Police coy over new probe into Koh Tao murders

[thailandchilli]

Cameron said:

But said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Notice, not has been... diplocrap or a mistake??

Who knows.

Does that mean Cameron now officially joins the ranks of the conspiracy theorists?? (according to the J's of course)

[phuketandsee]

"But (Cameron) said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Sounds like he doesn't think they have found the right guys yet.

[boomerangutang]

So of the persons mentioned in Post #369 not one of those categories of persons other than the criminals themselves would have any information that would be admissible in a US court of law unless the criminals themselves specifically told such persons that they did it and even that would be questionable.

Your comment is absolutely wrong. All of these persons could potentially have information that would be admissible.

JL Crab's comment is also off-base because he was responding (sounding like a defense attorney) to my assertion that there are people who know things - yet who aren't talking. I didn't say they 'knew things' just from word-of-mouth or gossip. Witnesses can know things from more reliable evidence, such as watching someone burying some bloody clothes behind a house or whatever.

Also, this is not the US or UK legal system at work here. This is Thailand. Things are more subjective here. This is a country where everyone believes in ghosts and other hocus pocus (granted, one could say similar about Americans and Brits, particularly during infancy). There's no law against 'harboring a criminal' and bribing officials is accepted as the norm. I wouldn't dougt Thailand has different laws re; being 'an accomplice to a crime.' In Thailand, being drunk and/or from a rich well-heeled family is useful for being excused from being found guilty of a crime. Not so in the US or UK.

[Soutpeel]

Cameron said:

But said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Notice, not has been... diplocrap or a mistake??

Who knows.

Does that mean Cameron now officially joins the ranks of the conspiracy theorists?? (according to the J's of course)

Maybe the RTP glee club needs to send him an email to remind him about Thailand's defamation/computer laws...

[BoristheBlade]

The people who did this were "found" on the first day, the police did not have far to look did they?....stood right in front of them!! When his accomplices were also quickly identified...bang ...the investigation took a sudden and dramatic change of direction....said 3 suspects released and patsys sought.... Burmese arrested, tortured and Charged....

The cunning plan has failed, one, social media, and Thai social media at that, won't let the case go away. Two, the total incompetence of the set up....a joke. 3, British Government got involved and this WILL have serious implications

The conclusion the Burmese will be released , a token investigation launched, then nothing,

Results, 3 murderers and rapists on the loose.

Conclusion,,,,if you were attractive, female, caucasian would you want to go anywhere near that Island?

[jdinasia]

DarloKnight, on 07 Nov 2014 - 10:37, said:

jdinasia, on 07 Nov 2014 - 10:27, said:

DarloKnight, on 07 Nov 2014 - 09:11, said:

Thank you for reply, there is a reason they have not gave an interview it's either out of respect and/or they have been asked not to by uk authorities.

Nobody even people formerly accused have given an interview.

How does respect weigh into it? What authority would the UK government have to request them not to tell their stories?

There are many more reasons that they would not talk. One is that they have nothing to add.

Respect for the victims family!

The travelling companions of Hannah and David will have been told by the British authorities not to give a statement to the press or anybody else until the time is right, which I expect will be at, or after the inquest. Given that this is an ongoing murder investigation, it's perfectly understandable.

I simply don't buy that.

I will explain at length later, but the UK authorities Have no standing nor valid reason to tell the Wares or the friends of the victims to not exercise their right to free speech.

[Bleacher Bum East]

Cameron said:

But said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Notice, not has been... diplocrap or a mistake??

Who knows.

It will not be a mistake, unlike officials Thailand, who spout verbal diarrhea all the time and put their foot in it, the politicians in the UK are very careful what is said or put in print, the words are "crafted"

diplocrap most likely, but could also be a veiled reference suggesting the RTP are full of sh*t we know it, but cant be seen to interfering in a police investigation in another country...

and the fact is they cant interfere..

Any time a public official (or anybody for that matter) uses a "but" following a statement that begins with "obviously", it should (and was probably intended to) raise antennas.

Parsing the second sentence, you get two separate statements:

1) We should do what we can to help, and

2) We should do what we can to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.

The waterfall of related questions this begs are:

How will the British government interpret what would constitute "interference" in the Thai judicial system in this particular case?

What steps does the British government believe it can take to "ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done" within the parameters of the answer to the first question?

What steps will the British government actually take within the parameters of the answers to the last two questions?

BTW it's interesting that Cameron's statement closely tracks the statement made by Hannah's family:

"As a family we hope that the right people are found and brought to justice," said the statement.

[Soutpeel]

I simply don't buy that.

