Koh Tao murder trial rescheduled

[BritTim]

So are any of our TV investigators located in Koh Tao, been there to take witness statements personally? Or is this all being done behind a keyboard using whatever snippets of information have appeared in the media?

Any one done personal investigations?

Oh please if anybody actually went to Koh Tao and started nosing around their life wouldn't be worth a 50 satang piece (posted 10 JAN 2015):

https://twitter.com/search?q=%40atomicalandy&src=typd&mode=photos

Had to smile. Actually, some of those photos are new to me, and I would dearly like to see the context ... which probably means I shall waste yet more hours on this case browsing through the Facebook account. Sigh!

[Krenjai]

I have told my scenario multiple times on what I think happened that night and I will keep doing that. I will keep speculating based on what I have seen, read and heard from the RTP, from the media, from everybody, yes even you. ALL seems to be pointing to a similar scenario like the one below, and nothing seems to point to the scenario the RTP and you want us to believe,

I think Hannah probably had some hassle in the AC bar, maybe somebody tried to fix her up with a "roofy" or she just rejected a certain "somebody" and told him to F-off. Whatever the case may have been, she was NOT seen with David, there is NO CCTV footage of them walking together, nothing. If that CCTV footage would exist the RTP would have shown the world because it fits so well with their ludicrous scenario. Therefore I assume she was followed to her apartment as she left the AC bar either along the beach or along the back road. At some point, close to the apartment they must have attacked her, and dragged her to the crime-scene to teach her a lesson.

David must have seen or heard something and tried to save her (right Sean?). David must have fought with his attackers (at least one being left-handed) but didn't stand a chance against these push-knifes (9 stab wounds) and got killed, dragged into the water, drowned to be sure he was dead, then stripped naked (they forgot one sock) and a sex crime scene was orchestrated. Please note, NO DNA from David on the hoe!

Sean who may have heard something tried to intervene not knowing want was going down but his (stab)wound and blood on the guitar tell the story he was there, to claim this came from a motorbike accident is crazy. My feeling tells me M was one of the killers, he seems like a bad dude who carries a push knife on him or even a gun, he is left-handed and he was identified by the RTP (pre-promotion days for the General).

Now some will claim the promotion was already decided before the killings, and even if so, you don't pull off your lead investigator of a double homicide case that is just a about to break, do you? That would be ridiculous, but that is what happened. How crazy! Yes, he looked in the wrong direction, even claiming they had sufficient evidence to make an arrest. He was not talking about the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests, no, he was talking about...well you know who I mean.

I say again ALL points to more or less similar scenario as the above, unfortunately for the B2, the decision was made they are guilty, their DNA matched suddenly and Hannah's phone (oops Davids'phone) & sunglasses(?) were found smashed near their sleeping hut. Poor guys!

Edited January 13, 2015 by CharlieH

[CRUNCHER]

The serial killer David Berkowitz the Son-of-Sam murderer was caught because someone noticed that there had been a parking ticket issued near the most recent murder scene and he was found by tracing that parking ticket.

That may be the one referenced above or maybe not but that was someone being alert who lived near the crime scene at the time of the most recent crime and not by people getting together pre-internet and saying what about this and what about that.

In the San Francisco region of California, police were stumped by a serial killer they dubbed 'The Zodiac Killer'. They couldn't decipher some coded messages, so they opted to publish one of the notes in the SF Examiner newspaper. A couple of regular (but bright) people in the suburbs were able to decipher the notes, and that led to capturing the bad guy. If it was a similar scenario in Thailand, the police would laugh at any suggestion to involve 'outsiders.' would tell you that the police are the professionals, and anyone outside offering an opinion (or possible evidence) is a 'conspiracy theorist' and input from them is worthless. Qualification: perhaps that closed-minded attitude would only happen when police and the gang of 4 decide to be shielding of particular well-connected people. I'm not sure if they would act that way if they had a vested interest in actually finding and nailing the real culprits - whomever they may be.

That's a nice story but the 'Zodiac Killer' of the SF region has never been apprehended --

The Zodiac Killer was a serial killer who operated in northern California in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The killer's identity remains unknown.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac_Killer#Suspects

I stand corrected. I thought he was caught. However, the gist of the story is that regular folks (would call them conspiracy theorists) proved helpful in a breakthrough in the case, which cops couldn't untangle. In contrast, we have the KT case, where the cops don't want any outside input, unless it's something which might further implicate the Burmese. They don't want to hear or see anything which could implicate the protected rich guys.

