Family of Brits murdered in Thailand say evidence convincing

[BritTim]

BritTim, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:52, said:

It is not sure Mon said it, but Sean definitely claimed to a reporter that he did. See http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-pal-murdered-brit-pair-4303495. As I intimated in an earlier post, my instincts say that Sean was quite evasive about what really happened. I think he was close to the truth in reporting what Mon said to him, but did not reveal anything of what he said to Mon.

Then we have the story (started by Mon I presume) that Sean had to have blood cleaned off him by one of Mon's employees on the night of the murders, which Sean vehemently denies. It was supposedly this which caused Mon and his cop friend to accuse Sean of being the murderer and to go after him a week later. Of course Sean maintains that Mon is lying and that he (Mon) knows who committed the murders.

I have to say that I do not see Sean as the kind of guy who would be a participant in a double murder (or even a violent rape). Like the B2, I do not think he is the type. He does come across as someone clearly damaged by substance abuse. I have seen a lot of that, including among friends, and including here in Thailand.

[thailandchilli]

Its great that more information gathering is taking place and CT are being scrutinised so objectively.

I have enlarged and enhanced the shorts label but Im not sure it will help any.

The Blue bits form the pockets.

I don't think they are reversible. Very few casual shorts are reversible. Especially of cotton mix. It will make the short very hot and heavy.

Agree, reversible shorts? Then the label shown would be on the inside out and how about the pockets, just does not seem feasible to me?

[IslandLover]

aimbc, on 31 Dec 2014 - 03:57, said:aimbc, on 31 Dec 2014 - 03:57, said:

loonodingle, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:45, said:loonodingle, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:45, said:

DennisF, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:42, said:DennisF, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:42, said:

Its great that more information gathering is taking place and CT are being scrutinised so objectively.

I have enlarged and enhanced the shorts label but Im not sure it will help any.

The Blue bits form the pockets.

I don't think they are reversible. Very few casual shorts are reversible. Especially of cotton mix. It will make the short very hot and heavy.

No, I don't think they are reversible either but there is some blue on the inside (pockets maybe?), although there does seem to be a lot of blue in one of the photos. The belt appears to be the same in both photos. Actually, the more I look at those photos, the more confused I get, i.e. are they really the same shorts?

Edited December 31, 2014 by IslandLover

[DennisF]

The shorts are not reversible, you can see the double stitching on the inside of them.

[Eirene]

DennisF, on 31 Dec 2014 - 03:23, said:

Just another 2 little facts

Sean said in that panicked facebook post ' It was the owner of the AC bar that did it'

He has since said he was refering to his own imminent death BUT no native English speaker would used the words did or done to describe a future event..

As it transpired he did not know the headman but did know Mon who manges the AC bar for his brother its not a stretch to assume he was speaking about Mon.

The second one is that he is reported to have borrowed the phone of the shop assistant to post to facebook and contact Sky News.

Where was his phone, could it be one of the phones the police have?

I saw a phone in the hands of the RTP in one of the videos, which I think was from Thai TV, and I'm sure it had a Ducati logo on the screen, just like the tattoo Sean has on his chest. If the police do have Sean's phone, then any photo he may have taken of the altercation in the AC bar will be long gone.

I wonder if the altercation happened in the bar or after they left the bar? I am sure I viewed a video of some sort of incident with Hannah and those three football players that were behind them....have searched...no joy...all I can locate is a still of the players.

[ravip]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

[DennisF]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

Very philosophical, Im sure this will bring real value to the thread.

So whats your point now youve done a copy and paste to impress us all??

Edited December 31, 2014 by DennisF

[thailandchilli]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

[BritTim]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Not conclusive IMHO.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

Yes, David being naked (except for one sock) is a huge clue. I would like to see a full list of possible hypotheses for how that could be. For instance, did the killers remove his clothing to thoroughly rinse it in the water?

[greenchair]

Spot the difference.

The t shirt is dirty and creased on the beach.

The t shirt is shiny clean and fresh on the Rock.

The pants are white with a little bit blue pockets.

The pants are dark blue all over with no white showing.

Sean phone with ducati picture with police.

Sean said I sent pictures to sky on my phone.

Sean said I borrowed the shop assistant phone and called my mother? ??who is in England. Very expensive on a shop assistant phone.

[greenchair]

Sean and mon at a press conference.

Mon:'he did it. We washed the

blood from him. '?

Sean:he did it.'he had a fight

with her in a bar, I have

the picture'?

Sean/mon: they did it,we saw

them at the beach

playing guitar.?

[loonodingle]

Personally I think focus on Sean. He is the link to be broken here. Chris Ware and some off the others could break his story about not being out. If this happens then he is floundering again. Perhaps this should be raised directly with the coroner or the met police. Perhaps even Hugo or Hannahs MP.

