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

[AGareth2]

do we know for sure it was not the guitar men?

Edited December 14, 2014 by AGareth2

[StealthEnergiser]

Interesting to note all the twists and turns .........

http://holiday-bangkok.blogspot.com/2014/09/koh-tao-police-fail-another-day.html

the case today bares scant resemblence to the original.

I hope the police make names public of these people who tried to divert attention they may be related to the young suspect that went missing and then turned up at a press conference with a new haircut.

Pol Maj Gen Kittipong Kaosam-ang, a Surat Thani police commander, asked the media not to report in-depth investigation results, saying it may give some clues to the culprits. But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

http://holiday-bangkok.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/koh-tao-police-fail-another-day.html

Edited December 14, 2014 by StealthEnergiser

[mcm991]

I'll be pedantic for a sec .........

Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation. - said Royal Thai Police adviser Jarumporn Suramanee

so... they were cleared.

Same 3? Or are you speculating?

I'm too busy today to go trawling through articles but I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers.

I'm assuming it must have been these B2 +1 .... but yes, I am speculating - but I think the odds of them being one and the same are pretty good.

As I pointed to someone else, you are conflating things, as it clearly says in the quoted text "Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation." That is not the same as "they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

Yes... I did say I was not sure.

But still - if it looks like a duck ..........

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thailand-beach-murders-desperate-police-4288032

A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go.

[AleG]

do we know for sure it was not the guitar men?

Since then the police released them and then kept looking for the "guitar men", the only logical answer is that no, they were not the same men.

[AleG]

I'm too busy today to go trawling through articles but I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers.

I'm assuming it must have been these B2 +1 .... but yes, I am speculating - but I think the odds of them being one and the same are pretty good.

As I pointed to someone else, you are conflating things, as it clearly says in the quoted text "Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation." That is not the same as "they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

Yes... I did say I was not sure.

But still - if it looks like a duck ..........

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thailand-beach-murders-desperate-police-4288032

A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go.

"Yes... I did say I was not sure."

"I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

"A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go."

Again, that doesn't mean those people are the same Burmese that have been accused of the crime.

[mcm991]

I'm too busy today to go trawling through articles but I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers.

I'm assuming it must have been these B2 +1 .... but yes, I am speculating - but I think the odds of them being one and the same are pretty good.

As I pointed to someone else, you are conflating things, as it clearly says in the quoted text "Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation." That is not the same as "they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

Yes... I did say I was not sure.

But still - if it looks like a duck ..........

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thailand-beach-murders-desperate-police-4288032

A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go.

"Yes... I did say I was not sure."

"I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

"A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go."

Again, that doesn't mean those people are the same Burmese that have been accused of the crime.

Yes I know. But I think most posters think you are just being pedantic now.

As I said...... yes speculation. But if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck........ it may be a duck. (it may not be though.... as you no doubt will point out)

[AleG]

"Yes... I did say I was not sure."

"I'm sure the RTP said initially that they detained 3 nocturnal, guitar playing migrant workers."

"A guitarist and two singers described as suspects were later traced by officers, interviewed and allowed to go."

Again, that doesn't mean those people are the same Burmese that have been accused of the crime.

Yes I know. But I think most posters think you are just being pedantic now.

As I said...... yes speculation. But if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck........ it may be a duck. (it may not be though.... as you no doubt will point out)

Oh, pardon me for being pedantic about significant events related to a double murder and two men on trial with a death penalty hanging over their heads.

Would you like to see the judge on the case use your same standards of proof?

[BoristheBlade]

If this is true, the editor of the Nation must be called as a defence witness, and asked to explain the story published in his newspaper.

Nomsod must be called and asked in a court of law, was he on the island on the fateful night.

If Nomsod was on that island that night, he, his lawyer are liars and must be charged with contempt of court.

The manager of the AC bar must also be presented to the court, as well as the owner.

The Police chief must also be called and asked why he has publicly helped the Head Man and his family in this investigation.

