Koh Tao murders: Lawyer protests Myanmar men detention

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And now the first tile in place.
Expect no more breaking news.
The Burmese2 will be let go,either on some technicality or more likely the appointed judge will be told to find some obscure law whereby they walk with no-one loosing face.
Make me to think Thai language must also have some translation for "time heals all wounds"

I prefer “Time wounds all heels.” - Groucho Marx

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

We do not know if they are guilty or
Not . We all , including the prosecutor and police know there is a lot of doubt.
Based on that doubt they should atleast be allowed secure.bail.
Like suthep and apichart.

Did you mean Suthep and Abhisit? Neither one is on bail as far as I know.

Abhisit reported for indictment last December and was released on bail.

Suthep was escorted by military officers on May 26, 2014 to court for charges relating to the 2010 killings and released on bail with Bt600,000 posted as the guarantee.

[sweatalot]

The other day an ex-MP was released having been found guilty of murder of a rival and after having been given the death sentence. OF course he is a rich man able to put up, for him, a relatively small amount of cash to secure his release (1.35 million baht). If they can release a man on death row, why cannot they release these two who have been framed?

because they have been framed, probably

[boomerangutang]

How many different reasons would you like? AFAIK there was no DNA other than the victims in the UK. Chain of custody Inadmissible

Sounding like a defense lawyer again. Of course independent DNA is needed. Thai officials know that, and that's why they want the Brits involved as little as possible. Thai officials started out, at the earlier stages of the investigation, saying that Thailand didn't have the facilities to type DNA. That apparently changed. Everyone, except those who are shielding the headman's people from justice, want the DNA trail to be verified by outsiders - all the way from the specimens taken from the female victim. You'll notice, Thai officials (and JD and the headman's people) don't want any scrutiny of the DNA found in/on the victim. No surprise. You'll also notice they will do all they can to avoid that happening, whether it be legal maneuverings or hiding DNA cards (with DNA typing), or hushing-up the British, or whatever.

Surely the Thai police (and hopefully the British police) would have taken detailed statements from witnesses who were with the victims on the night of the murders?

That's assuming the Thai cops are doing a decent job - and that's a Biiiiig assumption. Most if not all the cops doing the investigating haven't been trained in crime scene investigations. All went to Thai schools which are stuck in rote-learning (ask no questions). There are no independent crime investigators in Thailand as far as I know. So, all the Thai investigators are duty-bound to toe the officials line. None, except top brass, can speak up. In this case, it's frame-the-Burmese and shield-the-headman's-people. Simple. That's also why Thai investigators long-ago dismissed the men who should be prime suspects, and why cops appear to have done no investigating for the past 6 weeks. It appears all they've done in recent weeks is try to get the frame-up text to comply with what prosecutors want to see. If it weren't for social media interfering, this case would have resolved like other cases which frame scapegoats, and then everyone could go on to what they were doing and forget about it. Everyone, except the victims' families and the 2 boys who got framed - and perhaps future victims of the real perps who are out going to parties, slipping date-rape mickeys in drinks of the prettiest, youngest, most vivacious farang chicks.

You have made up your mind up based on social media rumor mills, and taking which bits of the bodged police inquiry fit the text you would like to see - who is guilty and innocent. Can you see any dangers in that? Probably not.

I have made up my mind, as have many other posters, re; this case. It's not based on 'social media rumor mills' although some of social media disclosures have been revealing. I have been following this case as closely as reasonably possible, and there are many indications that the headman's brother and son should still be prime suspects. If you want to have an alternative view to mine, that's your prerogative and choice. To answer your Q: I don't see any dangers in believing the investigation has been thoroughly botched, except for the possibility some revenge-freak might hunt me down to cause harm or death. Even so, I'd rather tell it like I see it, than cower in a corner because of some threat of bodily harm.

[jdinasia]

Boomerangutang

We can now change his "probably not" to "absolutely not".

[alfalfa19]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And now the first tile in place.

Expect no more breaking news.

The Burmese2 will be let go,either on some technicality or more likely the appointed judge will be told to find some obscure law whereby they walk with no-one loosing face.

Make me to think Thai language must also have some translation for "time heals all wounds"

I prefer “Time wounds all heels.” - Groucho Marx

One of my favorite sayings, I use it often. I didn't know, however that it came from Groucho. I really hope it holds true in this case, although things don't look too good right now. Public outcry seems to be dying down.

[sambum]

The other day an ex-MP was released having been found guilty of murder of a rival and after having been given the death sentence. OF course he is a rich man able to put up, for him, a relatively small amount of cash to secure his release (1.35 million baht). If they can release a man on death row, why cannot they release these two who have been framed?

