Koh Tao murder trial rescheduled

[loonodingle]

it probably is okay in their world they live in. To much time in Thailand or vested interest in not seeing the true killers verified a day proved guilty.

I don't make any money out of this; so your accusation is not just baseless, it also demonstrates that your are more interested in reinforcing your own beliefs than in the truth, you need to create fictional narratives for self validation.

Pay attention Ali Get I said or vested. Like island life... its all about the money whoopee business is booming message he sent in here. However I said or so that means either or..

I have no solid opinion on the killers either. You will note that my M.O. is more around stimulating a thorough investigation as promised by the UK government which is why they sent the MPS under a section 26 order.

If it the B2 or the ac staff or fishermen then so be it. I would just like to know that the real killers are convicted

by irrefutable evidence. Not a botched and possibly corrupted investigation.

Respect..

[loonodingle]

And how does one do that ?

Show it all I would suggest. Let us decide what is and isn't relevant. Surely know one could disagree with that.

"And how does one do that ?"

Precisely.

How does one use unknown footage as a basis for anything? You don't know if there is such footage; still you, and others, want to use that as "evidence" of a cover-up.

Absence of evidence is not evidence.

Unused footage cant be used as evidence. Do you not think that might be the reason it is unused ?

CCTV Camera run 24/7. There are loads of cameras as we have already seen clips from them.

The owner of the bar wont allow police to look at his footage cause its private property. But all that is OK in your world.

"Unused footage cant be used as evidence. Do you not think that might be the reason it is unused ?"

I think I will have to let you run around your circular logic on your own.

Ah how cute. I do love how people who have no reply use a childish smiley face instead. Something you do rather a lot I notice.

BerryBert

Not sure if I am reading this correctly but I can assure you that and video undiscovered so far that is unearthed by the defence can be used in evidence at a trial if helps prove or disprove any event that is crucial in finding them guilty

[catsanddogs]

Interesting post from 29 Sept on TV in 'Key witness says foreigner kills Brit tourists' post 856

Posted 2014-09-29 12:00:09

POPULAR

I'll have to be careful what I write. Most people on Koh Tao know who are responsible. They also know who took the main perpetrator of the island by private speedboat around sunrise. Media and UK reps were not allowed to witness DNA taking of certain suspects. But everyone on the island is too scared to talk. And who are you gonna talk to when the guy leading the investigation is a friend and partner of a certain local family in a mainland business venture? I think there will be quite some foreigners who are planning their departure from the island. And hopefully when one of these people is back safe in their home country the full story will come out.

[boomerangutang]

AleG is picking up where jdinasia left off, regarding comments on this crime. They're fixated with bandying around "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy theorist" in nearly every one of their posts.

They're quite busy, trying desperately to discount every tidbit of the deluge of possible evidence which points at the Headman's people. It must be tiresome. If they were open-minded, they would take an attitude like mine: I've already stated that if the DNA evidence shows the Burmese' DNA matching that found in Hannah, then I will admit the Burmese had sex with her. However, The DNA typing (to satisfy me) has to come from the Brits' independent analysis. Thai officials have zero credibility at this time. Since the replacement Head Cop was put in charge, there have been more screwed up statements than a ref can blow a whistle at.

Conversely, if independently/Brit garnered DNA evidence shows matches between Nomsod and/or Mon with that found in/on Hannah, the Gang of 4 will not admit it's implicating. that's but one difference in our attitudes toward this case. I'm willing and open to consider all solid evidence. In contrast, the Gang of 4 is consistently discounting any bit of evidence which implicates the people they're shielding.

I admit, I go off on theories and scenarios, but that's my right, on an internet blog. Part of a discussion, is putting forth theories of what happened. Thai police ventured similar, and that brought us the ridiculous reenactment on the beach.

btw, Police have not raised a finger to do any reenactments of suspects (yes, including Mon and Nomsod) walking/running on that same CCTV path. For any remotely competent investigation, that would have been a key thing to do. Cops either didn't think to do it, or simply figured it would further implicate Mon and Nomsod, so stuffed the idea. It's not too late.

[loonodingle]

Denied access to CCTV is a big worry for me. Please would someone explain why someone would not allow access to their CCTV in such a high profile case which could cause future ramifications for your own business?