Will they? NO why? Money!

catsanddogs, on 13 Dec 2014 - 12:33, said:

Old news yes, but in whose hands is this alleged photograph taken by British witness I wonder?

November 3, 2014

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/What-about-bar-manager-accused-of-harassing-victim-30246806.html

What about bar manager accused of harassing victim at Koh Tao?

A British witness had taken a photo of two men pestering the female victim not long before she was raped and murdered. He went to her assistance. One of the two troublemakers identified by the British witness and appearing in the photo is the bar manager. He is the bar owner's brother or nephew.

The press reported that he refused to take a DNA test after the murders. And the British witness sought protection from the British Embassy in Bangkok after receiving death threats over the Internet.

The public has every right to point out lapses by the police in the investigation of a homicide. A trained crime investigator takes nothing for granted. Since the bar manager, a close relative of the bar owner, was (allegedly) groping and annoying the victim before her rape and murder, police could rightfully scrutinise him and other male relatives of his who were - or could have been - in the vicinity at the time of the murders.

If the manager of the bar took a DNA test that ruled him out as a suspect in the rape, then the press failed to report it and the public is right in demanding he take the test.

Did police ever look into the death threats made against the British witness to trace their source? That might lead to the rapists and murderers.

The press did not consider the possibility. They must not overlook it. The public must not be intimidated by an inept policeman who has no business in this matter.

The fact that this photo exists (or existed) of the altercation in the AC bar has been reported by many other press sources besides The Nation, who have run the story twice to my knowledge, and an appeal has recently been made for information on its whereabouts by those working for the B2s' defence. The Nation was very specific about what the photo contained and who was in it. Why would they lie about something like that? It is after all a very serious accusation and they could be sued for defamation if it wasn't true, I presume. However, as no further references have been made to the existence of the photo after the initial one, I rather suspect it has been secretly destroyed .

[AGareth2]

maybe there was a whole orchestra on the beach?

[jdinasia]

If this is true, the editor of the Nation must be called as a defence witness, and asked to explain the story published in his newspaper.

Nomsod must be called and asked in a court of law, was he on the island on the fateful night.

If Nomsod was on that island that night, he, his lawyer are liars and must be charged with contempt of court.

The manager of the AC bar must also be presented to the court, as well as the owner.

The Police chief must also be called and asked why he has publicly helped the Head Man and his family in this investigation.

Will they? NO why? Money!

catsanddogs, on 13 Dec 2014 - 12:33, said:

Old news yes, but in whose hands is this alleged photograph taken by British witness I wonder?

November 3, 2014

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/What-about-bar-manager-accused-of-harassing-victim-30246806.html

What about bar manager accused of harassing victim at Koh Tao?

A British witness had taken a photo of two men pestering the female victim not long before she was raped and murdered. He went to her assistance. One of the two troublemakers identified by the British witness and appearing in the photo is the bar manager. He is the bar owner's brother or nephew.

The press reported that he refused to take a DNA test after the murders. And the British witness sought protection from the British Embassy in Bangkok after receiving death threats over the Internet.

The public has every right to point out lapses by the police in the investigation of a homicide. A trained crime investigator takes nothing for granted. Since the bar manager, a close relative of the bar owner, was (allegedly) groping and annoying the victim before her rape and murder, police could rightfully scrutinise him and other male relatives of his who were - or could have been - in the vicinity at the time of the murders.

If the manager of the bar took a DNA test that ruled him out as a suspect in the rape, then the press failed to report it and the public is right in demanding he take the test.

Did police ever look into the death threats made against the British witness to trace their source? That might lead to the rapists and murderers.

The press did not consider the possibility. They must not overlook it. The public must not be intimidated by an inept policeman who has no business in this matter.

