Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[jaidam]

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 ...

Now why would the murderer use a jetpack to escape when he has a speedboat, and was seen escaping. BTW, just in case anybody is unfamiliar with Koh Tao, most, if not all Burmese laborers own a private speedboat.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Koh-Tao-police-fail-another-day-30243890.html

[JLCrab]

Beats me -- but if Daddy is worth a hundred million bucks and one is prone to deviant behavior, why not have the jet pack or at least one of these ready for the big escape:

Edited March 22, 2015 by JLCrab

[jdinasia]

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. [emoji38][emoji38]

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 ...

Now why would the murderer use a jetpack to escape when he has a speedboat, and was seen escaping. BTW, just in case anybody is unfamiliar with Koh Tao, most, if not all Burmese laborers own a private speedboat.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Koh-Tao-police-fail-another-day-30243890.html

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

[berybert]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

Edited March 23, 2015 by berybert

[stephenterry]

More background and a mystery. See below:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Lawyer Aung Myo Thant and MAT representative Kyaw Thaung both confirmed to DVB that Maung Maung had told the embassy team that he had witnessed Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun in bed sleeping when he returned to the room at 5am and that nothing seemed suspicious.

According to Kyaw Thaung: “Maung Maung said he woke them up and asked them, ‘Where is the guitar?’ at which point one of the pair indicated it was in AC Bar [where the British couple, Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, had been drinking with friends the night before]. Maung Maung said he then went to AC Bar to look for the guitar and his sandals, ‘because they were expensive – 350 baht’, he said.

From the above, at least one of the B2 returned the guitar to the AC bar after finishing up their session on the beach. At what time? Supposedly before the bar closed at 3am. Which means they could have been present when the victims left. Doing what? More drinking? Could explain their 'we were drunk' statement.

So either they followed the victims back to the beach after 3am, or went back to their lodgings. Any CCTV?

The implications are enormous:-

1. Who witnessed their return to the AC bar with the guitar?

2. What did they do there? Drink? or Leave?

3. Where is the CCTV to evidence their movements?

4. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene is (probably) correct up to the time when they left to return to AC bar.

5. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene at the time when the attacks took place is contestable (because the guitar didn't return to AC bar on its own).

6. Muang Muang's statement that nothing seemed suspicious when he returned to their lodgings at 5am is exculpatory evidence.

Does anyone have a timeline of their movements?

Edited March 23, 2015 by stephenterry

[boomerangutang]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

In order for the RTP (and their friends and clients) to maintain the frame-up/cover-up, they have a lot of niggling issues to deal with. Here is a partial list of things they have to discount/disprove or hope fade from the canary-like memory of most Thais:

>>> furniture shown in alibi video

>>> speedboat allegations

>>> Stabbing wounds to David's neck and body

>>> CCTV which police (and tens of thousands of other observers) said show Nomsod, minutes after the crime

>>> why bloody clothes were not searched for

>>> why full body checks didn't happen

>>> why phone records/histories were apparently not looked into.

>>> why 9 Burmese migrants were tested and cleared for DNA matches, yet a few days later, two of the same were miraculously found to match.

>>> why there is no disclosure of the 3 hr questioning of Mon, nor the interrogation (allegedly with torture) of the Burmese.

>>> why no scrutiny of Mon's living space or where he does laundry.

[JLCrab]

... or just find the person referenced in a post about at about 5 AM this morning and who saw the escape-in-progress.

Now why would the murderer use a jetpack to escape when he has a speedboat, and was seen escaping

Edited March 23, 2015 by JLCrab

[EyesWideOpen]

This case stinks to high heaven, it will be interesting to see how the trial unfolds.

Also Burma is a bit pissed off that two of its nationals are being railroaded. It

makes a country look weak to do nothing to help its nationals who are being

set up. Burmese national gas is critical to Thailand's energy needs. Will be

interesting to see if Burma does a Russian move, and cuts off gas to Thailand.

Then you would see 2B instantly cleared.....

[JLCrab]

Maybe -- but there would go their biggest source of hard currency and PTT owns the only existing LNG port facilities in Myanmar.

[boomerangutang]

This case stinks to high heaven, it will be interesting to see how the trial unfolds. Also Burma is a bit pissed off that two of its nationals are being railroaded. It makes a country look weak to do nothing to help its nationals who are being set up. Burmese national gas is critical to Thailand's energy needs. Will be interesting to see if Burma does a Russian move, and cuts off gas to Thailand.

Then you would see 2B instantly cleared.....

