Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[AleG]

Strangely enough the defense unlike the police have mentioned very little.

I guess it would be called being professional.

Now if you would be so kind as to make a few more posts about the Burmese being at the crime scene close to the time of the murder whilst at the same time tell us Mon/Non or uncle Bon wasn't despite him being captured on CCTV minutes after the murder. I am sure we can all laugh some more.

To fail to present exculpatory evidence and leave their clients in jail is what you call "professional"?

No no, professional as in declaring that the case can only be won in the "Court of Public Opinion"... by encouraging baseless speculation, crude propaganda, witch hunts against dissenting voices, misleading or outright false information, and last but not least, when asked to come clean on this prejudicial tactics do the professional thing and... deny, deny, deny.

All in the name of Fairness and Transparency, apparently.

[boomerangutang]

isn't a Golden Nugget what you get for being McDonald's Employee of the Month?

No -- a golden nugget is finding the Chumphon taxi driver who picked up a guy wet off a speedboat early morning 15 SEP 2014 and took him to Bangkok post haste so he wouldn't be late for class.

If such a driver exists, we would never find out about him, if we relied on RTP (or Brit) investigators. Reasons (pick as many as apply):

>>> they're not looking beyond the B2 for any clues as to what happened that night,

>>> even if they found something/someone with ties to the crime, they wouldn't pursue that lead and/or would hush it up because it might implicate the people they're trying to shield from scrutiny,

>>> Investigators simply didn't think of it. Similar to how they didn't think to look for bloody clothes outside the crime scene, didn't use dogs for searching, didn't check phone records for Sept.15, didn't interview Nomsod's mother or his friends, didn't determine what weapon caused most of David's wounds, didn't do full body searches of 'people of interest,' etc. ad infinitum.....

[boomerangutang]

Strangely enough the defense unlike the police have mentioned very little.

I guess it would be called being professional.

Now if you would be so kind as to make a few more posts about the Burmese being at the crime scene close to the time of the murder whilst at the same time tell us Mon/Non or uncle Bon wasn't despite him being captured on CCTV minutes after the murder. I am sure we can all laugh some more.

To fail to present exculpatory evidence and leave their clients in jail is what you call "professional"?

No no, professional as in declaring that the case can only be won in the "Court of Public Opinion"... by encouraging baseless speculation, crude propaganda, witch hunts against dissenting voices, misleading or outright false information, and last but not least, when asked to come clean on this prejudicial tactics do the professional thing and... deny, deny, deny.

All in the name of Fairness and Transparency, apparently.

Is Sunday your day for looking in the mirror?

[JLCrab]

Speaking of Sunday, I used to live in the Bible Belt US City of Oklahoma City. People there believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old according to the timing of the Great Flood. If you would say to them: What about radio-active carbon dating showing fossils more than 100 million years old, they would say:

Well, The Lord knew we would have radio-active carbon dating. So he put those fossils there to appear to be 100 million years old to test our faith.

I think of this sometimes when I hear things like so-&-so may have evidence but they are too scared to come forward fearing reprisals from the 'real killers' or that family-ties on small islands are so strong that persons will protect family members from being held responsible for the cold-blooded murder of 2 UK citizens right on their door-step, or that millions of dollars of hush money have been spread around with not one person deliberately or by a slip of the tongue breaking the code of silence.

But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

Edited March 22, 2015 by JLCrab

[PaPiPuPePo]

So, who is the third burmese.

Muang Muang was originally held in custody. Could it be he was going to be railroaded also. But much to the rtp chagrin, came up with a strong alibi. Oops said the officer. We thought there were 3. but now we can only pin it on two.

MM was more savvy than the other two. He had an inkling of his legal rights. The B2 were easy prey for scapegoating, with older men gathered around, fists and teeth clenched. First thing the cops probably said was 'you're illegal, and we can slam you in jail for a long time.' The B2's families rely on the few satang which get sent from their sons each month - because there is zero social security for elders in Burma.

Burmese young men were casually playing sepak takraw on the beach, when police, in their frantic zeal to nab scapegoats, went to round them up. Two were able to run away. Guess who the two were? Yup, so when they were caught, the cops were doubly angry at the young men who didn't heed their calls of 'Don't run! Come back here!' Next day: 'safe-house' with a threatening interpreter who introduced the broken bottle idea. Not an attorney in sight. The rest is scapegoat history.