Perhaps I read Wiki wrong, but there was no break through.

[AleG]

I have told my scenario multiple times on what I think happened that night and I will keep doing that. I will keep speculating based on what I have seen, read and heard from the RTP, from the media, from everybody, yes even you. ALL seems to be pointing to a similar scenario like the one below, and nothing seems to point to the scenario the RTP and you want us to believe,

I think Hannah probably had some hassle in the AC bar, maybe somebody tried to fix her up with a "roofy" or she just rejected a certain "somebody" and told him to F-off. Whatever the case may have been, she was NOT seen with David, there is NO CCTV footage of them walking together, nothing. If that CCTV footage would exist the RTP would have shown the world because it fits so well with their ludicrous scenario. Therefore I assume she was followed to her apartment as she left the AC bar either along the beach or along the back road. At some point, close to the apartment they must have attacked her, and dragged her to the crime-scene to teach her a lesson.

David must have seen or heard something and tried to save her (right Sean?). David must have fought with his attackers (at least one being left-handed) but didn't stand a chance against these push-knifes (9 stab wounds) and got killed, dragged into the water, drowned to be sure he was dead, then stripped naked (they forgot one sock) and a sex crime scene was orchestrated. Please note, NO DNA from David on the hoe!

Sean who may have heard something tried to intervene not knowing want was going down but his (stab)wound and blood on the guitar tell the story he was there, to claim this came from a motorbike accident is crazy. My feeling tells me M was one of the killers, he seems like a bad dude who carries a push knife on him or even a gun, he is left-handed and he was identified by the RTP (pre-promotion days for the General).

Now some will claim the promotion was already decided before the killings, and even if so, you don't pull off your lead investigator of a double homicide case that is just a about to break, do you? That would be ridiculous, but that is what happened. How crazy! Yes, he looked in the wrong direction, even claiming they had sufficient evidence to make an arrest. He was not talking about the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests, no, he was talking about...well you know who I mean.

I say again ALL points to more or less similar scenario as the above, unfortunately for the B2, the decision was made they are guilty, their DNA matched suddenly and Hannah's phone (oops Davids'phone) & sunglasses(?) were found smashed near their sleeping hut. Poor guys!

You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts; for example "the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests" is not a fact.

They were not cleared by any tests before being arrested; that keeps coming back and not a single time has anyone who uses that "fact" shown any actual proof for it.

Now then comes the addendum to the first paragraph: if your opinions are based on false premises, your opinions are wrong.

Furthermore, if your opinions are based on little more than what imaginary scenario you can conjure up in your head, your opinions are nothing but a reflection of your own mind, they have no bearing on the real world, and what good does that in getting to the truth?

[berybert]

I have told my scenario multiple times on what I think happened that night and I will keep doing that. I will keep speculating based on what I have seen, read and heard from the RTP, from the media, from everybody, yes even you. ALL seems to be pointing to a similar scenario like the one below, and nothing seems to point to the scenario the RTP and you want us to believe,

I think Hannah probably had some hassle in the AC bar, maybe somebody tried to fix her up with a "roofy" or she just rejected a certain "somebody" and told him to F-off. Whatever the case may have been, she was NOT seen with David, there is NO CCTV footage of them walking together, nothing. If that CCTV footage would exist the RTP would have shown the world because it fits so well with their ludicrous scenario. Therefore I assume she was followed to her apartment as she left the AC bar either along the beach or along the back road. At some point, close to the apartment they must have attacked her, and dragged her to the crime-scene to teach her a lesson.

David must have seen or heard something and tried to save her (right Sean?). David must have fought with his attackers (at least one being left-handed) but didn't stand a chance against these push-knifes (9 stab wounds) and got killed, dragged into the water, drowned to be sure he was dead, then stripped naked (they forgot one sock) and a sex crime scene was orchestrated. Please note, NO DNA from David on the hoe!

Sean who may have heard something tried to intervene not knowing want was going down but his (stab)wound and blood on the guitar tell the story he was there, to claim this came from a motorbike accident is crazy. My feeling tells me M was one of the killers, he seems like a bad dude who carries a push knife on him or even a gun, he is left-handed and he was identified by the RTP (pre-promotion days for the General).

