And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

greenchair, it doesn't work like that, if you make a claim, you have to support it. Where did you get the information that half the migrant workers fled Koh Tao?

Besides that, even if that were to be true the statement that the defendants didn't flee is false, one of them left the island soon after being questioned by the police.

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

If half the migrant workers left KT before then I wouldn't blame any of them for doing so, after all an RTP stated it could not have been a Thai person who did this!

Yep lets run.................quick

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

Actually, on reading your post again, the "Correct me if I am wrong" seems to be related to the second part, not the first.

In that case, no, it wasn't Muang who was caught after leaving Surat Thani, it was Win.

Win was arrested at a location in Surat Thani.

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

Maung certainly in the hands of the policy in Samui , did he run , or was that the Safe house he was being led out of

. It was a very casual arrest and the building looked like a hotel , and not one that Muang would afford , if you know what I mean .....

And there it goes again... "they were among the few Myanmar resident/workers in the vicinity of the murders who did not run away"

One of them was arrested on the mainland after fleeing Koh Tao.

Actually, when they ran. Half the migrant workers had already left. They knew someone was in for a stitch up. Correct me if I am wrong. But wasn't it Muang caught. The one that originally confessed. Then denied and was set free.

Actually, on reading your post again, the "Correct me if I am wrong" seems to be related to the second part, not the first.

In that case, no, it wasn't Muang who was caught after leaving Surat Thani, it was Win.

Win was arrested at a location in Surat Thani.

I love the fact you believe all you read. And take it as fact. Win ran ? To the closet place he could find. When committing a double murder knowing he had done it, knowing the police were closing in on him, he run .... He didn't run back to Burma where he would have been safe and sound, he run to the next island.

Well if that is all that is needed to convince you.

Actually, on reading your post again, the "Correct me if I am wrong" seems to be related to the second part, not the first.

In that case, no, it wasn't Muang who was caught after leaving Surat Thani, it was Win.

Win was arrested at a location in Surat Thani.

I love the fact you believe all you read. And take it as fact. Win ran ? To the closet place he could find. When committing a double murder knowing he had done it, knowing the police were closing in on him, he run .... He didn't run back to Burma where he would have been safe and sound, he run to the next island.

Well if that is all that is needed to convince you.

Surat Thani is in the mainland, it's not an island; you have no clue about the things you are talking about.

Actually, on reading your post again, the "Correct me if I am wrong" seems to be related to the second part, not the first.

In that case, no, it wasn't Muang who was caught after leaving Surat Thani, it was Win.

Win was arrested at a location in Surat Thani.

I love the fact you believe all you read. And take it as fact. Win ran ? To the closet place he could find. When committing a double murder knowing he had done it, knowing the police were closing in on him, he run .... He didn't run back to Burma where he would have been safe and sound, he run to the next island.

Well if that is all that is needed to convince you.

Surat Thani is in the mainland, it's not an island; you have no clue about the things you are talking about.

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

Andy Hall and the fund in Bangkok Coconuts

“Everyone, including family and friends of the victims, surely want this case to be closed and the real perpetrators brought to justice,” Hall wrote. “A fair trial requires rights of the accused be respected and that the accused have a legal team to defend them of a crime they may not have done.” http://bangkok.coconuts.co/2015/01/13/defense-fund-created-migrant-workers-accused-koh-tao-murders

Actually, on reading your post again, the "Correct me if I am wrong" seems to be related to the second part, not the first.

In that case, no, it wasn't Muang who was caught after leaving Surat Thani, it was Win.

Win was arrested at a location in Surat Thani.

I love the fact you believe all you read. And take it as fact. Win ran ? To the closet place he could find. When committing a double murder knowing he had done it, knowing the police were closing in on him, he run .... He didn't run back to Burma where he would have been safe and sound, he run to the next island.

Well if that is all that is needed to convince you.

Surat Thani is in the mainland, it's not an island; you have no clue about the things you are talking about.

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

Yes, if you call Surat Thani an island I am 100% sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Surat Thani is in the mainland, it's not an island; you have no clue about the things you are talking about.

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

Yes, if you call Surat Thani an island I am 100% sure you don't know what you are talking about.

True, and if you think Win is called Sow and is aged between 25 and 27 then you also don't know what you are talking about.