Utter fantasy

I assume non-fantasy is what the RTP and their supporters put forth. . . . .

>>> Hannah's phone was found at the B's shack

>>> A blunt hoe caused David's stab wounds - all uniform size and clean cuts.

>>> Nomsod is absolutely not in the CCTV taken just after the crime - even tho RTP were sure it was him prior to investigative team leadership adjustment demanded by Bkk.

>>> two small young men overpowered and killed two healthy farang, one of whom was trice the size of either attacker.

Add this: the B2 bashed in Hanna's face because they were over-come with lust. The biggest groaner of the whole shoddy case against these guys.

Of course JDinAsia hasn't resolved any glaring issues like these in the prosecution's case, much easier to just label things he can't challenge as "fantasy." Also a good example of the report-worthy comments he's piled up.

[stephenterry]

Speaking of Sunday, I used to live in the Bible Belt US City of Oklahoma City. People there believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old according to the timing of the Great Flood. If you would say to them: What about radio-active carbon dating showing fossils more than 100 million years old, they would say:

Well, The Lord knew we would have radio-active carbon dating. So he put those fossils there to appear to be 100 million years old to test our faith.

I think of this sometimes when I hear things like so-&-so may have evidence but they are too scared to come forward fearing reprisals from the 'real killers' or that family-ties on small islands are so strong that persons will protect family members from being held responsible for the cold-blooded murder of 2 UK citizens right on their door-step, or that millions of dollars of hush money have been spread around with not one person deliberately or by a slip of the tongue breaking the code of silence.

But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

I agree, I'm very surprised that the RTP have managed to keep a lid on it. But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

[stephenterry]

My golden nugget (whether for prosecution or defense, your choice): There was a guy on the beach on the other side of the rocks who was there screwing his Thai girlfriend who is an eyewitness to the whole affair but he hasn't come forward publicly because he had told his Thai wife in Bangkok that he was at the time away on a business trip to Singapore.

if this is true

I hope he/she can tell their story

peoples lives are at stake

JLC forgot to add a footnote, Gareth:

All characters appearing in this post are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

[jdinasia]

More background:

Monday 15th. Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation.

Royal Thai Police adviser Jarumporn Suramanee said on Wednesday (17th September) that the DNA of 12 people had been tested, including nine samples from Burmese migrant workers and one from Ware.

The tests found none of the DNA matched that collected from semen found in the female victim’s body, he said.

However, the tests found that DNA from a cigarette near the scene matched the semen.

Wouldn't you think it more than probable that the B2 (seen standing in a queue) were initially ruled out?

No, there are hundreds, if not thousands of Burmese workers in Koh Tao.

Furthermore if the two now in custody were part of that initial batch that were cleared, why haven't them or the defense mention it at all?

Strangely enough the defense unlike the police have mentioned very little.

I guess it would be called being professional.

Now if you would be so kind as to make a few more posts about the Burmese being at the crime scene close to the time of the murder whilst at the same time tell us Mon/Non or uncle Bon wasn't despite him being captured on CCTV minutes after the murder. I am sure we can all laugh some more.

To fail to present exculpatory evidence and leave their clients in jail is what you call "professional"?

An application for bail was refused by the judge because of the flight risk and their nationality, ie not being Thai. This despite the prosecution not opposing bail.

If the defense had proof they were tested and cleared there would be no trial.

and, whats that got to do with the post? If, if if if can be applied to every aspect of this case. Unfortunately the DNA evidence is unverified and not up for investigation by anyone

See the sentence in the nested quotes that starts with "furthermore"

[PaPiPuPePo]

Speaking of Sunday, I used to live in the Bible Belt US City of Oklahoma City. People there believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old according to the timing of the Great Flood. If you would say to them: What about radio-active carbon dating showing fossils more than 100 million years old, they would say:

Well, The Lord knew we would have radio-active carbon dating. So he put those fossils there to appear to be 100 million years old to test our faith.

