Letter from two accused of Koh Tao murders to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi Myanmar Democracy icon

[Fat Haggis]

There is no such thing as closure when you lose a loved one to an act of violence, it stays with you forever and not a day goes past you don't think about that loss.

[aimbc]

IMHO, I don't think the family read the entire 1,000 page report to come to that conclusion? Or did they read a summary highlighting what the prosecutor thinks will stick in court.

Has anyone ever watch a movie trailer and thought the movie was going to be great and came out disappointed later.

I think the family should not have made such a statement without reading the entire report and, closely examining the findings and even questioning it. And in its original content, Thai, as things do get lost in translation. I suppose the translation of the report were provided by RTP. It definitely sways public opinion and put in the question of fairness for the defendant.

So for all of those posters hanging on to the family statement as proof of a solid case, need to stop referring to it as proof that the police has a solid case.

So you think that the families should not trust the UK police?

You think that the statements from the families influenced judges?

I think people should be able to form their own opinion and not believe others. Especially when you are talking about two human lives. This is not as trivial as you think.

JD, why do you make things up. I never wrote that it influence the judge, but it surely influenced you.

So, the families get briefed by the UK police, they then issue a statement saying that there's powerful and convincing evidence, but that is not OK. However, people who have not been involved with anyone having direct contact with the investigation can speculate and say anything and that is OK? People do make up their own minds, even those that said that they would refrain from speculation are still at it ( having already made up their minds)

I asked you the question regarding the judges based on this "put in the question of fairness for the defendant." if the judges are not influenced then the trial will be fair.

There you go. You just proved my point. I knew you would eventually get it. Everything is a speculation at this point. Me and your statements. Or have you seen the full case report. I just hate it when you exploit the family statement to be an end all and to prosecute these two. Yes spreading rumor.

[JohnThailandJohn]

Been reported numerous times that at least 3 labs were doing the testing. This is also why the University kid submitted his DNA to all three labs. Results are always recorded and those results are saved and shared with numerous people involved in the investigation and placed in records. There were MANY MANY people who had the results and were involved in the testing. The police collected hundreds of samples that needed to be compared.

Perhaps you need to see my question again, you state its been reported numerous times, strange I have seen it nowhere and I have now looked numerous times, HINT I did not mention the fiasco with Nomsod:

"can you provide a credible source for the early DNA being sent to numerous labs with the markers recorded in numerous reports, and which early set of DNA are you referring to, the first set of 12 or the second larger set of 100?"

Search the Bangkok Post, I remember I had to be careful when sharing this information here originally until it appeared elsewhere -- hint: The University kid submitted to all the same labs used for testing and comparing. There was at least 3 Labs including University labs that had the the original results and were processing the DNA police were collecting. Hint: they needed at least three labs to process the hundreds of samples they took and still were way back logged and this was also reported when the nonsense speculation came up that they already had tested the two in custody.

And no, I am not going to do the searches for you since it is not an easy search perform and would require reviewing too many articles but as I said, it was reported a number of times and repeated numerous times within links on these threads.

Edit: a search using the word "blind" will pull up Bangkok Post articles also explaining the DNA tests were done in a Blind fashion meaning the labs didn't know whose DNA they were testing.

Edited December 12, 2014 by JohnThailandJohn

[Wilsonandson]

Transparency, How would that be possible in a Thai court room? Name one Transparent court case in Thai history???

[AleG]

how can the DNA results be believed when the corruption goes right to the top...the prosecution can produce any written test results it wants but with no independent verification they are useless as evidence bearing in mind the circus that constituted the investigation along with what looks like a deliberate attempt to avoid a determined look at suspects that even the RTP themselves said were the murderers in the days after the tragic event

as to the couple of posters who go against the general consensus of opinion,i can understand that you or your friends business interests may be affected and i sympathise with you on that score but u seem to have no moral conscience in wanting to see these two burmese men locked up or executed on evidence that wouldnt even take this case to court in the west and for that reason i as others have no respect for you or your opinions

Your theory of the DNA swap would necessarily involve the collusion of the UK authorities and the laboratory in Singapore that carried out the initial testing; it's a ridiculous idea with no facts or evidence to support it.

As for your second paragraph, it only serves to demonstrate that you are deliberately unwilling to accept any ideas or facts that would go against your preconceived notions, hardly the attitude of someone with any interest in finding out the truth.

Nothing was sent to Singapore. Nothing was sent to the UK either. What are you rattling on about..... ?

Deputy National Police chief Somyot Poompanmoung told AFP the man was being questioned but had not been arrested or charged over the murders.

Earlier Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis.

The bodies of the victims were sent back to the UK, were, as I understand it, a forensic analysis is customary in cases of violent death.

[mcm991]

how can the DNA results be believed when the corruption goes right to the top...the prosecution can produce any written test results it wants but with no independent verification they are useless as evidence bearing in mind the circus that constituted the investigation along with what looks like a deliberate attempt to avoid a determined look at suspects that even the RTP themselves said were the murderers in the days after the tragic event

as to the couple of posters who go against the general consensus of opinion,i can understand that you or your friends business interests may be affected and i sympathise with you on that score but u seem to have no moral conscience in wanting to see these two burmese men locked up or executed on evidence that wouldnt even take this case to court in the west and for that reason i as others have no respect for you or your opinions

Your theory of the DNA swap would necessarily involve the collusion of the UK authorities and the laboratory in Singapore that carried out the initial testing; it's a ridiculous idea with no facts or evidence to support it.

As for your second paragraph, it only serves to demonstrate that you are deliberately unwilling to accept any ideas or facts that would go against your preconceived notions, hardly the attitude of someone with any interest in finding out the truth.

Nothing was sent to Singapore. Nothing was sent to the UK either. What are you rattling on about..... ?

Deputy National Police chief Somyot Poompanmoung told AFP the man was being questioned but had not been arrested or charged over the murders.

Earlier Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis.

The bodies of the victims were sent back to the UK, were, as I understand it, a forensic analysis is customary in cases of violent death.