How easy is that ?

From Post # 358 above: With key assistance and advice from several knowledgeable and skilled writers, my own personal letter to leaders of industry, high-income earners, and people with high net-worth the world over will soon be mailed out and then published.

From The Marvelettes (1961):

Please Mister Postman, look and see

If there's a letter in your bag for me

So many days you passed me by

See the tears standin' in my eyes

You didn't stop to make me feel better

By leavin' me a card or a letter

Why's it takin' such a long time

Why don't you check it and see one more time for me,

You gotta Wait a minute Wait a minute (oh yeah) (Fade out)

berybert, on 13 Jan 2015 - 13:31, said:

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

OK, sticking my neck out here but .....

Soe (Sow) = Cho = Win

Age 21 years

This kid has been given more names than I care to mention but I believe he is now known as Wai Phyo.

It was "Win" who legged it to Surat Thani and the report that put his age at between 25 and 27 was WRONG!

berybert, on 13 Jan 2015 - 13:31, said:

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

OK, sticking my neck out here but .....

Soe (Sow) = Cho = Win

Age 21 years

This kid has been given more names than I care to mention but I believe he is now known as Wai Phyo.

It was "Win" who legged it to Surat Thani and the report that put his age at between 25 and 27 was WRONG!

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

Couldn't agree more, the RTP and Thai Authorities have a lot to answer to with all their innuendo, cherry picking, speculation, assumptions and demonstrably false facts.

One gets to the truth by having evidence that is clean and collected in a manner that would satisfy international standards. Followed by a fair and transparent trial.

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

Couldn't agree more, the RTP and Thai Authorities have a lot to answer to with all their innuendo, cherry picking, speculation, assumptions and demonstrably false facts.

One gets to the truth by having evidence that is clean and collected in a manner that would satisfy international standards. Followed by a fair and transparent trial.

Can't argue the facts, can't handle the logic, what's left?

I am rubber you are glue...

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

Couldn't agree more, the RTP and Thai Authorities have a lot to answer to with all their innuendo, cherry picking, speculation, assumptions and demonstrably false facts.

One gets to the truth by having evidence that is clean and collected in a manner that would satisfy international standards. Followed by a fair and transparent trial.

Can't argue the facts, can't handle the logic, what's left?

I am rubber you are glue...

Why would one wish to argue facts? Whats the logic in that

berybert, on 13 Jan 2015 - 13:31, said:

Are you sure I don't know what I am talking about. I do as the police have done since the start of the investigation talk a bit of rubbish and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

If I was a Thai copper you would be saying It was it was an easy mistake to make etc. A bit like the man who ran being called Sow and being aged between 25 and 27. You need to be a bit more consistent in your criticism.

OK, sticking my neck out here but .....

Soe (Sow) = Cho = Win

Age 21 years

This kid has been given more names than I care to mention but I believe he is now known as Wai Phyo.

It was "Win" who legged it to Surat Thani and the report that put his age at between 25 and 27 was WRONG!

Stick your neck out a bit futher and you might find that he didn't give out any false information.. He had papers with his name on them also his age would have been on there. So everything was reported wrong. Which hasn't changed since the second team took over.

Can't argue the facts, can't handle the logic, what's left?

I am rubber you are glue...

Why would one wish to argue facts? Whats the logic in that

"Why would one wish to argue facts?"

In your case, because they run contrary to your beliefs, and that's the logic of it.

Can't argue the facts, can't handle the logic, what's left?

I am rubber you are glue...

Why would one wish to argue facts? Whats the logic in that

"Why would one wish to argue facts?"

In your case, because they run contrary to your beliefs, and that's the logic of it.

Is that a fact?

I can give you plenty of 'real' facts however and if you wish to argue them go ahead but they still remain facts for the world to see.

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

If a non-invested / objective person looked at the scenarios painted by those of us who are seriously concerned for truth and justice ....were compared with the scenarios painted by those who are tight with the Headman and officialdom, then it's plain to see which is more believable.

Here are just a few of the things a person must believe if they side with the Thai officials re; the investigation:

>>> David's wounds were not caused by a sharp blade, but instead by a blunt hoe

>>> Hannah's phone was found near the Burmese dwelling

>>> The video providing Nomsod's alibi was not tampered with and is completely believable. So believable, that he was dropped as a suspect (and not even requested to provide a sample for DNA) ....because of that one CCTV clip.