I think of this sometimes when I hear things like so-&-so may have evidence but they are too scared to come forward fearing reprisals from the 'real killers' or that family-ties on small islands are so strong that persons will protect family members from being held responsible for the cold-blooded murder of 2 UK citizens right on their door-step, or that millions of dollars of hush money have been spread around with not one person deliberately or by a slip of the tongue breaking the code of silence.

But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

I think I really need to stop wasting time responding to such posts, but so far at least the temptation proves irresistible:

You are conflating two completely different things: one, a belief system that is drummed into children. Ample research has shown that it's near-impossible to think critically/change one's opinion on a matter one has been thoroughly propagandized about from a young age.

The situation on KT is people being afraid to speak up--this happens around criminal activity all the time and everywhere. And there's well-founded suspicion that there's hush money being passed around: also far from unheard of.

The point you seem to be trying to make (since you leave it to innuendo to complete the thought, a common thing in your posts, be just vague enough to not take responsibility for the things you half-say, half-imply) is that the belief among people engaged in this TV debate that there are people being silent out of fear, or hush money being passed around--since none of us has actually seen it--is just as blind, as silly, as believing in the Bible's creation story.

So you're discrediting these two beliefs by associating them with true-believing Christians, without reason or cause. It should be obvious that this is such as weak, specious argument as to barely merit a response, but I did any way. Maybe you just like to wind people up, in which case you got me, congratulations.

[JLCrab]

Thank you -- my apologies for your waste of time in responding to my specious argument that isn't worthy of response.

[jdinasia]

Speaking of Sunday, I used to live in the Bible Belt US City of Oklahoma City. People there believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old according to the timing of the Great Flood. If you would say to them: What about radio-active carbon dating showing fossils more than 100 million years old, they would say:

Well, The Lord knew we would have radio-active carbon dating. So he put those fossils there to appear to be 100 million years old to test our faith.

I think of this sometimes when I hear things like so-&-so may have evidence but they are too scared to come forward fearing reprisals from the 'real killers' or that family-ties on small islands are so strong that persons will protect family members from being held responsible for the cold-blooded murder of 2 UK citizens right on their door-step, or that millions of dollars of hush money have been spread around with not one person deliberately or by a slip of the tongue breaking the code of silence.

But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

I agree, I'm very surprised that the RTP have managed to keep a lid on it. But I guess there's always an answer for everything.

Very easy to keep a lid on fantasy.

Either there's one family so powerful that everyone is afraid to talk or to implicate them, or that is a fantasy.

Since the investigation certainly pointed at the family people claim is that powerful (until exculpatory evidence was provided) it rules out that scenario.

[CharlieH]

Debate/discuss the topic, not the poster(s), dont make it personal.

Post removed.

[stephenterry]

More background:

Monday 15th. Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation.

Royal Thai Police adviser Jarumporn Suramanee said on Wednesday (17th September) that the DNA of 12 people had been tested, including nine samples from Burmese migrant workers and one from Ware.

The tests found none of the DNA matched that collected from semen found in the female victim’s body, he said.

However, the tests found that DNA from a cigarette near the scene matched the semen.

Wouldn't you think it more than probable that the B2 (seen standing in a queue) were initially ruled out?

No, there are hundreds, if not thousands of Burmese workers in Koh Tao.

Furthermore if the two now in custody were part of that initial batch that were cleared, why haven't them or the defense mention it at all?

Strangely enough the defense unlike the police have mentioned very little.

I guess it would be called being professional.

Now if you would be so kind as to make a few more posts about the Burmese being at the crime scene close to the time of the murder whilst at the same time tell us Mon/Non or uncle Bon wasn't despite him being captured on CCTV minutes after the murder. I am sure we can all laugh some more.

To fail to present exculpatory evidence and leave their clients in jail is what you call "professional"?

An application for bail was refused by the judge because of the flight risk and their nationality, ie not being Thai. This despite the prosecution not opposing bail.

If the defense had proof they were tested and cleared there would be no trial.

and, whats that got to do with the post? If, if if if can be applied to every aspect of this case. Unfortunately the DNA evidence is unverified and not up for investigation by anyone

See the sentence in the nested quotes that starts with "furthermore"

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

[JLCrab]

More background:

Monday 15th. Police had initially detained and questioned three male migrant workers from Burma, but DNA tests and other evidence have ruled them out of the investigation.

