Koh Tao murder trial rescheduled

[loonodingle]

Well, let's see, vast government conspiracy at work or the defense team blatantly disregarded the rules of the service they were using:

"YouCaring does not permit fundraising campaigns for legal defense, litigation, bail bonds or other legal matters."

Clearly the second.

Clearly the second AleG? Really? Your so sure of that aren't you despite it being a new policy that was placed after they had already joined the site.

Here's a cached page of the same webpage taken on 2nd Dec 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20141202025150/http://www.youcaring.com/how-it-works

But I'll let you carry on with your conspiracy

I cant post an email I have seen for confidentiality reasons however they said they have the right to review individual cases and to change the rules.

They have driven this case of the Net.

[IslandLover]

loonodingle, on 13 Feb 2015 - 08:37, said:

minikev, on 13 Feb 2015 - 07:40, said:

Tanlic, on 27 Dec 2014 - 04:00, said:

klauskunkel, on 27 Dec 2014 - 02:49, said:

I believe this is an effort to have people watching this circus lose interest.

Yeah people like you would think that.......if you had half a brain in your head and didn't spend so much time trolling you would realize It is quite the opposite.

What Thailand are doing via the court is sending a message saying :we are being a fair as we can: and when we prove these 2 are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt it will shut people like you up

How can it be fair when in your sentence you only state that they will be proved guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Surely in a fair case it could go either way. Or don't you understand there is a chance they may not have done this crime?

The defence team are working very hard to disprove the arguments submitted by the RTP. Including getting verification of key evidence. In the UK there is lawyers working away diligently on all parts of the case that they can have a bearing on.

There is hope... despite attempts to railroad the case.

You will remember the prosecutor sent the file back many times for additional information. This could indicate some had to be fabricated after the event.

The donations page was shut down yesterday by the website owners who decided to change the rules. They said it can't be used to raise any funds for any defence expenses. No notice given and they just shut it down. Attempts are being made to find a new host.

Stinks a bit that. .... makes you wonder who complained...... They wouldn't have done it randomly. ..

Was it the YouCaring site? If so, I think it's standard practice with them. They've done it in another case I've been following where the perps are in a Bali jail awaiting trial.

[IslandLover]

loonodingle, on 13 Feb 2015 - 13:26, said:

AleG, on 13 Feb 2015 - 12:58, said:

stephen terry, on 13 Feb 2015 - 09:44, said:

loonodingle, on 13 Feb 2015 - 08:37, said:

The defence team are working very hard to disprove the arguments submitted by the RTP. Including getting verification of key evidence. In the UK there is lawyers working away diligently on all parts of the case that they can have a bearing on.

There is hope... despite attempts to railroad the case.

You will remember the prosecutor sent the file back many times for additional information. This could indicate some had to be fabricated after the event.

The donations page was shut down yesterday by the website owners who decided to change the rules. They said it can't be used to raise any funds for any defence expenses. No notice given and they just shut it down. Attempts are being made to find a new host.

Stinks a bit that. .... makes you wonder who complained...... They wouldn't have done it randomly. ..

Thanks for the update. Very informative, and yet another barrier placed in front of the defence. Seems like the Thai authorities are determined to prevent a fair trial or seek justice, this time by putting pressure on the donations website.

What are the Myanmar authorities doing/saying? I thought bail was being raised, or has that sunk? Or are the B2 safer in jail than outside?

Well, let's see, vast government conspiracy at work or the defense team blatantly disregarded the rules of the service they were using:

"YouCaring does not permit fundraising campaigns for legal defense, litigation, bail bonds or other legal matters."

Clearly the second.

Actually AleG that is the NEW RULES..... not the old rules.

They updated them.

And it is highly likely that somebody tipped them off about the defence fund for the B2

[greenchair]

That is so sad about the site not letting them get donations . I try to make a donation when I can . If anyone wants the account they can pm me .

[AleG]

Thanks for the update. Very informative, and yet another barrier placed in front of the defence. Seems like the Thai authorities are determined to prevent a fair trial or seek justice, this time by putting pressure on the donations website.