AleG?

First you'll have to show that any relevant CCTV footage has been withheld.

RTP have said that they have footage of woman running through the streets that they have not released that could be a witness to the crime or Hannah herself. Sounds very relevant.

Samui prosecuters office did release information to the defence in the last few days according to Andy Hall. Hence their trip to Koh Tao and analysis of of the evidence.

[catsanddogs]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

[Mooner]

CCTV Camera run 24/7. There are loads of cameras as we have already seen clips from them.

The owner of the bar wont allow police to look at his footage cause its private property.

Let's run this one again. Seems to me to be deliberately withholding possible evidence with the sanction of the RTP. It doesn't take much to reason that had the Burmese been involved, the CCTV would have been handed over, PDQ. A reasonable person would then conclude that perhaps the CCTV implicated people, other than the chosen scapegoats, who wouldn't, couldn't be, Thai.

Actually a reasonable person doesn't use his own ignorance as a basis for a conclusion, you only can consider one option completely ignoring the other: that the CCTV footage is immaterial to the crime. You don't know either way.

For example (and I am not actually making the allegation): I don't know whether you are working for the defense team and being paid for posting in ThaiVisa or not, but I'm just going to assume that as true and act accordingly because it is self reassuring and it would reinforce some of my preconceived notions. Would you take that as a reasonable attitude?

CCTV is obviously not immaterial to the crime or the case in general as it has been used as evidence against the B2 to show the movements of them and the deceased that night.

As you mentioned in a earlier post that as the crime happened at such a late hour there would not be many people around so by using ALL CCTV footage available the police could see who was awake and what movements they made around the time the murders happened.

[Lozza]

Seems we are all getting a little confused. We were told they were a pair of trousers. From there you have changed them to a pair of pants and now a pair of shorts.

What is the need to change the trousers into shorts ?

You can carry on with the good policing. Just got to hope no one catches you out changing the name of things to fit the story.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/thailand-top-bangkok-cop-flies-koh-tao-investigate-david-miller-hannah-witheridge-murders-1466049

Yes, they were trousers, not shorts, doesn't change a thing:

Miller and Ware were sharing a room, the police investigated the room, found a pair of trousers with what they thought may be blood stains; since it would had been improvable for Miller to go back to his room to change blood stained clothing after being murdered the police assumed the trousers may be Ware's. Now here is where things diverge between the people speculating here and actual police work, with that assumption they actually tested the trousers, no blood; furthermore, they determined they were Miller's trousers so they moved on; on the other hand the people that cling to speculation regardless of facts and developments are still stuck wondering about the bloody trousers.

Are you quoting from what the police said? Or did you actually witness the investigation? I don't think you were there to witness the investigation. So everything you based your argument are from hearsay from the police statement. And nothing has been checked or validated by any one. Or have you checked it?

Simple answer please, can you confirm and validate the report by the police? If not, then using the statement to prove your point is pointless and speculation as well. For all we know, it was fabricated. Unless you can provide solid proof that it is true.

The RTP, at this point has a very low credibility.

The claim that the police planted bloody trousers in Chris Ware's luggage to try to frame him comes from armchair "detectives" with a chip on their shoulders and is supported by nothing but their own imagination, so yes, I'll take a police statement against that any day of the week.

Besides that, you still don't understand how the concept of burden of proof works.

The police admitted it WAS them who planted the bloody/muddy trousers. Suggest you head back and re-read posts from the beginning.

You are seriously painfull and clueless.

[AleG]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

[Mooner]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

They have released plenty of CCTV footage to date. I dont see the issue with releasing the footage of them together. The police werent slow to post pics of the deceased all over social media!

[AleG]

AleG is picking up where jdinasia left off, regarding comments on this crime. They're fixated with bandying around "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy theorist" in nearly every one of their posts.

They're quite busy, trying desperately to discount every tidbit of the deluge of possible evidence which points at the Headman's people. It must be tiresome. If they were open-minded, they would take an attitude like mine: I've already stated that if the DNA evidence shows the Burmese' DNA matching that found in Hannah, then I will admit the Burmese had sex with her. However, The DNA typing (to satisfy me) has to come from the Brits' independent analysis. Thai officials have zero credibility at this time. Since the replacement Head Cop was put in charge, there have been more screwed up statements than a ref can blow a whistle at.