I will explain at length later, but the UK authorities Have no standing nor valid reason to tell the Wares or the friends of the victims to not exercise their right to free speech.

The British authorities will have ADVISED all not to make statements at this point, certainly if they have made official statements to the UK police or authorities and second thing to consider is the tabloid press in the UK, if any have been given "exclusive" rights to the stories, there will certainly be an agreement not to make public statements at this point.

So yes there are valid and standing reasons why what the people involved haven't made public statements as yet

an example of British official advise can been seen the case of the guy who was apparently chased by the mafia on KT ended up in the 7/11 and started posting on FB or twitter or what ever its was,

I believe it was the British authorities or members of the BE, who told him to stop posting and delete the comments.

[Mackie]

It's really not a nuclear science what needs to be done to clear up lingering doubts. The UK government should officially request a permission to take DNA samples from imprisoned suspects so the British forensic team could carry out an independent DNA test. It would give Royal Thai police an opportunity to repair their reputation and prove many of us here wrong.

[BoristheBlade]

The British won't make any statement until the Thai courts make there move, hence the delay in court proceedings.

The British may well be in breach of International Law if they were to release their findings before a trial,

They the British will wait for the Thai authorities to commit to trial, wait for the verdict and act accordingly.

It's very true to say they can't affect the outcome of a Thai Trial.

But if they were to publish their report and it showed what they thought was a miscarriage of justice, the effect on Thailand's reputation would be catastrophic.

It would place the rulers of this country under intense investigation and speculation. Would the rulers of Thailand want that, and more importantly would they want their "activities" looked at in detail.

[Mooner]

I know this sounds harsh but I don't think the UK government care. Probably wouldn't of got involved if it wasn't for the petition.

I guess they probably feel its not worth rocking the boat for a couple of citizens,

[BoristheBlade]

Very true, especially with politicians involved.

But good politicians are opportunists, this has given David Cameron a chance to show some courage and conviction and all this with an election looming.

Added to the fact of huge public concern over the investigation, and lets not forget the many other mysterious deaths of British and Foreigners in Thailand.

As said politicians are opportunists , look at David Cameron's response and look at the response of the Thai Pm. The Thai PM had an opportunity to show his people that law for the rich and poor is the same....he has failed!

I know this sounds harsh but I don't think the UK government care. Probably wouldn't of got involved if it wasn't for the petition.

I guess they probably feel its not worth rocking the boat for a couple of citizens,

[Krenjai]

The British won't make any statement until the Thai courts make there move, hence the delay in court proceedings.

The British may well be in breach of International Law if they were to release their findings before a trial,

They the British will wait for the Thai authorities to commit to trial, wait for the verdict and act accordingly.

It's very true to say they can't affect the outcome of a Thai Trial.

But if they were to publish their report and it showed what they thought was a miscarriage of justice, the effect on Thailand's reputation would be catastrophic.

It would place the rulers of this country under intense investigation and speculation. Would the rulers of Thailand want that, and more importantly would they want their "activities" looked at in detail.

Very good post and totally agreed...... if the above is correct NOBODY will want this case to go to court.....that is why the 100% perfect investigation/case suddenly drops to 80% and has been sent back for a 5th time. The B2 WILL WALK and so it should be!

[Mackie]

Very true, especially with politicians involved.

But good politicians are opportunists, this has given David Cameron a chance to show some courage and conviction and all this with an election looming.

Added to the fact of huge public concern over the investigation, and lets not forget the many other mysterious deaths of British and Foreigners in Thailand.

As said politicians are opportunists , look at David Cameron's response and look at the response of the Thai Pm. The Thai PM had an opportunity to show his people that law for the rich and poor is the same....he has failed!

I have lived long enough to see someone implying that Cameron is a brave man and what's more implying that he cares about the poor. Absolute nonsense. The man holds the poor in contempt. Thai PM has nothing to do with actions of Thai Royal police. We all know where Thai Royal police heart lies and who has the biggest influence on them.

[BoristheBlade]

Your comments about Cameron are totally true, I hate the man with a passion. What I said about him is he is an opportunist, he does not have to believe in what he is doing, just that his actions will allow him to continue his political career.

Being seen as courageous does not make you courageous

Very true, especially with politicians involved.

But good politicians are opportunists, this has given David Cameron a chance to show some courage and conviction and all this with an election looming.

Added to the fact of huge public concern over the investigation, and lets not forget the many other mysterious deaths of British and Foreigners in Thailand.

As said politicians are opportunists , look at David Cameron's response and look at the response of the Thai Pm. The Thai PM had an opportunity to show his people that law for the rich and poor is the same....he has failed!