It needs some with a bit of clout to look into this.

Whilst all involved seem to have buried their heads (Friends and Family) the initial shock should turn I to a determination to see justice for them both.

So if any of you are reading this speak up. What do you know about Sean McAnna. Did you see him out that night.

[loonodingle]

And by the way Sean claimed his puncture wound was from falling off a motorcycle.

I don't believe this as you would expect grazing in the vicinity of a wound. He has a clear puncture mark and no peripheral damage.

not likely to be made how he claimed.

[catsanddogs]

Just another 2 little facts

Sean said in that panicked facebook post ' It was the owner of the AC bar that did it'

He has since said he was refering to his own imminent death BUT no native English speaker would used the words did or done to describe a future event..

As it transpired he did not know the headman but did know Mon who manges the AC bar for his brother its not a stretch to assume he was speaking about Mon.

The second one is that he is reported to have borrowed the phone of the shop assistant to post to facebook and contact Sky News.

Where was his phone, could it be one of the phones the police have?

Yes, I imagine his was one of the phones the police had. Maybe the phone with the photo of the altercation on of Hannah and someone in AC bar.

[catsanddogs]

Just another 2 little facts

Sean said in that panicked facebook post ' It was the owner of the AC bar that did it'

He has since said he was refering to his own imminent death BUT no native English speaker would used the words did or done to describe a future event..

As it transpired he did not know the headman but did know Mon who manges the AC bar for his brother its not a stretch to assume he was speaking about Mon.

The second one is that he is reported to have borrowed the phone of the shop assistant to post to facebook and contact Sky News.

Where was his phone, could it be one of the phones the police have?

Yes, I imagine his was one of the phones the police had. Maybe the phone with the photo of the altercation on of Hannah and someone in AC bar.

[catsanddogs]

BritTim, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:52, said:

boomerangutang, on 31 Dec 2014 - 01:13, said:

BritTim, on 30 Dec 2014 - 19:04, said:

Why would you discount the idea of a drug addict trying to blackmail Mon with threats about revealing the truth about what happened to David and Hannah? Why did Mon suddenly become so angry? Mon saying to David "you did it and you are going to die tonight" would be a pretty good reply to the attempted blackmail. Also, money to shut him up would be pretty logical once he was in Europe out of reach. Sean strikes me as someone who would be talking to reporters unless paid not to. My hypothesis might be wrong, but it seems to fit.

Methinks you're reading too much in these scenarios. It's not sure Mon said to Sean "you did it and you are going to die tonight". Maybe I missed that claim. My understanding, was Mon and Mon's cop friend threatened to kill Sean if Sean revealed what he knew about the crime.

It is not sure Mon said it, but Sean definitely claimed to a reporter that he did. See http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-pal-murdered-brit-pair-4303495. As I intimated in an earlier post, my instincts say that Sean was quite evasive about what really happened. I think he was close to the truth in reporting what Mon said to him, but did not reveal anything of what he said to Mon.

Then we have the story (started by Mon I presume) that Sean had to have blood cleaned off him by one of Mon's employees on the night of the murders, which Sean vehemently denies. It was supposedly this which caused Mon and his cop friend to accuse Sean of being the murderer and to go after him a week later. Of course Sean maintains that Mon is lying and that he (Mon) knows who committed the murders.

Sean also said that he gave his motorbike to a girl I think because she helped him in someway. That's quite a gift. Maybe to keep someone quite. Could have been the person whose phone he used in the 24/7 store (if he didn't use his own). Maybe Mon took the phone off her after Sean posted the stuff on facebook?

[catsanddogs]

BritTim, on 31 Dec 2014 - 02:52, said:

It is not sure Mon said it, but Sean definitely claimed to a reporter that he did. See http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-pal-murdered-brit-pair-4303495. As I intimated in an earlier post, my instincts say that Sean was quite evasive about what really happened. I think he was close to the truth in reporting what Mon said to him, but did not reveal anything of what he said to Mon.

Then we have the story (started by Mon I presume) that Sean had to have blood cleaned off him by one of Mon's employees on the night of the murders, which Sean vehemently denies. It was supposedly this which caused Mon and his cop friend to accuse Sean of being the murderer and to go after him a week later. Of course Sean maintains that Mon is lying and that he (Mon) knows who committed the murders.

I have to say that I do not see Sean as the kind of guy who would be a participant in a double murder (or even a violent rape). Like the B2, I do not think he is the type. He does come across as someone clearly damaged by substance abuse. I have seen a lot of that, including among friends, and including here in Thailand.

But he has said things publicly which he has later retracted.

1. 'the owner of the AC bar did it' - later said he meant if HE was killed then it was Mon who did it.

2. 'I know you tried to save her' - later got himself out of that by saying David was that kind of guy blah blah.