Yup... Somyot said a lot of things on that day. He also said that Nomsod and Mon were the prime suspects and both were identified on CCTV running from the crime scene.

Which sentence of his would you like to quote as truth and which would you like to say are false?

[cookee68]

If the defendants D.N.A was found on the bodies we need know 100 percent if people were malicious is it possible for the DNA to be put on the bodies by other means.

It isn't necessary to plant DNA on the bodies (and highly improbable in the early stages of the investigation). The suspects were arrested after the bodies were repatriated to the UK. All the RTP has to report (if they are stitching up the suspects) is that the suspects' DNA matches that on the victim. That's it.

Ummm the prosecution will have to give the court the test results with the dates that the tests were run. Those results have to match.

This is Thailand where people see ghosts with no heads, flying elephants, lottery numbers on trees, do you get my drift, they will believe anything if enough people say it was true.

[jdinasia]

What verdict in this case could possibly bring closure to the family of the victims?

A guilty verdict of those who actually committed the crime.

And the families of the victims have made a statement.

[thailandchilli]

Been reported numerous times that at least 3 labs were doing the testing. This is also why the University kid submitted his DNA to all three labs. Results are always recorded and those results are saved and shared with numerous people involved in the investigation and placed in records. There were MANY MANY people who had the results and were involved in the testing. The police collected hundreds of samples that needed to be compared.

Perhaps you need to see my question again, you state its been reported numerous times, strange I have seen it nowhere and I have now looked numerous times, HINT I did not mention the fiasco with Nomsod:

"can you provide a credible source for the early DNA being sent to numerous labs with the markers recorded in numerous reports, and which early set of DNA are you referring to, the first set of 12 or the second larger set of 100?"

Search the Bangkok Post, I remember I had to be careful when sharing this information here originally until it appeared elsewhere -- hint: The University kid submitted to all the same labs used for testing and comparing. There was at least 3 Labs including University labs that had the the original results and were processing the DNA police were collecting. Hint: they needed at least three labs to process the hundreds of samples they took and still were way back logged and this was also reported when the nonsense speculation came up that they already had tested the two in custody.

And no, I am not going to do the searches for you since it is not an easy search perform and would require reviewing too many articles but as I said, it was reported a number of times and repeated numerous times with links on these threads.

Edit: a search using the word "blind" will pull up Bangkok Post articles also explaining the DNA tests were done in a Blind fashion meaning the labs didn't know whose DNA they were testing.

So you make a claim that you do not back up, if you do that in such a specific and precise way then you make it as fact, to be credible fact then you also need to provide the link to that said fact. You have not and so as far as I'm concerned its speculation, by the way....hint.... speculation or assumption is fine so long as its not claimed to be fact.

I have read the article in Bangkok Post dated published 30 Sept, it makes no mention of various labs that it was sent to only that : "He said experts in Bangkok were rushing to complete the tests, though each sample takes at least 48 hours to complete. Up to 30 tests are being conducted simultaneously" also no mention of your other claims

[jdinasia]

If the defendants D.N.A was found on the bodies we need know 100 percent if people were malicious is it possible for the DNA to be put on the bodies by other means.

It isn't necessary to plant DNA on the bodies (and highly improbable in the early stages of the investigation). The suspects were arrested after the bodies were repatriated to the UK. All the RTP has to report (if they are stitching up the suspects) is that the suspects' DNA matches that on the victim. That's it.

Ummm the prosecution will have to give the court the test results with the dates that the tests were run. Those results have to match.

This is Thailand where people see ghosts with no heads, flying elephants, lottery numbers on trees, do you get my drift, they will believe anything if enough people say it was true.

This is TVF and people see conspiracy everywhere....

But it goes to the judges and not the people. It will be decided on the points of law.

[phuketrichard]

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

meanwhile another party at the AC Bar last night and another farang beaten up there by three Thais and hospitalised off the island this morning- a first hand eye witness account!!

Please share more details on this

I dont know the cause but three guys in AC bar took out one farang last night because something was said. The man was taken off the island by boat this morning. I heard this from someone on the island who was at the bar last night. The same source said there was also trouble there on Saturday night

sorry;

without a link its nothing but another Rumor

[jdinasia]

IMHO, I don't think the family read the entire 1,000 page report to come to that conclusion? Or did they read a summary highlighting what the prosecutor thinks will stick in court.

Has anyone ever watch a movie trailer and thought the movie was going to be great and came out disappointed later.

I think the family should not have made such a statement without reading the entire report and, closely examining the findings and even questioning it. And in its original content, Thai, as things do get lost in translation. I suppose the translation of the report were provided by RTP. It definitely sways public opinion and put in the question of fairness for the defendant.

So for all of those posters hanging on to the family statement as proof of a solid case, need to stop referring to it as proof that the police has a solid case.

So you think that the families should not trust the UK police?

You think that the statements from the families influenced judges?

I think people should be able to form their own opinion and not believe others. Especially when you are talking about two human lives. This is not as trivial as you think.

JD, why do you make things up. I never wrote that it influence the judge, but it surely influenced you.

So, the families get briefed by the UK police, they then issue a statement saying that there's powerful and convincing evidence, but that is not OK. However, people who have not been involved with anyone having direct contact with the investigation can speculate and say anything and that is OK? People do make up their own minds, even those that said that they would refrain from speculation are still at it ( having already made up their minds)

I asked you the question regarding the judges based on this "put in the question of fairness for the defendant." if the judges are not influenced then the trial will be fair.

There you go. You just proved my point. I knew you would eventually get it. Everything is a speculation at this point. Me and your statements. Or have you seen the full case report. I just hate it when you exploit the family statement to be an end all and to prosecute these two. Yes spreading rumor.

Not spreading rumor at all.

The families met with the UK police and discussed the case. Putting them in a better position than you or me to make a statement.

They made a statement.

Those are facts, not rumors.

You sure glossed over the question of the judges being influenced.

[AleG]

Deputy National Police chief Somyot Poompanmoung told AFP the man was being questioned but had not been arrested or charged over the murders.

Earlier Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis.