What are the Myanmar authorities doing/saying? I thought bail was being raised, or has that sunk? Or are the B2 safer in jail than outside?

Well, let's see, vast government conspiracy at work or the defense team blatantly disregarded the rules of the service they were using:

"YouCaring does not permit fundraising campaigns for legal defense, litigation, bail bonds or other legal matters."

Clearly the second.

Clearly the second AleG? Really? Your so sure of that aren't you despite it being a new policy that was placed after they had already joined the site.

Here's a cached page of the same webpage taken on 2nd Dec 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20141202025150/http://www.youcaring.com/how-it-works

But I'll let you carry on with your conspiracy

And what conspiracy would that be?

No, really, if you are going to accuse me of being part of an illegal you should be more specific.

The old rules don't mention using the services to raise funds for legal defenses, obviously the updated rules clarify that doing so is beyond the scope of the service.

[loonodingle]

That is so sad about the site not letting them get donations . I try to make a donation when I can . If anyone wants the account they can pm me .

Any questions you have ask Andy. He is a wealth of knowledge

https://www.facebook.com/andy.hall.3110?fref=ts

https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

[loonodingle]

Thanks for the update. Very informative, and yet another barrier placed in front of the defence. Seems like the Thai authorities are determined to prevent a fair trial or seek justice, this time by putting pressure on the donations website.

What are the Myanmar authorities doing/saying? I thought bail was being raised, or has that sunk? Or are the B2 safer in jail than outside?

Well, let's see, vast government conspiracy at work or the defense team blatantly disregarded the rules of the service they were using:

"YouCaring does not permit fundraising campaigns for legal defense, litigation, bail bonds or other legal matters."

Clearly the second.

Clearly the second AleG? Really? Your so sure of that aren't you despite it being a new policy that was placed after they had already joined the site.

Here's a cached page of the same webpage taken on 2nd Dec 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20141202025150/http://www.youcaring.com/how-it-works

But I'll let you carry on with your conspiracy

And what conspiracy would that be?

No, really, if you are going to accuse me of being part of an illegal you should be more specific.

The old rules don't mention using the services to raise funds for legal defenses, obviously the updated rules clarify that doing so is beyond the scope of the service.

I have seen the email from them and they said they have changed the rules.

[berybert]

Hard to believe some people don't even want the accused to have a fair trial.

They tell you they want to see justice done, but it will only be justice if they get their way.

[greenchair]

That is so sad about the site not letting them get donations . I try to make a donation when I can . If anyone wants the account they can pm me .

Any questions you have ask Andy. He is a wealth of knowledge

https://www.facebook.com/andy.hall.3110?fref=ts

https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

I thought that we were not allowed to post his details. That's why I didn't post that. But obviously you can. My mistake. Therefore don't anybody pm me since loony has posted any details you need above.

[loonodingle]

That is so sad about the site not letting them get donations . I try to make a donation when I can . If anyone wants the account they can pm me .

Any questions you have ask Andy. He is a wealth of knowledge

https://www.facebook.com/andy.hall.3110?fref=ts

https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

I thought that we were not allowed to post his details. That's why I didn't post that. But obviously you can. My mistake. Therefore don't anybody pm me since loony has posted any details you need above.

# 2000....

Arent we???

No idea.. We seem to be able to post most things its a forum after all. we post peoples pics and links to them.

Edited February 13, 2015 by loonodingle

[Maestro]

Removed some off-topic posts, defamatory posts, posts with photos without citation of the source, a post commenting on a moderation action, and replies to them.

[IslandLover]

IslandLover, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:46, said:

Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:

both taken in 2013 one on KT the other in Cambodia. Oh and the tovichien woman is Mon's wife to the best of my knowledge ,

Mon's wife is Suchana Toovichien, not Sanlaya.

https://www.facebook.com/suchana.toovichien?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab

For research purposes Sanlaya's fb is here:

https://www.facebook.com/sanlaya.toovichean?fref=tl_fr_box&pnref=lhc.friends

Monlada's (blondie) is here:

https://www.facebook.com/s.siincere?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab&pnref=friends.all

[loonodingle]

Dark forces at work. Donation page deleted. FRIDAY 13th. ..

