Family of Brits murdered in Thailand say evidence convincing

[BritTim]

Wish I could agree but the UK Police and FCO have been nothing short of a disgrace as far as I'm concerned. They should be ashamed of themselves putting politics and business interests before the safety of their own people!

I think the reactions of the UK authorities are complicated, and the full picture very difficult to read. At the highest levels, there will be reluctance to make waves. They do not want a diplomatic incident that would effect UK citizens and business interests. Add to this the fact that most senior UK officials, and probably the family liaison officers, are not as clued up on Thai realities as we are. Those who have not studied the case in detail will be very inclined to suspect that conspiracy theories are being spouted, as is usual in high profile cases, that should simply be ignored. (Before jumping on this, reflect on the fact that alongside the very reasonable doubts raised, there have also been several ridiculous theories espoused. It takes time for busy officials to become sufficiently informed to realize that there is something real here.)

Now, there are some (including, I think, the MET officers who were sent over) that do understand that there is something fishy going on. They are doing what they can, but some fairly unfortunate regulations, plus the natural caution of top level officials, is limiting what they are allowed to do.

As already noted, the families (through the family liaison officers) are also being fed information by the Thai prosecutors. The family liaison officers should (were they genuinely knowledgeable about the situation) tell the families not to place implicit faith in what the Thai authorities are feeding them, but they clearly dropped the ball.

The defense should have modest expectations in what they can expect in the way of help from the UK, but there are some who are working behind the scenes to do what they can.

[Luang]

I think it is worth a new post to reiterate 2 facts:

A limited and selected part of the evidence of the prosecution case was shown by the REGION 8 RTP to the families, delivered by GB police.

Their statement was released by the FCO who added the caveat that is does not necessarily reflect the FCO views.

The MET is now issuing radio interviews expressing its SERIOUS doubts about the investigation.

A lot of diplobabble but, if the MET is giving radio interviews, albeit on an afternoon radio show then make no mistake, it is a shot across the bows that the RTP and its sponsors would do well to take note of. This kind of interview is sanctioned at very senior levels and the content meticulously prepared.

In short, the GB police are pretty pi%%ed off at being made to look like the RTP and they are not going to take it lying down.

They may not be being as full on as the Myanmar government BUT they will make their views known.

I still have faith in the British police and its capabilities.

I also think there is a smoking gun out there and it will fire at some point before the trial begins.

Keep these threads populated with positive stuff.

Wish I could agree but the UK Police and FCO have been nothing short of a disgrace as far as I'm concerned. They should be ashamed of themselves putting politics and business interests before the safety of their own people!

I agree it does look that way on the surface but the police had their hands tied officially and the FCO is, I think too, a waste of space.

The politics have gotten in the way but I am sure the police are trying to loosen the straitjacket they were bundled into.

I think they will manage to.

Dennis, it's their involvement in the statements released by the families I'm referring to. They have prejudiced the trial and should never have been released at this time. I can forgive the families for not knowing what has been going on but the Police, FCO etc. not knowing (or caring) is unforgivable in my eyes. It's one thing just being able to observe and following political protocol, but a whole new ball game when you either knowingly swallow it all or deliberately swallow and then mislead families of murdered children for the sake of diplomacy! If the UK just don't know what has been going on then they are just idiots then but I don't believe that for a minute. It's business interests as it always is with governments. Let's hope they prove me wrong and find their concsciences somewhere before two more are murdered.

[DennisF]

I think it is worth a new post to reiterate 2 facts:

A limited and selected part of the evidence of the prosecution case was shown by the REGION 8 RTP to the families, delivered by GB police.

Their statement was released by the FCO who added the caveat that is does not necessarily reflect the FCO views.

The MET is now issuing radio interviews expressing its SERIOUS doubts about the investigation.

A lot of diplobabble but, if the MET is giving radio interviews, albeit on an afternoon radio show then make no mistake, it is a shot across the bows that the RTP and its sponsors would do well to take note of. This kind of interview is sanctioned at very senior levels and the content meticulously prepared.

In short, the GB police are pretty pi%%ed off at being made to look like the RTP and they are not going to take it lying down.

