is studying the Damma and making merit for past actions

[JLCrab]

... to which I would add if you can't make a case on the Burmese in custody then make a case on somebody else and I don't care how connected they might be.

[DennisF]

@JLCrab

I think friend-of-the-family is not exactly the term I would use.

The family in question have been loyal and active supporters, politically, of the mad monk

and it is said they are close.

More than that would be defamation but, you get the gist, I'm sure.

[boomerangutang]

Suthep doesn't have the juice right now. He is on the outside looking in, and relying on the robes to keep him safe (that's the cynical view)

The less cynical view is that he is studying the Damma and making merit for past actions

Then how do you explain, dressed in monk's robes, him recently pinning a citation on a lead cop of the investigation. It looks like he wants to influence the proceedings, does it not?

[DennisF]

... to which I would add if you can't make a case on the Burmese in custody then make a case on somebody else and I don't care how connected they might be.

Of course the resort/hotel owners do not care who gets done, mas long as someone does and it dies down.

Just after the coup a statement made by Suthep waqs in the national news, it was a conversation he said he had with

our dear leader.

Our dear leader told him (quote from memory)

'You can go home now, Khun Suthep, we will carry on now, (or take over now, or take it from here)'. Anyone can find the direct quote, please amend.

Political affiliations obvious since, to the best of my knowledge, that statement has never been denied (or confirmed) by the dear leader.

[jdinasia]

Suthep doesn't have the juice right now. He is on the outside looking in, and relying on the robes to keep him safe (that's the cynical view)

The less cynical view is that he is studying the Damma and making merit for past actions

Then how do you explain, dressed in monk's robes, him recently pinning a citation on a lead cop of the investigation. It looks like he wants to influence the proceedings, does it not?

It "looks like"...

Perhaps to people who don't know much about Surat Thani it might look like that.

[jdinasia]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

You are aware that "it looks like" "message was something like" are just the build up to a straw man fallacy, right?

[DennisF]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

Actually, it was a bit more than something like.

He was reported (in the press) as saying that he had told the RTP to solve this case quickly so tourists would feel safe again.

It was just before the arrests and his complete (perfect) investigation statement.

Sometime after the bikini statement and days prior to the taxi driver complaining he had been offered a bribe to be a witness.

[thailandchilli]

All eyes on Samui court 2mrw. Will judge authorize temporarily release on bail of Zaw Lin/Wai Phyo, guaranteed by Myanmar embassy officials?

https://twitter.com/Atomicalandy

Things may be starting to happen tomorrow

If you believe in God, karma, justice or power of good, then we should all spare a thought tonight for the scapegoats and the victims families

Edited November 25, 2014 by thailandchilli

[boomerangutang]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

You are aware that "it looks like" "message was something like" are just the build up to a straw man fallacy, right?

You never miss a chance to jump on something, do you. The word 'shrill' comes to mind. If I were to to state things emphatically, then you'd immediately jump up and down saying either, 'show me the press source! No, not the social media source, because that's 100% conspiracy' ...or you might make a thinly-veiled hint that I could be liable for defamation lawsuit.

Preceding statements with 'it looks like' or 'something like' is framing it as a supposition or a conditional statement. Thai-Visa is a forum which closely resembles a discussion using text. In blogs and discussions, people make points using different sentence structure, depending on the situation. Someone once told me that eating bananas makes a person mellow. Methinks you need to eat some bananas.

[thailandchilli]

Here's a great place for those who find it a little challenging to debate issues and instead opt for crying for source, legal gobbledygook from wiki or two phrase replies http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=101&s=84a9f5c6811416f84d55e31445eaf109

Edited November 25, 2014 by thailandchilli

[changnaam]

I hope that tomorrow they are released, at least on bail. It is pretty obvious the evidence is shaky to say the least. If the had real evidence then this would have been put to bed long ago

[jdinasia]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

You are aware that "it looks like" "message was something like" are just the build up to a straw man fallacy, right?

You never miss a chance to jump on something, do you. The word 'shrill' comes to mind. If I were to to state things emphatically, then you'd immediately jump up and down saying either, 'show me the press source! No, not the social media source, because that's 100% conspiracy' ...or you might make a thinly-veiled hint that I could be liable for defamation lawsuit.

Preceding statements with 'it looks like' or 'something like' is framing it as a supposition or a conditional statement. Thai-Visa is a forum which closely resembles a discussion using text. In blogs and discussions, people make points using different sentence structure, depending on the situation. Someone once told me that eating bananas makes a person mellow. Methinks you need to eat some bananas.