The bodies of the victims were sent back to the UK, were, as I understand it, a forensic analysis is customary in cases of violent death.

Yup... Somyot said a lot of things on that day. He also said that Nomsod and Mon were the prime suspects and both were identified on CCTV running from the crime scene.

Which sentence of his would you like to quote as truth and which would you like to say are false?

Nothing precludes both sentences being true, subsequent facts are needed to determine the validity of the sentences. In the case of the suspects subsequent facts exculpated them from involvement; that's how things work, you make a hypothesis is made, it is tested against facts and evidence and if those don't validate the hypothesis or support a different scenario the hypothesis goes to the waste bin.

For example, you can find a citation for the test having been not done in Singapore after all and prove me wrong on that point; because I'm not a deliberately obtuse individual I would not refuse to believe any credible source that would contradict my current understanding of events.

[mcm991]

Deputy National Police chief Somyot Poompanmoung told AFP the man was being questioned but had not been arrested or charged over the murders.

Earlier Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis.

The bodies of the victims were sent back to the UK, were, as I understand it, a forensic analysis is customary in cases of violent death.

Yup... Somyot said a lot of things on that day. He also said that Nomsod and Mon were the prime suspects and both were identified on CCTV running from the crime scene.

Which sentence of his would you like to quote as truth and which would you like to say are false?

Nothing precludes both sentences being true, subsequent facts are needed to determine the validity of the sentences. In the case of the suspects subsequent facts exculpated them from involvement; that's how things work, you make a hypothesis is made, it is tested against facts and evidence and if those don't validate the hypothesis or support a different scenario the hypothesis goes to the waste bin.

For example, you can find a citation for the test having been not done in Singapore after all and prove me wrong on that point; because I'm not a deliberately obtuse individual I would not refuse to believe any credible source that would contradict my current understanding of events.

I like what you say about facts, evidence and hypotheses. I wish even a fraction of this had been applied to this case.

I hope you are correct that samples were sent to Singapore. Many here were hoping the same initially, myself included. No follow up evidence of this ever emerged - not for the lack of looking.

If it comes out in court that DNA testing was initially done in Singapore ...... and it is independantly verified .... I for one would be comfortable in accepting the results of those tests and letting the chips fall where they may.

[aimbc]

IMHO, I don't think the family read the entire 1,000 page report to come to that conclusion? Or did they read a summary highlighting what the prosecutor thinks will stick in court.

Has anyone ever watch a movie trailer and thought the movie was going to be great and came out disappointed later.

I think the family should not have made such a statement without reading the entire report and, closely examining the findings and even questioning it. And in its original content, Thai, as things do get lost in translation. I suppose the translation of the report were provided by RTP. It definitely sways public opinion and put in the question of fairness for the defendant.

So for all of those posters hanging on to the family statement as proof of a solid case, need to stop referring to it as proof that the police has a solid case.

So you think that the families should not trust the UK police?

You think that the statements from the families influenced judges?

I think people should be able to form their own opinion and not believe others. Especially when you are talking about two human lives. This is not as trivial as you think.

JD, why do you make things up. I never wrote that it influence the judge, but it surely influenced you.

So, the families get briefed by the UK police, they then issue a statement saying that there's powerful and convincing evidence, but that is not OK. However, people who have not been involved with anyone having direct contact with the investigation can speculate and say anything and that is OK? People do make up their own minds, even those that said that they would refrain from speculation are still at it ( having already made up their minds)

I asked you the question regarding the judges based on this "put in the question of fairness for the defendant." if the judges are not influenced then the trial will be fair.

There you go. You just proved my point. I knew you would eventually get it. Everything is a speculation at this point. Me and your statements. Or have you seen the full case report. I just hate it when you exploit the family statement to be an end all and to prosecute these two. Yes spreading rumor.

Not spreading rumor at all.

The families met with the UK police and discussed the case. Putting them in a better position than you or me to make a statement.

They made a statement.

Those are facts, not rumors.

You sure glossed over the question of the judges being influenced.

So do you think the two are guilty or not? Or is there a possibility of them being innocent

And since you are stuck with me answering the judge thing, I will answer it. First I never said judge or anything. You just like to make things up so you can argue about it. Public opinion can sway decisions. Not always, but the possibility is there.

In case of the judge being swayed by the statements, chances are probably slim. Because the judge won't be swayed easily as you have been by the statement.

[sjaak327]

Andy Hall, from the trial moved up 2 months thread

"Nakhon explained to me in detail how Koh Tao case preliminary court hearing brought forward from Feb 25th 2015 to Dec 26th 2014 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defense case against the charges laid against the defendants Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo. He explained (see picture one) Samui court now demanded 10 sets of documents/evidence from both defense/prosecution to be submitted at same time by 18th Dec 2014 (in 7 days time), 7 days prior to the hearing on 26th Dec 2014.

"

You obivously didn't notice my earlier reaction to your last post on this issue.

Let me repeat it again.

As your post shows, the defense has indeed 7 days to present their evidence/witness list WITHOUT knowing the evidence that is being brought against them.

The prosecution has all the evidence, so for them it would not be difficult to present their case (otherwise they wouldn't have pressed charges) but the defense has no knowledge of the actual evidence that is going to be used against the defendants. So how do you propose they could submit their evidence /witness list ?

How can you contradict evidence which you know nothing about ?

In this case, the prosecution already has a 3-0 lead before the trial even begins, looks fair to you ? Not to me in any case.

Scroll back up. You were objecting to my "both sides submit..." at the same time statement.

That is the system here.

It would appear more difficult at first for the defense, but they get to hold back witness lists, evidence that refutes the prosecution 's precis of the case etc.

With this system it is possible to create a defense that can crush the prosecution case with no advanced warning which is unusual in most places.

How could theyb hold back witness lists ? Why didn't you quote the full text:

"Speaking to migrant worker rights activist Mr Andy Hall, Nakhon Chompuchat, lead lawyer for the two suspects, said a preliminary court hearing abruptly brought forward from February 25, 2015 to December 26 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defence case against the charges laid against the defendants Ko Zaw Lin Oo and Ko Wai Phyo (aka Ko Win Zaw Htun), both 21.