I don't trust him. Trouble is, if he WAS around on the eve of the murders someone would have seen him, maybe even have a photo of him and no one has come forward, not even anonymously on FB despite the thousands of posts on there.

[catsanddogs]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

The shorts definitely are not reversible as pointed out by another poster. It look like there are two pairs on the beach then. The blue ones with the belt may be long trousers and not shorts. There looks a lot of crumpled fabric there to me - enough to be trousers not shorts. If you were in the middle of murdering or raping someone and were suddenly seen by someone no doubt you would rather run from the scene than take the time to get your trousers back on. Maybe you'd just grab your underpants (if you didn't already have them on). So if the blue trousers are not David's then they must be either the rapists (if Hannah was indeed raped), or the murderers - or both. It should not take a lot of work for the RTP to find out who the blue shorts/trousers belong to.

[balo]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

Very philosophical, Im sure this will bring real value to the thread.

So whats your point now youve done a copy and paste to impress us all??

The point is that you and the gang are all biased . Where is the truth ? Not on Thaivisa , thats for sure,

[DennisF]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

Very philosophical, Im sure this will bring real value to the thread.

So whats your point now youve done a copy and paste to impress us all??

The point is that you and the gang are all biased . Where is the truth ? Not on Thaivisa , thats for sure,

And Blabo returns purely to tell us what someone else means, obviously in an biased fashion as he is so open minded about this case.

[DennisF]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

Very philosophical, Im sure this will bring real value to the thread.

So whats your point now youve done a copy and paste to impress us all??

The point is that you and the gang are all biased . Where is the truth ? Not on Thaivisa , thats for sure,

Thank you for clarifying what someone else meant, we were all confused.

If the truth is not here, why are you constantly trolling?

[AGareth2]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

The shorts definitely are not reversible as pointed out by another poster. It look like there are two pairs on the beach then. The blue ones with the belt may be long trousers and not shorts. There looks a lot of crumpled fabric there to me - enough to be trousers not shorts. If you were in the middle of murdering or raping someone and were suddenly seen by someone no doubt you would rather run from the scene than take the time to get your trousers back on. Maybe you'd just grab your underpants (if you didn't already have them on). So if the blue trousers are not David's then they must be either the rapists (if Hannah was indeed raped), or the murderers - or both. It should not take a lot of work for the RTP to find out who the blue shorts/trousers belong to.

can you link a pic?

crucial as David wasn't wearing 2 pairs

not heard this before

[StealthEnergiser]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

The shorts definitely are not reversible as pointed out by another poster. It look like there are two pairs on the beach then. The blue ones with the belt may be long trousers and not shorts. There looks a lot of crumpled fabric there to me - enough to be trousers not shorts. If you were in the middle of murdering or raping someone and were suddenly seen by someone no doubt you would rather run from the scene than take the time to get your trousers back on. Maybe you'd just grab your underpants (if you didn't already have them on). So if the blue trousers are not David's then they must be either the rapists (if Hannah was indeed raped), or the murderers - or both. It should not take a lot of work for the RTP to find out who the blue shorts/trousers belong to.

can you link a pic?

crucial as David wasn't wearing 2 pairs

not heard this before

Edited December 31, 2014 by StealthEnergiser

[thailandchilli]

When a person's mind is biased, he\she would never see the truth.

And biased minds we see a dime a dozen.

Very philosophical, Im sure this will bring real value to the thread.

So whats your point now youve done a copy and paste to impress us all??

The point is that you and the gang are all biased . Where is the truth ? Not on Thaivisa , thats for sure,

If thats the case then what are you doing on here lying????

[catsanddogs]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Not conclusive IMHO.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

Yes, David being naked (except for one sock) is a huge clue. I would like to see a full list of possible hypotheses for how that could be. For instance, did the killers remove his clothing to thoroughly rinse it in the water?

Maybe one of the Burmese boys trousers were planted there? Maung and Zaw were wearing dark trousers on the evening of the murders. Crazy thought but not beyond the realm of possibility considering all the other unbelievable stuff that seems to be going on. I still have a strange feeling about Maung's confession regarding going back to get a guitar around 5am from the AC bar. The timing seems too coincidental. And the fact that the RTP at first said he confessed and then his status was changed to a witness.

[metisdead]

A post in which the reply had been made within the quoted post has been removed:

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

Even though a different colored font was used, this is still not allowed.

[boomerangutang]

A different, parallel tack.

Was out standing in a field this morning thinking about this and it seems the change of focus came about when Gen Panya was replaced.

He had already arrested Mon and was looking for the son after saying there was enough evidence to convict them.

It would seem he was replaced because he was looking in the wrong, right, place (depending on point of view) for as soon as he was replaced they were no longer suspects, so questions :

Who ordered Gen Panya to be replaced ?