Astonishing! (Not! - Money talks very loudly here in LOS!)

Astonishing that people just gobble up whatever they are told when it fits their preconceptions.

As I pointed out on post #33 what retarious presents is not true, false, wrong, not a fact. The man he alludes to, Kanchit Thapsawuan is currently in Bang Khwan prison under a death sentence.

Once again this illustrates what the case against the Koh Tao headman's son was built upon, someone says something, people don't bother with finding out the facts and before you know it everyone "knows" the guy is guilty because they heard this or that on Internet; epistemological responsibility be damned.

Not surprised that JD liked your post! You're obviously a Monty Python fan - "not true, wrong, not a fact". Bit over the top, don't you think? You could have just said "wrong" and presented your "evidence". And "epistemological responsibility"!!! Huh? A bit overelaborate and I'm sure half the posters on here won't have a clue what you're talking about! By the way, I agree with what you say, but sometimes you just have to believe what people tell you otherwise you'd be spending all your spare time on the Internet checking facts and figures so that you could gleefully point out someone's error in just accepting what they have read or been told!

[Willy Eckerslike]

And thanks to Wiki...................

Epistemology (ἐπιστήμη,episteme|knowledge, understanding|| λόγος, logos|study of) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge^[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired. Much of the debate in this field has focused on the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. The term "epistemology" was introduced by the Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier (1808–1864).^[3]

[sambum]

And thanks to Wiki...................

Epistemology (ἐπιστήμη,episteme|knowledge, understanding|| λόγος, logos|study of) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge^[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired. Much of the debate in this field has focused on the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. The term "epistemology" was introduced by the Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier (1808–1864).^[3]

And did you know that before you before you looked it up on Wiki.....? Or when you first saw it did you think "&lt;deleted&gt;?"

[jdinasia]

Ummm I knew it.

[sambum]

Ummm I knew it.

I wasn't asking you - I was asking Willy! As an interested party you would have already looked it up anyway if you didn't know it, and if you didn't know it, going by your condescending tone in your posts, Ummmm, you certainly wouldn't admit it!

[Baerboxer]

How many different reasons would you like? AFAIK there was no DNA other than the victims in the UK. Chain of custody Inadmissible

Sounding like a defense lawyer again. Of course independent DNA is needed. Thai officials know that, and that's why they want the Brits involved as little as possible. Thai officials started out, at the earlier stages of the investigation, saying that Thailand didn't have the facilities to type DNA. That apparently changed. Everyone, except those who are shielding the headman's people from justice, want the DNA trail to be verified by outsiders - all the way from the specimens taken from the female victim. You'll notice, Thai officials (and JD and the headman's people) don't want any scrutiny of the DNA found in/on the victim. No surprise. You'll also notice they will do all they can to avoid that happening, whether it be legal maneuverings or hiding DNA cards (with DNA typing), or hushing-up the British, or whatever.

You have made up your mind up based on social media rumor mills, and taking which bits of the bodged police inquiry fit the text you would like to see - who is guilty and innocent. Can you see any dangers in that? Probably not.

I have made up my mind, as have many other posters, re; this case. It's not based on 'social media rumor mills' although some of social media disclosures have been revealing. I have been following this case as closely as reasonably possible, and there are many indications that the headman's brother and son should still be prime suspects. If you want to have an alternative view to mine, that's your prerogative and choice. To answer your Q: I don't see any dangers in believing the investigation has been thoroughly botched, except for the possibility some revenge-freak might hunt me down to cause harm or death. Even so, I'd rather tell it like I see it, than cower in a corner because of some threat of bodily harm.

Not sure whether you are trying to be obtusely clever with your remarks about the dangers of trial by media, miss the point completely or fail to see your own irony.

Unfortunately, the truth is unlikely to be verified in this case, whatever that truth maybe.

[retsdon]

Has it been revealed in public how these 2 devious Burmese managed to steal all cctv footage(except for the 2 minute blurry running man clip) from all businesses on Sairee beach close to where they were alledged to have murdered the 2 Brits?

It is such a shame they did this, especially for themselves. Having the cctv footage of the argument in the bar before the murders would have likely helped the 2B's case.

Has it been revealed publicly that there was a row in the bar, outside the bar, or anywhere before the murders?

I have followed the case but can't find where any witness, especially the friends of the victims, or other foreign tourists have confirmed this. (Ignoring the ramblings of McAnna). There must have been witnesses.