Royal Thai Police adviser Jarumporn Suramanee said on Wednesday (17th September) that the DNA of 12 people had been tested, including nine samples from Burmese migrant workers and one from Ware.

The tests found none of the DNA matched that collected from semen found in the female victim’s body, he said.

However, the tests found that DNA from a cigarette near the scene matched the semen.

Wouldn't you think it more than probable that the B2 (seen standing in a queue) were initially ruled out?

No, there are hundreds, if not thousands of Burmese workers in Koh Tao.

Furthermore if the two now in custody were part of that initial batch that were cleared, why haven't them or the defense mention it at all?

Strangely enough the defense unlike the police have mentioned very little.

I guess it would be called being professional.

Now if you would be so kind as to make a few more posts about the Burmese being at the crime scene close to the time of the murder whilst at the same time tell us Mon/Non or uncle Bon wasn't despite him being captured on CCTV minutes after the murder. I am sure we can all laugh some more.

To fail to present exculpatory evidence and leave their clients in jail is what you call "professional"?

An application for bail was refused by the judge because of the flight risk and their nationality, ie not being Thai. This despite the prosecution not opposing bail.

If the defense had proof they were tested and cleared there would be no trial.

and, whats that got to do with the post? If, if if if can be applied to every aspect of this case. Unfortunately the DNA evidence is unverified and not up for investigation by anyone

See the sentence in the nested quotes that starts with "furthermore"

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

And if the case were non-non-transparent how would you know any more of what they didn't not do than what they did didn't do?

[stephenterry]

And if the case were non-non-transparent how would you know any more of what they didn't not do than what they did didn't do?

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

Put it this way. One example. The verification of Nomsod's whereabouts in BKK.

A transparent report would detail a statement like this: we forensically analysed the content of the CCTV evidence in its entirety and found it to be factual. We interviewed several teachers and students of the school and they all confirmed his attendance at the classes on Monday. Etc, etc. All recorded evidence and witness statements are on our files (and available on request, subject to that request coming from legal representatives of concerned persons).

But they didn't do that, or confirm that they did that. Or investigate further into the false testimony provided by his cousin? who said she was with him in BKK when she was proven to be in Pattaya. That is non-transparency. And the investigation is littered with such examples.

But you know that, and so I'm grooving now...

Edited March 22, 2015 by stephenterry

[JLCrab]

Well maybe -- as Boomer puts it -- when the 'real killers' feel confident enough to claim their next victim, the investigation will be handled more to your liking.

Edited March 22, 2015 by JLCrab

[jdinasia]

And if the case were non-non-transparent how would you know any more of what they didn't not do than what they did didn't do?

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

Put it this way. One example. The verification of Nomsod's whereabouts in BKK.

A transparent report would detail a statement like this: we forensically analysed the content of the CCTV evidence in its entirety and found it to be factual. We interviewed several teachers and students of the school and they all confirmed his attendance at the classes on Monday. Etc, etc. All recorded evidence and witness statements are on our files (and available on request, subject to that request coming from legal representatives of concerned persons).

But they didn't do that, or confirm that they did that. Or investigate further into the false testimony provided by his cousin? who said she was with him in BKK when she was proven to be in Pattaya. That is non-transparency. And the investigation is littered with such examples.

But you know that, and so I'm grooving now...

Contrary to what you think, there's a right to privacy. Proving to the investigation that he wasn't on the island is enough. It doesn't have to be proven to the amateur sleuths on social media.

[jdinasia]

Well maybe -- as Boomer puts it -- when the 'real killers' feel confident enough to claim their next victim, the investigation will be handled more to your liking.

Investigation of murder in jail is much easier than outside.

[berybert]

Well maybe -- as Boomer puts it -- when the 'real killers' feel confident enough to claim their next victim, the investigation will be handled more to your liking.

Investigation of murder in jail is much easier than outside.

But you can bet they would still get the wrong people.

[PaPiPuPePo]

Thank you -- my apologies for your waste of time in responding to my specious argument that isn't worthy of response.