[greenchair]

IslandLover, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:46, said:

Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:

both taken in 2013 one on KT the other in Cambodia. Oh and the tovichien woman is Mon's wife to the best of my knowledge ,

Mon's wife is Suchana Toovichien, not Sanlaya.

https://www.facebook.com/suchana.toovichien?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab

For research purposes Sanlaya's fb is here:

https://www.facebook.com/sanlaya.toovichean?fref=tl_fr_box&pnref=lhc.friends

Monlada's (blondie) is here:

https://www.facebook.com/s.siincere?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab&pnref=friends.all

So is monlada wichien related or not.

[IslandLover]

greenchair, on 14 Feb 2015 - 00:09, said:

IslandLover, on 13 Feb 2015 - 21:56, said:

IslandLover, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:46, said:

IslandLover, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:46, said:

Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:

Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:Chetzee, on 13 Feb 2015 - 19:25, said:

both taken in 2013 one on KT the other in Cambodia. Oh and the tovichien woman is Mon's wife to the best of my knowledge ,

Mon's wife is Suchana Toovichien, not Sanlaya.

https://www.facebook.com/suchana.toovichien?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab

For research purposes Sanlaya's fb is here:

https://www.facebook.com/sanlaya.toovichean?fref=tl_fr_box&pnref=lhc.friends

Monlada's (blondie) is here:

https://www.facebook.com/s.siincere?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab&pnref=friends.all

So is monlada wichien related or not.

Yes, I certainly think so because she is included in the friends list of all the family fb pages. The spelling of the family name in English varies considerably.

[boomerangutang]

What are the Myanmar authorities doing/saying? I thought bail was being raised, or has that sunk? Or are the B2 safer in jail than outside?

I don't think bail is an issue any more with Burmese authorities. Months ago, they offered to post bail and promised that the boys would show up in court. Right away, Thai top brass shot that down. A slap in the face to Burmese gov't.

[loonodingle]

They offered no money just a personal guarantee

[boomerangutang]

They offered no money just a personal guarantee

I think they (Myanmar gov't) offered to pay bail. Offer flatly refused, therefore there was no talk of a specific amount.

[thailandchilli]

Good article just published by AD on a separate miscarriage of justice (serial killer) in the Surat Thani province. But he also refers to the RTP and UK police as to being no nearer to finding the real killers of Hannah and David as the world watches on.

Justice here is carried out with the sword only, the scales are but a symbol to be ignored.

[greenchair]

I am sorry to intrude in an area outside my considerable expertise. But it might be the that at least one of them was refused bail ,because he was here illegally. If he was bailed, he would not be able to stay here with no visa. If he went home, he would not be able to come back here legally. The one that had a valid visa might not have wanted to leave his friend alone.

[jimmybkk]

rockingrobin, on 11 Feb 2015 - 17:32, said:

loonodingle, on 11 Feb 2015 - 16:37, said:

One thing they had Burmese witnesses who said the 2 young men gave them David's phone. Well who is to say they hadn't been paid to say that. It's already known they offered money to the taxi driver. Also the 3rd person was released as long as he gave evidence?

I dont recall the burmese witnesses claiming it was Davids Phone, however I do have an account where they say a phone was given to them by the 2 accused but where suspicious of its origin.

Does anybody still have the links to the confessions statements including contents

Here's the link to an article which talks about the room mates of Win and Zaw and the fact that they were allegedly given a phone believed to belong to one of the victims by the suspects, Win and Zaw.

https://www.dvb.no/news/koh-tao-murders-third-man-released-returning-to-burma-myanmar/45040

Maung Maung, Nyi Nyi Aung and Aung Zaw Lin were called as prosecution witnesses on Tuesday and gave testimonies in a preliminary hearing at a courthouse in Koh Samui, southern Thailand.

Moe Wai, a member of the Burmese embassy delegation that attended the hearing, said Nyi Nyi Aung and Aung Zaw Lin were mostly quizzed about a mobile phone belonging to one of the victims. The pair testified that they were given the phone by the suspects and decided to smash it with a hammer after being unable to use it, he said.

and then we have this:

Moe Wai said that nothing that the three witnesses said in their individual testimonies amounted to evidence that supports the allegations against Win Zaw Htun and Zaw Lin.