Conversely, if independently/Brit garnered DNA evidence shows matches between Nomsod and/or Mon with that found in/on Hannah, the Gang of 4 will not admit it's implicating. that's but one difference in our attitudes toward this case. I'm willing and open to consider all solid evidence. In contrast, the Gang of 4 is consistently discounting any bit of evidence which implicates the people they're shielding.

I admit, I go off on theories and scenarios, but that's my right, on an internet blog. Part of a discussion, is putting forth theories of what happened. Thai police ventured similar, and that brought us the ridiculous reenactment on the beach.

btw, Police have not raised a finger to do any reenactments of suspects (yes, including Mon and Nomsod) walking/running on that same CCTV path. For any remotely competent investigation, that would have been a key thing to do. Cops either didn't think to do it, or simply figured it would further implicate Mon and Nomsod, so stuffed the idea. It's not too late.

"the Gang of 4 is consistently discounting any bit of evidence which implicates the people they're shielding."

Every time you repeat that same mantra it just reaffirms that you can't think outside the conspiracy box. You are obsessed with Nomsod, so of course everything and everything has him and his family in it.

[catsanddogs]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Why don't you get off this thread then and await the trial.

[Lozza]

Another thought. The stained trousers could have belonged to James Ware. What time did he leave the island the night before the murders? And what transport did he use? Why did he leave? James is Chris's younger brother I think I read. Blood is thicker than water the saying goes.

Also, we have seen from the CCTV video that something happened on the eve and morning of 14/15 Sept as David was seen walking past the food stall. We saw a crowd of people looking in the direction of where David was coming from as if something was going down - someone shouting maybe at David. And in another video we saw the couple at the food stand looking in the direction of where David was coming from, again, the woman's face as if something odd was going on. We then see what looks like Chris Ware and one of Hannahs friends (to me anyway) arrive at the stall and David carries on walking down the street. It could have been that Ware was having issues with David or shouting at him because the woman at the stall then turns her attention back to the stall once this bloke that looks like Ware is there. We don't see anyone else walk past in that video that takes her attention. Or maybe someone was shouting at both Chris and David and they went in the other direction so did not come into view of the CCTV camera.

Also, that picture that was put up of David after he had been murdered - he had a black eye. Because we have no footage to look at from ANY source after 2am ish with David or Hannah in it, it may be possible that David got that black eye before he was murdered. Even before he got to the beach. Maybe in one of the bars, maybe at the Ocean View accommodation, or somewhere in the street or a side alley. The friends know lots plenty and that's why the defence is asking them to take the stand. They are no doubt living in terrible fear and know that whatever they say will not bring Hannah and David back. And it appears the UK police also want to protect them by refusing to do what they should be doing which is taking a stand and getting independent DNA tests done for the sake of the victims, their families and and all the other naive youngsters that are planning to take the holiday of a lifetime.

James Ware.jpg

interesting photo , to me that looks like the guy in the white baggy shirt that arrives at the food stall with the female friend , just as david continues up the road to get some fags . There is a bit of footage where david seems to come out of the bar / shop on the otherside of the road to the foods stall ( lower left of the stall )

James Ware I believe.

James Ware was in Bangkok when the murders took place. He and Chris were due to fly home on the15th.

The only crime Chris is guilty of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

No point trying to make-up stories about either of them. Remember DNA is Asian origin.

[AleG]

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

They have released plenty of CCTV footage to date. I dont see the issue with releasing the footage of them together. The police werent slow to post pics of the deceased all over social media!

It's up to the investigation team what information to release to the public and what not to release, you are not entitled to ask them for anything. This is not just in Thailand, go to the UK and ask the coroner that did the postmortem on the victims to release information of your choosing to you so you can share it in social media, see how far you go.

Of course that is beside the point that during the investigation the police broke proper protocol many times regarding the release of information, suspect names and premature conclusions. I find it rather rich from people that complain about the improper conduct of the RTP to request more of the same to please their wishes.

[thailandchilli]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Better tell that to the RTP

A video capture from CCTV footage released by police of a prime "person of interest" in the Koh Tao murder investigation.Authorities are hoping the public can identify him

[Krenjai]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

WRONG, the RTP does not have CCTV footage of them leaving together because if they really would have this, we would have seen it by now as it backs-up their total ridiculous & fabricated scenario. Also if you click the link you'll see what the RTP is referring to, which is also ridiculous because that girl has black hair.