They may not be being as full on as the Myanmar government BUT they will make their views known.

I still have faith in the British police and its capabilities.

I also think there is a smoking gun out there and it will fire at some point before the trial begins.

Keep these threads populated with positive stuff.

Wish I could agree but the UK Police and FCO have been nothing short of a disgrace as far as I'm concerned. They should be ashamed of themselves putting politics and business interests before the safety of their own people!

I agree it does look that way on the surface but the police had their hands tied officially and the FCO is, I think too, a waste of space.

The politics have gotten in the way but I am sure the police are trying to loosen the straitjacket they were bundled into.

I think they will manage to.

Dennis, it's their involvement in the statements released by the families I'm referring to. They have prejudiced the trial and should never have been released at this time. I can forgive the families for not knowing what has been going on but the Police, FCO etc. not knowing (or caring) is unforgivable in my eyes. It's one thing just being able to observe and following political protocol, but a whole new ball game when you either knowingly swallow it all or deliberately swallow and then mislead families of murdered children for the sake of diplomacy! If the UK just don't know what has been going on then they are just idiots then but I don't believe that for a minute. It's business interests as it always is with governments. Let's hope they prove me wrong and find their concsciences somewhere before two more are murdered.

I could not agree more about the FCO, a complete moronic government department that should employ humans.

The police I can forgive because they HAD to deliver the RTP report and they had nothing to do with the families statement release.

They have been diplomatic and the release of the radio interview could well be an attempt by them to try and redress some balance.

I believe they will do more.

[AleG]

I think it is worth a new post to reiterate 2 facts:

A limited and selected part of the evidence of the prosecution case was shown by the REGION 8 RTP to the families, delivered by GB police.

Their statement was released by the FCO who added the caveat that is does not necessarily reflect the FCO views.

The MET is now issuing radio interviews expressing its SERIOUS doubts about the investigation.

A lot of diplobabble but, if the MET is giving radio interviews, albeit on an afternoon radio show then make no mistake, it is a shot across the bows that the RTP and its sponsors would do well to take note of. This kind of interview is sanctioned at very senior levels and the content meticulously prepared.

In short, the GB police are pretty pi%%ed off at being made to look like the RTP and they are not going to take it lying down.

They may not be being as full on as the Myanmar government BUT they will make their views known.

I still have faith in the British police and its capabilities.

I also think there is a smoking gun out there and it will fire at some point before the trial begins.

Keep these threads populated with positive stuff.

I know you don't want anyone disturbing the echo chamber but...

Two facts?

"A limited and selected part of the evidence of the prosecution case was shown by the REGION 8 RTP to the families, delivered by GB police."

You have no idea what information and from whom the UK investigators were privy to. Uninformed speculation =/= fact.

"Their statement was released by the FCO who added the caveat that is does not necessarily reflect the FCO views."

The statement was released through the FCO not by the FCO, that's why the caveat. I'll give that a half a fact score.

As for the "The MET is now issuing radio interviews expressing its SERIOUS doubts about the investigation.", I presume you are referring to the one 15 second snippet at 1:01:50 here?

This is the transcription: "The Metropolitan Police says there is confusion and inconsistencies in the investigation in Thailand into the murders of two British tourists on the island of Koh Tao. Hannah Witheridge and David Miller were killed in September; Scotland Yard, which is observing the Thai inquiry, says there are questions about the strength of the case against the two men from Burma charged with murder."

Incidentally, a search on the transcript of the statement yields no results.

First of, that is not "radio interviews", it's a 15 second statement, second, you gilded the lily by adding SERIOUS to the statement; thirdly it's impossible to know if they are simply acknowledging what people feel or if the statement is the actual position of the Metropolitan Police, an actual interview would had been more clear on that regard.

In any case what is new? there have been many inconsistencies and confusion since day one, this guy did it, no, that guy did it, we have the murderers, oops, it wasn't them. So nothing new there, neither with "there are questions about the strength of the case against the two men from Burma charged with murder", is that acknowledging that some people question strength of the case or is the the Metropolitan Police position on the issue? Since there is no context to those that interviews 15 second statement (or even a source) it is impossible to say.