“None of the witness testimonies included anything that could implicate [Win Zaw Htun and Zaw Lin] as the murderers. It’s starting to appear that it wasn’t them,” said Moe Wai.

Confusing, or what?

Not confussing, it's standard CYA lawyer talk, it goes like this: yes it has been established that they had possession of one of the victim's belongings, but that doesn't mean they were the murderers, they could have stolen it before, or after the murder, or being given it by the real murderers, etc, etc...

In short, it's circumstantial evidence, what it does prove though is that the two Burmese suspects claims that they have no connection to the murders are false.

Complete rubbish and a shameful attempt to put words into the mouth of Moe Wai. He said what he said. There's no need for your ridiculous transcription.

"...what it does prove though is that the two Burmese suspects claims that they have no connection to the murders are false." No it does not.

[jimmybkk]

AleG, on 12 Feb 2015 - 03:26, said:

Not confussing, it's standard CYA lawyer talk, it goes like this: yes it has been established that they had possession of one of the victim's belongings, but that doesn't mean they were the murderers, they could have stolen it before, or after the murder, or being given it by the real murderers, etc, etc...

In short, it's circumstantial evidence, what it does prove though is that the two Burmese suspects claims that they have no connection to the murders are false.

Only if Nyi and Aung were telling the truth about the phone.

The phone was found where they left it, so there's actual physical evidence to support their testimony.

The only part of their testimony it supports is that the phone was in their (Nyi and Aung's) possession at some point.

And unless you personally witnessed them leaving the phone there it was found where they say/claim/allege/report they left it.

[jimmybkk]

AleG, on 12 Feb 2015 - 03:38, said:

The phone was found where they left it, so there's actual physical evidence to support their testimony.

The phone that was recovered could just as easily have been planted by (insert whoever you like here) and the two Burmese 'witnesses' could just as easily have been lying that they were given the phone by Win and Zaw.

On the other hand, this:

"The phone that was recovered could just as easily have been planted by (insert whoever you like here) and the two Burmese 'witnesses' could just as easily have been lying that they were given the phone by Win and Zaw."

Is not supported by any evidence.

Island Lover's post was suggesting a possible scenario. There's no need for evidence to support it. On the contrary, evidence would only be required to prove that it was an impossible scenario. Unless you have that evidence accept it for what it is - a possible scenario.

[jimmybkk]

As usual, you rather dismiss actual physical evidence in favour of your own fantasies; not only that, you blatantly insist on peddling things that have been debunked, repeatedly, for example Miller had two phones, I'm certain you know this, yet you still say "Yet, David's phone was found at the crime scene, was it not? What the 'found phone' most likely shows is police planted it."

You also know that "Thai officials originally claimed the phone was Hannah's." is not true, it was one official during one press conference that mistook the ownership of the phone while addressing the press, you don't care about that, you just want to peddle innuendo and misleading information.

The funny thing is you accused me of wanting to destroy evidence against your boogiemen, and here what do you do? desperately trying to sweep under the rug actual evidence that doesn't match what you would really, really want to believe. You have serious projection issues.

"...it was one official during one press conference that mistook the ownership of the phone while addressing the press..."

Hilarious. So you need 2 or more officials speaking in harmony at a press conference before the information released at the press conference can be considered official. Well, I never knew that... i always assumed that the person speaking was the appointed spokesperson of the official body that he/she was representing. I also assumed that there was usually a prepared script for these kind of events. Would never have guessed that they would wing it and make wild guesses on the ownership of evidence as the actual press conference was taking place. They should probably stop doing that - it's asking for trouble.

Nice that you got a like from the organ grinder though.

[rockingrobin]

What I know is that there is more gaps and holes than Swiss cheese, as for the phone well considering it was a top RTP the contradictions continued , leaving me to question if they actually do know who it belonged to .