I have lived long enough to see someone implying that Cameron is a brave man and what's more implying that he cares about the poor. Absolute nonsense. The man holds the poor in contempt. Thai PM has nothing to do with actions of Thai Royal police. We all know where Thai Royal police heart lies and who has the biggest influence on them.

[stephen terry]

Article from BP today re the continuing incarceration of the B2. Bail was refused. They have been interviewed several times and continue to maintain they were not involved with the murders. Their lawyers say they are not allowed to talk to them and cannot prepare a defence while in prison.

So much for fairness and transparency. Makes me sick.

[thailandchilli]

I simply don't buy that.

I will explain at length later, but the UK authorities Have no standing nor valid reason to tell the Wares or the friends of the victims to not exercise their right to free speech.

The British authorities will have ADVISED all not to make statements at this point, certainly if they have made official statements to the UK police or authorities and second thing to consider is the tabloid press in the UK, if any have been given "exclusive" rights to the stories, there will certainly be an agreement not to make public statements at this point.

So yes there are valid and standing reasons why what the people involved haven't made public statements as yet

an example of British official advise can been seen the case of the guy who was apparently chased by the mafia on KT ended up in the 7/11 and started posting on FB or twitter or what ever its was,

I believe it was the British authorities or members of the BE, who told him to stop posting and delete the comments.

I would imagine that another reason could be that the inquest is not due until January, if asked by the police to not to speak openly about the matter, any friends or family would not do so out of pure respect. Nothing about the British stopping their rights to freedom of speech. Get real JD

[mojorison]

DarloKnight, on 07 Nov 2014 - 10:37, said:

How does respect weigh into it? What authority would the UK government have to request them not to tell their stories?

There are many more reasons that they would not talk. One is that they have nothing to add.

Respect for the victims family!

The travelling companions of Hannah and David will have been told by the British authorities not to give a statement to the press or anybody else until the time is right, which I expect will be at, or after the inquest. Given that this is an ongoing murder investigation, it's perfectly understandable.

I simply don't buy that.

I will explain at length later, but the UK authorities Have no standing nor valid reason to tell the Wares or the friends of the victims to not exercise their right to free speech.

Rubbish. They would simply say, "please don't say anything because it may compromise the integrity of the investigation."

[heyexile]

Cameron said:

But said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Notice, not has been... diplocrap or a mistake??

Who knows.

It will not be a mistake, unlike officials Thailand, who spout verbal diarrhea all the time and put their foot in it, the politicians in the UK are very careful what is said or put in print, the words are "crafted"

diplocrap most likely, but could also be a veiled reference suggesting the RTP are full of sh*t we know it, but cant be seen to interfering in a police investigation in another country...

and the fact is they cant interfere..

Any time a public official (or anybody for that matter) uses a "but" following a statement that begins with "obviously", it should (and was probably intended to) raise antennas.

Parsing the second sentence, you get two separate statements:

1) We should do what we can to help, and

2) We should do what we can to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.

The waterfall of related questions this begs are:

How will the British government interpret what would constitute "interference" in the Thai judicial system in this particular case?

What steps does the British government believe it can take to "ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done" within the parameters of the answer to the first question?

What steps will the British government actually take within the parameters of the answers to the last two questions?

BTW it's interesting that Cameron's statement closely tracks the statement made by Hannah's family:

"As a family we hope that the right people are found and brought to justice," said the statement.

Good analyses. I guess Thai authorities can also halt any unwanted Brit actions/enquiries at any time by saying you are "now interfering in Thailand`s judicial system. Desist. Go forth..."

Or are we just talking about what can be done back in uk?

[stephen terry]

I believe the prosecutor will indict the B2 because it's already been decided. There could be a succession of 'eye-witnesses' to state they saw the B2 on the beach, and more (drunk, high on drugs, making a nuisance of themselves, whatever). Actually I wouldn't be surprised if members of the headman's family are on this witness list. That could completely seal up the case. And nobody would do a damn thing to stop it happening.

Worrying, eh?

[Bleacher Bum East]

Cameron said:

But said: “Obviously we can’t interfere with another country’s judicial system, but we should do what we can to help, and to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.”

Notice, not has been... diplocrap or a mistake??

Who knows.

It will not be a mistake, unlike officials Thailand, who spout verbal diarrhea all the time and put their foot in it, the politicians in the UK are very careful what is said or put in print, the words are "crafted"

diplocrap most likely, but could also be a veiled reference suggesting the RTP are full of sh*t we know it, but cant be seen to interfering in a police investigation in another country...

and the fact is they cant interfere..

Any time a public official (or anybody for that matter) uses a "but" following a statement that begins with "obviously", it should (and was probably intended to) raise antennas.