[catsanddogs]

The following People and groups have doubts and concerns about the investigation

The Met Police (Scotland Yard)

Sondhi Limthongkul

Dr Pornthip

Burmese Government

99.99% of posters on the topics on thai visa .

423, 585 followers csi

The Thai National Human Rights Commission

Change.org 105,000

The following People and groups don’t have any concerns or doubts about the investigation

4 posters on thai visa

Not forgetting Andy Hall and I think Amnesty International were taking an interest.

We also have another couple to add, Reprieve the UK based fair trials rights group has already stated their serious concerns and that justice is not being seen to be done

&

The UK government also made it clear they were concerned at the alleged corruption ie coverup and the the lack of an independent DNA test of the B2

And not forgetting their parents too.

[catsanddogs]

This story of the two Burmese kids has been included in every news item on the BBC World Service today. With typical British restraint, 'You lying Thai a#holes'

Indeed. Furthermore at the bottom of the BBC page (link provided) you will see a bunch of links to newspapers such as the Independent covering the story.(look for 'From other news sites' heading) On many of these newspaper websites there is an opportunity to comment at the bottom of the KT articles. Get on those newspaper sites and start awakening the UK public to what is going on with this circus. These are all very recent stories (within past few hrs)

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30602984

I could not find from other news sites

Here you go GC

From other news sites

• Reuters UK Lawyer confident of testimony to clear Myanmar duo of Britons' murders 40 mins ago
• Daily Express Trial of Thailand tourist murder suspects begins 2 hrs ago
• The Guardian Nigeria Thailand tourist double murder trial under way 3 hrs ago
• The Independent Thailand backpacker double murder trial begins 4 hrs ago
• Daily Star Thai tourist double murder trial begins with suspects facing death penalty if found guilty 5 hrs ago
• About these results

Thanks for that.

[catsanddogs]

Greenchair -

Duracell .

They should be at the right of the faces that don't move. They are on mine .

[BoristheBlade]

Maybe explains why Nomsod is hiding in the Temple,

But we will be waiting for you......

[catsanddogs]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

[mcm991]

But the boy was not on the island, he was in Bangkok so whats your point ?

I have already explained that 1 week ago . He left the island before it happened , it could mean he left 2 weeks before or days before. You can not believe every word written in the Thai press. I wish you could leave this kid alone now, he has a life and thanks to social media bullshit it almost destroyed him. Do you know his feelings into all this ? If the B2 are scapegoats then what about him ?

You've made it clear you believe the alibi. Yet, you apparently didn't convince anyone. I would be the first to 'leave the kid alone' if there weren't a slew of factoids (some of which could be termed 'evidence') which incriminate him. There are also intriguing things which incriminate Mon, Mon's cop friend, and the so-called 'Stingray Man.' Those issues don't go away simply because the 2nd head man decided 'all of a sudden' () the perpetrators had to be Burmese. The RTP can claim the Headman's people are not suspects (have they actually articulated that? source?), but the RTP's credibility is lower than Pinnocio's.

Indeed, the question was not phrased correctly, it's the kind of thing that happens when writing something at work and I'm interrupted in the middle.

Let's try again and see if someone can spare some time out of the echo chamber to answer: cite for Nomsod's father saying that his son left on the morning of the murders?

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

[BritTim]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

Edited December 26, 2014 by BritTim

[beammeup]

This story of the two Burmese kids has been included in every news item on the BBC World Service today. With typical British restraint, 'You lying Thai a#holes'

Indeed. Furthermore at the bottom of the BBC page (link provided) you will see a bunch of links to newspapers such as the Independent covering the story.(look for 'From other news sites' heading) On many of these newspaper websites there is an opportunity to comment at the bottom of the KT articles. Get on those newspaper sites and start awakening the UK public to what is going on with this circus. These are all very recent stories (within past few hrs)

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30602984

'We are victims of influential people.'

They said.

Good to hear it from the horses mouths.

Hmmm, They say they were drunk and have no idea who killed the pair. How could they know they are victims of influential people.

[BritTim]

'We are victims of influential people.'