Now some will claim the promotion was already decided before the killings, and even if so, you don't pull off your lead investigator of a double homicide case that is just a about to break, do you? That would be ridiculous, but that is what happened. How crazy! Yes, he looked in the wrong direction, even claiming they had sufficient evidence to make an arrest. He was not talking about the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests, no, he was talking about...well you know who I mean.

I say again ALL points to more or less similar scenario as the above, unfortunately for the B2, the decision was made they are guilty, their DNA matched suddenly and Hannah's phone (oops Davids'phone) & sunglasses(?) were found smashed near their sleeping hut. Poor guys!

You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts; for example "the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests" is not a fact.

They were not cleared by any tests before being arrested; that keeps coming back and not a single time has anyone who uses that "fact" shown any actual proof for it.

Now then comes the addendum to the first paragraph: if your opinions are based on false premises, your opinions are wrong.

Furthermore, if your opinions are based on little more than what imaginary scenario you can conjure up in your head, your opinions are nothing but a reflection of your own mind, they have no bearing on the real world, and what good does that in getting to the truth?

They were not cleared are your facts. You really need to get with the times. They were cleared they took the tests and they were cleared. Unlike some of the head mans family who came back 70% positive.

You can call us all lying shits as long as you like, but suspects 1 and 2 are closer to the truth than we have now.

[JLCrab]

The serial killer David Berkowitz the Son-of-Sam murderer was caught because someone noticed that there had been a parking ticket issued near the most recent murder scene and he was found by tracing that parking ticket.

That may be the one referenced above or maybe not but that was someone being alert who lived near the crime scene at the time of the most recent crime and not by people getting together pre-internet and saying what about this and what about that.

In the San Francisco region of California, police were stumped by a serial killer they dubbed 'The Zodiac Killer'. They couldn't decipher some coded messages, so they opted to publish one of the notes in the SF Examiner newspaper. A couple of regular (but bright) people in the suburbs were able to decipher the notes, and that led to capturing the bad guy. If it was a similar scenario in Thailand, the police' would laugh at any suggestion to involve 'outsiders.' would tell you that the police are the professionals, and anyone outside offering an opinion (or possible evidence) is a 'conspiracy theorist' and input from them is worthless. Qualification: perhaps that closed-minded attitude would only happen when police decide to be shielding of particular well-connected people. I'm not sure if they would act that way if they had a vested interest in actually finding and nailing the real culprits - whomever they may be.

That's a nice story but the 'Zodiac Killer' of the SF region has never been apprehended --

The Zodiac Killer was a serial killer who operated in northern California in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The killer's identity remains unknown.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac_Killer#Suspects

I stand corrected. I thought he was caught. However, the gist of the story is that regular folks proved helpful in a breakthrough in the case, which cops couldn't untangle. In contrast, we have the KT case, where the cops don't want any outside input, unless it's something which might further implicate the Burmese. They don't want to hear or see anything which could implicate the protected rich guys.

While some of the highly publicized murder or serial murder cases have been solved by input from the public, a big problem on these highly publicized cases for the investigators is in separating the legitimate leads from the concerned citizenry from the idle speculation and hypotheses from total nutcases.

Edited January 13, 2015 by JLCrab

[Krenjai]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

[seahorse]

• The way that Hannah's body was sexually posed further indicates the extent of the killer's anger and is intended to send a very spiteful, hateful message, which suggests that even after murdering her the anger and hatred had not subsided, hence the posing. Here is an interesting article on posing: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.practicalhomicide.com%2FResearch%2FISJjuly2010.pdf&ei=P7y0VMaXEND8ugSdnoDABQ&usg=AFQjCNH1B2cnPbGwnnviXCXtuR4Jmo5MwQ&bvm=bv.83339334,d.c2E

For those who don't have time to read all of that (I didn't) - here is an extract from the conclusion.

The data indicate that sexual

posing is a highly personal action on the part of the offender, which oftentimes involves extreme

emotion, anger and rage. The most prevalent motive is fantasy driven behavior (71%). In these

instances the offender subconsciously acted-out a sexually significant behavioral pattern to

obtain sexual satisfaction. The second most frequent motivation was anger/retaliation (22%). In

those cases the offender uses sex as a weapon to punish and degrade the victim; the body is

posed out of anger, to retaliate against the victim for some real or apparent slight of the offender.