The fact that this photo exists (or existed) of the altercation in the AC bar has been reported by many other press sources besides The Nation, who have run the story twice to my knowledge, and an appeal has recently been made for information on its whereabouts by those working for the B2s' defence. The Nation was very specific about what the photo contained and who was in it. Why would they lie about something like that? It is after all a very serious accusation and they could be sued for defamation if it wasn't true, I presume. However, as no further references have been made to the existence of the photo after the initial one, I rather suspect it has been secretly destroyed .

Ummm no.

The article is not news, it is opinion.

Nobody else but the defendants are on trial.

Your 'musts' are nonsense.

[Gweiloman]

Interesting to note all the twists and turns .........

http://holiday-bangkok.blogspot.com/2014/09/koh-tao-police-fail-another-day.html

the case today bares scant resemblence to the original.

What an interesting read.

It seemed that the police had initially gotten a very strong smell of the scent and were progressing along nicely. Very senior policemen (even in Thailand) would not release such strong statements unless they are close to 100% positive of what they are saying.

Sadly, somewhere along the trail, the scent was mixed up with many others (who knows, the smell of freshly minted "dough", threats, promises......) and the original sniffer dogs were replaced.

Unless justice is SEEN to be done (which hasn't been the case thus far), there will always be doubts and unanswered questions.

[sambum]

do we know for sure it was not the guitar men?

Since then the police released them and then kept looking for the "guitar men", the only logical answer is that no, they were not the same men.

So now we have 2 sets of 3 "guitar men"? I set of 3 that they questioned and released, and another set of 3 that they kept looking for? Sounds like they shouldn't have let our guitar playing friend Sean go (sorry - I meant to say - aided him in leaving) He might have been playing in a trio on the beach that night!

Edited December 14, 2014 by sambum

[catsanddogs]

do we know for sure it was not the guitar men?

Since then the police released them and then kept looking for the "guitar men", the only logical answer is that no, they were not the same men.

So now we have 2 sets of 3 "guitar men"? I set of 3 that they questioned and released, and another set of 3 that they kept looking for? Sounds like they shouldn't have let our guitar playing friend Sean go (sorry - I meant to say - aided him in leaving) He might have been playing in a trio on the beach that night!

It's a bit too convenient for me that McAnna was in bed the morning of the murders, esp in light of what he has said on FB - '

'I know you tried to save her'

And reports that he was witness to Hannah being hassled by the AC bar manager.

So yes, he could have been on the beach playing guitar that morning. He could have seen what happened, or he could have been involved. Bar manager and policeman friend wanted him dead for some reason if McAnna's words are to be believed.

And three Burmese men playing guitar on the morning of the murders would be perfect scapegoats for the killers. Easy to spread rumours if you are thick with the police, or a policeman yourself, and have money. The fact that the 3rd Burmese who I understand to be Maung Maung is not being held leads me to speculate that he may have witnessed the crime. It was reported that he went back to the AC bar at around 5pm to fetch a guitar. What did he see on that journey? Where is he now? Is he going to be remunerated to testify that his friends committed the murders?

[stephen terry]

Interesting to note all the twists and turns .........

http://holiday-bangkok.blogspot.com/2014/09/koh-tao-police-fail-another-day.html

the case today bares scant resemblence to the original.

What an interesting read.

It seemed that the police had initially gotten a very strong smell of the scent and were progressing along nicely. Very senior policemen (even in Thailand) would not release such strong statements unless they are close to 100% positive of what they are saying.

Sadly, somewhere along the trail, the scent was mixed up with many others (who knows, the smell of freshly minted "dough", threats, promises......) and the original sniffer dogs were replaced.

Unless justice is SEEN to be done (which hasn't been the case thus far), there will always be doubts and unanswered questions.

Yes it is abundantly clear from this report that the B2 had nothing to do with this murder, because they would have been identified earlier (or would have been grassed up by the islanders had they been involved).

I hope the defence will submit this to the court as clear evidence of their non-involvement.

[jdinasia]

Interesting to note all the twists and turns .........

http://holiday-bangkok.blogspot.com/2014/09/koh-tao-police-fail-another-day.html

the case today bares scant resemblence to the original.