They said.

Good to hear it from the horses mouths.

Hmmm, They say they were drunk and have no idea who killed the pair. How could they know they are victims of influential people.

If you believe them, and I do, they know are being set up (they are innocent). There are not too many logical explanations that lack influential people pulling strings for whatever reason (note island mafia protecting others is one theory, but not the only one).

[AleG]

Indeed, the question was not phrased correctly, it's the kind of thing that happens when writing something at work and I'm interrupted in the middle.

Let's try again and see if someone can spare some time out of the echo chamber to answer: cite for Nomsod's father saying that his son left on the morning of the murders?

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

That is, of course, distinctly different from the claim that the father of Nomsod said his son left in the morning of the murders.

One would expect that a credible source for such devastatingly incriminating statement would be at the fingertips of those pushing the Nomsod theory, but so far, nothing.

[catsanddogs]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

I want to agree with you BritTim but it keeps troubling me about how they say they were drunk. I'm not saying they are lying. It was reported that they had a can a beer each and then Mau went back to get another before going to see his girlfriend. Of course they could have had a lot more to drink before these beers which may have made them inebriated. I know they are also saying they know nothing about the crimes and I sincerely want to believe this too and I have up until now. It just that I keep thinking what if they did see something and they have been threatened/tortured so much and they would fear much more would come their way from the RTP if they gave information that might incriminate someone of 'influence'. Keeping them imprisoned for another 9 months will surely ensure they have no chance to speak out, especially to reporters. It was in the press at some point that one of the Burmese men said the real killer was out of the country. Even if they saw someone disposing of the hoe and saw nothing else (and knew who this someone was) wouldn't they fear the repercussions of divulging this information even though they have been through Hell? And although it seems there is no definite answer as to whether they were actually tested the first time round (they were queuing in a photograph), I veer towards believing that they were tested and that they were picked out then to be scapegoats. Hope I'm wrong though.

[Luang]

This story of the two Burmese kids has been included in every news item on the BBC World Service today. With typical British restraint, 'You lying Thai a#holes'

Indeed. Furthermore at the bottom of the BBC page (link provided) you will see a bunch of links to newspapers such as the Independent covering the story.(look for 'From other news sites' heading) On many of these newspaper websites there is an opportunity to comment at the bottom of the KT articles. Get on those newspaper sites and start awakening the UK public to what is going on with this circus. These are all very recent stories (within past few hrs)

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30602984

'We are victims of influential people.'

They said.

Good to hear it from the horses mouths.

Hmmm, They say they were drunk and have no idea who killed the pair. How could they know they are victims of influential people.

Mmmmm, because they know they didn't kill anyone but are behind bars being charged thus?

See, it wasn't too difficult to work out was it, when you try a little?! Some real critical thinkers on here huh!

[AleG]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

"They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi"

This is what the third Burmese, Muang Muang actually said:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB. “Maung Maung said he left the scene at around 1am after they finished one bottle of beer each, but the two stayed – apparently they wanted to continue drinking and playing guitar. He did mention that there was an ‘English’ or ‘Western’ couple at some point.”

MAT representative Kyaw Thaung reconfirmed the testimony the legal team had been told. “After finishing the beer and cigarettes, Maung Maung said he told his two friends he was leaving, but they insisted on having more to drink, so he went back to the room and got an extra bottle of alcohol and took it to them. That was all around 1am,” he said.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Exactly how is that an alibi for the defendants since he left them near the scene of the crime before the time of the murders and didn't see them again until 5 AM?

[BritTim]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

"They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi"

This is what the third Burmese, Muang Muang actually said:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB. “Maung Maung said he left the scene at around 1am after they finished one bottle of beer each, but the two stayed – apparently they wanted to continue drinking and playing guitar. He did mention that there was an ‘English’ or ‘Western’ couple at some point.”

MAT representative Kyaw Thaung reconfirmed the testimony the legal team had been told. “After finishing the beer and cigarettes, Maung Maung said he told his two friends he was leaving, but they insisted on having more to drink, so he went back to the room and got an extra bottle of alcohol and took it to them. That was all around 1am,” he said.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Exactly how is that an alibi for the defendants since he left them near the scene of the crime before the time of the murders and didn't see them again until 5 AM?