Mr Nakhon said the court is now demanding ten sets of documents and evidence from both the defence and prosecution to be submitted at same time by December 18, just a week away.

So far the prosecution has made no disclosure of their witness statements while the defence has been asked to produce a full witness list, according to Mr Nakhon, as reported by Mr Hall in a Facebook post.

The prosecution has only provided “a six-page bland document” for the defense team to go on giving the defense team no time to prepare challenges to prosecution witnesses.

Mr Hall told Mizzima that “this lack of transparency and cooperation with defence team to ensure a fair trial, and the release of statements could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial for the accused.”

"

[jdinasia]

Deputy National Police chief Somyot Poompanmoung told AFP the man was being questioned but had not been arrested or charged over the murders.

Earlier Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis.

The bodies of the victims were sent back to the UK, were, as I understand it, a forensic analysis is customary in cases of violent death.

Yup... Somyot said a lot of things on that day. He also said that Nomsod and Mon were the prime suspects and both were identified on CCTV running from the crime scene.

Which sentence of his would you like to quote as truth and which would you like to say are false?

Nothing precludes both sentences being true, subsequent facts are needed to determine the validity of the sentences. In the case of the suspects subsequent facts exculpated them from involvement; that's how things work, you make a hypothesis is made, it is tested against facts and evidence and if those don't validate the hypothesis or support a different scenario the hypothesis goes to the waste bin.

For example, you can find a citation for the test having been not done in Singapore after all and prove me wrong on that point; because I'm not a deliberately obtuse individual I would not refuse to believe any credible source that would contradict my current understanding of events.

I like what you say about facts, evidence and hypotheses. I wish even a fraction of this had been applied to this case.

I hope you are correct that samples were sent to Singapore. Many here were hoping the same initially, myself included. No follow up evidence of this ever emerged - not for the lack of looking.

If it comes out in court that DNA testing was initially done in Singapore ...... and it is independantly verified .... I for one would be comfortable in accepting the results of those tests and letting the chips fall where they may.

BTW I think you will find that Panya not Somyot talked about locals. Later he talked about arrests being made inside of 3 days and that's what happened.

[jdinasia]

Andy Hall, from the trial moved up 2 months thread

"Nakhon explained to me in detail how Koh Tao case preliminary court hearing brought forward from Feb 25th 2015 to Dec 26th 2014 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defense case against the charges laid against the defendants Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo. He explained (see picture one) Samui court now demanded 10 sets of documents/evidence from both defense/prosecution to be submitted at same time by 18th Dec 2014 (in 7 days time), 7 days prior to the hearing on 26th Dec 2014.

"

You obivously didn't notice my earlier reaction to your last post on this issue.

Let me repeat it again.

As your post shows, the defense has indeed 7 days to present their evidence/witness list WITHOUT knowing the evidence that is being brought against them.

The prosecution has all the evidence, so for them it would not be difficult to present their case (otherwise they wouldn't have pressed charges) but the defense has no knowledge of the actual evidence that is going to be used against the defendants. So how do you propose they could submit their evidence /witness list ?

How can you contradict evidence which you know nothing about ?

In this case, the prosecution already has a 3-0 lead before the trial even begins, looks fair to you ? Not to me in any case.

Scroll back up. You were objecting to my "both sides submit..." at the same time statement.

That is the system here.

It would appear more difficult at first for the defense, but they get to hold back witness lists, evidence that refutes the prosecution 's precis of the case etc.

With this system it is possible to create a defense that can crush the prosecution case with no advanced warning which is unusual in most places.

How could theyb hold back witness lists ? Why didn't you quote the full text:

"Speaking to migrant worker rights activist Mr Andy Hall, Nakhon Chompuchat, lead lawyer for the two suspects, said a preliminary court hearing abruptly brought forward from February 25, 2015 to December 26 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defence case against the charges laid against the defendants Ko Zaw Lin Oo and Ko Wai Phyo (aka Ko Win Zaw Htun), both 21.

Mr Nakhon said the court is now demanding ten sets of documents and evidence from both the defence and prosecution to be submitted at same time by December 18, just a week away.

So far the prosecution has made no disclosure of their witness statements while the defence has been asked to produce a full witness list, according to Mr Nakhon, as reported by Mr Hall in a Facebook post.

The prosecution has only provided “a six-page bland document” for the defense team to go on giving the defense team no time to prepare challenges to prosecution witnesses.

Mr Hall told Mizzima that “this lack of transparency and cooperation with defence team to ensure a fair trial, and the release of statements could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial for the accused.”

"

I quoted the relevant part. You said that the defense said something different. You were reading things that were not there.

Mr Hall is an amazing guy. He is fighting his own court case and is an advocate for migrant labor here. An advocate's job is....?

[AleG]

Nothing precludes both sentences being true, subsequent facts are needed to determine the validity of the sentences. In the case of the suspects subsequent facts exculpated them from involvement; that's how things work, you make a hypothesis is made, it is tested against facts and evidence and if those don't validate the hypothesis or support a different scenario the hypothesis goes to the waste bin.

For example, you can find a citation for the test having been not done in Singapore after all and prove me wrong on that point; because I'm not a deliberately obtuse individual I would not refuse to believe any credible source that would contradict my current understanding of events.

I like what you say about facts, evidence and hypotheses. I wish even a fraction of this had been applied to this case.

I hope you are correct that samples were sent to Singapore. Many here were hoping the same initially, myself included. No follow up evidence of this ever emerged - not for the lack of looking.

If it comes out in court that DNA testing was initially done in Singapore ...... and it is independantly verified .... I for one would be comfortable in accepting the results of those tests and letting the chips fall where they may.

In any case whether the analysis was done here or there is of little consequence, "planting" such evidence is an extraordinary claim, and those, in my book, require extraordinary evidence to prove.