Sorry if I've missed that, but I can't find it. Surely the Thai police (and hopefully the British police) would have taken detailed statements from witnesses who were with the victims on the night of the murders?

The Thai police have issued statements basely supporting whatever outcome they hoped for.

You would need to look at foreign news sources and facebook pages. Just google it, you will find various sources.

Police here mostly do what they want to do, to suit their own purposes. .

No they don't, really. Mostly they do what they're told to do. If you have sufficient status in Thailand, you own the police. They work for the status quo. That's why a bigwig can just summon up policemen to check on his house while he's away (leaving a sign in slip that they've been there). That's why a bigwig can have a police escort to the golf course (who hang around in the car park while he completes his round), etc, etc. No police officer ever questions what he's told to do by his superiors, no matter what it is. And no senior police officer ever questions what he's told to do by HIS superiors.

The RTP is perfect microcosm of perfect Thai society (from the perspective of those who run the show).

[AleG]

The other day an ex-MP was released having been found guilty of murder of a rival and after having been given the death sentence. OF course he is a rich man able to put up, for him, a relatively small amount of cash to secure his release (1.35 million baht). If they can release a man on death row, why cannot they release these two who have been framed?

Astonishing! (Not! - Money talks very loudly here in LOS!)

Astonishing that people just gobble up whatever they are told when it fits their preconceptions.

As I pointed out on post #33 what retarious presents is not true, false, wrong, not a fact. The man he alludes to, Kanchit Thapsawuan is currently in Bang Khwan prison under a death sentence.

Once again this illustrates what the case against the Koh Tao headman's son was built upon, someone says something, people don't bother with finding out the facts and before you know it everyone "knows" the guy is guilty because they heard this or that on Internet; epistemological responsibility be damned.

Not surprised that JD liked your post! You're obviously a Monty Python fan - "not true, wrong, not a fact". Bit over the top, don't you think? You could have just said "wrong" and presented your "evidence". And "epistemological responsibility"!!! Huh? A bit overelaborate and I'm sure half the posters on here won't have a clue what you're talking about! By the way, I agree with what you say, but sometimes you just have to believe what people tell you otherwise you'd be spending all your spare time on the Internet checking facts and figures so that you could gleefully point out someone's error in just accepting what they have read or been told!

I already pointed out the problem with accepting facts from things people say in the post you quoted; there's a man being hounded as a rapist and murdered thanks to that attitude. You are the third person in this thread to swallow up that Retarius false information, he misled you, why don't you take him to task over it?

Epistemological responsibility refers to standards of quality applied to the gathering and evaluation of information used in establishing facts and building knowledge; or to put it in simpler terms, junk information leads to poor understanding, which of course is not a good basis to form opinions or taking actions.

[Snookyville]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/20/burmese-murder-accused-british-backpackers-thailand

Two Burmese men detained in Thailand for allegedly killing the British backpackers Hannah Witheridge and David Miller have told the Guardian they are innocent and have appealed to the victims’ families and the UK government to help them clear their names.

[Willy Eckerslike]

And thanks to Wiki...................

Epistemology (ἐπιστήμη,episteme|knowledge, understanding|| λόγος, logos|study of) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge^[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired. Much of the debate in this field has focused on the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. The term "epistemology" was introduced by the Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier (1808–1864).^[3]

And did you know that before you before you looked it up on Wiki.....? Or when you first saw it did you think "<deleted>?"

Not sure what you had deleted there sambum................but my first thought was eh....&lt;deleted&gt;'s that???????

[jdinasia]

Ummm I knew it.

I wasn't asking you - I was asking Willy! As an interested party you would have already looked it up anyway if you didn't know it, and if you didn't know it, going by your condescending tone in your posts, Ummmm, you certainly wouldn't admit it!

condescending??? Like the post I am replying to?

[jdinasia]

Has it been revealed in public how these 2 devious Burmese managed to steal all cctv footage(except for the 2 minute blurry running man clip) from all businesses on Sairee beach close to where they were alledged to have murdered the 2 Brits?

It is such a shame they did this, especially for themselves. Having the cctv footage of the argument in the bar before the murders would have likely helped the 2B's case.

Has it been revealed publicly that there was a row in the bar, outside the bar, or anywhere before the murders?

I have followed the case but can't find where any witness, especially the friends of the victims, or other foreign tourists have confirmed this. (Ignoring the ramblings of McAnna). There must have been witnesses.

Sorry if I've missed that, but I can't find it. Surely the Thai police (and hopefully the British police) would have taken detailed statements from witnesses who were with the victims on the night of the murders?