Yes it stinks, and the outlook is gloomy that it will stink less when the trial commences. Burmese officials are likely also annoyed by being summarily rebuffed when they asked if they could post bail for the defendants. Here's how things work in Thailand: the son of a very rich man can kill a cop, and gets off with nary a wrist slap (happened with the Chaleum family and also with the caffeine-drink big shot) . In contrast, a Burmese migrant can get slapped in jail indefinitely on flimsy charges - with no hope of bail.

... or just find the person referenced in a post about at about 5 AM this morning and who saw the escape-in-progress.

Now why would the murderer use a jetpack to escape when he has a speedboat, and was seen escaping

Ok, the jetpack was barely a grin when it first appeared, and isn't funny now. Some of us are trying to find what really happened that night, and why the investigation has been so screwed-up. Do you want to assist with that, or divert?

[JLCrab]

As for now, I am waiting to see, starting 8 JULY, if the Prosecution knows that their intended premise of what really happened early morning 15 SEP 2014 is totally false and that they, and their parade of perjured witness testimony, will be trying to perpetuate a hoax on the Court, the country of Thailand, and any and all representatives of the international community including the international press corp, and think that they are clever enough to get away with it.

As for you and persons on this website finding out what really happened, I will quote Sly and the Family Stone:

Boom laka-laka-laka, boom laka-laka-laka

Boom laka-laka-laka, boom laka-laka-laka

Edited March 23, 2015 by JLCrab

[boomerangutang]

As for now, I am waiting to see, starting 8 JULY, if the Prosecution knows that their intended premise of what really happened early morning 15 SEP 2014 is totally false and that they, and their parade of perjured witness testimony, will be trying to perpetuate a hoax on the Court, the country of Thailand, and any and all representatives of the international community including the international press corp, and think that they are clever enough to get away with it.

As for you and persons on this website finding out what really happened, I will quote Sly and the Family Stone:

Boom laka-laka-laka, boom laka-laka-laka

Boom laka-laka-laka, boom laka-laka-laka

You said 'totally false.' It's not a black & white situation. In other words, a scenario can be shown to be wrong if just one part of the evidence doesn't fit. Similarly, not ALL the witnesses need to tell lies for the prosecutions' case to fall apart or for it to be shown to be largely a hoax (your word).

Innocent until proven guilty. Prosecution will have to prove their case. Just making a statement while wearing a policeman's uniform won't cut it - or at least I hope that won't be enough to convict.

[JLCrab]

You've used that one before that some witnesses will only be relaying what their superiors told them to say and that they have no independent reason to believe such is true or not -- which is a sitting duck for any able cross-examiner. To me, if the Prosecution knows for a fact that the accused are in no way complicit in the crimes for which they have been charged, then it is indeed -- I will repeat -- a hoax.

[jdinasia]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

I know someone might say "but it was posted on...."

Social media isn't reality.

[jdinasia]

Maybe -- but there would go their biggest source of hard currency and PTT owns the only existing LNG port facilities in Myanmar.

Myanmar will accept the results of the court case. Anyone thinking otherwise might want to look at what courts are like there and how their own people are treated.

[jdinasia]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

In order for the RTP (and their friends and clients) to maintain the frame-up/cover-up, they have a lot of niggling issues to deal with. Here is a partial list of things they have to discount/disprove or hope fade from the canary-like memory of most Thais:

>>> furniture shown in alibi video

>>> speedboat allegations

>>> Stabbing wounds to David's neck and body

>>> CCTV which police (and tens of thousands of other observers) said show Nomsod, minutes after the crime

>>> why bloody clothes were not searched for

>>> why full body checks didn't happen

>>> why phone records/histories were apparently not looked into.

>>> why 9 Burmese migrants were tested and cleared for DNA matches, yet a few days later, two of the same were miraculously found to match.

>>> why there is no disclosure of the 3 hr questioning of Mon, nor the interrogation (allegedly with torture) of the Burmese.

>>> why no scrutiny of Mon's living space or where he does laundry.

Nothing in your list needs to be answered by the prosecution except, possibly, the wounds on David.

The prosecution needs to prove to the judges that the 2 Burmese defendants committed the crime. They should be able to do so with just the DNA, a murder weapon for Hannah, and testimony about the phone.

The rest are your issues, not issues with the case.

[berybert]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

I know someone might say "but it was posted on...."

Social media isn't reality.

Social media is becoming a reality fortunately .

Just imagine without mobile phones and the like, one of your BIB would have got away with killing a biker last week. I can see why you oppose it.