Why is an extraordinary claim? Because sperm cells are not any cell, the supposed conspirators couldn't just pick a hair from the defendants comb and swap the DNA from the initial samples with it. Sperm cells are haploid, they only have one set of chromosomes and are easily differentiated from other cells with the complete paired set. The swap would had to be using sperm cells, to date the defense or the defendants (as far as I know) haven't been asked to produce a semen sample, so the "oh, they can just swap the samples" scenario is done and done right there.

On top of that the body of the victim was sent to the UK before the defendants were arrested, so it would had been impossible to plant such evidence on the body, plainly impossible. So the conspiracy would had to hinge on the Thai crossing their fingers that the UK wouldn't perform a postmortem and collect samples that could later be used to demolish the case by the defense.

The only way it would work would be to have everyone into it, local authorities,the UK authorities and the labs doing the testing. As I said, it's an extraordinary claim, were is the extraordinary evidence of this wide ranging conspiracy?

[sjaak327]

How could theyb hold back witness lists ? Why didn't you quote the full text:

"Speaking to migrant worker rights activist Mr Andy Hall, Nakhon Chompuchat, lead lawyer for the two suspects, said a preliminary court hearing abruptly brought forward from February 25, 2015 to December 26 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defence case against the charges laid against the defendants Ko Zaw Lin Oo and Ko Wai Phyo (aka Ko Win Zaw Htun), both 21.

Mr Nakhon said the court is now demanding ten sets of documents and evidence from both the defence and prosecution to be submitted at same time by December 18, just a week away.

So far the prosecution has made no disclosure of their witness statements while the defence has been asked to produce a full witness list, according to Mr Nakhon, as reported by Mr Hall in a Facebook post.

The prosecution has only provided “a six-page bland document” for the defense team to go on giving the defense team no time to prepare challenges to prosecution witnesses.

Mr Hall told Mizzima that “this lack of transparency and cooperation with defence team to ensure a fair trial, and the release of statements could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial for the accused.”

"

I quoted the relevant part. You said that the defense said something different. You were reading things that were not there.

Mr Hall is an amazing guy. He is fighting his own court case and is an advocate for migrant labor here. An advocate's job is....?

No you did not, how would the bolded part not be relevant, if you claim they can withhold witness lists ?

the point here is a FAIR TRIAL. Now judging from the remarks of the lead lawyer for the defendants, do you really believe they are offered a fair trail ?

This has been my point all along (from my very first post on this thread, which is post number 5). Never mind the technicalities, or my apparent misunderstanding on some details, just focus on the concept of a fair trail and on the remarks of the lead defense lawyer who is quite clear and leaves little room for misunderstanding. Or are we only suppose to take the statements of the parents via the FOC at face value ?

[jdinasia]

IMHO, I don't think the family read the entire 1,000 page report to come to that conclusion? Or did they read a summary highlighting what the prosecutor thinks will stick in court.

Has anyone ever watch a movie trailer and thought the movie was going to be great and came out disappointed later.

I think the family should not have made such a statement without reading the entire report and, closely examining the findings and even questioning it. And in its original content, Thai, as things do get lost in translation. I suppose the translation of the report were provided by RTP. It definitely sways public opinion and put in the question of fairness for the defendant.

So for all of those posters hanging on to the family statement as proof of a solid case, need to stop referring to it as proof that the police has a solid case.

So you think that the families should not trust the UK police?

You think that the statements from the families influenced judges?

I think people should be able to form their own opinion and not believe others. Especially when you are talking about two human lives. This is not as trivial as you think.

JD, why do you make things up. I never wrote that it influence the judge, but it surely influenced you.

So, the families get briefed by the UK police, they then issue a statement saying that there's powerful and convincing evidence, but that is not OK. However, people who have not been involved with anyone having direct contact with the investigation can speculate and say anything and that is OK? People do make up their own minds, even those that said that they would refrain from speculation are still at it ( having already made up their minds)

I asked you the question regarding the judges based on this "put in the question of fairness for the defendant." if the judges are not influenced then the trial will be fair.

There you go. You just proved my point. I knew you would eventually get it. Everything is a speculation at this point. Me and your statements. Or have you seen the full case report. I just hate it when you exploit the family statement to be an end all and to prosecute these two. Yes spreading rumor.

Not spreading rumor at all.

The families met with the UK police and discussed the case. Putting them in a better position than you or me to make a statement.

They made a statement.

Those are facts, not rumors.

You sure glossed over the question of the judges being influenced.

So do you think the two are guilty or not? Or is there a possibility of them being innocent

And since you are stuck with me answering the judge thing, I will answer it. First I never said judge or anything. You just like to make things up so you can argue about it. Public opinion can sway decisions. Not always, but the possibility is there.

In case of the judge being swayed by the statements, chances are probably slim. Because the judge won't be swayed easily as you have been by the statement.

You questioned the fairness of the trial regarding the family statements. Not me. I see no reason for the family to have less right to make a statement than the conspiracy theorists do.

As for "So do you think the two are guilty or not? Or is there a possibility of them being innocent"

Those are not either / or questions.

I do think that they are guilty. There is a possibility of them being innocent. That is why we have trials.

Do you think that the families have less rights to decide who to believe, and what they can say than you have?

[sambum]

How to spell corroberate.

• Corroborate - Merriam-Webster Online

  www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/corroborate

  Full Definition of CORROBORATE. transitive verb ... Studies that are right will becorroborated by other good studies. .... We just didn't know the spelling. Reply · ...

[mcm991]

Nothing precludes both sentences being true, subsequent facts are needed to determine the validity of the sentences. In the case of the suspects subsequent facts exculpated them from involvement; that's how things work, you make a hypothesis is made, it is tested against facts and evidence and if those don't validate the hypothesis or support a different scenario the hypothesis goes to the waste bin.

For example, you can find a citation for the test having been not done in Singapore after all and prove me wrong on that point; because I'm not a deliberately obtuse individual I would not refuse to believe any credible source that would contradict my current understanding of events.

I like what you say about facts, evidence and hypotheses. I wish even a fraction of this had been applied to this case.

I hope you are correct that samples were sent to Singapore. Many here were hoping the same initially, myself included. No follow up evidence of this ever emerged - not for the lack of looking.