It is fortunate that the least often seen offender motivation for sexual posing is to misdirect the

investigation, occurring in 7% of the cases. The rarity of such events, of course, does not suggest

that they deserve any less attention in the training regimen of investigators.

It certainly doesn't fit with the story put to us by the RTP and their apologists that the Burmese two just became aroused.

[AleG]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Nowhere have I seen it reported that the samples were tested and they were cleared, that comes entirely from the ass... umptions of some people.

Why don't you try (and fail) to prove your "FACTS" by providing a credible citation for them?

[berybert]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Nowhere have I seen it reported that the samples were tested and they were cleared, that comes entirely from the ass... umptions of some people.

Why don't you try (and fail) to prove your "FACTS" by providing a credible citation for them?

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

[AleG]

You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts; for example "the B2 who had been cleared already by previous DNA tests" is not a fact.

They were not cleared by any tests before being arrested; that keeps coming back and not a single time has anyone who uses that "fact" shown any actual proof for it.

Now then comes the addendum to the first paragraph: if your opinions are based on false premises, your opinions are wrong.

Furthermore, if your opinions are based on little more than what imaginary scenario you can conjure up in your head, your opinions are nothing but a reflection of your own mind, they have no bearing on the real world, and what good does that in getting to the truth?

They were not cleared are your facts. You really need to get with the times. They were cleared they took the tests and they were cleared. Unlike some of the head mans family who came back 70% positive.

You can call us all lying shits as long as you like, but suspects 1 and 2 are closer to the truth than we have now.

Well, go ahead, provide any credible citation (that is a link to a source stating what you claim) that they were tested and cleared before they were arrested.

At least one of them provided a sample a few days before the arrests, along with 100/200 other people, the results were expected by the 30th of September (Bangkok Post article "Murder probe DNA testing ‘nearly done’"), they were arrested on the 2nd of October, for all you know they were finally arrested based on the DNA test results.

[AleG]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Nowhere have I seen it reported that the samples were tested and they were cleared, that comes entirely from the ass... umptions of some people.

Why don't you try (and fail) to prove your "FACTS" by providing a credible citation for them?

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

Edited January 14, 2015 by AleG

[berybert]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Nowhere have I seen it reported that the samples were tested and they were cleared, that comes entirely from the ass... umptions of some people.

Why don't you try (and fail) to prove your "FACTS" by providing a credible citation for them?

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing. Something you claimed didn't happen. So far from me making things up, maybe you should just admit you lied and stop moving the goalposts to fit whatever lie you want to tell.

P.S. Why would'nt they have analyzed his test from the first day.

[AleG]

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing. Something you claimed didn't happen. So far from me making things up, maybe you should just admit you lied and stop moving the goalposts to fit whatever lie you want to tell.

P.S. Why would'nt they have analyzed his test from the first day.

What photo shows one of the suspects being tested on the first days of testing?

The first DNA sampling of people were done, if I remember correctly, two or three days after the murders, so go on, don't just say something is so, prove it.

If you are going to call me a liar you better have some very conclusive proof of what you are claiming.

By the way, don't say I'm moving the goalposts when you wrote "they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation" and now change it to "I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing"

Edited January 14, 2015 by AleG

[jdinasia]

Having a sample taken amongst 100's of others doesn't do more than prove a sample was taken. It doesn't prove that the test was run at any time. We do know that tests were run before they were arrested.

[thailandchilli]

I also believe tests were run after their arrest so they were in my opinion tested twice:

On the arrest of the Burmese 3........................

"Police pushed through DNA tests in record time, obtaining results in just hours, instead of the usual days. Even before the official 10am press conference, police "sources" began leaking news that the tests were positive; "

However the DNA evidence here is a moot point:

The Foreign Office last month summoned a Thai diplomat and expressed concerns about the investigation including allegations the suspects, both 21, had been mistreated and that DNA evidence had not been verified. http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/thailand-murders/60430/thai-court-charges-two-over-british-tourists-murder

Edited January 14, 2015 by thailandchilli

[stephen terry]

• The way that Hannah's body was sexually posed further indicates the extent of the killer's anger and is intended to send a very spiteful, hateful message, which suggests that even after murdering her the anger and hatred had not subsided, hence the posing. Here is an interesting article on posing: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.practicalhomicide.com%2FResearch%2FISJjuly2010.pdf&ei=P7y0VMaXEND8ugSdnoDABQ&usg=AFQjCNH1B2cnPbGwnnviXCXtuR4Jmo5MwQ&bvm=bv.83339334,d.c2E

For those who don't have time to read all of that (I didn't) - here is an extract from the conclusion.