[jdinasia]

LOL

Social media, when presented with direct evidence is helpful. When it just pushes conspiracy theories here and there, it's just a bit of silliness.

As I have no significant connection with the RTP, they are not my BIB

[berybert]

Conspiracy theory would be that David was killed by a hoe. So I agree with you that that is extremely silly.

[catsanddogs]

More background and a mystery. See below:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Lawyer Aung Myo Thant and MAT representative Kyaw Thaung both confirmed to DVB that Maung Maung had told the embassy team that he had witnessed Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun in bed sleeping when he returned to the room at 5am and that nothing seemed suspicious.

According to Kyaw Thaung: “Maung Maung said he woke them up and asked them, ‘Where is the guitar?’ at which point one of the pair indicated it was in AC Bar [where the British couple, Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, had been drinking with friends the night before]. Maung Maung said he then went to AC Bar to look for the guitar and his sandals, ‘because they were expensive – 350 baht’, he said.

From the above, at least one of the B2 returned the guitar to the AC bar after finishing up their session on the beach. At what time? Supposedly before the bar closed at 3am. Which means they could have been present when the victims left. Doing what? More drinking? Could explain their 'we were drunk' statement.

So either they followed the victims back to the beach after 3am, or went back to their lodgings. Any CCTV?

The implications are enormous:-

1. Who witnessed their return to the AC bar with the guitar?

2. What did they do there? Drink? or Leave?

3. Where is the CCTV to evidence their movements?

4. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene is (probably) correct up to the time when they left to return to AC bar.

5. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene at the time when the attacks took place is contestable (because the guitar didn't return to AC bar on its own).

6. Muang Muang's statement that nothing seemed suspicious when he returned to their lodgings at 5am is exculpatory evidence.

Does anyone have a timeline of their movements?

There is always the possibility that neither of the B2 took the guitar back to the bar - maybe someone else did for whatever reason. Maybe someone borrowed it and took it back to the bar after the B2 had left the beach. Maybe Hannah borrowed it? Why would the B2 take it back to the bar instead of to their lodgings?

[catsanddogs]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

I know someone might say "but it was posted on...."

Social media isn't reality.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

'That you know of' I might add. I'm imagining you haven't been privy to the defence's documentation.

[stephenterry]

More background and a mystery. See below:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Lawyer Aung Myo Thant and MAT representative Kyaw Thaung both confirmed to DVB that Maung Maung had told the embassy team that he had witnessed Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun in bed sleeping when he returned to the room at 5am and that nothing seemed suspicious.

According to Kyaw Thaung: “Maung Maung said he woke them up and asked them, ‘Where is the guitar?’ at which point one of the pair indicated it was in AC Bar [where the British couple, Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, had been drinking with friends the night before]. Maung Maung said he then went to AC Bar to look for the guitar and his sandals, ‘because they were expensive – 350 baht’, he said.

From the above, at least one of the B2 returned the guitar to the AC bar after finishing up their session on the beach. At what time? Supposedly before the bar closed at 3am. Which means they could have been present when the victims left. Doing what? More drinking? Could explain their 'we were drunk' statement.

So either they followed the victims back to the beach after 3am, or went back to their lodgings. Any CCTV?

The implications are enormous:-

1. Who witnessed their return to the AC bar with the guitar?

2. What did they do there? Drink? or Leave?

3. Where is the CCTV to evidence their movements?

4. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene is (probably) correct up to the time when they left to return to AC bar.

5. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene at the time when the attacks took place is contestable (because the guitar didn't return to AC bar on its own).

6. Muang Muang's statement that nothing seemed suspicious when he returned to their lodgings at 5am is exculpatory evidence.

Does anyone have a timeline of their movements?

There is always the possibility that neither of the B2 took the guitar back to the bar - maybe someone else did for whatever reason. Maybe someone borrowed it and took it back to the bar after the B2 had left the beach. Maybe Hannah borrowed it? Why would the B2 take it back to the bar instead of to their lodgings?

The very fact that the guitar moved from the beach to the AC bar has not been explained anywhere. That's why it is important to hear what the B2 say about their movements, and what happened to the guitar. When they were awakened they stated that the guitar was at the AC Bar, that indicates first hand knowledge of its movements (not that someone borrowed it).

If another person was involved, he/she would be a witness at a time after Muang Muang left them on the beach. Maybe the AC bar was more secure than their lodgings? Maybe they fancied another drink?

[JLCrab]

The handicappers in the US have a saying: That's why they play the game.

