jdinasia Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 RTP deny retraction 12 Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Lawyers confession made under duress 7th Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Officially recanted on the 21st of October 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockingrobin Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 RTP deny retraction 12 Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Lawyers confession made under duress 7th Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Officially recanted on the 21st of October Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 RTP deny retraction 12 Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Lawyers confession made under duress 7th Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Officially recanted on the 21st of October Link http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/4435. Most sources quote the BKK post 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockingrobin Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 RTP deny retraction 12 Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Lawyers confession made under duress 7th Oct http://www.mizzima.com/mizzima-news/regional/item/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police/13709-koh-tao-murders-retraction-denied-say-thai-police Officially recanted on the 21st of October Link http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/4435. Most sources quote the BKK post Cant disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post seahorse Posted March 18, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 18, 2015 I've been wondering how David got a fractured skull when police have said that there was none of his DNA found on the hoe and even that it was an "other weapon". This "other weapon" i.e. the "sharp", "metal" weapon the police said was used to "bludgeon" David wouldn't have fractured his skull. That would have inflicted the "deep cut to his neck" that the police talked about. So how did David get a fractured skull? How can they convict for these murders with the pitiful amount of (at best circumstantial) evidence they have against these two Burmese guys? They have a long way to go before convincing anybody that they've got the right guys for these murders. I hope these two young men don't have their lives taken away on this less than flimsy prosecution case. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I've been wondering how David got a fractured skull when police have said that there was none of his DNA found on the hoe and even that it was an "other weapon". This "other weapon" i.e. the "sharp", "metal" weapon the police said was used to "bludgeon" David wouldn't have fractured his skull. That would have inflicted the "deep cut to his neck" that the police talked about. So how did David get a fractured skull? How can they convict for these murders with the pitiful amount of (at best circumstantial) evidence they have against these two Burmese guys? They have a long way to go before convincing anybody that they've got the right guys for these murders. I hope these two young men don't have their lives taken away on this less than flimsy prosecution case. Maybe he fell from a great height. He was about 6 foot 4 or something simular. Mind you he was attacked whilst laying down, and on sand. Scrub that. Give us time to think of something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I've been wondering how David got a fractured skull when police have said that there was none of his DNA found on the hoe and even that it was an "other weapon". This "other weapon" i.e. the "sharp", "metal" weapon the police said was used to "bludgeon" David wouldn't have fractured his skull. That would have inflicted the "deep cut to his neck" that the police talked about. So how did David get a fractured skull? How can they convict for these murders with the pitiful amount of (at best circumstantial) evidence they have against these two Burmese guys? They have a long way to go before convincing anybody that they've got the right guys for these murders. I hope these two young men don't have their lives taken away on this less than flimsy prosecution case. Just a reminder, we have not seen the prosecution case. We have read some things that the police have stated. Three different items have been mentioned that could have inflicted the massive head wound. The hoe, a wine bottle, a metal bar. Regarding circumstantial evidence : DNA, fingerprints, weapons, can all be circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is not necessarily better than circumstantial evidence. Guilt doesn't need to be proven to a 100% burden of proof. The measure is "reasonable doubt". In this case, assuming that the confessions to the police are ruled inadmissible there's still direct evidence of guilt from the HRC commissioner and the lawyer. When you add that to the DNA it is probable the judges will arrive at a guilty verdict. Contrary to claims above that David was killed on the ground, that is simply inference by people and likely incorrect. Many questions need to be answered in the trial but not as many as some people think. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I think most people would rule out David being killed by a bottle or a hoe. Or are we to believe someone left behind a bloody hoe yet cleared up the glass of a broken bottle. As for an iron bar, where does that come from ? No he was most likely killed by a short sharp object i.e. a knife, or shark tooth ring. The confessions to the HRC and the lawyer, simple question there would be "when you were asked if you killed either David or Hannah were the RTP present" "When you recanted were the RTP present" A yes no answer, would answer that part of the investigation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thailandchilli Posted March 18, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 18, 2015 I've been wondering how David got a fractured skull when police have said that there was none of his DNA found on the hoe and even that it was an "other weapon". This "other weapon" i.e. the "sharp", "metal" weapon the police said was used to "bludgeon" David wouldn't have fractured his skull. That would have inflicted the "deep cut to his neck" that the police talked about. So how did David get a fractured skull? How can they convict for these murders with the pitiful amount of (at best circumstantial) evidence they have against these two Burmese guys? They have a long way to go before convincing anybody that they've got the right guys for these murders. I hope these two young men don't have their lives taken away on this less than flimsy prosecution case. We do know the prosecution is saying that both Hannah and David were killed by the hoe (according to reports), we also know the defense has a good case prepared for this assertion. "Prosecution documents seen by The Telegraph allege the two men killed both Mr Miller and Ms Witheridge with a hoe." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11313714/Koh-Tao-murders-suspects-in-killing-of-David-Miller-and-Hannah-Witheridge-say-they-were-framed.html 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stephenterry Posted March 18, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 18, 2015 I've been wondering how David got a fractured skull when police have said that there was none of his DNA found on the hoe and even that it was an "other weapon". This "other weapon" i.e. the "sharp", "metal" weapon the police said was used to "bludgeon" David wouldn't have fractured his skull. That would have inflicted the "deep cut to his neck" that the police talked about. So how did David get a fractured skull? How can they convict for these murders with the pitiful amount of (at best circumstantial) evidence they have against these two Burmese guys? They have a long way to go before convincing anybody that they've got the right guys for these murders. I hope these two young men don't have their lives taken away on this less than flimsy prosecution case. We do know the prosecution is saying that both Hannah and David were killed by the hoe (according to reports), we also know the defense has a good case prepared for this assertion. "Prosecution documents seen by The Telegraph allege the two men killed both Mr Miller and Ms Witheridge with a hoe." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11313714/Koh-Tao-murders-suspects-in-killing-of-David-Miller-and-Hannah-Witheridge-say-they-were-framed.html Yes, it is reasonable to assume that this would be the prosecution's assertion. It is the simplest. I would also agree that the defence could rebut the assertion. While it is clear that the hoe was the weapon that killed Hannah, because her DNA was found on it, it is questionable whether it was the weapon that killed David, because his DNA was not on it. Nor was the suspects DNA on it. Given this, the defence could assert that there is reasonable doubt that the hoe did not kill David. And logically, it wasn't the suspects as alleged. Then it would be up to the prosecution to have other evidence to support their assertion. It is going to be an interesting trial, thankfully with the defence submitting their rebuttals after the prosecution has submitted their case. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I won't be surprised if the judges don't delve 1/10th as deep in to the intricacies of the evidence as most of us posting here in T.Visa are doing. When they summarize while talking in to their audio recording devices (hours reduced to seconds or minutes), they will likely be doing just that: summarizing. Sometimes an overwhelming amount of evidence can be, well, overwhelming. Ok, the OJ case was different for various reasons, but one reason (perhaps the main reason) the jury let OJ off was because they were overwhelmed by evidence, they'd been in court for too long, and they just wanted to get out and go home. They were pooped. The OJ case also had a strong racial element (jurors were black). Again, I'm not saying the two cases are the same, but there are similarities. The judges are mortal, and can get overwhelmed (like other mortals) by too much data/detail, and will be aware of racial factors/prerogatives in the courtroom. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The judges will look at the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense. They don't hear day after day and week after week of testimony. There are no similarities with a jury trial in the US and a tribunal in Thailand. There won't be a "if it doesn't fit you must acquit" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The judges will look at the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense. They don't hear day after day and week after week of testimony. There are no similarities with a jury trial in the US and a tribunal in Thailand. There won't be a "if it doesn't fit you must acquit" If the hoe don't show how can we know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post jimmybkk Posted March 18, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 