Hmm, the--frankly--laughably obvious false equivalence you made above probably doesn't go unnoticed by many, even if I'm the only one to point it out. So I'll do us both a favour as well as show some more respect for other readers and refrain from commenting on them in the future.

[JLCrab]

Thank you -- my apologies for your waste of time in responding to my specious argument that isn't worthy of response.

Hmm, the--frankly--laughably obvious false equivalence you made above probably doesn't go unnoticed by many, even if I'm the only one to point it out. So I'll do us both a favour as well as show some more respect for other readers and refrain from commenting on them in the future.

I don't know that there is any false equivalence -- living in OKC taught me how to get along with total bible-thumping nut cases which at times serves me well on here.

If this is to be a case this summer made totally out of whole-cloth with 60-some prosecution witnesses providing a conga-line of perjured testimony (or what they believe to be truthful testimony even if it is perjured testimony) with the type of world-wide media attention this trial is to receive, I don't think the folks down there on Samui -- many of who are one generation away from coconut farmers -- are good enough to pull that one off.

Edited March 22, 2015 by JLCrab

[PaPiPuPePo]

Hmm, the--frankly--laughably obvious false equivalence you made above probably doesn't go unnoticed by many, even if I'm the only one to point it out. So I'll do us both a favour as well as show some more respect for other readers and refrain from commenting on them in the future.

I don't know that there is any false equivalence -- living in OKC taught me how to get along with total bible-thumping nut cases which at times serves me well on here.

Which is not the equivalence you were making, or I commented on. So you're basically re-making, not un-making, my point. As does your implication that there are numerous ("serves me well") "nut cases" on this forum. Not really in the spirit of the general debate at all either, to put it mildly.

Edited March 22, 2015 by PaPiPuPePo

[JLCrab]

Hmm, the--frankly--laughably obvious false equivalence you made above probably doesn't go unnoticed by many, even if I'm the only one to point it out. So I'll do us both a favour as well as show some more respect for other readers and refrain from commenting on them in the future.

I don't know that there is any false equivalence -- living in OKC taught me how to get along with total bible-thumping nut cases which at times serves me well on here.

Which is not the equivalence you were making, or I commented on. So you're basically re-making, not un-making, my point. As does your implication that there are numerous ("serves me well") "nut cases" on this forum. Not really in the spirit of the general debate at all either, to put it mildly.

You had a point?

Someone can make an argument that no witnesses have come forward because they are afraid of what the 'real killers' might do; it might also be the case that no witnesses have come forward because there are no such witnesses.

Edited March 22, 2015 by JLCrab

[DM07]

And if the case were non-non-transparent how would you know any more of what they didn't not do than what they did didn't do?

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

Put it this way. One example. The verification of Nomsod's whereabouts in BKK.

A transparent report would detail a statement like this: we forensically analysed the content of the CCTV evidence in its entirety and found it to be factual. We interviewed several teachers and students of the school and they all confirmed his attendance at the classes on Monday. Etc, etc. All recorded evidence and witness statements are on our files (and available on request, subject to that request coming from legal representatives of concerned persons).

But they didn't do that, or confirm that they did that. Or investigate further into the false testimony provided by his cousin? who said she was with him in BKK when she was proven to be in Pattaya. That is non-transparency. And the investigation is littered with such examples.

But you know that, and so I'm grooving now...

Contrary to what you think, there's a right to privacy. Proving to the investigation that he wasn't on the island is enough. It doesn't have to be proven to the amateur sleuths on social media.

...and like in the "human rights"- issue (you know: giving DNA-samples can be stopped, because...human rights!) this "privacy" only goes for one party in this case, which is the one, that is Thai...and they could not do such a thing anyways.

Since it is okay for the RTP, the Roti-vendor and everybody with a big mouth, to spout all kind of (made up and flawed) details and evidence about the B2...our darling- family of island- leaders, of course, has the right to privacy in all matters!

[jdinasia]

And if the case were non-non-transparent how would you know any more of what they didn't not do than what they did didn't do?