>>> There's no need to send Nomsod's DNA typing to Brit officials or coroner, because Brits completely agree with everything Thai officials claim.

>>> Ms Porntip, Thailand's #1 forensic scientist, is wrong when she seriously doubts the veracity of the official Thai DNA trail.

>>> The Brits were told not to investigate by the Thai PM because Thai officials can do a perfect job without their assistance.

>>> There were no bloody clothes outside of the immediate crime scene. Nomsod didn't have a haircut and have his sideburns re-positioned (so as not to match the CCTV from KT)

>>> The scenario at the beach bars near (and prior to) the crime, have no bearing on the case.

>>> The crime histories (including attempted rapes, fights, and/or prior use of date-rape drugs) of suspects (prior and current) have no bearing on the case.

>>> Two small men got so enraged by seeing two farang having sex, that they bludgeoned them both.

>>> It doesn't matter that the Burmese signed confessions which they couldn't read, while not having legal reps. Their confession is still binding, and there was no undue coercion in that scenario.

>>> There need be no mention of M, the Stingray Man or Mon's cop friend in relation to the crime. Forget about them.

>>> Sean cannot add anything to solving the crime. Forget about him.

obviously something is wrong , how anybody can believe with the utmost faith what is reported , stated by police chiefs is beyond me.

At one point during the investigation one group of the RTP did not know what the other was doing

With regards to the awesome 4 (or whoever), if they are so confident with regards the investigation why do they insist on responding to comments and remarks made by others, why not let history take its course and then be content knowing they were correct.

I am of the opinion that they do not take this stance because of vested interests

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

Couldn't agree more, the RTP and Thai Authorities have a lot to answer to with all their innuendo, cherry picking, speculation, assumptions and demonstrably false facts.

One gets to the truth by having evidence that is clean and collected in a manner that would satisfy international standards. Followed by a fair and transparent trial.

Agreed, this is exactly why this case has such a high interest to me. The investigation has been tainted and the police are trying very hard to find people to fit the crime. Not on who committed the crime. I have never seen police with so many mislead during the investigation and retracting it and then go off on a tangent.

Already made up their mind that it could not have been a Thai person who did it. That proves that they were out to frame some one else other than a Thai person. The police may be able to fool some people who are not capable of thinking on their own and who are taught to never to question authorities. Out of the North Korea playbook.

All I can say is that the two in custody have not been proven guilty of the murder. So they are presume to be innocent. And deserve a fair and transparent trial. And with the history of RTP with those well connected, it is highly unlikely they will get the fair trial.

We will never find the real killers as the investigation has already been botched on purpose to contaminate evidence. I think all we can now focus on is whether or not the two could have committed such a murder. All for the sake of having sex with a victim? Creating wounds on David that are not consistent with a hoe or even a glass bottle? They were so drunk that they were able to over power the two without sustaining any injuries to themselves? Almost like mercenaries. Planting DNA is easy when there is no independent agency over sight.

Yes all of this are reason enough for me to fight for these two individuals. Most of all, get the killers off the street for a safer Thailand.

Why would one wish to argue facts? Whats the logic in that

"Why would one wish to argue facts?"

In your case, because they run contrary to your beliefs, and that's the logic of it.

Is that a fact?

I can give you plenty of 'real' facts however and if you wish to argue them go ahead but they still remain facts for the world to see.

"I can give you plenty of 'real' facts"

Yes, well, go on then.

The problem is, there are people that insist on spinning alternative scenarios, that would be fine if the method wasn't to use little more than innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion. That's not how one gets to the truth, that's how one rationalizes prejudices.

Some people take umbrage at such things; after all you wouldn't be very happy, I presume, if you would be at the receiving end of it, would you?

If a non-invested / objective person looked at the scenarios painted by those of us who are seriously concerned for truth and justice ....were compared with the scenarios painted by those who are tight with the Headman and officialdom, then it's plain to see which is more believable.