What an interesting read.

It seemed that the police had initially gotten a very strong smell of the scent and were progressing along nicely. Very senior policemen (even in Thailand) would not release such strong statements unless they are close to 100% positive of what they are saying.

Sadly, somewhere along the trail, the scent was mixed up with many others (who knows, the smell of freshly minted "dough", threats, promises......) and the original sniffer dogs were replaced.

Unless justice is SEEN to be done (which hasn't been the case thus far), there will always be doubts and unanswered questions.

Yes it is abundantly clear from this report that the B2 had nothing to do with this murder, because they would have been identified earlier (or would have been grassed up by the islanders had they been involved).

I hope the defence will submit this to the court as clear evidence of their non-involvement.

Strange how this is absolutely clear to you, but the statement from the families, who have actually been briefed by the UK police, isn't clear!

[IslandLover]

HansIsaan, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:47, said:HansIsaan, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:47, said:

IslandLover, on 14 Dec 2014 - 02:42, said:IslandLover, on 14 Dec 2014 - 02:42, said:

Willy Eckerslike, on 12 Dec 2014 - 18:19, said:Willy Eckerslike, on 12 Dec 2014 - 18:19, said:Willy Eckerslike, on 12 Dec 2014 - 18:19, said:Willy Eckerslike, on 12 Dec 2014 - 18:19, said:

HughJass, on 12 Dec 2014 - 16:10, said:HughJass, on 12 Dec 2014 - 16:10, said:HughJass, on 12 Dec 2014 - 16:10, said:HughJass, on 12 Dec 2014 - 16:10, said:

am i correct in saying that the 3rd guy who left the beach early to see his g/f said that when he woke up the two were in bed sleeping like a baby?

has this guy has since disappeared or will he be called as a witness?

surely this guy would have seen blood on clothes etc and a heightened state of alertness on his friends had they just committed this heinous crime

Not quite HJ the 3rd guy found them sleeping like babies when he returned to the room at 05:00 after seeing his GF

The 3rd Burmese (Muang Muang?) is the one who was pictured in the supermarket buying cigarettes on the night of the murders. He was arrested along with the other two and the police tried to "coerce" (euphemism for torture) him into testifying against his friends, which he refused to do, according to an interview he gave with a journalist after the police were forced to release him. I understand from what I've read that he's gone back to Burma and I doubt he'll want to come back to Thailand .

Muang Muang already gave his testimony during a Pre-trial Witness Hearing at the Koh Samui Court. After that he was released and allowed to go home. In the interview he repeated what he had told the Court. It means there is no need for him to come and testify again.

Correct, and I understand he told them he had witnessed nothing of the crime, using words to the effect of "I cannot say what I do not know". BTW I'm not sure if his name is Muang Muang or Maung Maung. I think in initial press reports he was referred to as Mau, so it's probably Maung Maung.

Edited December 14, 2014 by IslandLover

[mcm991]

Tell me again ...... Why was Sean's guitar full of blood splatter?

To me that is a big red flag.

But maybe he is just an awful musician.

Shame that nobody thought to ask him properly. D'oh!

[boomerangutang]

I wonder what the British police make of all these developments as observers, after Prime Minister Cameron offered the Thai Government assistance. What, for instance, is being done to investigate any other leads from this case?

Yes, the Brit PM offered Brit experts to assist. The Thai PM was put on the spot (he would have preferred the subject wasn't mentioned), but he reluctantly said 'yes'. However, a day later, when the Thai PM returned home, he explicitly replaced the verb 'assist' with 'observe.' There's no mystery, to open minded people, why the word changed. True assistance, by Brit experts, would quite possibly reveal evidence which would implicate one or more of the Headman's people. Mere 'observations' would compel Brit observers to stick with what Thai authorities told/showed them.

Here's what 'observer only' status confers, while the Brits were in Thailand:

>>> no interviews, other than with RTP officers.