Starting July, the Prosecution will have a chance to prove the 2 accused are guilty of the crimes for which they are charged. If they know for a fact that the two accused are in no way complicit in these crimes, then they will have to build a house-of-cards to prove that they are guilty when they are not. Up to you whether you think that they are clever enough to pull that one off with all the media attention this trial will receive.

Everything on here then becomes a side show if it were not already.

[jdinasia]

Interesting that people are trotting this story (and the furniture story) but nobody has ever been able to actually establish a connection if the boat to the murders... Or establish that the furniture had been changed in BKK.

To find the answer to the first part of the story we need to know what become of little duck, and the 2 people who were hiding in a cave on the beach.

The furniture it should be easy enough to look at CCTV footage from days previous to that which has been used.

But lets be honest even if the evidence you wanted was produced you would still claim it could only be the Burmese.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

I know someone might say "but it was posted on...."

Social media isn't reality.

No connection with reality has ever been made regarding the boat nor the furniture, even after all this time.

'That you know of' I might add. I'm imagining you haven't been privy to the defence's documentation.

Granted. I (nor you) are privy to the prosecution case either.

[jdinasia]

Deleted -- just realized that I would have been quoting defamation. (for example)

Edited March 23, 2015 by jdinasia

[Linky]

Maybe -- but there would go their biggest source of hard currency and PTT owns the only existing LNG port facilities in Myanmar.

Myanmar will accept the results of the court case. Anyone thinking otherwise might want to look at what courts are like there and how their own people are treated.

Is that a fact or your opinion?

[jdinasia]

Maybe -- but there would go their biggest source of hard currency and PTT owns the only existing LNG port facilities in Myanmar.

Myanmar will accept the results of the court case. Anyone thinking otherwise might want to look at what courts are like there and how their own people are treated.

Is that a fact or your opinion?

My conclusion is an informed opinion based on the facts of the situations mentioned in Myanmar. It will either be confirmed as a fact or not as the case proceeds.

[jimmybkk]

Maybe -- but there would go their biggest source of hard currency and PTT owns the only existing LNG port facilities in Myanmar.

Myanmar will accept the results of the court case. Anyone thinking otherwise might want to look at what courts are like there and how their own people are treated.

Is that a fact or your opinion?

My conclusion is an informed opinion based on the facts of the situations mentioned in Myanmar. It will either be confirmed as a fact or not as the case proceeds.

Nope - it was wild speculation presented as a foregone conclusion, dressed up to look like a statement of fact and highlighted by the non sequitur you attempted to back it up with. Tsk tsk... resorting to crystal ball assertions now, eh? Well, at least some things are becoming more transparent as this case continues... Keep up the good work

[IslandLover]

stephenterry, on 23 Mar 2015 - 09:37, said:

catsanddogs, on 23 Mar 2015 - 09:14, said:

stephenterry, on 23 Mar 2015 - 04:13, said:

More background and a mystery. See below:

“According to the testimony of Maung Maung, who shared accommodation with the two suspects [Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun], they were all three drinking and playing guitar on the night of the incident,” the Burmese lawyer told DVB.

“Maung Maung said he then went to see his girlfriend and did not return until 5am.”

Lawyer Aung Myo Thant and MAT representative Kyaw Thaung both confirmed to DVB that Maung Maung had told the embassy team that he had witnessed Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun in bed sleeping when he returned to the room at 5am and that nothing seemed suspicious.

According to Kyaw Thaung: “Maung Maung said he woke them up and asked them, ‘Where is the guitar?’ at which point one of the pair indicated it was in AC Bar [where the British couple, Hannah Witheridge and David Miller, had been drinking with friends the night before]. Maung Maung said he then went to AC Bar to look for the guitar and his sandals, ‘because they were expensive – 350 baht’, he said.

From the above, at least one of the B2 returned the guitar to the AC bar after finishing up their session on the beach. At what time? Supposedly before the bar closed at 3am. Which means they could have been present when the victims left. Doing what? More drinking? Could explain their 'we were drunk' statement.

So either they followed the victims back to the beach after 3am, or went back to their lodgings. Any CCTV?

The implications are enormous:-

1. Who witnessed their return to the AC bar with the guitar?

2. What did they do there? Drink? or Leave?

3. Where is the CCTV to evidence their movements?

4. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene is (probably) correct up to the time when they left to return to AC bar.

5. The scenario that they were at the beach within a hundred metres of the crime scene at the time when the attacks took place is contestable (because the guitar didn't return to AC bar on its own).