[AleG]

Are you quoting from what the police said? Or did you actually witness the investigation? I don't think you were there to witness the investigation. So everything you based your argument are from hearsay from the police statement. And nothing has been checked or validated by any one. Or have you checked it?

Simple answer please, can you confirm and validate the report by the police? If not, then using the statement to prove your point is pointless and speculation as well. For all we know, it was fabricated. Unless you can provide solid proof that it is true.

The RTP, at this point has a very low credibility.

The claim that the police planted bloody trousers in Chris Ware's luggage to try to frame him comes from armchair "detectives" with a chip on their shoulders and is supported by nothing but their own imagination, so yes, I'll take a police statement against that any day of the week.

Besides that, you still don't understand how the concept of burden of proof works.

The police admitted it WAS them who planted the bloody/muddy trousers. Suggest you head back and re-read posts from the beginning.

You are seriously painfull and clueless.

Seriously, again? That rumor is nothing but the result of inbred speculation on social media.

They were in Miller's luggage, you think the police was trying to frame him for the murder by "planting" those non-bloody trousers in his luggage?

[Krenjai]

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/mafia-island-from-paradise-to-bloodshed/story-fnizu4n5-1227181210830

[JLCrab]

To whom it may or may not concern: Thank you. I used that expression after someone suggested that the 'true killer' killed the victim because she would not have sex with him and, if so, that must have been the way he thought about her.

The rest is up to you -- I don't need no button to ignore your nonsense but it amuses me to read it any way.

[AleG]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Why don't you get off this thread then and await the trial.

What a concept! Wait for the evidence from the trial to make a judgment!

Have you thought of suggesting the same thing to people that use their speculation to do things like defaming people, intrude in the private lives of family and friends of the deceased (or just anyone they deem suspicious), call for boycotts that would affect the life of thousands, outright calls for vigilante justice, etc, etc...?

Because, you know, there but for the grace of god you go...

[greenchair]

Aleg and ?and? I am sorry to button in. But that news is olddddddd and redundant. The police have already acknowledged many ????? ago. This is not David and Hannah. There is no footage of them leaving together.

[JLCrab]

That's OK -- the more I read of some the circuitous, convoluted explanations as to why the wrong persons may be scheduled to be on trial, the more I believe that they just might have the right persons scheduled to be on trial.

[catsanddogs]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Why don't you get off this thread then and await the trial.

What a concept! Wait for the evidence from the trial to make a judgment!

Have you thought of suggesting the same thing to people that use their speculation to do things like defaming people, intrude in the private lives of family and friends of the deceased (or just anyone they deem suspicious), call for boycotts that would affect the life of thousands, outright calls for vigilante justice, etc, etc...?

Because, you know, there but for the grace of god you go...

What I am saying is why, if you find it all so distasteful, do you continue to read all the posts and reply to many of them? Why not just stay away? Please answer so I can understand.

[berybert]

CCTV Camera run 24/7. There are loads of cameras as we have already seen clips from them.

The owner of the bar wont allow police to look at his footage cause its private property.

Let's run this one again. Seems to me to be deliberately withholding possible evidence with the sanction of the RTP. It doesn't take much to reason that had the Burmese been involved, the CCTV would have been handed over, PDQ. A reasonable person would then conclude that perhaps the CCTV implicated people, other than the chosen scapegoats, who wouldn't, couldn't be, Thai.

Actually a reasonable person doesn't use his own ignorance as a basis for a conclusion, you only can consider one option completely ignoring the other: that the CCTV footage is immaterial to the crime. You don't know either way.

For example (and I am not actually making the allegation): I don't know whether you are working for the defense team and being paid for posting in ThaiVisa or not, but I'm just going to assume that as true and act accordingly because it is self reassuring and it would reinforce some of my preconceived notions. Would you take that as a reasonable attitude?

I agree with you. But no one is using ignorance as a basis for conclusion. What people are asking for is to show the footage. It may well prove you are right and show the Burmese heading home from the beach at the time the murders were committed. Or do you think the headman is protected the Burmese two ?