>>> no pursuance of evidence,

>>> no pursuance of leads

Perhaps the Brits could suggest things to the RTP (such as checking phone records, looking for bloody clothes, speaking with friends and barber of Nomsod, the bouncer at AC bar with the sharks tooth ring, and dozens of other basic things), but that's about it. In response, Thai officials could easily say, "We already looked in to those things, and there's nothing there." What can Brits do in response? NOTHING. Just turn tail and return to England, and make their one-sided report based on what the RTP fed them.

[boomerangutang]

Tell me again ...... Why was Sean's guitar full of blood splatter?

To me that is a big red flag.

But maybe he is just an awful musician.

Shame that nobody thought to ask him properly. D'oh!

That's funny; "maybe he's just an awful musician."

Sean claimed it was from the wound to his arm, which was from a motorcycle accident. It probably was from the wound in his arm, but that wound may not have been from a road accident. The clean wound looks remarkably like the shallow stab wounds to David. Motorcycle wounds are nearly always scrapes. He knows for sure, we can only speculate.

As for why didn't police ask him about it? Maybe they did. But if anything Sean said hinted at Headman's people involved with the crime, then police don't want to hear it or know about it. Sean, who could at least be a witness to the crime, was quickly allowed to leave the island and leave Thailand. Nothing got in his way from leaving. Connect the dots. Sean could be the iceberg to the Thaitanic.

[Krenjai]

do we know for sure it was not the guitar men?

Since then the police released them and then kept looking for the "guitar men", the only logical answer is that no, they were not the same men.

So now we have 2 sets of 3 "guitar men"? I set of 3 that they questioned and released, and another set of 3 that they kept looking for? Sounds like they shouldn't have let our guitar playing friend Sean go (sorry - I meant to say - aided him in leaving) He might have been playing in a trio on the beach that night!

It's a bit too convenient for me that McAnna was in bed the morning of the murders, esp in light of what he has said on FB - '

'I know you tried to save her'

And reports that he was witness to Hannah being hassled by the AC bar manager.

So yes, he could have been on the beach playing guitar that morning. He could have seen what happened, or he could have been involved. Bar manager and policeman friend wanted him dead for some reason if McAnna's words are to be believed.

And three Burmese men playing guitar on the morning of the murders would be perfect scapegoats for the killers. Easy to spread rumours if you are thick with the police, or a policeman yourself, and have money. The fact that the 3rd Burmese who I understand to be Maung Maung is not being held leads me to speculate that he may have witnessed the crime. It was reported that he went back to the AC bar at around 5pm to fetch a guitar. What did he see on that journey? Where is he now? Is he going to be remunerated to testify that his friends committed the murders?

"I know you tried to save her"..........too convenient.......well yes indeed!

What f* was he taking about? He knows? How does he know? He was sleeping as per his own statement, so how does he know David tried to save her? If David & Hannah were about to have sex and somebody hit him with a hoe from behind (which is the RTP version, correct?) then this statement of Sean does not make sense at all.

If however the scenario is true he heard/saw something and got confronted with a nice stab wound in his arm with the message , "get the fuk out of here. You didn't see anything, you understand?!" as per Boomerangutang scenario that Sean's statement does make a lot of sense suddenly. In that case, YES, he knows David tried to save her (because he saw/heard it).

BTW that wound on his arm was very similar to David his wounds. A motorbike accident? Is he serious? I think he had the guitar in his hand as he approached the crime scene (50 meters away?) possibly as a sort of a defense weapon (explains the blood spray pattern on the guitar) when he got stabbed. I think he ran away knowing what was going down there fearing for his own life (rightfully so). I also believe he must have recognized one or two (Mon?), this turned out to be a severe problem, the rest we know.......

IMHO of course!

Edited December 14, 2014 by Krenjai

[AleG]

What an interesting read.

It seemed that the police had initially gotten a very strong smell of the scent and were progressing along nicely. Very senior policemen (even in Thailand) would not release such strong statements unless they are close to 100% positive of what they are saying.