Has that person got any connections with Koh Tau ?

Was there any coercion, intimidation, bribery involved in the replacement ?

If there was bribery is there any way to find and follow a money trail ?

Has the person who ordered the transfer or any of their family made any extraordinary purchases since the replacement ?

Have any of the other police involved or their families made any extraordinary purchases since the investigation began ?

Possibly showing that money changed hands could indicate a cover up which would be of advantage to the defense.

Finally, could the defense call Gen Panya as a witness to explain why he considered Mon and the son to be the guilty parties rather than the 2 Burmese ?

Good points, tho most mentioned in several prior posts. Your last question is interesting. However, it would be too easy for Panya (the initial head cop) to simply say he was wrong about designating Mon and Nomsod as prime suspects during his shift. Panya, as all Thai top brass, are required to be team players. He is no more likely to say things which go against the grain (of the frame-up) than he is to get a sex-change.

"Who ordered Gen Panya to be replaced ?"

It came from the top. That's why top brass (who are now top politicians) are so eager to get their agenda fulfilled on this frame-up. The Gang of 4, if you asked them, would say the replacement was pre-planned before the crime, but that is completely nonsensical. A top brass on a very important case, doesn't get replaced right as the case starts getting investigated, unless there's a serious reason to do so. In this instance, it was because Panya was barking up trees which he shouldn't be barking up. In other words, he was implicating the Headman's people. They're Thai, they're rich, and they're well connected. A definite no-no. It was either 'get replaced right away' or get mysteriously snuffed out by an unfortunate accident.

And yes, the money trail. Thai investigators are notoriously inept at following or exposing money trails. During the 3 months Reds were commandeering Bangkok, there were strong allegations that Thaksin was funneling tens of millions of baht to Red leaders. Was any of that large money trail exposed/revealed? The public heard nothing.

[catsanddogs]

Meanwhile, Thailand agreed to allow British and Burmese observers of the judicial process after senior Thai officials met with British Ambassador to Thailand Mark Kent and his Burmese counterpart Win Maung on Tuesday, according to the Bangkok Post.

Win Maung confirmed to The Irrawaddy that the Thai police chief had agreed to allow the foreign observers, saying their presence would bolster the credibility of the investigation and judicial process.

(Irrawaddy Oct 15th)

So that's why Scotland Yard were invited. That makes more sense of it.

[catsanddogs]

Lawyer U Aung Myo Thant, a member of the team, told Mizzima they were calling on the court to summon Mr Christopher Ware and Mr Sean McAnna - friends of the two British murder victims Ms Hannah Witheridge and Mr David Millar - as they could be main witnesses in the case.

“Myanmar witnesses testify that they (Mr Ware and Mr McAnna) are related to the case. When they entered into the bar, they had injuries. Bloods stains were on their guitar. And the time was around 4 o’clock in the early morning,” said U Aung Myo Thant. “But they said they had a motorcycle accident and then they were released. Therefore, we officially requested the court to question them again.”

source http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/16046-koh-tao-murder-defence-team-wants-to-quiz-two-british-witnesses/16046-koh-tao-murder-defence-team-wants-to-quiz-two-british-witnesses

(19th December)

[BritTim]

Yes the shorts are confusing.

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

If we assume they are the same shorts then it would indicate that David was wearing them at the time of the struggle and his murder as they are so filthy.

Not conclusive IMHO.

Yet when he was found his shorts were off and so was his underwear? This would not have happened in the struggle and so must have been done after his death ie someone stripping him of the shorts and underwear? Again the possibility of the staged crime scene

Yes, David being naked (except for one sock) is a huge clue. I would like to see a full list of possible hypotheses for how that could be. For instance, did the killers remove his clothing to thoroughly rinse it in the water?

Maybe one of the Burmese boys trousers were planted there? Maung and Zaw were wearing dark trousers on the evening of the murders. Crazy thought but not beyond the realm of possibility considering all the other unbelievable stuff that seems to be going on. I still have a strange feeling about Maung's confession regarding going back to get a guitar around 5am from the AC bar. The timing seems too coincidental. And the fact that the RTP at first said he confessed and then his status was changed to a witness.

I shall be curious to see if Maung is ever heard from again. The prosecution may want us to forget all about him.

Anyway, I do not believe anything belonging to the Burmese kids was at the crime scene. They may from the beginning have hoped to find scapegoats, but they would not yet have known who they would be.

On physical evidence, they have the (probably genuine) cigarette butt with its DNA found, not at the crime scene, but on the beach where the Burmese had been. More questionable, they have the semen DNA. I want to hear the chain of custody around that, but strongly suspect tampering (though my guess is that the original post mortem was done correctly). [Will the prosecution be required to release full technical details about the DNA testing, sufficient that the defense could compare with their own DNA tests from the B2?]