An interesting report early ( a few days after the murders ) claimed that the residence of 3 Burmese migrant workers were raided and blood stained jeans was found along with a broken iPhone

[greenchair]

What I know is that there is more gaps and holes than Swiss cheese, as for the phone well considering it was a top RTP the contradictions continued , leaving me to question if they actually do know who it belonged to .

An interesting report early ( a few days after the murders ) claimed that the residence of 3 Burmese migrant workers were raided and blood stained jeans was found along with a broken iPhone

Firstly. After dna testing, it was found that the blood did not belong to either of the victims. There are no bloody clothes in the evidence.

Secondly. their friends ,threw the phone/sunglasses away because they could not use it. However, the story that they threw it because they could not use it is suspicious. Because why did they supposedly throw the sunglasses as well.they could use them. Or

Were they suspicious of the items? ??in that case, surely If they wanted to hide/get rid of items. They would not be so stupid to throw them so near their residents.

[berybert]

Hoe with no DNA or fingerprints. No bloodied clothes full stop. Condom with sperm on the outside only. Blond hair snagged to the phone, what phone ? Take your pick. 3 sets of DNA on body, 3rd set of no interest to RTP. Many more.

If swiss cheese had this many holes, there would be no cheese.

[boomerangutang]

I am sorry to intrude in an area outside my considerable expertise. But it might be the that at least one of them was refused bail ,because he was here illegally. If he was bailed, he would not be able to stay here with no visa. If he went home, he would not be able to come back here legally. The one that had a valid visa might not have wanted to leave his friend alone.

valid points that could have been used by Thai officials to justify denying bail request from Myanmar officials. However, bail requests often have sticklers, and the points mentioned (above) would not be problematic. If the Myanmar gov't asserts they would make sure the suspects show up when/where they're supposed to, then that's pretty solid. For their part, Thai officialdom could enact some easing of migrant worker restrictions for the B2, if needed, to facilitate the process. That's all assuming Thai officials would be reasonable, and that's a BIG assumption, and more than they're capable of.

Here's a little thumbnail glimpse of one difference between Burmese and Thai bureaucracies, and their mind-sets:

At the border crossing between Thailand and Burma at Tachilek: Both exiting and re-entering Thailand, crossers are met with kiosks - one is blacked out so you can barely see the officials, and never do eyes meet. The other Thai kiosk has no glass, but instead a small slit where neither tourist nor official can see each other unless the tourist bends down to belly-level and peeks in. the only way it would be more impersonal, would be dealing with a blank wall.

In contrast, when entering and leaving Burma at the same crossing, the officials are like real people. There's eye contact, there are no barriers between tourists and officials, ....you can even share a smile or venture a joke. It's like dealing with people. In Thailand, it's like dealing with automatons hidden behind a vending machine.

[IslandLover]

rockingrobin, on 14 Feb 2015 - 22:31, said:

What I know is that there is more gaps and holes than Swiss cheese, as for the phone well considering it was a top RTP the contradictions continued , leaving me to question if they actually do know who it belonged to .

An interesting report early ( a few days after the murders ) claimed that the residence of 3 Burmese migrant workers were raided and blood stained jeans was found along with a broken iPhone

Thailandchilli posted a video a couple of pages back in this thread, post #1937, which shows the blood stained jeans at 1.31 and a little before that the iPhone. These were obtained right after the murders so they couldn't have been found at the residence of Win and Zaw as they weren't arrested for another two weeks.

[IslandLover]

berybert, on 15 Feb 2015 - 02:53, said:

Hoe with no DNA or fingerprints. No bloodied clothes full stop. Condom with sperm on the outside only. Blond hair snagged to the phone, what phone ? Take your pick. 3 sets of DNA on body, 3rd set of no interest to RTP. Many more.

If swiss cheese had this many holes, there would be no cheese.

I think the condom is a completely irrelevant red herring. Apparently it had a drop of Hannah's blood on the outside which, if true, just means it was laying around at the murder scene.

https://crimesontheblog.wordpress.com/category/koh-tao-sept-2014/the-players-more/crime-scene/

Condom found

• initially said to contain victim HWs DNA on the outside

• no other DNA (inside)

• re-enactment: it is considered unrelated to the crime

• only blood drop of victim HW was found on the condom