The data indicate that sexual

posing is a highly personal action on the part of the offender, which oftentimes involves extreme

emotion, anger and rage. The most prevalent motive is fantasy driven behavior (71%). In these

instances the offender subconsciously acted-out a sexually significant behavioral pattern to

obtain sexual satisfaction. The second most frequent motivation was anger/retaliation (22%). In

those cases the offender uses sex as a weapon to punish and degrade the victim; the body is

posed out of anger, to retaliate against the victim for some real or apparent slight of the offender.

It is fortunate that the least often seen offender motivation for sexual posing is to misdirect the

investigation, occurring in 7% of the cases. The rarity of such events, of course, does not suggest

that they deserve any less attention in the training regimen of investigators.

It certainly doesn't fit with the story put to us by the RTP and their apologists that the Burmese two just became aroused.

Agree 100%. It doesn't take much sensible reasoning to conclude that the Burmese are, more than likely, the chosen scapegoats, but the difficulty the defence has, is to prove it in face of the RTP's constructed 'evidence'. How do they contest a faked DNA report if in fact it is faked? All they can do is to challenge the flawed collection of DNA and the chain of security. For example, is it a fact that the initial samples were held in the Headman's fridge?

[berybert]

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing. Something you claimed didn't happen. So far from me making things up, maybe you should just admit you lied and stop moving the goalposts to fit whatever lie you want to tell.

P.S. Why would'nt they have analyzed his test from the first day.

What photo shows one of the suspects being tested on the first days of testing?

The first DNA sampling of people were done, if I remember correctly, two or three days after the murders, so go on, don't just say something is so, prove it.

If you are going to call me a liar you better have some very conclusive proof of what you are claiming.

By the way, don't say I'm moving the goalposts when you wrote "they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation" and now change it to "I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing"

'Goalposts moved'

Sorry but can you explain the meaning of your first 2 lines.

Seems to me as if you are trying to make people believe they were not tested on the first day of testing, because the first day testing was done 2 or 3 days after the murder.

[stephen terry]

Having a sample taken amongst 100's of others doesn't do more than prove a sample was taken. It doesn't prove that the test was run at any time. We do know that tests were run before they were arrested.

JD, the defence will have the pictures of the B2 queuing and the first police general's statement to the effect that the initial tests didn't identify a suspect, So it will be up to the prosecution to respond to that. I surmise they will say not all of the results had come back - and there will be further challenges to put doubt on the veracity of the subsequent DNA test results.

And to respond to your post, I am sure the defence will use this to show how incompetent the RTP were. Why take a sample if you're not going to test it? And possibly, if there was a testing delay, the taken samples could have been wrongly labelled or contaminated. The defence's aim re the DNA is to cast doubts, as I'm sure you realise.

[AleG]

What photo shows one of the suspects being tested on the first days of testing?

The first DNA sampling of people were done, if I remember correctly, two or three days after the murders, so go on, don't just say something is so, prove it.

If you are going to call me a liar you better have some very conclusive proof of what you are claiming.

By the way, don't say I'm moving the goalposts when you wrote "they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation" and now change it to "I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing"

'Goalposts moved'

Sorry but can you explain the meaning of your first 2 lines.

Seems to me as if you are trying to make people believe they were not tested on the first day of testing, because the first day testing was done 2 or 3 days after the murder.

No, I'm saying that the first testings of people were done two or three days after the murder, you claim the two Burmese men on trial were part of those initial tests and that they were cleared by the results, prove it.

Clear enough now?

[berybert]

What photo shows one of the suspects being tested on the first days of testing?

The first DNA sampling of people were done, if I remember correctly, two or three days after the murders, so go on, don't just say something is so, prove it.

If you are going to call me a liar you better have some very conclusive proof of what you are claiming.

By the way, don't say I'm moving the goalposts when you wrote "they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation" and now change it to "I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing"

'Goalposts moved'

Sorry but can you explain the meaning of your first 2 lines.

Seems to me as if you are trying to make people believe they were not tested on the first day of testing, because the first day testing was done 2 or 3 days after the murder.