Parsing the second sentence, you get two separate statements:

1) We should do what we can to help, and

2) We should do what we can to ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done and that is what we are focused on.

The waterfall of related questions this begs are:

How will the British government interpret what would constitute "interference" in the Thai judicial system in this particular case?

What steps does the British government believe it can take to "ensure that the people who did this are found and justice is done" within the parameters of the answer to the first question?

What steps will the British government actually take within the parameters of the answers to the last two questions?

BTW it's interesting that Cameron's statement closely tracks the statement made by Hannah's family:

"As a family we hope that the right people are found and brought to justice," said the statement.

Good analyses. I guess Thai authorities can also halt any unwanted Brit actions/enquiries at any time by saying you are "now interfering in Thailand`s judicial system. Desist. Go forth..."

Or are we just talking about what can be done back in uk?

I think we're talking about both . . .

Of course the Thai authorities will have their own interpretation of what constitutes interfering in the Thai judicial system.

If they think or claim the British team have stepped over that line, they may actively try and block further investigation/observation on Thai soil. But that would have it's own set of diplomatic and public relations consequences.

But it also relates to what the British team can and will do to investigate, and more importantly how they will handle the results, from outside of Thailand.

[Katoom]

An investigation in Thailand, that under UK law they have no authority to investigate?

What could a private citizen say from the UK that changes an investigation in Thailand, in which the UK police are only observers?

If any of the UK cits that returned to the UK have any evidence /proof of anything that directly implicates anyone other than the 2 Burmese men, would it not create leverage to push for a new investigation headed by the DSI?

Add to that the absolute freedom of speech and what is there but the conclusion that the people that returned to the UK have nothing to add.

Well, for the simple fact that it would be subjudice to the inquest to be held in the UK in January 2015? I think you will also find that similar rules also apply in the House of Commons regarding subjudice and inquests for questions or statements by members but at the discretion of the Speaker.

[jdinasia]

An investigation in Thailand, that under UK law they have no authority to investigate?

What could a private citizen say from the UK that changes an investigation in Thailand, in which the UK police are only observers?

If any of the UK cits that returned to the UK have any evidence /proof of anything that directly implicates anyone other than the 2 Burmese men, would it not create leverage to push for a new investigation headed by the DSI?

Add to that the absolute freedom of speech and what is there but the conclusion that the people that returned to the UK have nothing to add.

Well, for the simple fact that it would be subjudice to the inquest to be held in the UK in January 2015? I think you will also find that similar rules also apply in the House of Commons regarding subjudice and inquests for questions or statements by members but at the discretion of the Speaker.

Sub judice -

There's no case in court in the UK regarding this matter. An inquest is not a trial and the legal concept of Sub judice doesn't apply.

Nothing about why none of the people have spoken to the press?

[boomerangutang]

Conclusion,,,,if you were attractive, female, caucasian would you want to go anywhere near that Island?

I hate to say it, but there are other southern Thai beach resorts where safety is questionable, particularly for pretty young partying farang chicks. Ko Phi Phi has had more deaths of young farang females than Ko Tao, and (surprise!) those Phi Phi deaths are unresolved. No suspects arrested, ...even causes of death are unknown. Though some of us who followed those stories strongly suspect it was some weird 'beach cocktails' (including ground-up mosquito coils) given by local boys (date-rape drugs, sound familiar?). Such date-rape drugs are most likely administered clandestinely (as mickeys). Chiang Mai could arguably have more backpacker tourists killed than Ko Tao. I'm not justifying Ko Tao at all, but merely putting some perspective on the scene.

In contrast: where are the safest comparable places for pretty young farang chicks to go? The quick answer is: outside of Thailand, like Laos, Burma and possibly Cambodia. Since we're on a Thailand topic, I'd say my town of Chiang Rai is rather safe. It's a tourist town, but zero tourists of any age have died mysteriously or been murdered here, as far as I can recall. There are other safe places also, but backpackers are out to party hardy (and I used to be one of them), so they naturally get drawn to the wildest party places.

It's really not a nuclear science what needs to be done to clear up lingering doubts. The UK government should officially request a permission to take DNA samples from imprisoned suspects so the British forensic team could carry out an independent DNA test. It would give Royal Thai police an opportunity to repair their reputation and prove many of us here wrong.

There have been assumptions on this forum that Brit authorities have DNA from the crime scene. We're hopeful, but we (the general public) don't know for sure. If Brits do have comparison DNA from the crimes scene, then I think it's 'kiss your ass bye bye' time for Thai officialdom on the crime case (am not referring to donkeys). At the least, it will be fun to watch the RTP brass squirm and make excuses.