It is an alibi for Muang Muang, not the remaining two accused. Did you also notice that the English or Western couple could not have been David and Hannah before 1:00 am based on CCTV and various witness reports.

[mcm991]

Indeed, the question was not phrased correctly, it's the kind of thing that happens when writing something at work and I'm interrupted in the middle.

Let's try again and see if someone can spare some time out of the echo chamber to answer: cite for Nomsod's father saying that his son left on the morning of the murders?

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

That is, of course, distinctly different from the claim that the father of Nomsod said his son left in the morning of the murders.

One would expect that a credible source for such devastatingly incriminating statement would be at the fingertips of those pushing the Nomsod theory, but so far, nothing.

You are correct and I knew you would be along shortly to point out the distinction.

Still ... I find it an odd response to the question.

If it were me in that situation.......

I would reply something like ........ 'My son had nothing to do with this. He is in Bangkok..... ' (assuming he actually was in Bangkok)

but..... I understand you have a position to maintain.

[AleG]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

I want to agree with you BritTim but it keeps troubling me about how they say they were drunk. I'm not saying they are lying. It was reported that they had a can a beer each and then Mau went back to get another before going to see his girlfriend. Of course they could have had a lot more to drink before these beers which may have made them inebriated. I know they are also saying they know nothing about the crimes and I sincerely want to believe this too and I have up until now. It just that I keep thinking what if they did see something and they have been threatened/tortured so much and they would fear much more would come their way from the RTP if they gave information that might incriminate someone of 'influence'. Keeping them imprisoned for another 9 months will surely ensure they have no chance to speak out, especially to reporters. It was in the press at some point that one of the Burmese men said the real killer was out of the country. Even if they saw someone disposing of the hoe and saw nothing else (and knew who this someone was) wouldn't they fear the repercussions of divulging this information even though they have been through Hell? And although it seems there is no definite answer as to whether they were actually tested the first time round (they were queuing in a photograph), I veer towards believing that they were tested and that they were picked out then to be scapegoats. Hope I'm wrong though.

They are in prison, facing the possibility of a death sentence, I don't think the they are too afraid of what may happen to them if they speak the truth argument holds much weight; first of from a self preservation point of view, secondly from a moral point of view, it implies they are putting their own "safety" ahead of victims family right for closure, society's interest in not having a murder/s go unpunished, justice for the victims themselves and last but not least sheer indignation at being made scapegoats for the real murderer/s.

Edited December 26, 2014 by AleG

[beammeup]

"

Mmmmm, because they know they didn't kill anyone but are behind bars being charged thus?

See, it wasn't too difficult to work out was it, when you try a little?! Some real critical thinkers on here huh! "

How do you know that they know they didn't kill anyone? Are you clarvouyant? Is that your critical thinking? LOL

[BritTim]

I don't want to throw a curved ball into the discussion, so apols if I am doing so. But on reading the news reports and seeing how the Burmese men continue to say they were drunk, I am getting this uncomfortable feeling that there is a possibility they may have actually witnessed the murders, or at the least, saw something that they shouldn't have.

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

I want to agree with you BritTim but it keeps troubling me about how they say they were drunk. I'm not saying they are lying. It was reported that they had a can a beer each and then Mau went back to get another before going to see his girlfriend. Of course they could have had a lot more to drink before these beers which may have made them inebriated. I know they are also saying they know nothing about the crimes and I sincerely want to believe this too and I have up until now. It just that I keep thinking what if they did see something and they have been threatened/tortured so much and they would fear much more would come their way from the RTP if they gave information that might incriminate someone of 'influence'. Keeping them imprisoned for another 9 months will surely ensure they have no chance to speak out, especially to reporters. It was in the press at some point that one of the Burmese men said the real killer was out of the country. Even if they saw someone disposing of the hoe and saw nothing else (and knew who this someone was) wouldn't they fear the repercussions of divulging this information even though they have been through Hell? And although it seems there is no definite answer as to whether they were actually tested the first time round (they were queuing in a photograph), I veer towards believing that they were tested and that they were picked out then to be scapegoats. Hope I'm wrong though.