Sadly, somewhere along the trail, the scent was mixed up with many others (who knows, the smell of freshly minted "dough", threats, promises......) and the original sniffer dogs were replaced.

Unless justice is SEEN to be done (which hasn't been the case thus far), there will always be doubts and unanswered questions.

Yes it is abundantly clear from this report that the B2 had nothing to do with this murder, because they would have been identified earlier (or would have been grassed up by the islanders had they been involved).

I hope the defence will submit this to the court as clear evidence of their non-involvement.

So, what is the right and proper time frame for identifying a suspect? Is that a rule in some book or something?

Your logic is... odd, it doesn't make any sense; can you explain?

[Willy Eckerslike]

I wonder what the British police make of all these developments as observers, after Prime Minister Cameron offered the Thai Government assistance. What, for instance, is being done to investigate any other leads from this case?

Yes, the Brit PM offered Brit experts to assist. The Thai PM was put on the spot (he would have preferred the subject wasn't mentioned), but he reluctantly said 'yes'. However, a day later, when the Thai PM returned home, he explicitly replaced the verb 'assist' with 'observe.' There's no mystery, to open minded people, why the word changed. True assistance, by Brit experts, would quite possibly reveal evidence which would implicate one or more of the Headman's people. Mere 'observations' would compel Brit observers to stick with what Thai authorities told/showed them.

Here's what 'observer only' status confers, while the Brits were in Thailand:

>>> no interviews, other than with RTP officers.

>>> no pursuance of evidence,

>>> no pursuance of leads

Perhaps the Brits could suggest things to the RTP (such as checking phone records, looking for bloody clothes, speaking with friends and barber of Nomsod, the bouncer at AC bar with the sharks tooth ring, and dozens of other basic things), but that's about it. In response, Thai officials could easily say, "We already looked in to those things, and there's nothing there." What can Brits do in response? NOTHING. Just turn tail and return to England, and make their one-sided report based on what the RTP fed them.

Hey Boomers don't forget that when the Brits went to the Island on the 25th Oct they met up with two of their team that had been there since the day before.........who knows what they were up to ?

[jdinasia]

I wonder what the British police make of all these developments as observers, after Prime Minister Cameron offered the Thai Government assistance. What, for instance, is being done to investigate any other leads from this case?

Yes, the Brit PM offered Brit experts to assist. The Thai PM was put on the spot (he would have preferred the subject wasn't mentioned), but he reluctantly said 'yes'. However, a day later, when the Thai PM returned home, he explicitly replaced the verb 'assist' with 'observe.' There's no mystery, to open minded people, why the word changed. True assistance, by Brit experts, would quite possibly reveal evidence which would implicate one or more of the Headman's people. Mere 'observations' would compel Brit observers to stick with what Thai authorities told/showed them.

Here's what 'observer only' status confers, while the Brits were in Thailand:

>>> no interviews, other than with RTP officers.

>>> no pursuance of evidence,

>>> no pursuance of leads

Perhaps the Brits could suggest things to the RTP (such as checking phone records, looking for bloody clothes, speaking with friends and barber of Nomsod, the bouncer at AC bar with the sharks tooth ring, and dozens of other basic things), but that's about it. In response, Thai officials could easily say, "We already looked in to those things, and there's nothing there." What can Brits do in response? NOTHING. Just turn tail and return to England, and make their one-sided report based on what the RTP fed them.

One would have to have been present to know what the agreement was. Only one person who was present made any comment. Nobody corrected that public statement, nor did any official publicly state the results of Cameron 's meeting from the UK side.

Some posters here seem fixated with people who are not suspects nor defendants, but can never explain why no journalist nor witness has come forward in the UK or Thailand to break the alibi etc...

In light of the families making a public statement through the UK government, it is clear that sub judice doesn't apply... But still nothing to support the conspiracy theories.