Here are just a few of the things a person must believe if they side with the Thai officials re; the investigation:

>>> David's wounds were not caused by a sharp blade, but instead by a blunt hoe

>>> Hannah's phone was found near the Burmese dwelling

>>> The video providing Nomsod's alibi was not tampered with and is completely believable. So believable, that he was dropped as a suspect (and not even requested to provide a sample for DNA) ....because of that one CCTV clip.

>>> There's no need to send Nomsod's DNA typing to Brit officials or coroner, because Brits completely agree with everything Thai officials claim.

>>> Ms Porntip, Thailand's #1 forensic scientist, is wrong when she seriously doubts the veracity of the official Thai DNA trail.

>>> The Brits were told not to investigate by the Thai PM because Thai officials can do a perfect job without their assistance.

>>> There were no bloody clothes outside of the immediate crime scene. Nomsod didn't have a haircut and have his sideburns re-positioned (so as not to match the CCTV from KT)

>>> The scenario at the beach bars near (and prior to) the crime, have no bearing on the case.

>>> The crime histories (including attempted rapes, fights, and/or prior use of date-rape drugs) of suspects (prior and current) have no bearing on the case.

>>> Two small men got so enraged by seeing two farang having sex, that they bludgeoned them both.

>>> It doesn't matter that the Burmese signed confessions which they couldn't read, while not having legal reps. Their confession is still binding, and there was no undue coercion in that scenario.

>>> There need be no mention of M, the Stingray Man or Mon's cop friend in relation to the crime. Forget about them.

>>> Sean cannot add anything to solving the crime. Forget about him.

Well, that took care of the "innuendo, cherry-picking, speculation, assumptions, demonstrably false "facts" and outright lies to arrive to some preconceived, yet unwarranted conclusion" I was alluding to, now how about some facts?

It is not necessary, in establishing reasonable doubt as to their client's guilt in a case, that the defense prove that someone else did it AKA 'Perry Mason' complex:

(From Wikipedia) Perry Mason is a fictional character, a criminal defense lawyer who was the main character in works of detective fiction written by Erle Stanley Gardner. Perry Mason was featured in more than 80 novels and short stories, most of which had a plot involving his client's murder trial. Typically, Mason was able to establish his client's innocence by implicating another character, who then confessed.

Yes lets have some facts.

1, The fact is the boys did it. They said so themselves.

2, The RTP said the boys did it.

3, The pancake seller who translated for them said they did it.

4, No torture was used to get the boys to confess, both the RTP and the pancake seller have said this.

5, The crime scene re-enactment proves that the hoe is in fact the murder weapon.

6,The British police as well as both sets of parents are 100% sure the RTP have the right people. The RTP have made this statement with regard the British police many times so we know it to be true.

There are 6 facts that prove guilt 100% I am sure there are many more, these are just a few I picked off the top of my head.

Why would one wish to argue facts? Whats the logic in that

"Why would one wish to argue facts?"

In your case, because they run contrary to your beliefs, and that's the logic of it.

Is that a fact?

I can give you plenty of 'real' facts however and if you wish to argue them go ahead but they still remain facts for the world to see.

"I can give you plenty of 'real' facts"

Yes, well, go on then.

Here's the first 13 top facts in order of the timeline

1. The Investigation was seriously flawed from the word go

2. The crime scene invaded by members of the public and even future suspect/s

3. Fingerprints from the hoe impossible to get because of others handling it prior to forensics

4. Attempts by Thai's to destroy evidence linking them to the murders

5. Attempts given to give false information to divert attention to the real killers

6. Racial bias in at least 2 publicly made statements that Thai's could have not done this crime

7. DNA collection carried out by non specialist personal

8. Allegations of witness bribery

9. Allegations of torture by the B2

10. Police still refusing to meet the Human Rights Commission to answer those allegations of torture

11. Concerns internationally that this is not a fair trial in the making

12. Concerns of a cover up expressed by the UK government (corruption)

13. Concerns by the UK government of the DNA trail and the need to get it independently verified

Theres more but that should keep you going with excuses and arguments for a while...........................if you want any links to verify the above I will give them when I have time

Meanwhile on an island not a million miles away........Koh Phangan Headman's son, age 26, shot and seriously wound a police when the police was trying to arrest him...... But it cant have been him as he wasn't on the island at the time. Oh hang on lets wait for the dollar bill to be exchanged before we use that excuse.