The third Burmese left them around 1:00 am. The original estimate for time of death was between 4:00 and 5:00 am. I find it quite credible that the accused would have had enough to drink to want to return to their room and go to sleep in the intervening period.

I think the RTP have a good idea of who was around at the time of the crime. While they have messed up in many ways, I do not think they would be so stupid as to drag someone into court who could identify the real culprits.

[AleG]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

That is, of course, distinctly different from the claim that the father of Nomsod said his son left in the morning of the murders.

One would expect that a credible source for such devastatingly incriminating statement would be at the fingertips of those pushing the Nomsod theory, but so far, nothing.

You are correct and I knew you would be along shortly to point out the distinction.

Still ... I find it an odd response to the question.

If it were me in that situation.......

I would reply something like ........ 'My son had nothing to do with this. He is in Bangkok..... ' (assuming he actually was in Bangkok)

but..... I understand you have a position to maintain.

I actually find the statement, if accurate, remarkably dispassionate.

Think about it, he didn't know were his son was and instead of the knee-jerk parental reaction of defending his son regardless of what he knew or didn't he went for the cold hard facts, he didn't know where he was or if he was responsible, that's what I call intellectual honesty.

[Luang]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11313714/Koh-Tao-murders-suspects-in-killing-of-David-Miller-and-Hannah-Witheridge-say-they-were-framed.html

Prosecution documents seen by The Telegraph allege the two men “repeatedly smashed and chopped Mr Miller's face and head many times, which resulted in his death”.

They are then alleged to have beaten Ms Witheridge until she was unconscious before raping her. Finally the men “smashed and chopped” her head with a hoe in order to kill her and cover up her sexual assault and Mr Miller’s murder.

His head wasn't smashed was it?

I thought he was drowned too?

Who was restraining Hannah at this gruesome point, or was she waiting politely?

How does smashing splitting her skull almost in two cover up a sexual assualt?

Are these guys the strongest Hobbits on record?

What a complete ant utter sham!!!

[Luang]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

That is, of course, distinctly different from the claim that the father of Nomsod said his son left in the morning of the murders.

One would expect that a credible source for such devastatingly incriminating statement would be at the fingertips of those pushing the Nomsod theory, but so far, nothing.

You are correct and I knew you would be along shortly to point out the distinction.

Still ... I find it an odd response to the question.

If it were me in that situation.......

I would reply something like ........ 'My son had nothing to do with this. He is in Bangkok..... ' (assuming he actually was in Bangkok)

but..... I understand you have a position to maintain.

I actually find the statement, if accurate, remarkably dispassionate.

Think about it, he didn't know were his son was and instead of the knee-jerk parental reaction of defending his son regardless of what he knew or didn't he went for the cold hard facts, he didn't know where he was or if he was responsible, that's what I call intellectual honesty.

OMFG!!

[mcm991]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Police-free-bar-owners-and-look-for-ex-village-hea-30243997.html

One of the two men released last night, who reporters did not identify, said he was unable to contact his son and did not know if he had a hand in the killings.

That is, of course, distinctly different from the claim that the father of Nomsod said his son left in the morning of the murders.

One would expect that a credible source for such devastatingly incriminating statement would be at the fingertips of those pushing the Nomsod theory, but so far, nothing.

You are correct and I knew you would be along shortly to point out the distinction.

Still ... I find it an odd response to the question.

If it were me in that situation.......

I would reply something like ........ 'My son had nothing to do with this. He is in Bangkok..... ' (assuming he actually was in Bangkok)

but..... I understand you have a position to maintain.

I actually find the statement, if accurate, remarkably dispassionate.

Think about it, he didn't know were his son was and instead of the knee-jerk parental reaction of defending his son regardless of what he knew or didn't he went for the cold hard facts, he didn't know where he was or if he was responsible, that's what I call intellectual honesty.

Perhaps you are not a parent.

His answer does seem to indicate that he did not know where his son was at the time ...... (I'd know if my kid was in Bangkok or not)

but also that he would not be too surprised if his son was involved.