If it comes out in court that DNA testing was initially done in Singapore ...... and it is independantly verified .... I for one would be comfortable in accepting the results of those tests and letting the chips fall where they may.

In any case whether the analysis was done here or there is of little consequence, "planting" such evidence is an extraordinary claim, and those, in my book, require extraordinary evidence to prove.

Why is an extraordinary claim? Because sperm cells are not any cell, the supposed conspirators couldn't just pick a hair from the defendants comb and swap the DNA from the initial samples with it. Sperm cells are haploid, they only have one set of chromosomes and are easily differentiated from other cells with the complete paired set. The swap would had to be using sperm cells, to date the defense or the defendants (as far as I know) haven't been asked to produce a semen sample, so the "oh, they can just swap the samples" scenario is done and done right there.

On top of that the body of the victim was sent to the UK before the defendants were arrested, so it would had been impossible to plant such evidence on the body, plainly impossible. So the conspiracy would had to hinge on the Thai crossing their fingers that the UK wouldn't perform a postmortem and collect samples that could later be used to demolish the case by the defense.

The only way it would work would be to have everyone into it, local authorities,the UK authorities and the labs doing the testing. As I said, it's an extraordinary claim, were is the extraordinary evidence of this wide ranging conspiracy?

Planting of evidence is not an exraordinary claim in this country. To claim this you have either never lived here or you believe in unicorns.

This is why, so many here were overjoyed to hear that initial samples were sent to SIN. However, that has never been mentioned again. All the DNA talk from the RTP has centered around testing facilities in Thailand. Hopefully it comes out in court that SIN was involved.

The bodies were likely embalmed before transportation which makes subsequent DNA examination problematic. Certainly, I have not read of any results from the UK. Hopefully, there are some. Again, that would lend credence to the case.

It is credibility that is lacking here ....... in spades.

[boomerangutang]

The DNA collected early on was sent to numerous labs and its markers were recorded in numerous reports. The suspects DNA is still in their body and can be tested over and over again with the semen DNA collected early on that also matched the DNA from cigarettes as reported early on when police were pointing the finger at other suspects.

Been reported numerous times that at least 3 labs were doing the testing. This is also why the University kid submitted his DNA to all three labs. Results are always recorded and those results are saved and shared with numerous people involved in the investigation and placed in records. There were MANY MANY people who had the results and were involved in the testing. The police collected hundreds of samples that needed to be compared.

At least 3 labs dealt with the DNA from Nomsod, weeks after the crime, which everyone involved knew wouldn't match beforehand.

But if we go back to the early days after the crime, Thai officials publicly claimed they couldn't sequence DNA in Thailand, beyond knowing sex and possibly general ethnicity. For a half day they considered asking the FBI to assist with DNA, then (apparently) opted to use a lab in Singapore. So, the '3 labs' idea mentioned, applies only to the press conference and 1 person's DNA weeks after the crime, as far as I know. As for 'MANY MANY people who had the results' ...it's doubtful, and neither you nor I know, unless you're an insider in this case. A DNA result is typically put on a card. Are there copies of the original cards going around? Who has the original card for each sample? We don't know. My guess, which fits with my assumption there's a cover-up / frame-up going on, is there are 1 or 2 top Thai officials who have the original cards (or access to them) - the most important, are the DNA types taken from Hannah's body. I've mentioned earlier, how it wouldn't be difficult to alter the cards of DNA typing taken from Hannah.

Whether or not the Brits have independently garnered DNA is unknown to the public at this time. Even if they did have DNA results which conflicted with results claimed by Thai officials, would the Brits speak up about it? ....before the inquest? ....after? We don't know. It's hard to gauge what people are thinking, when they don't speak up. Thus far, Thai officials have been speaking officially for the Brits, like when the Thais said they won't send Nomsod's DNA profile to the Brits, "because the British police trust everything we're doing, so there is no need for us to send them Nomsod's DNA data."

[boomerangutang]

In any case whether the analysis was done here or there is of little consequence, "planting" such evidence is an extraordinary claim, and those, in my book, require extraordinary evidence to prove.

Why is an extraordinary claim? Because sperm cells are not any cell, the supposed conspirators couldn't just pick a hair from the defendants comb and swap the DNA from the initial samples with it. Sperm cells are haploid, they only have one set of chromosomes and are easily differentiated from other cells with the complete paired set. The swap would had to be using sperm cells, to date the defense or the defendants (as far as I know) haven't been asked to produce a semen sample, so the "oh, they can just swap the samples" scenario is done and done right there.

On top of that the body of the victim was sent to the UK before the defendants were arrested, so it would had been impossible to plant such evidence on the body, plainly impossible. So the conspiracy would had to hinge on the Thai crossing their fingers that the UK wouldn't perform a postmortem and collect samples that could later be used to demolish the case by the defense.

The only way it would work would be to have everyone into it, local authorities,the UK authorities and the labs doing the testing. As I said, it's an extraordinary claim, were is the extraordinary evidence of this wide ranging conspiracy?

All mentioned above is moot. Fudging the DNA trail wouldn't require planting DNA, semen or anything else. The easiest way to alter the DNA evidence is for one person to get the cards which show the DNA sequence found on/in the female victim. I've mentioned earlier how the B2's DNA cards could be copied and labeled as 'DNA found on Hannah.' Who would have access to the original DNA cards? Probably only 1 or 2 officials. I admit, this would not work if DNA results were sent out to 'many many people' as JTJ claims. But we don't know whether that's true, and frankly, it's doubtful, when Thai officials won't even send Nomsod's DNA profile to the Brit experts.

addendum: Even if it were true that Thai officials sent DNA typing out to "many many people" as JTJ asserts, then perhaps it was sent out after the re-labeling/alterations to the DNA profiles found on Hannah.

Edited December 12, 2014 by boomerangutang

[mcm991]

In any case whether the analysis was done here or there is of little consequence, "planting" such evidence is an extraordinary claim, and those, in my book, require extraordinary evidence to prove.