No

It is semantically the same as using "what he is basically saying is" to then change the entire meaning of what was said.

[chotthee]

I wondered if the village chief paid one of the now arrested CIB police.

He would be in deep shit if he did.

[boomerangutang]

If we want to discuss the big shot resort owners on Samui. I see them as continuing to lay low and hope this blows over a.s.a.p. They probably don't much care who gets convicted or let off, as their priorities are their families and their revenue. That's similar to how it appears the PM oversees things. I imagine when he appointed a replacement head cop to take over the investigation, 2 weeks after the crime (and right after a person came forward who claimed he was offered payment by cops to give false witness testimony) - the message from the PM was likely something like: 'this drawn out investigation is awful for image and tourist numbers. Wrap it up as soon as possible. I don't care and don't want to know if you pull in some Burmese scapegoats, just get a confession, a conviction, and put this whole mess behind us!'

You are aware that "it looks like" "message was something like" are just the build up to a straw man fallacy, right?

You never miss a chance to jump on something, do you. The word 'shrill' comes to mind. If I were to to state things emphatically, then you'd immediately jump up and down saying either, 'show me the press source! No, not the social media source, because that's 100% conspiracy' ...or you might make a thinly-veiled hint that I could be liable for defamation lawsuit.

Preceding statements with 'it looks like' or 'something like' is framing it as a supposition or a conditional statement. Thai-Visa is a forum which closely resembles a discussion using text. In blogs and discussions, people make points using different sentence structure, depending on the situation. Someone once told me that eating bananas makes a person mellow. Methinks you need to eat some bananas.

No

It is semantically the same as using "what he is basically saying is" to then change the entire meaning of what was said.

a half dozen posts earlier, you'll see that DennisF not only backs what I put forth (supported by earlier press release), but goes a few steps further. Because I didn't have the exact phrase of what the PM said, I simply paraphrased it and, it turns out, I got it right. Give it a break, jd. You're so desperate to shield the RTP and the headman's people that you've painted yourself in to a corner, and it's obvious you're uncomfortable being there.

[IslandLover]

thailandchilli, on 25 Nov 2014 - 11:43, said:

I think most people in society accept the fact that when evidence is tampered with and false information is given to hide the people who committed this crime, then whether thats done now, in the future or immediately after the crime pales into insignificance. Those who refuse to take this as credible even when its stated from an official source are ignorant or part of the conspiracy to hide the truth, no other reason is available.

It would be better to know exactly what evidence was tampered with, DNA, CCTV, phones, blood, fingerprints on the hoe there are so many possibilities, the missing weapon? And the false information given to divert attention. One can only speculate, but its a damning statement and a direct admission from the RTP that an attempted coverup was in progress from the start.

If the case moves on then thats irrelevant, the acts of the cover up have already been done and those responsible should be held accountable. The implications can lead to any number of suspects

It would be better to know exactly what evidence was tampered with, DNA, CCTV, phones, blood, fingerprints on the hoe there are so many possibilities, the missing weapon? And the false information given to divert attention. One can only speculate, but its a damning statement and a direct admission from the RTP that an attempted coverup was in progress from the start.

Agreed, but I don't think we're ever going to learn the truth

[jdinasia]

thailandchilli, on 25 Nov 2014 - 11:43, said:

I think most people in society accept the fact that when evidence is tampered with and false information is given to hide the people who committed this crime, then whether thats done now, in the future or immediately after the crime pales into insignificance. Those who refuse to take this as credible even when its stated from an official source are ignorant or part of the conspiracy to hide the truth, no other reason is available.

It would be better to know exactly what evidence was tampered with, DNA, CCTV, phones, blood, fingerprints on the hoe there are so many possibilities, the missing weapon? And the false information given to divert attention. One can only speculate, but its a damning statement and a direct admission from the RTP that an attempted coverup was in progress from the start.

If the case moves on then thats irrelevant, the acts of the cover up have already been done and those responsible should be held accountable. The implications can lead to any number of suspects

It would be better to know exactly what evidence was tampered with, DNA, CCTV, phones, blood, fingerprints on the hoe there are so many possibilities, the missing weapon? And the false information given to divert attention. One can only speculate, but its a damning statement and a direct admission from the RTP that an attempted coverup was in progress from the start.

Agreed, but I don't think we're ever going to learn the truth

And this is why cherry picking, and misquoted material matters. "tried" is a far cry from"destroyed"