Show what you have and stop the speculation. There is no one on this forum who wouldn't be unhappy to see the Burmese hang if they are the murderers, And who knows maybe the un shown CCTV could prove this.

Any reason you think it shouldn't be shown ?

[boomerangutang]

If anyone needs proof of a cover-up by Thai cops, look no further than Thai top brass saying they would not share Nomsod's DNA with Brit experts.

There are other proofs, but that one is like a toe stub - it can't be ignored.

Indeed, everything, I repeat everything Thai officials have said and done since the 2nd head cop was installed, has been designed to shield the Headman's people and/or nail the scapegoats. Granted, Thai cops haven't done much of anything since the week after the replacement came forth. Why should they? They don't want to hear or see any evidence (and there's lots) which might implicate the Headman's people. Similarly, they don't want to pursue any leads for the same reasons. All their focus is squarely on nailing the B2, and that's why the ONLY thing they've done since mid-Oct is re-write their version of the frame-up to suit the prosecution. Oh, and do what they can to stifle/delay any announcements by the British. Already, the Thai PM has spoken with the UK PM about this case. It's no stretch to imagine them speaking subsequent times about it. It should, by now, be clear to Cameron that Thai officials are very spooked about any Brit findings seeing the light of day. Thus far, all's going the way of Thai officials, but methinks they can't continue to have everything go their way. There are cracks in the Thaitanic, and when it starts listing, it's going to be a gusher, and more than shit will hit the fan.

[seahorse]

The claim that the police planted bloody trousers in Chris Ware's luggage to try to frame him comes from armchair "detectives" with a chip on their shoulders and is supported by nothing but their own imagination, so yes, I'll take a police statement against that any day of the week.

Besides that, you still don't understand how the concept of burden of proof works.

The police admitted it WAS them who planted the bloody/muddy trousers. Suggest you head back and re-read posts from the beginning.

You are seriously painfull and clueless.

Indeed. And here's the proof.

As for the pair of stained pants found in Miller's luggage, the general admitted that the substance found on the clothing was not blood and that they belonged to Miller and the pair had been put in the victim's luggage by the first group of police officers.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Killers-will-be-caught-30243629.html

Have you noticed that these corruption apologists only come out of the woodwork to derail the threads when it seems like some posters who want to see justice done are getting too close to the real truth of what happened?

[Neilly]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Okay, that's enough, you're off to the 'ignore' list along with a couple of your mates

[loonodingle]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

Correct AleG........ we have no entitlement to anything the defense do but not us.

We are just passengers and no one really cares what we write. I know that which is why I personally have been doing many other things to try to generate some action from the familys and the media. We musnt blow our stuff to early here and we have time.

Brandon Lewis the local MP is going to get a face full of this. He is the local rep for the current government in Hannah's ward for example. There's lots we can do as individuals to raise awareness as well as examining the clips the RTP choose to release... we must bear this in mind at all time. its a coordinated media release to make you believe what they want.

[AleG]

That's OK -- the more I read of some the circuitous, convoluted explanations as to why the wrong persons may be scheduled to be on trial, the more I believe that they just might have the right persons scheduled to be on trial.

The more I hear of those the more I think of the Dunning-Kruger effect:

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude. Conversely, highly skilled individuals tend to underestimate their relative competence, erroneously assuming that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.

[loonodingle]

Police say they have examined CCTV footage showing the two victims leaving a bar late on Sunday night, walking towards the beach - but they were killed in a hidden spot behind some rocks, and no eyewitnesses have yet been found.

(Jonathan Head http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29225672) - 16 Sept.

Must have missed this. So police have footage of them leaving the bar TOGETHER? Would be helpful if they stated what time. Unless they got it wrong again and the footage was of the other couple they initially said were Hannah and David. So more footage they have chosen not to release. Why? Why have they been so selective in what they have released?

What makes you think you are entitled to it? It's a murder trial, not a media circus, as much as some people would like to make it so.

The evidence will be presented in court, were it can be contested by the defense.

They have released plenty of CCTV footage to date. I dont see the issue with releasing the footage of them together. The police werent slow to post pics of the deceased all over social media!

The pics were released by the rescue workers I think not the police. That's what I heard somewhere... gone dizzy with it all now