Maybe the defence does have the 'clearance' assertion, but as the RTP did not, and have not, released the names of those cleared, it's a matter of trying to prove it. And equally, why didn't the RTP release the names of those who were cleared if the B2 were NOT on that list?

This case has been more about what the RTP did not do, than what they did. No wonder there has been challenges as to the non-transparency of this investigation.

Put it this way. One example. The verification of Nomsod's whereabouts in BKK.

A transparent report would detail a statement like this: we forensically analysed the content of the CCTV evidence in its entirety and found it to be factual. We interviewed several teachers and students of the school and they all confirmed his attendance at the classes on Monday. Etc, etc. All recorded evidence and witness statements are on our files (and available on request, subject to that request coming from legal representatives of concerned persons).

But they didn't do that, or confirm that they did that. Or investigate further into the false testimony provided by his cousin? who said she was with him in BKK when she was proven to be in Pattaya. That is non-transparency. And the investigation is littered with such examples.

But you know that, and so I'm grooving now...

Contrary to what you think, there's a right to privacy. Proving to the investigation that he wasn't on the island is enough. It doesn't have to be proven to the amateur sleuths on social media.

...and like in the "human rights"- issue (you know: giving DNA-samples can be stopped, because...human rights!) this "privacy" only goes for one party in this case, which is the one, that is Thai...and they could not do such a thing anyways.

Since it is okay for the RTP, the Roti-vendor and everybody with a big mouth, to spout all kind of (made up and flawed) details and evidence about the B2...our darling- family of island- leaders, of course, has the right to privacy in all matters!

Certainly not what I wrote. However, if you can prove something is "made up " you should certainly contact the defense

[CharlieH]

6) You will not post comments that could be reasonably construed as defamation or libel.

Defamation is the issuance of a statement about another person or business which causes that person to suffer harm. It does not have to be false to be defamatory. Libel is when the defamatory statement is published either in a drawing, painting, cinematography, film, picture or letters made visible by any means, or any other recording instruments, recording picture or letters, or by broadcasting or spreading picture, or by propagation by any other means. Defamation is both a civil and criminal charge in Thailand.

[greenchair]

My golden nugget (whether for prosecution or defense, your choice): There was a guy on the beach on the other side of the rocks who was there screwing his Thai girlfriend who is an eyewitness to the whole affair but he hasn't come forward publicly because he had told his Thai wife in Bangkok that he was at the time away on a business trip to Singapore.

Maybe you do have a nugget bent out of shape a bit to fit the box.

Maybe there was a guy down there not screwing not a Thai girl, but raping a white girl. Maybe the wife in Bangkok was actually a girlfriend. Maybe he didn't say he was on a business trip, maybe he said he was studying at university, when really he was on the island partying. ??

[rockingrobin]

My golden nugget (whether for prosecution or defense, your choice): There was a guy on the beach on the other side of the rocks who was there screwing his Thai girlfriend who is an eyewitness to the whole affair but he hasn't come forward publicly because he had told his Thai wife in Bangkok that he was at the time away on a business trip to Singapore.

Can you expand on this

Is the RTP in possesion of this info, and what is your source

[rockingrobin]

If the DNA evidence is accepted by the court then the B2 are in difficulty

I cannot disagree

Lets not forget that after the Burmese were arrested , the name of all three and the age of one of them was reported incorrectly , an explanation as never been forthcoming as far as I know

This leads me to question if during the course of DNA testing of migrants it would have been possible to give false details

[JLCrab]

My golden nugget (whether for prosecution or defense, your choice): There was a guy on the beach on the other side of the rocks who was there screwing his Thai girlfriend who is an eyewitness to the whole affair but he hasn't come forward publicly because he had told his Thai wife in Bangkok that he was at the time away on a business trip to Singapore.

Maybe you do have a nugget bent out of shape a bit to fit the box.

Maybe there was a guy down there not screwing not a Thai girl, but raping a white girl. Maybe the wife in Bangkok was actually a girlfriend. Maybe he didn't say he was on a business trip, maybe he said he was studying at university, when really he was on the island partying. ??

You left out the part about the jet pack to get him off the island and to the mainland to get a taxi back to BKK -- always makes sense to have the jet pack if one is prone to deviant behavior to get oneself out of tight circumstances ...