[AleG]

I am quite sure (assuming the Burmese kids are innocent scapegoats) that they know nothing. They would not have been chosen as the fall guys if they did know anything, because of what they might say in court. There were two key criteria in choosing scapegoats:

• They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi. He, also, incidentally, provided evidence that will probably aid the defense (the Burmese kids in bed around 5:00 am with no signs of anything out of the ordinary).
• They would not be able to drop any bombshells in court.

The RTP had to sift through hundreds of candidates until they found these two. Those who knew anything were threatened and fled back to Myanmar.

"They had no alibi. The RTP partly screwed up on this as one of their targets, the third Burmese, was able to prove an alibi"

This is what the third Burmese, Muang Muang actually said:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB. “Maung Maung said he left the scene at around 1am after they finished one bottle of beer each, but the two stayed – apparently they wanted to continue drinking and playing guitar. He did mention that there was an ‘English’ or ‘Western’ couple at some point.”

MAT representative Kyaw Thaung reconfirmed the testimony the legal team had been told. “After finishing the beer and cigarettes, Maung Maung said he told his two friends he was leaving, but they insisted on having more to drink, so he went back to the room and got an extra bottle of alcohol and took it to them. That was all around 1am,” he said.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Exactly how is that an alibi for the defendants since he left them near the scene of the crime before the time of the murders and didn't see them again until 5 AM?

It is an alibi for Muang Muang, not the remaining two accused. Did you also notice that the English or Western couple could not have been David and Hannah before 1:00 am based on CCTV and various witness reports.

Ah, I see what you meant now. Still, it's a bit of a stretch argue that they had no alibi, therefore that's why they were chosen as scapegoats in view of the fact that since relatively early on the investigation they were focusing on three unidentified Burmese men that were near the scene of the crime drinking and singing with a guitar.

As for the time and western couple, there lots of western tourists in Koh Tao, so it may had been someone else; besides that "around 1AM" from someone who has been drinking leaves a lot of leeway; in any case I haven't seen any definite information regarding the time any of the victims were last seen alive.

[mitsubishi]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11313714/Koh-Tao-murders-suspects-in-killing-of-David-Miller-and-Hannah-Witheridge-say-they-were-framed.html

Prosecution documents seen by The Telegraph allege the two men “repeatedly smashed and chopped Mr Miller's face and head many times, which resulted in his death”.

They are then alleged to have beaten Ms Witheridge until she was unconscious before raping her. Finally the men “smashed and chopped” her head with a hoe in order to kill her and cover up her sexual assault and Mr Miller’s murder.

His head wasn't smashed was it?

I thought he was drowned too?

Who was restraining Hannah at this gruesome point, or was she waiting politely?

How does smashing splitting her skull almost in two cover up a sexual assualt?

Are these guys the strongest Hobbits on record?

What a complete ant utter sham!!!

It's not pretty but that's the reality. You can't expect all women these days to be shield-maidens. In fact most let their guard down so much I fear the little thing was probably just screaming and rooted to the spot by fear as her man was meeting his end.

You've got to remember that Asians might look feeble compared to some of us, but they are ferociously violent when the mood (read alcohol) takes them.

[AleG]

I actually find the statement, if accurate, remarkably dispassionate.

Think about it, he didn't know were his son was and instead of the knee-jerk parental reaction of defending his son regardless of what he knew or didn't he went for the cold hard facts, he didn't know where he was or if he was responsible, that's what I call intellectual honesty.

OMFG!!

Yes, intellectual honesty, the thing that compels some people to, when they don't know something, say they don't know, instead of coming up with some made up excuse even if that is against their own self interest or that of someone they care about.

If you had a son and the police comes knocking at your door one day asking were he was yesterday because he is a suspect in a murder case, if you don't know for a fact were he was at that time what would be you answer?

[Broeno]

Family, aldo i understand their feelings very well, are emotional involved and not objective. To quote this a a headline looks like a next move from Thai police to hide the mistakes that are made in the investigation.

There are more questions than facts in this case.

Why do i have a bad feeling about Justice being done in this case