[IslandLover]

StealthEnergiser, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:52, said:

not sure if this is the samsung

blackobject.jpg

I'm not sure if this is a phone next to the victim's shorts. It looks like the end of a belt to me. The dimensions appear to be of a similar size as the belt buckle on the right of the photo. See how the end of the belt is angled/bent in the same way in the other photo of the shorts. I presume the shorts were first pictured inside out because in the 2nd photo you can just about see the dark blue colour on the inside. I could be completely wrong of course but I'm just reporting what I see in these photos.

[Willy Eckerslike]

StealthEnergiser, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:52, said:

not sure if this is the samsung

blackobject.jpg

I'm not sure if this is a phone next to the victim's shorts. It looks like the end of a belt to me. The dimensions appear to be of a similar size as the belt buckle on the right of the photo. See how the end of the belt is angled/bent in the same way in the other photo of the shorts. I presume the shorts were first pictured inside out because in the 2nd photo you can just about see the dark blue colour on the inside. I could be completely wrong of course but I'm just reporting what I see in these photos.

Here is a close up of the same photo and I think it shows the object to be a phone with the lens of a camera showing.........also if the belt had a clip rather than a buckle I would agree with you it could be the end of a belt...........I could also be wrong......

[IslandLover]

Krenjai, on 14 Dec 2014 - 15:52, said:

catsanddogs, on 14 Dec 2014 - 11:28, said:

It's a bit too convenient for me that McAnna was in bed the morning of the murders, esp in light of what he has said on FB - '

'I know you tried to save her'

And reports that he was witness to Hannah being hassled by the AC bar manager.

So yes, he could have been on the beach playing guitar that morning. He could have seen what happened, or he could have been involved. Bar manager and policeman friend wanted him dead for some reason if McAnna's words are to be believed.

And three Burmese men playing guitar on the morning of the murders would be perfect scapegoats for the killers. Easy to spread rumours if you are thick with the police, or a policeman yourself, and have money. The fact that the 3rd Burmese who I understand to be Maung Maung is not being held leads me to speculate that he may have witnessed the crime. It was reported that he went back to the AC bar at around 5pm to fetch a guitar. What did he see on that journey? Where is he now? Is he going to be remunerated to testify that his friends committed the murders?

"I know you tried to save her"..........too convenient.......well yes indeed!

What f* was he taking about? He knows? How does he know? He was sleeping as per his own statement, so how does he know David tried to save her? If David & Hannah were about to have sex and somebody hit him with a hoe from behind (which is the RTP version, correct?) then this statement of Sean does not make sense at all.

If however the scenario is true he heard/saw something and got confronted with a nice stab wound in his arm with the message , "get the fuk out of here. You didn't see anything, you understand?!" as per Boomerangutang scenario that Sean's statement does make a lot of sense suddenly. In that case, YES, he knows David tried to save her (because he saw/heard it).

BTW that wound on his arm was very similar to David his wounds. A motorbike accident? Is he serious? I think he had the guitar in his hand as he approached the crime scene (50 meters away?) possibly as a sort of a defense weapon (explains the blood spray pattern on the guitar) when he got stabbed. I think he ran away knowing what was going down there fearing for his own life (rightfully so). I also believe he must have recognized one or two (Mon?), this turned out to be a severe problem, the rest we know.......

IMHO of course!

I don't know what to make of Sean to be honest but feel in a British court of law, he would be deemed an "unreliable witness" unfortunately.

[catsanddogs]

Tell me again ...... Why was Sean's guitar full of blood splatter?

To me that is a big red flag.

But maybe he is just an awful musician.

Shame that nobody thought to ask him properly. D'oh!

Very odd. Wasn't it a week after the murders that he left the island? If the blood on his guitar was anything to do with the crime then surely he would have cleaned it up by then? If the blood was not related to the crime then how did it get there and why didn't he clean it off? All the people he came into contact with you would think someone would have questioned him about it and he would have wiped it off? Maybe for some bizarre reason it wanted it to be seen.