6. Muang Muang's statement that nothing seemed suspicious when he returned to their lodgings at 5am is exculpatory evidence.

Does anyone have a timeline of their movements?

There is always the possibility that neither of the B2 took the guitar back to the bar - maybe someone else did for whatever reason. Maybe someone borrowed it and took it back to the bar after the B2 had left the beach. Maybe Hannah borrowed it? Why would the B2 take it back to the bar instead of to their lodgings?

The very fact that the guitar moved from the beach to the AC bar has not been explained anywhere. That's why it is important to hear what the B2 say about their movements, and what happened to the guitar. When they were awakened they stated that the guitar was at the AC Bar, that indicates first hand knowledge of its movements (not that someone borrowed it).

If another person was involved, he/she would be a witness at a time after Muang Muang left them on the beach. Maybe the AC bar was more secure than their lodgings? Maybe they fancied another drink?

There is yet another report that says the B2 went for a swim and when they came out of the water, their clothes and the guitar had disappeared.

Burmese embassy representative went to see two boys for more information.: Media interview and answer by embassy official. The Embassy officer said: “The two boys told him that they were swimming at beach near AC Bar and Maya Bar on that night, after 10 or 15 minutes, when they come back to the beach after swimming, they did not find their guitar and cloth on where they left. Somebody may be stolen their cloth and guitar.but on 14 Oct the police bring as evidence their cloth and guitar to the court.

https://crimesontheblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/02/burmese-on-the-beach-at-crime-time/

I have often wondered if they told Maung Maung that they had left the guitar at the AC bar because they were too embarassed to admit that they had eiher lost it or it had been stolen.

[AleG]

In order for the RTP (and their friends and clients) to maintain the frame-up/cover-up, they have a lot of niggling issues to deal with. Here is a partial list of things they have to discount/disprove or hope fade from the canary-like memory of most Thais:

>>> furniture shown in alibi video

>>> speedboat allegations

>>> Stabbing wounds to David's neck and body

>>> CCTV which police (and tens of thousands of other observers) said show Nomsod, minutes after the crime

>>> why bloody clothes were not searched for

>>> why full body checks didn't happen

>>> why phone records/histories were apparently not looked into.

>>> why 9 Burmese migrants were tested and cleared for DNA matches, yet a few days later, two of the same were miraculously found to match.

>>> why there is no disclosure of the 3 hr questioning of Mon, nor the interrogation (allegedly with torture) of the Burmese.

>>> why no scrutiny of Mon's living space or where he does laundry.

">>> furniture shown in alibi video"

Oh, furniture, on a video, how... meaningless.

The CCTV footage you insist was faked was reviewed by the press, are they all also in the payroll?

Yes, of course, you think everyone is in the payroll, what was I thinking?

">>> speedboat allegations"

Anyone can make allegations, about anyone or anything else, means nothing.

">>> Stabbing wounds to David's neck and body"

You are neither a pathologist nor did you examine the wounds by yourself, so you are speculating from a position of ignorance.

">>> CCTV which police (and tens of thousands of other observers) said show Nomsod, minutes after the crime"

Tens of thousands agree with you... you simply made that up; for what is worth hundreds of thousands agree with me, so there.

">>> why bloody clothes were not searched for"

You state something as a fact when in reality you have no idea.

">>> why full body checks didn't happen"

See previous point,

">>> why phone records/histories were apparently not looked into."

See previous two points... I'm starting to see a pattern here...

">>> why 9 Burmese migrants were tested and cleared for DNA matches, yet a few days later, two of the same were miraculously found to match."

If you need miracles to make sense of the world then you are doing something wrong, as in this case, claiming the two men now on trial were among those other nine men. You simply made that up, completely.

">>> why there is no disclosure of the 3 hr questioning of Mon, nor the interrogation (allegedly with torture) of the Burmese."

Where in the World, does police release such information to the public ahead of a trial?

Besides that you are flip-flopping like a fish on the ground: "We don't expect defense or prosecution to divulge their plans, data or strategies to us concerned observers." The problem with ad-hoc arguments and rationalizations is that they reveal a lack of intellectual rigor, just say something that sounds about right now, say the opposite later, whatever gives a perceived edge at any given time.

">>> why no scrutiny of Mon's living space or where he does laundry."

Again, you know they didn't do that because you really have nothing else to work with but speculation without any support; so, as always, you invent some scenario, you declare that scenario suspicious therefore things look suspicious... in the fictional world you created. Circular logic, simple, easy, comforting (any similarity with reality is merely accidental).