The Thai police have issued statements basely supporting whatever outcome they hoped for.

You would need to look at foreign news sources and facebook pages. Just google it, you will find various sources.

Police here mostly do what they want to do, to suit their own purposes. .

No they don't, really. Mostly they do what they're told to do. If you have sufficient status in Thailand, you own the police. They work for the status quo. That's why a bigwig can just summon up policemen to check on his house while he's away (leaving a sign in slip that they've been there). That's why a bigwig can have a police escort to the golf course (who hang around in the car park while he completes his round), etc, etc. No police officer ever questions what he's told to do by his superiors, no matter what it is. And no senior police officer ever questions what he's told to do by HIS superiors.

The RTP is perfect microcosm of perfect Thai society (from the perspective of those who run the show).

Retsdon,

Out of curiosity, how many senior police officers do you personally know well enough to have discussed this with?

[sambum]

And thanks to Wiki...................

Epistemology (ἐπιστήμη,episteme|knowledge, understanding|| λόγος, logos|study of) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge^[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired. Much of the debate in this field has focused on the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. The term "epistemology" was introduced by the Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier (1808–1864).^[3]

And did you know that before you before you looked it up on Wiki.....? Or when you first saw it did you think "<deleted>?"

Not sure what you had deleted there sambum................but my first thought was eh....<deleted>'s that???????

Yes, that's it!

[sambum]

Ummm I knew it.

I wasn't asking you - I was asking Willy! As an interested party you would have already looked it up anyway if you didn't know it, and if you didn't know it, going by your condescending tone in your posts, Ummmm, you certainly wouldn't admit it!

condescending??? Like the post I am replying to?

Sorry, not going to bite!

[retsdon]

Has it been revealed in public how these 2 devious Burmese managed to steal all cctv footage(except for the 2 minute blurry running man clip) from all businesses on Sairee beach close to where they were alledged to have murdered the 2 Brits?

It is such a shame they did this, especially for themselves. Having the cctv footage of the argument in the bar before the murders would have likely helped the 2B's case.

Has it been revealed publicly that there was a row in the bar, outside the bar, or anywhere before the murders?

I have followed the case but can't find where any witness, especially the friends of the victims, or other foreign tourists have confirmed this. (Ignoring the ramblings of McAnna). There must have been witnesses.

Sorry if I've missed that, but I can't find it. Surely the Thai police (and hopefully the British police) would have taken detailed statements from witnesses who were with the victims on the night of the murders?

The Thai police have issued statements basely supporting whatever outcome they hoped for.

You would need to look at foreign news sources and facebook pages. Just google it, you will find various sources.

Police here mostly do what they want to do, to suit their own purposes. .

No they don't, really. Mostly they do what they're told to do. If you have sufficient status in Thailand, you own the police. They work for the status quo. That's why a bigwig can just summon up policemen to check on his house while he's away (leaving a sign in slip that they've been there). That's why a bigwig can have a police escort to the golf course (who hang around in the car park while he completes his round), etc, etc. No police officer ever questions what he's told to do by his superiors, no matter what it is. And no senior police officer ever questions what he's told to do by HIS superiors.

The RTP is perfect microcosm of perfect Thai society (from the perspective of those who run the show).

Retsdon,

Out of curiosity, how many senior police officers do you personally know well enough to have discussed this with?

None. But half my in laws are mid-level RTP. And we"ve talked about how it works.

[Briggsy]

We have now had the Surat Thani prosecutors urging the victims' families to join them in a very rare civil & criiminal joint prosecution to ensure the death sentence for the Burmese.

We have now had the Burmese pair appealing for the victims' families help them expose Thai Police corruption.

We have now had the victims' families jostled in a media scrum and callously exposed to the press when they arrived to collect the bodies.

This continual added pressure at an impossibly difficult time for the victims' families all of which stems from the ridiculous circus of Thai governmental incompetence, gross insensitivity and evil corruption is inexcusable.

[ubonjoe]

A inflammatory post and a quote of it has been removed.

[SteveFong]

When did the prosecutors contact the victims families and ask for their help getting the death penalty?

When did the prosecutors accept the case?

[boomerangutang]

Independent DNA testing is needed. Thai officials know that, and that's why they want the Brits involved as little as possible. Thai officials started out, at the earlier stages of the investigation, saying that Thailand didn't have the facilities to type DNA. That apparently changed. Everyone, except those who are shielding the headman's people from justice, want the DNA trail to be verified by outsiders - all the way from the specimens taken from the female victim. You'll notice, Thai officials (and JD and the headman's people) don't want any scrutiny of the DNA found in/on the victim. No surprise. You'll also notice they will do all they can to avoid that happening, whether it be legal maneuverings or hiding DNA cards (with DNA typing), or hushing-up the British, or whatever.