Why is an extraordinary claim? Because sperm cells are not any cell, the supposed conspirators couldn't just pick a hair from the defendants comb and swap the DNA from the initial samples with it. Sperm cells are haploid, they only have one set of chromosomes and are easily differentiated from other cells with the complete paired set. The swap would had to be using sperm cells, to date the defense or the defendants (as far as I know) haven't been asked to produce a semen sample, so the "oh, they can just swap the samples" scenario is done and done right there.

On top of that the body of the victim was sent to the UK before the defendants were arrested, so it would had been impossible to plant such evidence on the body, plainly impossible. So the conspiracy would had to hinge on the Thai crossing their fingers that the UK wouldn't perform a postmortem and collect samples that could later be used to demolish the case by the defense.

The only way it would work would be to have everyone into it, local authorities,the UK authorities and the labs doing the testing. As I said, it's an extraordinary claim, were is the extraordinary evidence of this wide ranging conspiracy?

All mentioned above is moot. Fudging the DNA trail wouldn't require planting DNA, semen or anythings else. The easiest way to alter the DNA evidence is for one person to get the cards which show the DNA sequence found on/in the female victim. I've mentioned earlier how the B2's DNA cards could be copied and labeled as 'DNA found on Hannah.' Who would have access to the original DNA cards? Probably only 1 or 2 officials. I admit, this would not work if DNA results were sent out to 'many many people' as JTJ claims. But we don't know whether that's true, and frankly, it's doubtful, when Thai officials won't even send Nomsod's DNA profile to the Brit experts.

Maybe the RTP refused to release Junior's DNA to the Yard because they don't trust them. They know how easy it is to manipulate it......... it could come back to show anything ......

[jdinasia]

How could theyb hold back witness lists ? Why didn't you quote the full text:

"Speaking to migrant worker rights activist Mr Andy Hall, Nakhon Chompuchat, lead lawyer for the two suspects, said a preliminary court hearing abruptly brought forward from February 25, 2015 to December 26 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defence case against the charges laid against the defendants Ko Zaw Lin Oo and Ko Wai Phyo (aka Ko Win Zaw Htun), both 21.

Mr Nakhon said the court is now demanding ten sets of documents and evidence from both the defence and prosecution to be submitted at same time by December 18, just a week away.

So far the prosecution has made no disclosure of their witness statements while the defence has been asked to produce a full witness list, according to Mr Nakhon, as reported by Mr Hall in a Facebook post.

The prosecution has only provided “a six-page bland document” for the defense team to go on giving the defense team no time to prepare challenges to prosecution witnesses.

Mr Hall told Mizzima that “this lack of transparency and cooperation with defence team to ensure a fair trial, and the release of statements could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial for the accused.”

"

I quoted the relevant part. You said that the defense said something different. You were reading things that were not there.

Mr Hall is an amazing guy. He is fighting his own court case and is an advocate for migrant labor here. An advocate's job is....?

No you did not, how would the bolded part not be relevant, if you claim they can withhold witness lists ?

the point here is a FAIR TRIAL. Now judging from the remarks of the lead lawyer for the defendants, do you really believe they are offered a fair trail ?

This has been my point all along (from my very first post on this thread, which is post number 5). Never mind the technicalities, or my apparent misunderstanding on some details, just focus on the concept of a fair trail and on the remarks of the lead defense lawyer who is quite clear and leaves little room for misunderstanding. Or are we only suppose to take the statements of the parents via the FOC at face value ?

"so far..."

And yes, I think they are being offered a fair trial.

I get that you are choosing to believe the defense attorney and are presenting things that he didn't say as fact.

BTW yes you should take the family statements at face value. Not only have they been granted access which you don't have, they are also calling for a fair and transparent trial.

Feel free to argue fairness as much as you like, but remember that the lack of discovery cuts both ways.

[jdinasia]

In any case whether the analysis was done here or there is of little consequence, "planting" such evidence is an extraordinary claim, and those, in my book, require extraordinary evidence to prove.

Why is an extraordinary claim? Because sperm cells are not any cell, the supposed conspirators couldn't just pick a hair from the defendants comb and swap the DNA from the initial samples with it. Sperm cells are haploid, they only have one set of chromosomes and are easily differentiated from other cells with the complete paired set. The swap would had to be using sperm cells, to date the defense or the defendants (as far as I know) haven't been asked to produce a semen sample, so the "oh, they can just swap the samples" scenario is done and done right there.

On top of that the body of the victim was sent to the UK before the defendants were arrested, so it would had been impossible to plant such evidence on the body, plainly impossible. So the conspiracy would had to hinge on the Thai crossing their fingers that the UK wouldn't perform a postmortem and collect samples that could later be used to demolish the case by the defense.

The only way it would work would be to have everyone into it, local authorities,the UK authorities and the labs doing the testing. As I said, it's an extraordinary claim, were is the extraordinary evidence of this wide ranging conspiracy?

All mentioned above is moot. Fudging the DNA trail wouldn't require planting DNA, semen or anything else. The easiest way to alter the DNA evidence is for one person to get the cards which show the DNA sequence found on/in the female victim. I've mentioned earlier how the B2's DNA cards could be copied and labeled as 'DNA found on Hannah.' Who would have access to the original DNA cards? Probably only 1 or 2 officials. I admit, this would not work if DNA results were sent out to 'many many people' as JTJ claims. But we don't know whether that's true, and frankly, it's doubtful, when Thai officials won't even send Nomsod's DNA profile to the Brit experts.

addendum: Even if it were true that Thai officials sent DNA typing out to "many many people" as JTJ asserts, then perhaps it was sent out after the re-labeling/alterations to the DNA profiles found on Hannah.

Serious question. Have you ever seen a DNA lab report?

Your claims that it can just be swapped out are not accurate.

[aimbc]

IMHO, I don't think the family read the entire 1,000 page report to come to that conclusion? Or did they read a summary highlighting what the prosecutor thinks will stick in court.

Has anyone ever watch a movie trailer and thought the movie was going to be great and came out disappointed later.