No, I'm saying that the first testings of people were done two or three days after the murder, you claim the two Burmese men on trial were part of those initial tests and that they were cleared by the results, prove it.

Clear enough now?

Not sure if you are aware, but I have no need to prove anything. That is what the defense team will do.

800 pages of evidence, and most of it will be bumbling rubbish pretty much in line with your posts.

It is rather quaint to see how excitable you get trying to disprove what others believe. You then rush around from pillar to post trying to find an old post or newspaper clipping to prove your point. Then when you cant do that 20 minutes later you are back having proved nothing and asking others to prove you wrong.

You do realize as I said before no one has to prove anything to you.

Now tell me again. ***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***

Clear enough now ?

[mojorison]

• We've all have seen pictures of the B2 standing in line for DNA sampling early in the investigation (FACT)
• We've all read that the RTP itself said that all the initial DNA tests came back negative (and they took about 200) (FACT)

Of course Mr. A will claim a backlog in testing, but even if so, the B2 were among the first to be tested since they worked in the AC bar. They were the firts to be targeted for testing. So yes, it is indeed correct (FACT) that they were cleared until somebody decided they needed two scapegoats. They carefully planned who to take so no bombshell would drop on them, and guess what, they succeeded very well..........so far....

No, they were not tested and cleared in the early stages of the investigation, that is not a FACT, they provided samples a few days before their arrest, along with other 100 to 200 people. Nowhere have I seen it reported that the samples were tested and they were cleared, that comes entirely from the ass... umptions of some people.

Why don't you try (and fail) to prove your "FACTS" by providing a credible citation for them?

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

So why did a month pass before they were arrested if they were detected in the first round of testing? Your bias is boring me to tears.

[AleG]

Krenjai, I would suggest you repost the picture of the guys standing in line on the first day of testing which clearly shows 1 if not both of the boys queuing up to be tested.

This still wont be good enough for you know who. Because it wont be endorsed by the RTP. And if the RTP say no our friend will call you a liar no matter what.

If you claim that a photo of one of the men standing on line to provide a test proves that those samples were analyzed and they were cleared before their arrest, you are making the underlined part up.

So why did a month pass before they were arrested if they were detected in the first round of testing? Your bias is boring me to tears.

It's not me who is claiming that, it's berybert (and others); why don't you ask him?

Besides that, between the murder and the arrests there were 17 days in total.

[AleG]

No, I'm saying that the first testings of people were done two or three days after the murder, you claim the two Burmese men on trial were part of those initial tests and that they were cleared by the results, prove it.

Clear enough now?

Not sure if you are aware, but I have no need to prove anything. That is what the defense team will do.

800 pages of evidence, and most of it will be bumbling rubbish pretty much in line with your posts.

It is rather quaint to see how excitable you get trying to disprove what others believe. You then rush around from pillar to post trying to find an old post or newspaper clipping to prove your point. Then when you cant do that 20 minutes later you are back having proved nothing and asking others to prove you wrong.

You do realize as I said before no one has to prove anything to you.

Now tell me again. ***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***

Clear enough now ?

Moving the goalposts again, first you say:

"No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing."

Now you say:

"I have no need to prove anything"

I believe that is the result of you being completely unable to prove anything and attempting to save face.

"***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***"

And you have the chutzpah to call my posts "bumbling rubbish".

It's very, very simple, berybert, you said:

"They were cleared they took the tests and they were cleared."

Provide a source for that "fact";<deleted>

[jdinasia]

Having a sample taken amongst 100's of others doesn't do more than prove a sample was taken. It doesn't prove that the test was run at any time. We do know that tests were run before they were arrested.

JD, the defence will have the pictures of the B2 queuing and the first police general's statement to the effect that the initial tests didn't identify a suspect, So it will be up to the prosecution to respond to that. I surmise they will say not all of the results had come back - and there will be further challenges to put doubt on the veracity of the subsequent DNA test results.

And to respond to your post, I am sure the defence will use this to show how incompetent the RTP were. Why take a sample if you're not going to test it? And possibly, if there was a testing delay, the taken samples could have been wrongly labelled or contaminated. The defence's aim re the DNA is to cast doubts, as I'm sure you realise.

It will be fairly easy to produce the documents proving when the samples were taken, when and where the tests were run, and what the results were. The prosecution has stated that the DNA was solid from the first time the case was presented to them.