You have made up your mind up based on social media rumor mills, and taking which bits of the bodged police inquiry fit the text you would like to see - who is guilty and innocent. Can you see any dangers in that? Probably not.

I have made up my mind, as have many other posters, re; this case. It's not based on 'social media rumor mills' although some of social media disclosures have been revealing. I have been following this case as closely as reasonably possible, and there are many indications that the headman's brother and son should still be prime suspects. If you want to have an alternative view to mine, that's your prerogative and choice. To answer your Q: I don't see any dangers in believing the investigation has been thoroughly botched, except for the possibility some revenge-freak might hunt me down to cause harm or death. Even so, I'd rather tell it like I see it, than cower in a corner because of some threat of bodily harm.

Not sure whether you are trying to be obtusely clever with your remarks about the dangers of trial by media, miss the point completely or fail to see your own irony.

Unfortunately, the truth is unlikely to be verified in this case, whatever that truth maybe.

I can somewhat concur with your ending sentence. However, there is a point which I missed earlier, perhaps me being naive?) when I responded to the question by Baerboxer: "Can you see any dangers in that?" referring, I assume to 'trial by media.' Generally, I don't like the concept of trial by media, but this KT case has been dragged closer to justice by social media. Without social media, we (who are following it) wouldn't have seen some photos which could be useful (in solving the crime), we wouldn't have heard some of the witness claims nor the scrutiny of the CCTV footage, and other pertinent things. In other words, 100's of 1,000's of regular people wouldn't have seen or heard about the sorts of things that Thai officials don't want us to know about. Why do they not want us to see/hear about so many things? Because Thai officials are orchestrating a frame up of the Burmese while concurrently shielding the headman's people. The less truth revealed, the more likely Thai officials get the results they want.

But back to the Q "Can you see any dangers in that?" ...it's most likely alluding to 'defamation of character' charges, is it not? As an aside, it would be nice if baerboxer and jdinasia could articulate a bit better, instead of often being so hazy in statements. As for 'defamation,': yes, it's a concern when dealing (directly or indirectly) with rich powerful Thais who don't want truth revealed in relation to criminal cases. Look no further than Chaleum or Thaksin, who have no qualms about slapping defamation charges left and right, on people who have a lot less money and political power than themselves. Is that how you'd like to see crime cases steered, by threats of defamation charges - stifling quests for truth and evidence?

Perhaps the headman will threaten defamation charges against the British experts, when he hears they might reveal evidence which implicates his brother and son in the crime.

[jdinasia]

Missed it again in the end.

Trial in any media much less anonymous social media is dangerous.

Claiming it helps solve a crime by anonymously accusing people who have been excluded by investigation actually deserves defamation charges.

[Bleacher Bum East]

Missed it again in the end.

Trial in any media much less anonymous social media is dangerous.

Claiming it helps solve a crime by anonymously accusing people who have been excluded by investigation actually deserves defamation charges.

So what role do you think the news media should play in a case like this?

What do you think is the range of appropriate responses for people on social media in a case like this?

[boomerangutang]

Missed it again in the end.

Trial in any media much less anonymous social media is dangerous.

Claiming it helps solve a crime by anonymously accusing people who have been excluded by investigation actually deserves defamation charges.

Some of the things social media can add to the discussion:

>>> witness accounts

>>> useful photos

>>> expertise and analysis

Is JD saying none of the general public have expertise and/or abilities to see clues in the data - which could lead to a conviction? Are Thai police investigators to be trusted to solve this case on their own? Thai police are subjective, duty-bound to follow orders handed down by superiors, not well-apprised of detective work, and sometimes open to bribes.

People hiding things, or with an easily-bruised egos can dig around and find grounds for defamation litigation.

Take a bag of trash to a neighborhood, and some people will find recyclables within. Others will just find rotten food.

To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

[jdinasia]

What jdinasia is saying is that your expertise and analysis are bogus and there are no witnesses that have come forward. If there were they would be part of the case.

Point - not one of the people on the island has come forward to state publicly that anyone other than the 2 Burmese men accused of being the killers is involved. This includes foreigners on the island that night.

[Gonzo the Face]

Readers could be forgiven for thinking that some posters on this thread appear to be trying to move up in Thai Hi-So-ciety , by their ingratiating posts