I think the family should not have made such a statement without reading the entire report and, closely examining the findings and even questioning it. And in its original content, Thai, as things do get lost in translation. I suppose the translation of the report were provided by RTP. It definitely sways public opinion and put in the question of fairness for the defendant.

So for all of those posters hanging on to the family statement as proof of a solid case, need to stop referring to it as proof that the police has a solid case.

So you think that the families should not trust the UK police?

You think that the statements from the families influenced judges?

I think people should be able to form their own opinion and not believe others. Especially when you are talking about two human lives. This is not as trivial as you think.

JD, why do you make things up. I never wrote that it influence the judge, but it surely influenced you.

So, the families get briefed by the UK police, they then issue a statement saying that there's powerful and convincing evidence, but that is not OK. However, people who have not been involved with anyone having direct contact with the investigation can speculate and say anything and that is OK? People do make up their own minds, even those that said that they would refrain from speculation are still at it ( having already made up their minds)

I asked you the question regarding the judges based on this "put in the question of fairness for the defendant." if the judges are not influenced then the trial will be fair.

There you go. You just proved my point. I knew you would eventually get it. Everything is a speculation at this point. Me and your statements. Or have you seen the full case report. I just hate it when you exploit the family statement to be an end all and to prosecute these two. Yes spreading rumor.

Not spreading rumor at all.

The families met with the UK police and discussed the case. Putting them in a better position than you or me to make a statement.

They made a statement.

Those are facts, not rumors.

You sure glossed over the question of the judges being influenced.

So do you think the two are guilty or not? Or is there a possibility of them being innocent

And since you are stuck with me answering the judge thing, I will answer it. First I never said judge or anything. You just like to make things up so you can argue about it. Public opinion can sway decisions. Not always, but the possibility is there.

In case of the judge being swayed by the statements, chances are probably slim. Because the judge won't be swayed easily as you have been by the statement.

You questioned the fairness of the trial regarding the family statements. Not me. I see no reason for the family to have less right to make a statement than the conspiracy theorists do.

As for "So do you think the two are guilty or not? Or is there a possibility of them being innocent"

Those are not either / or questions.

I do think that they are guilty. There is a possibility of them being innocent. That is why we have trials.

Do you think that the families have less rights to decide who to believe, and what they can say than you have?

If you notice, this entire debate is about credibility of the police and how investigation had been carried out.

So how did you come to the conclusion that they are guilty? And by your posting, you seem to back up your claim with the statement from the family. Or merely exploiting their statement to validate your claim.

But the statement the family made should not have swayed anyone opinion about the case. Everyone has the right to say our do any thing, but we also have the responsibility for our action. Because what they said validate your position on the rtp report. That is the danger I was pointing out about the statement. Because to you it's a definitive answer that proves the two are guilty. I find it disturbing.

I may be assuming too much that the family statement swayed you. If I am wrong, I apologize. But of it didn't sway you, what did? Statement from the police? The report by the police, which no one saw. Better yet, you should say that you assume that they are guilty based on the statement of the RTP.

ASSUME....Yes you assumed without questioning the integrity of the investigation.

Assuming that they are guilty, doesn't make them guilty. So conspiracy, I guess you have your version as well. Conspiracy to find this two guilty with out reviewing the evidence.

[sjaak327]

How could theyb hold back witness lists ? Why didn't you quote the full text:

"Speaking to migrant worker rights activist Mr Andy Hall, Nakhon Chompuchat, lead lawyer for the two suspects, said a preliminary court hearing abruptly brought forward from February 25, 2015 to December 26 has the most serious and concerning implications for his preparation of the defence case against the charges laid against the defendants Ko Zaw Lin Oo and Ko Wai Phyo (aka Ko Win Zaw Htun), both 21.

Mr Nakhon said the court is now demanding ten sets of documents and evidence from both the defence and prosecution to be submitted at same time by December 18, just a week away.

So far the prosecution has made no disclosure of their witness statements while the defence has been asked to produce a full witness list, according to Mr Nakhon, as reported by Mr Hall in a Facebook post.

The prosecution has only provided “a six-page bland document” for the defense team to go on giving the defense team no time to prepare challenges to prosecution witnesses.

Mr Hall told Mizzima that “this lack of transparency and cooperation with defence team to ensure a fair trial, and the release of statements could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial for the accused.”

"

I quoted the relevant part. You said that the defense said something different. You were reading things that were not there.

Mr Hall is an amazing guy. He is fighting his own court case and is an advocate for migrant labor here. An advocate's job is....?

No you did not, how would the bolded part not be relevant, if you claim they can withhold witness lists ?

the point here is a FAIR TRIAL. Now judging from the remarks of the lead lawyer for the defendants, do you really believe they are offered a fair trail ?

This has been my point all along (from my very first post on this thread, which is post number 5). Never mind the technicalities, or my apparent misunderstanding on some details, just focus on the concept of a fair trail and on the remarks of the lead defense lawyer who is quite clear and leaves little room for misunderstanding. Or are we only suppose to take the statements of the parents via the FOC at face value ?

"so far..."

And yes, I think they are being offered a fair trial.

I get that you are choosing to believe the defense attorney and are presenting things that he didn't say as fact.

BTW yes you should take the family statements at face value. Not only have they been granted access which you don't have, they are also calling for a fair and transparent trial.

Feel free to argue fairness as much as you like, but remember that the lack of discovery cuts both ways.

No it doesn't cut both ways, that's the whole point. How can the defense submit their case when all they know is the charge, and how are they supposed to submit their full witness list in 7 days time ? The prosecution have all the evidence, the defense a 6 page document.

Of course I believe the defense lawyer, why wouldn't I ? I would hope the main defense lawyer knows how the Thai judicial system works, and he has made a pretty compelling reason why the fairness of the trial could be doubted even before it actually starts.

And no I did not present things that they didn't say as fact. I might have misunderstood one tiny detail, and have already alluded to this, so no need to keep mentioning it.

Maybe you should ask yourself the question why the family statements specifically mention a fair and transparent trail, and ask yourself if this specific mention would be stated if the trial would not be held in Thailand.

I know the answer to that question, you probably not, must be new to Thailand