[boomerangutang]

The British may well be in breach of International Law if they were to release their findings before a trial,

perhaps 'breach of diplomatic etiquette' but doubtful if it's breach of law.

[IslandLover]

Soutpeel, on 08 Nov 2014 - 03:31, said:

joebrown, on 08 Nov 2014 - 03:16, said:

JOC, on 07 Nov 2014 - 17:18, said:

thailandchilli, on 07 Nov 2014 - 16:24, said:

I see that CSI has just received an email from Sean McAnna interesting if genuine saying that Nomsod was in Koh Tao on the night of the murders, also giving some insight into him.

No doubt the British police have already taken a statement from him

Sean's also active on his Google account https://plus.google.com/101768055405292405319/posts/ZeoTy8iBjv4

Sean McAnna would sell his mother for another few minutes in the limelight!!

I believe Sean knows a lot more about these murders than he's already said. He may be a 'bad apple' but I don't agree that he's been looking for another few minutes in the limelight. Where are the newspaper interviews etc? It appears just the opposite to me!

That would be my thought as well, if this guy is the attention seeker people say he is, one would have expected to see:

" my night of terror being pursued by Thai Mafia on a tropical island" in the Daily Mail or similar, and let's face it those rags are not too fussy what they post as regards " facts"

He has said he has given an interview to the Mail on Sunday but it has not appeared yet. I really don't know what to make of Sean. Does he tell the truth or does he live in a fantasy world?

[StealthEnergiser]

When and where did he get the haircut may be relevant as it was mentioned on one of the forums he was seen with marks or cuts on his arms.

[Soutpeel]

An investigation in Thailand, that under UK law they have no authority to investigate?

What could a private citizen say from the UK that changes an investigation in Thailand, in which the UK police are only observers?

If any of the UK cits that returned to the UK have any evidence /proof of anything that directly implicates anyone other than the 2 Burmese men, would it not create leverage to push for a new investigation headed by the DSI?

Add to that the absolute freedom of speech and what is there but the conclusion that the people that returned to the UK have nothing to add.

Well, for the simple fact that it would be subjudice to the inquest to be held in the UK in January 2015? I think you will also find that similar rules also apply in the House of Commons regarding subjudice and inquests for questions or statements by members but at the discretion of the Speaker.

Sub judice -

There's no case in court in the UK regarding this matter. An inquest is not a trial and the legal concept of Sub judice doesn't apply.

Nothing about why none of the people have spoken to the press?

JD you are starting to ramble without actually making a point.

As to your question on why no one has talked to the press, it has been commented on multiple times as to the possible reasons, so please try an keep up and read the answers/comments given

as why the British police have not made any statements to the press, this is easy, this report is for the inquest and or possibly authorities eyes only, however at the inquest, certain parts of the report which are relevant to the inquest may be become part of the public record.

You don't know whether people haven't been talking to the press, they may have, all that has happened is that nothing significant has be published yet ie "My night of terror chased buy Thai mafia on desert Island" in the Daily Telegraph

The fact is, its rather interesting that so long after the event "No exclusives" have been published in the tabloids, as they would have been onto to these people in the UK like a rash, certainly the Daily Mail, and the silence is deafening, which leads me to believe there are people there who do know what went on, maybe even as witness's and for one reason or another, per reasons in an earlier post, they are keeping silent for the moment.

The fact that the British police who were in Thailand haven't come out and made a general statement (not divulging the contents of the report) that they are satisfied with the investigation is also interesting, (BTW I actually mean the British police making the statement, not BiB putting words in peoples mouths as they have done frequently) as if it had been done it would be worthy of a line or two in one of the tabloids in the UK.

[Gumballl]

That picture alone would negate the possibility of a fair trial in any country in the world with a proper justice system.

What is it with the pictures of alleged offenders being paraded in front of the media, never seen anything quite like it in any other country.

In some countries, a person accused of a crime is guilty until proven innocent. One country that comes to mind is Mexico.

[JOC]

It's really not a nuclear science what needs to be done to clear up lingering doubts. The UK government should officially request a permission to take DNA samples from imprisoned suspects so the British forensic team could carry out an independent DNA test. It would give Royal Thai police an opportunity to repair their reputation and prove many of us here wrong.

Possible scenario: In the first round of DNA-testing, where 200-300 people were tested, amongst them the alledged culprits and their DNA-profile goes to the RTP's evidence-room marked: "Retrieved from female victim"

A week later, they are arrested and DNA-tested again, and surprise, surprise: A MATCH!!

Forensic science has made a lot of progress, but sadly can also be misused by coppers lacking moral and ethics!!