[thailandchilli]

StealthEnergiser, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:52, said:

not sure if this is the samsung

blackobject.jpg

I'm not sure if this is a phone next to the victim's shorts. It looks like the end of a belt to me. The dimensions appear to be of a similar size as the belt buckle on the right of the photo. See how the end of the belt is angled/bent in the same way in the other photo of the shorts. I presume the shorts were first pictured inside out because in the 2nd photo you can just about see the dark blue colour on the inside. I could be completely wrong of course but I'm just reporting what I see in these photos.

Here is a close up of the same photo and I think it shows the object to be a phone with the lens of a camera showing.........also if the belt had a clip rather than a buckle I would agree with you it could be the end of a belt...........I could also be wrong......

Blue shorts.png

And here we have the crime scene being invaded by Mon again and it appears he's heading straight for the shorts

[boomerangutang]

What an interesting read.

It seemed that the police had initially gotten a very strong smell of the scent and were progressing along nicely. Very senior policemen (even in Thailand) would not release such strong statements unless they are close to 100% positive of what they are saying.

Sadly, somewhere along the trail, the scent was mixed up with many others (who knows, the smell of freshly minted "dough", threats, promises......) and the original sniffer dogs were replaced.

Unless justice is SEEN to be done (which hasn't been the case thus far), there will always be doubts and unanswered questions.

Yes it is abundantly clear from this report that the B2 had nothing to do with this murder, because they would have been identified earlier (or would have been grassed up by the islanders had they been involved).

I hope the defence will submit this to the court as clear evidence of their non-involvement.

So, what is the right and proper time frame for identifying a suspect? Is that a rule in some book or something?

Your logic is... odd, it doesn't make any sense; can you explain?

Yes, the B2 would have been "identified earlier" because Thai cops investigated and did DNA sampling on 100 to 200 Burmese migrants a week before declaring the B3 as prime suspects. After those initial testings, they claimed 'no matches and no suspects from that group.' Surely, if cops rounded up and tested 100 to 200 migrants, they would have included the 3 migrants which both work at AC bar and which were playing guitar on the beach near the bar and the crime scene. So yes, the cops are caught in yet another of a long string of lies, all designed to nail the B2 while concurrently shield those who should be prime suspects.

The most reasonable explanation for that scenario, is the top banana gave instructions to the replacement head cop, something like, "we need indictments right away. The man you're replacing is too slow, he's implicating the Headman's people who are Thai, and just yesterday some taxi driver claimed he was offered 300k baht by your predecessor and beaten up when he didn't comply. The Ko Tao investigation is too slow and it's unraveling at the seams. Can't we nail any migrants on this? Go do what you have to do, but I want indictments very soon, do you get my drift?"

[IslandLover]

thailandchilli, on 15 Dec 2014 - 02:14, said:

Willy Eckerslike, on 14 Dec 2014 - 18:12, said:

IslandLover, on 14 Dec 2014 - 17:06, said:

StealthEnergiser, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:52, said:StealthEnergiser, on 14 Dec 2014 - 03:52, said:

not sure if this is the samsung

blackobject.jpg

I'm not sure if this is a phone next to the victim's shorts. It looks like the end of a belt to me. The dimensions appear to be of a similar size as the belt buckle on the right of the photo. See how the end of the belt is angled/bent in the same way in the other photo of the shorts. I presume the shorts were first pictured inside out because in the 2nd photo you can just about see the dark blue colour on the inside. I could be completely wrong of course but I'm just reporting what I see in these photos.

Here is a close up of the same photo and I think it shows the object to be a phone with the lens of a camera showing.........also if the belt had a clip rather than a buckle I would agree with you it could be the end of a belt...........I could also be wrong......

Blue shorts.png

And here we have the crime scene being invaded by Mon again and it appears he's heading straight for the shorts

I have seen another photo where he appears to be staring directly at Hannah's body. I'm not the only one who noticed it either.