[thailandchilli]

Having a sample taken amongst 100's of others doesn't do more than prove a sample was taken. It doesn't prove that the test was run at any time. We do know that tests were run before they were arrested.

JD, the defence will have the pictures of the B2 queuing and the first police general's statement to the effect that the initial tests didn't identify a suspect, So it will be up to the prosecution to respond to that. I surmise they will say not all of the results had come back - and there will be further challenges to put doubt on the veracity of the subsequent DNA test results.

And to respond to your post, I am sure the defence will use this to show how incompetent the RTP were. Why take a sample if you're not going to test it? And possibly, if there was a testing delay, the taken samples could have been wrongly labelled or contaminated. The defence's aim re the DNA is to cast doubts, as I'm sure you realise.

It will be fairly easy to produce the documents proving when the samples were taken, when and where the tests were run, and what the results were. The prosecution has stated that the DNA was solid from the first time the case was presented to them.

Its also fairly easy to falsify documents or results and that's the international concern and one of the prime concerns of the British Government to get extra "independent verification'

Edited January 14, 2015 by thailandchilli

[jdinasia]

Having a sample taken amongst 100's of others doesn't do more than prove a sample was taken. It doesn't prove that the test was run at any time. We do know that tests were run before they were arrested.

JD, the defence will have the pictures of the B2 queuing and the first police general's statement to the effect that the initial tests didn't identify a suspect, So it will be up to the prosecution to respond to that. I surmise they will say not all of the results had come back - and there will be further challenges to put doubt on the veracity of the subsequent DNA test results.

And to respond to your post, I am sure the defence will use this to show how incompetent the RTP were. Why take a sample if you're not going to test it? And possibly, if there was a testing delay, the taken samples could have been wrongly labelled or contaminated. The defence's aim re the DNA is to cast doubts, as I'm sure you realise.

It will be fairly easy to produce the documents proving when the samples were taken, when and where the tests were run, and what the results were. The prosecution has stated that the DNA was solid from the first time the case was presented to them.

Its also fairly easy to falsify documents or results and that's the international concern and one of the prime concerns of the British Government to get extra "independent verification'

The conspiracy theorists are claiming that. There's no proof that those fears are based in reality.

[thailandchilli]

Is that right, the conspiracy theorists, what do you think the UK is implying when it states it wants further independent verification? What do you think it is implying when it states it is concerned about alleged corruption. But carry on, wondered how long it would be before you uttered your favorite phrase to try to deflect the concerns of reputable people and organisations.

Those who are not concerned about the DNA trail, are also not concerned about a fair trial.

[berybert]

No, I'm saying that the first testings of people were done two or three days after the murder, you claim the two Burmese men on trial were part of those initial tests and that they were cleared by the results, prove it.

Clear enough now?

Not sure if you are aware, but I have no need to prove anything. That is what the defense team will do.

800 pages of evidence, and most of it will be bumbling rubbish pretty much in line with your posts.

It is rather quaint to see how excitable you get trying to disprove what others believe. You then rush around from pillar to post trying to find an old post or newspaper clipping to prove your point. Then when you cant do that 20 minutes later you are back having proved nothing and asking others to prove you wrong.

You do realize as I said before no one has to prove anything to you.

Now tell me again. ***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***

Clear enough now ?

Moving the goalposts again, first you say:

"No I am using it to prove that at least one of the guys took a test on the first day of testing."

Now you say:

"I have no need to prove anything"

I believe that is the result of you being completely unable to prove anything and attempting to save face.

"***The boys didn't do the first round of testing. Ok they didn't do the first round of testing because the first round of testing wasn't done on the first day the first day testing was done. OK they were tested on the first day of testing but their tests weren't cleared on the first day of testing because the first test results weren't done on the first day the first day the test results were tested***"

And you have the chutzpah to call my posts "bumbling rubbish".

It's very, very simple, berybert, you said:

"They were cleared they took the tests and they were cleared."

Provide a source for that "fact"; <deleted>

<deleted>

You babble on about these tests, the trousers that were pants that were shorts.

Now you prove to me (being as you seem to think proof is so important on a forum) that they didn't take the first round of tests and they were not cleared.

<deleted>

Edited January 14, 2015 by CharlieH

[CharlieH]

Posts edited to remove petty squabbling and inflammatory remark.