18, 2015 Remember this is not a jury trial. The prosecution asks about previous statements and then points out that they are liars. (under the scenario above)Pretty hard to get past the fact of being a liar when you admit to it in court. Nice witch-hunting behaviour to use the word "liar" not once, but twice in that post. As an apparent expert of judicial procedure I would have thought you would be aware that the appropriate courtroom parlance would be that they "contradicted themselves", or "gave contradictory statements". Calling them liars is so much more prejudicial, don't you think? You may have noted that I deliberately refrained from calling you a liar for those misleading posts you made regarding the way in which we can expect the events at the trial to be reported. But then I am not rabble-rousing nor supporting a witch-hunt... Incidentally, what exactly are you asserting they have lied about? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exsexyman Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Quite amusing to see that off topic posts have been removed, lets face it if the topic under discussion is strictly adhered to just about every post is off topic. With all due respect surely these threads have run their course, and if only for the sake of showing respect to the families of the deceased it must be time to close these threads and wait for the trial. People are just going round in circles here, i realise that a few posters have no other life other than re hashing theory after theory, playing at detectives, very reminiscent of the Enid Blyton famous five, but surely enough is enough. Time to grow up i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Quite amusing to see that off topic posts have been removed, lets face it if the topic under discussion is strictly adhered to just about every post is off topic. With all due respect surely these threads have run their course, and if only for the sake of showing respect to the families of the deceased it must be time to close these threads and wait for the trial. People are just going round in circles here, i realise that a few posters have no other life other than re hashing theory after theory, playing at detectives, very reminiscent of the Enid Blyton famous five, but surely enough is enough. Time to grow up i think. People are just going round in circles here ... You mean they are not proceeding in a linear manner which changes the whole dynamics of the conversation? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Remember this is not a jury trial. The prosecution asks about previous statements and then points out that they are liars. (under the scenario above) Pretty hard to get past the fact of being a liar when you admit to it in court. Nice witch-hunting behaviour to use the word "liar" not once, but twice in that post. As an apparent expert of judicial procedure I would have thought you would be aware that the appropriate courtroom parlance would be that they "contradicted themselves", or "gave contradictory statements". Calling them liars is so much more prejudicial, don't you think? You may have noted that I deliberately refrained from calling you a liar for those misleading posts you made regarding the way in which we can expect the events at the trial to be reported. But then I am not rabble-rousing nor supporting a witch-hunt... Incidentally, what exactly are you asserting they have lied about? Read the posts above the one you replied to. As for how the trial is reported, let's see when it gets here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post boomerangutang Posted March 19, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 19, 2015 Quite amusing to see that off topic posts have been removed, lets face it if the topic under discussion is strictly adhered to just about every post is off topic. With all due respect surely these threads have run their course, and if only for the sake of showing respect to the families of the deceased it must be time to close these threads and wait for the trial. People are just going round in circles here, i realise that a few posters have no other life other than re hashing theory after theory, playing at detectives, very reminiscent of the Enid Blyton famous five, but surely enough is enough. Time to grow up i think. The general topic: The botched investigation of the Ko Tao crimes of Sept 15, 2014, is what is interesting enough for dozens of posters to keep posting 6 months+ after the crime. As you know, there were about 10 threads relating to that general topic, and nearly all have been closed. ThaiVisa members want an outlet to express their ideas and passion about the botched investigation (even jdinasia admits it's been botched), so this is what we're left with: two threads relating to that specific crime - in order to express ourselves. No one is compelled to read or comment herein. It's interesting to note that some posters made a lot of noise about not posting (out of respect to the victims' families), yet those same folks post often. The few posters who want to close the two remaining threads are the same folks who don't want transparency or thoroughness in the investigation. Am I right or am I right? They're the same folks who keep wanting to thwart or close down any scrutiny of those who used to (and should still) be prime suspects. It's a simple equation: Most of us (posters) are seeking justice for the crimes against David and Hannah, and will leave no stone unturned toward that goal. Others want to put up barriers. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post seahorse Posted March 19, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? Edited March 19, 2015 by seahorse 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Quite amusing to see that off topic posts have been removed, lets face it if the topic under discussion is strictly adhered to just about every post is off topic. With all due respect surely these threads have run their course, and if only for the sake of showing respect to the families of the deceased it must be time to close these threads and wait for the trial. People are just going round in circles here, i realise that a few posters have no other life other than re hashing theory after theory, playing at detectives, very reminiscent of the Enid Blyton famous five, but surely enough is enough. Time to grow up i think. The general topic: The botched investigation of the Ko Tao crimes of Sept 15, 2014, is what is interesting enough for dozens of posters to keep posting 6 months+ after the crime. As you know, there were about 10 threads relating to that general topic, and nearly all have been closed. ThaiVisa members want an outlet to express their ideas and passion about the botched investigation (even jdinasia admits it's been botched), so this is what we're left with: two threads relating to that specific crime - in order to express ourselves. No one is compelled to read or comment herein. It's interesting to note that some posters made a lot of noise about not posting (out of respect to the victims' families), yet those same folks post often. The few posters who want to close the two remaining threads are the same folks who don't want transparency or thoroughness in the investigation. Am I right or am I right? They're the same folks who keep wanting to thwart or close down any scrutiny of those who used to (and should still) be prime suspects. It's a simple equation: Most of us (posters) are seeking justice for the crimes against David and Hannah, and will leave no stone unturned toward that goal. Others want to put up barriers. "The few posters who want to close the two remaining threads are the same folks who don't want transparency or thoroughness in the investigation. Am I right or am I right?" No, you are wrong. If you want to have a thread to repeat over and over again the same thoroughly debunked, unsubstantiated and prejudicial theories there's nothing stopping you from opening one in another forum, like the General section. "It's a simple equation: Most of us (posters) are seeking justice for the crimes against David and Hannah, and will leave no stone unturned toward that goal. Others want to put up barriers." You are out in a witch hunt for, as greenchair put very succinctly (and you agreed with) "personal gratification", justice has nothing to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandLover Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 seahorse, on 19 Mar 2015 - 02:34, said: So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? Several reports stated that David had wounds on his hands which would indicate that he fought with his attackers. This was NOT represented in the farcical reenactment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stephenterry Posted March 19, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 19, 2015 So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? One could speculate that the B2 have been set up as scapegoats by those who have influence. That's probably a more plausible scenario than the one the prosecution asserts. And if they have been set up, it is natural for the prosecution to produce 'evidence' to support their case. It could even convince those who believe the B2 are responsible for the murders. We'll see what happens at the trial - and I expect the defence would be asking the same questions as you. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Quite amusing to see that off topic posts have been removed, lets face it if the topic under discussion is strictly adhered to just about every post is off topic. With all due respect surely these threads have run their course, and if only for the sake of showing respect to the families of the deceased it must be time to close these threads and wait for the trial. People are just going round in circles here, i realise that a few posters have no other life other than re hashing theory after theory, playing at detectives, very reminiscent of the Enid Blyton famous five, but surely enough is enough. Time to grow up i think.The general topic: The botched investigation of the Ko Tao crimes of Sept 15, 2014, is what is interesting enough for dozens of posters to keep posting 6 months+ after the crime. As you know, there were about 10 threads relating to that general topic, and nearly all have been closed. ThaiVisa members want an outlet to express their ideas and passion about the botched investigation (even jdinasia admits it's been botched), so this is what we're left with: two threads relating to that specific crime - in order to express ourselves. No one is compelled to read or comment herein. It's interesting to note that some posters made a lot of noise about not posting (out of respect to the victims' families), yet those same folks post often.The few posters who want to close the two remaining threads are the same folks who don't want transparency or thoroughness in the investigation. Am I right or am I right? They're the same folks who keep wanting to thwart or close down any scrutiny of those who used to (and should still) be prime suspects. It's a simple equation: Most of us (posters) are seeking justice for the crimes against David and Hannah, and will leave no stone unturned toward that goal. Others want to put up barriers. You are not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 seahorse, on 19 Mar 2015 - 02:34, said: So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? Several reports stated that David had wounds on his hands which would indicate that he fought with his attackers. This was NOT represented in the farcical reenactment. Why let facts spoil a good police theory? You'll want us to believe David was killed by a hoe that has been discredited as his murder weapon, next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? One could speculate that the B2 have been set up as scapegoats by those who have influence. That's probably a more plausible scenario than the one the prosecution asserts. And if they have been set up, it is natural for the prosecution to produce 'evidence' to support their case. It could even convince those who believe the B2 are responsible for the murders. We'll see what happens at the trial - and I expect the defence would be asking the same questions as you. It is "natural" for the prosecution to present evidence in support of their case every time . Add DNA to the other direct and circumstantial evidence and, while not a foregone conclusion, it is likely the defendants will be convicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Several reports stated that David had wounds on his hands which would indicate that he fought with his attackers. This was NOT represented in the farcical reenactment. Why let facts spoil a good police theory? You'll want us to believe David was killed by a hoe that has been discredited as his murder weapon, next. What fact? That Miller fought with his attackers?, that is not a fact, that is speculation. If you can stop treating speculation and your own opinion (as in "David was killed by a hoe that has been discredited as his murder weapon") as facts and evidence as "evidence" then maybe you'll have a chance of actually being objective about the case. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnniey Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? They can't and won't. It called a cover up. The case will be forgotten like so many before. Duangchalerm is a classic case of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 So how did David get a fractured skull? If he was hit with the hoe, wouldn't it have left some blood? Wouldn't there be some DNA? The re-enactment did not feature the "other" "sharp" "metal" weapon mentioned by police that was used to inflict the "deep cut" in David's neck and lacerations all over his face, skull, and shoulders, which obviously he sustained during a fight with someone. There was no fight re-enactment. How can the prosecution case be taken seriously without any evidence? How can two young men be convicted of murder and sent to their deaths without any proof that they did this? Two bodies next to each other are evidence, a murder weapon is evidence, DNA from rape in one of the bodies is evidence, belongings of one of the deceased in possession of the suspects is evidence, witness, DNA in objects and CCTV video placing the suspects in the area of the murders, at the approximate time of the murders is evidence, etc, etc... Saying there is no evidence is false, plain and simple. If that evidence constitutes proof is up to the judge to decide, not some people that would rather ignore actual evidence in favour of fanciful speculation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stephenterry Posted March 19, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 19, 2015 CCTV video placing the suspects in the area of the murders, at the approximate time of the murders is evidence. WRONG. If that CCTV was available, the B2 would have been picked up in the first few days following the murders. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stephenterry Posted March 19, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) rtp Several reports stated that David had wounds on his hands which would indicate that he fought with his attackers. This was NOT represented in the farcical reenactment. Why let facts spoil a good police theory? You'll want us to believe David was killed by a hoe that has been discredited as his murder weapon, next. What fact? That Miller fought with his attackers?, that is not a fact, that is speculation. If you can stop treating speculation and your own opinion (as in "David was killed by a hoe that has been discredited as his murder weapon") as facts and evidence as "evidence" then maybe you'll have a chance of actually being objective about the case. RTP report plus autopsy report, re the cuts - or are those speculations? Or was Miller just standing there? Being objective is being open-minded enough to question both sides of an 'argument'. In all of your posts on here, you've done nothing other than trying to discredit others' opinions. Which means you're in denial. In denial that the RTP cannot be wrong, that their assertions cannot be faulty, that their case against the suspects cannot be questioned, that their evidence is factual and fool-proof. When you can accept that other opinions have validity, you're on your way to being objective. And if you think I do not have any doubts as to the B2's innocence/non involvement, you're wrong again. However, as you've never raised any of those issues, I feel disinclined to relate any. Edited March 19, 2015 by stephenterry 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts