Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[berybert]

From today's thread In the Thailand news section.

"The social media, having hurt many innocent people with its knee-jerk reaction , must exercise its power with a greater responsibility. Responsibility is the key for everyone involved.

In an era where what is said or written can go viral in the blink of an eye and is much harder to retract or erase, prudence is required more than ever before. While punishment can be decried as harsh, those at the wrong end of defamation can bemoan a scar that lasts virtually forever."

This doesn't even take the CCA into account.

One of the people social media has hurt was the copper who shot dead a biker. Without social media he would have got away clean as a whistle.

As I have said before you are happy for people to get away with murder. Damn social media.

It was the family of the man that requested a second autopsy and that proved the man was shot, plus witnesses that saw the shooting... and a video of the incident. In short, real evidence as opposed inbred theories with no factual basis whatsoever.

Truth is painful for some people.

I am still waiting for people to admit, after so many links to prove it, that Panya cleared previous suspects prior to his promotion.

The video shot by a person with a phone who put it on social media. Without that the rest of it would have been meaningless. Witnesses would have been told they had seen nothing. There would have been no second autopsy. People would have accepted the first autopsy.

Do tell me how two autopsy's can be so different ? The first one missed the bullet to the head. Really that doctor should be sacked but being as he was doing it for the police, he did as he was told.

There is a picture of the killer cop giving an old lady a piggyback to save her getting her shoes dirty. To prove he is really a nice guy.

[stephenterry]

My non-long-winded point of view: If this thing is a hoax in that those at the top of the Prosecution chain if not top-to-bottom know for a fact that the 2 accused are in no way complicit in the crimes for which they are charged, then I don't think those down in Samui even with direction from Bangkok are good enough to pull that one off given the international attention this trial will receive.

Your statement would have some credence if it didn't use superlatives like "....know for a fact that..." "...are in no way complicit..."

When I was in jr. High school, there were gals who had a world view something like this: Everything, certainly every boy, was either 'super dreamy' or 'yuksville.' In other words, everything was either excellent or horrible - no middle ground. We don't need to stoop to that level. It's Sunday for Kryssache.

For example, when I discount what the RTP have done in this investigation, I don't assert everything they've done is off-base and unprofessional, .....only some things.

Did you make it past jr. High school? Either the B2 are complicit in these crimes or they are not. I don't see that there is any shade-of-grey in that matter.

It's not that simple. While I don't think the B2 committed murder, I am positive (by their conflicting 'whereabouts' statements) that they know or are aware of what might have happened that night. As do Mon and Nomsod (for their suspicious behaviour) - and I don't think they are murderers, either.

It was reported (and hushed up) that a 'biker gang' assaulted and robbed two female tourists on that very beach, the previous night. Is that a coincidence, or could that same gang have been involved in these crimes as well?

I see plenty of shades of grey in most aspects of this investigation, often or not with conflicting information that has been bandied around ad nauseum. The main culprits being the RTP media reports.

[JLCrab]

What is simple is that if there are conflicting statements by the defense about what one might know about what might have happened and who might have been involved but some are not sure because they only know what people have told them and others say that they are afraid for one reason or another to believe or say otherwise and that will run out the clock most likely in the prosecutions favor even for a long trial

[stephenterry]

What is simple is that if there are conflicting statements by the defense about what one might know about what might have happened and who might have been involved but some are not sure because they only know what people have told them and others say that they are afraid for one reason or another to believe or say otherwise and that will run out the clock most likely in the prosecutions favor even for a long trial

Nah, the defence would have had plenty of time to get their story straight, as would the prosecution. I see the prosecution's case succeeding or failing on the strength and veracity of the DNA evidence. But, if successful, that alone wouldn't be enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 committed murder. IMO, that needs more.

For example, neither David's DNA nor the B2's DNA are on the hoe, there is no alternative murder weapon, Hannah was dragged some 50 metres from the initial attack site (according to early RTP reports) so the link of the B2 to David is tenuous. If the prosecution rely on the hoe as the murder weapon that killed David, the B2 have no case to answer. If the prosecution rely on some other (missing) murder weapon that killed David, again there is no DNA link to the B2. It needs more.

Edited March 29, 2015 by stephenterry

[JLCrab]

What is simple is that if there are conflicting statements by the defense about what one might know about what might have happened and who might have been involved but some are not sure because they only know what people have told them and others say that they are afraid for one reason or another to believe or say otherwise and that will run out the clock most likely in the prosecutions favor even for a long trial

Nah, the defence would have had plenty of time to get their story straight, as would the prosecution. I see the prosecution's case succeeding or failing on the strength and veracity of the DNA evidence. But, if successful, that alone wouldn't be enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 committed murder. IMO, that needs more.

For example, neither David's DNA nor the B2's DNA are on the hoe, there is no alternative murder weapon, Hannah was dragged some 50 metres from the initial attack site (according to early RTP reports) so the link of the B2 to David is tenuous. If the prosecution rely on the hoe as the murder weapon that killed David, the B2 have no case to answer. If the prosecution rely on some other (missing) murder weapon that killed David, again there is no DNA link to the B2. It needs more.

Nah, the defence would have had plenty of time to get their story straight ... Maybe not if they listen to you. The defense may not even have to put on muuch of a story: If the Prosecution is putting on a case to convict the 2 accused when the 2 accused are not complicit in the crimes as they have been charged, the defense can maybe just put forward a few questions per witness on cross-examination and show that the evidence is just a fictional house-of-cards and just watch and have everyone in turn watch the house of cards collapse.

[boomerangutang]

Your statement would have some credence if it didn't use superlatives like "....know for a fact that..." "...are in no way complicit..."

When I was in jr. High school, there were gals who had a world view something like this: Everything, certainly every boy, was either 'super dreamy' or 'yuksville.' In other words, everything was either excellent or horrible - no middle ground. We don't need to stoop to that level. It's Sunday for Kryssache.

For example, when I discount what the RTP have done in this investigation, I don't assert everything they've done is off-base and unprofessional, .....only some things.

Did you make it past jr. High school? Either the B2 are complicit in these crimes or they are not. I don't see that there is any shade-of-grey in that matter.

"Either the B2 are complicit in these crimes or they are not." You sound like the PM who stated earlier: "if the DNA matches, they must be guilty of the murders."

Again, it's not necessarily a black or white scenario. If the DNA trail is credible (which many doubt) the B2 could have come along after the crime and had sex with a dead body. Even if they had sex with Hannah while she was alive, that doesn't prove murder of one or both victims. I'm not trying to bend over backwards to find the B2 innocent, but instead trying to look at all the evidence - to try and gauge what really happened that awful night. RTP have made too many mistakes thus far for them to be believable. There are many indications showing that the RTP have an agenda different from finding the real culprits.

As for the Brit experts: Most of us were hopeful they would contribute to unraveling the who-dunnit. Thus far, the Brits have been as useful as a tennis racquet to a pigeon.

[JLCrab]

So now it's necrophilia as a defense?

[boomerangutang]

So now it's necrophilia as a defense?

I mentioned a possible scenario. I'm not talking about legal strategies.

[JLCrab]

So now it's necrophilia as a defense?

I mentioned a possible scenario. I'm not talking about legal strategies.

Great -- possible scenario. The trial starts in 3 months and the month April is a wash for Songkran. I trust if the 2 are innocent that the defense will have a better case than maybe - what if -- it's possible -- imagine this -- people know but they're afraid to talk, etc.

Or maybe:

"You're traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's the signpost up ahead - your next stop, the Twilight Zone!"

[thailandchilli]

My non-long-winded point of view: If this thing is a hoax in that those at the top of the Prosecution chain if not top-to-bottom know for a fact that the 2 accused are in no way complicit in the crimes for which they are charged, then I don't think those down in Samui even with direction from Bangkok are good enough to pull that one off given the international attention this trial will receive.

Your statement would have some credence if it didn't use superlatives like "....know for a fact that..." "...are in no way complicit..."

When I was in jr. High school, there were gals who had a world view something like this: Everything, certainly every boy, was either 'super dreamy' or 'yuksville.' In other words, everything was either excellent or horrible - no middle ground. We don't need to stoop to that level. It's Sunday for Kryssache.

For example, when I discount what the RTP have done in this investigation, I don't assert everything they've done is off-base and unprofessional, .....only some things.

Did you make it past jr. High school? Either the B2 are complicit in these crimes or they are not. I don't see that there is any shade-of-grey in that matter.

It's not that simple. While I don't think the B2 committed murder, I am positive (by their conflicting 'whereabouts' statements) that they know or are aware of what might have happened that night. As do Mon and Nomsod (for their suspicious behaviour) - and I don't think they are murderers, either.

It was reported (and hushed up) that a 'biker gang' assaulted and robbed two female tourists on that very beach, the previous night. Is that a coincidence, or could that same gang have been involved in these crimes as well?

I see plenty of shades of grey in most aspects of this investigation, often or not with conflicting information that has been bandied around ad nauseum. The main culprits being the RTP media reports.

Good post stephenterry. I'm currently in the same camp as you unless we see further evidence either way materialize which I now doubt is going to be the case. Confusion and contradictions are the order of the case not only from the Prosecution and RTP side but also from the very limited snippets we've had from the B2/3. The defense is keeping whatever they have or not have as the case may be very close to their chest, quite rightly so.

I'm very disturbed by the early RTP investigation and anyone that is not needs their heads examined. The historical evidence of the RTP using migrant scapegoats is well documented and in the early stages of this case the indications of this were more than evident, not just in their racist statements but also in their actions, ie rounding up migrant workers, male and female for DNA testing before doing the same to the local Thai population. Added to that the speculations made by the RTP regards Chris Ware appeared to be a direct attempt to pin this one anyone other than a Thai.

Then we have the concerns about DNA, evidence planting, and even witness bribery. It all hardly makes for a trustworthy investigation that people can be assured of is fair.

In light of all this and much more I fail to see how people be it on social media, forums, or in the established media cannot but carry on asking questions, trying to find out if there's any other 'mistakes' the RTP have made that they haven't admitted to or attempting to find anyone else that may have been involved.

I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

I keep thinking back to the dear leader when he said that this investigation was going to be carried out as scientifically as possible we do not want to rush the RTP as they may arrest scapegoats if we do that. If somebodies DNA does not match then they are not suspects.

Well if the RTP investigation followed his words of advice then we can see one of the major flaws of this case right there.

[JLCrab]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

[thailandchilli]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

[JLCrab]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

If the 2 accused are indeed innocent I hope they can do better than present a case that even leaves themselves confused.

[jdinasia]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

Oh? So the defense is leaking information via Facebook? Mind you, not the Facebook page of the defense ; but somebody "very close to the defense team"...

Keep going in those circles...

[thailandchilli]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

Oh? So the defense is leaking information via Facebook? Mind you, not the Facebook page of the defense ; but somebody "very close to the defense team"...

Keep going in those circles...

Not particularly help full or constructive post. Leaking information....oh dear god forbid eh

[boomerangutang]

30 weeks since the crime. 13 1/2 weeks before the trial begins. Thai justice is re-defining the phrase 'glacial pace.'

Still zilch from the Brits. Even when the verdict is read, Sept 26 (over 1 year since crime), there will likely be appeals. All the while, the defendants are stuck behind bars with no hope for bail. How long do appeals processes take in Thailand? .....years? All the while, most of us posting herein think the wrong people are being held. But not to worry, the Thai PM said the police are doing a great job, doing everything right. "reading from the same book (How To Investigate a Crime) as the British" ...uh uh, great, very comforting. Thanks Mr self-appointed PM, but somehow I don't feel all warm and fuzzy inside, when hearing those words.

[jdinasia]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

Oh? So the defense is leaking information via Facebook? Mind you, not the Facebook page of the defense ; but somebody "very close to the defense team"...

Keep going in those circles...

Not particularly help full or constructive post. Leaking information....oh dear god forbid eh

You wanted me to stick to the social media question earlier.

This claim is a good example. A non-verifiable claim on an unofficial social media page.

[thailandchilli]

Yes and you may notice I had already qualified it when I said that "if this account is true" please pay attention.

[boomerangutang]

A non-verifiable claim on an unofficial social media page.

Are there now official and unofficial media pages? The social media mule is on the ground - are you still beating it?

Social media, Thai-Visa included, is a means where all sorts of people can discuss things. Some are pure opinions, some are facts, some is nonsense, some is ranting, some are tidbits put forth by experts in the field being discussed. In other words, all sorts of things.

If your 13 yr old daughter went missing some dark and stormy night, there might be a clue on social media to her whereabouts. Social media has potentially millions of people with eyes and ears and minds. The local police station might have four people.

No one is saying social media has all the answers or that everything posted on social media is gospel. Instead, some of what's posted on the media may have credence. Re; to the KT crime, there have been some interesting postings on SM which may prove to be true. If they incriminate the B2, so be it. If they incriminate Nomsod or Mon, or any of their associates, so be it. I'm open minded and sincerely want the real culprits tried. If found guilty (in fair court proceedings), I want to see the full weight of punishment put upon them. If that happens to the B2, so be it.

[thailandchilli]

A non-verifiable claim on an unofficial social media page.

Are there now official and unofficial media pages? The social media mule is on the ground - are you still beating it?

Social media, Thai-Visa included, is a means where all sorts of people can discuss things. Some are pure opinions, some are facts, some is nonsense, some is ranting, some are tidbits put forth by experts in the field being discussed. In other words, all sorts of things.

If your 13 yr old daughter went missing some dark and stormy night, there might be a clue on social media to her whereabouts. Social media has potentially millions of people with eyes and ears and minds. The local police station might have four people.

No one is saying social media has all the answers or that everything posted on social media is gospel. Instead, some of what's posted on the media may have credence. Re; to the KT crime, there have been some interesting postings on SM which may prove to be true. If they incriminate the B2, so be it. If they incriminate Nomsod or Mon, or any of their associates, so be it. I'm open minded and sincerely want the real culprits tried. If found guilty (in fair court proceedings), I want to see the full weight of punishment put upon them. If that happens to the B2, so be it.

Its the RTP that needs to learn something from this, not social media. Blaming social media when you are at fault because of uprofessional police statements is a little primitive. A full working Social Media Policy guide should be created for the RTP to avoid such a shambolic investigation and limit statements to just one central person.

Social Media, Police Culture and the Koh Tao Murders

http://www.cgmoore.com/blog/view.asp?id=792

In developed countries social media is harnessed as a positive tool not something to be scared about. Not so in Thailand apparently

Social-Networking Tools Help Find Missing Children

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/03/30/social-networking-tools-help-missing-children/

Oh wait, so the RTP does harness social media when it suits them: Tourist Thief Struck in Phuket, Nabbed by Social Media in Songkhla cant link to this one but its in Phuketwan dated 20th March 2015

[IslandLover]

thailandchilli, on 29 Mar 2015 - 16:50, said:

boomerangutang, on 29 Mar 2015 - 16:05, said:

jdinasia, on 29 Mar 2015 - 14:48, said:

A non-verifiable claim on an unofficial social media page.

Are there now official and unofficial media pages? The social media mule is on the ground - are you still beating it?

Social media, Thai-Visa included, is a means where all sorts of people can discuss things. Some are pure opinions, some are facts, some is nonsense, some is ranting, some are tidbits put forth by experts in the field being discussed. In other words, all sorts of things.

If your 13 yr old daughter went missing some dark and stormy night, there might be a clue on social media to her whereabouts. Social media has potentially millions of people with eyes and ears and minds. The local police station might have four people.

No one is saying social media has all the answers or that everything posted on social media is gospel. Instead, some of what's posted on the media may have credence. Re; to the KT crime, there have been some interesting postings on SM which may prove to be true. If they incriminate the B2, so be it. If they incriminate Nomsod or Mon, or any of their associates, so be it. I'm open minded and sincerely want the real culprits tried. If found guilty (in fair court proceedings), I want to see the full weight of punishment put upon them. If that happens to the B2, so be it.

Its the RTP that needs to learn something from this, not social media. Blaming social media when you are at fault because of uprofessional police statements is a little primitive. A full working Social Media Policy guide should be created for the RTP to avoid such a shambolic investigation and limit statements to just one central person.

Social Media, Police Culture and the Koh Tao Murders

http://www.cgmoore.com/blog/view.asp?id=792

In developed countries social media is harnessed as a positive tool not something to be scared about. Not so in Thailand apparently

Social-Networking Tools Help Find Missing Children

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/03/30/social-networking-tools-help-missing-children/

Oh wait, so the RTP does harness social media when it suits them: Tourist Thief Struck in Phuket, Nabbed by Social Media in Songkhla cant link to this one but its in Phuketwan dated 20th March 2015

For the Thai authorities to slate Social Media is hypocritical. Wasn't it those very authorities who posted graphic pictures of the bodies of Hannah and David on social media in the first place? It seems it's OK for some to use social media when it suits their purposes. In the western world, investigative journalists on national newspapers now use facebook and twitter extensively when researching their stories. Do not underestimate the power of social media in the 21st century.

[berybert]

I have said it before and I will say it again. Why do people use social media to tell people not to use social media ?

[boomerangutang]

I have said it before and I will say it again. Why do people use social media to tell people not to use social media ?

Same sort of reason top gov't leaders keep telling people they won't tolerate graft while they themselves are taking bribes. Or why fathers harangue their kids not to smoke cigs, while puffing on a cig.

...or why some posters herein tell everyone not to post - out of respect for the victims' families - while they themselves post feverishly.

Edited March 30, 2015 by boomerangutang

[stephenterry]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

Yes, the B2 have made contradictory statements, pre-trial. From a pragmatic POV, I suggest self-preservation while incarcerated takes priority, and they would have used the above statement. In other words, 'we know nothing about the murders, we were drunk'.

All B/S, IMO, but it keeps them safe until the trial.

Again, IMO, the pre-trial judge was bang out of order when he asked them if they knew who committed the crimes. <deleted> does he expect them to say? A gang of Thai thugs who are roaming the island with mates in the Samui prison?

Other statements:

What about the swimming near the AC bar where the guitar and clothes were stolen? Contradictory to the above?

What about the statement 'we think the real murderer has left the island'. Contradictory?

And no better if Nomsod was in the dock. As many contradictory statements emanating from him that tests credibility.

All in all, a right can of worms.

[JLCrab]

It seems to me if the 2 accused had any credible information as to others who may have been responsible for these crimes, there in Court sitting before a Judge in a preliminary hearing as to whether this whole matter should be brought to full trial proceedings would have been a splendid time to divulge such information. Then maybe there might have been sufficient cause for the Judge to decide that the matter of a full trial was in sufficient doubt.

Edited March 30, 2015 by JLCrab

[stephenterry]

It seems to me if the 2 accused had any credible information as to others who may have been responsible for these crimes, there in Court sitting before a Judge in a preliminary hearing as to whether this whole matter should be brought to full trial proceedings would have been a splendid time to divulge such information. Then maybe there might have been sufficient cause for the Judge to decide that the matter of a full trial was in sufficient doubt.

The very fact that the prosecution brought this case to pre-trial is he considers there is enough evidence to convict - and I'm pretty sure the judge would see it that way, also - whatever the accused said.

And, on a risk basis, where the downside is an early grave, I don't blame the B2 for waiting for a better opportunity to tell their side of the story.

[AleG]

I have said it before and I will say it again. Why do people use social media to tell people not to use social media ?

Same sort of reason top gov't leaders keep telling people they won't tolerate graft while they themselves are taking bribes. Or why fathers harangue their kids not to smoke cigs, while puffing on a cig.

...or why some posters herein tell everyone not to post - out of respect for the victims' families - while they themselves post feverishly.

Nobody is telling anyone not to use social media or post here, what the families said, and what those people, have said is that people have been peddling wild, baseless BS about this case that has caused damage to the families of the victims, to the investigation of the crime and the court proceedings (not to mention the slew of defamatory accusations against anyone that doesn't buy the conspiracies).

[AleG]

From the above: I do not for one moment believe the B2 are solely responsible for this crime, but I also do believe they know something about it, have information or may even be involved in some way.

So the two accused may have lied to the judge at the preliminary hearing when asked if they had any information as to who may have committed these crimes.

I don't know, possibly or maybe thats the route they are taking? I read yesterday on a facebook page the owner of which is very close to the defense team that they are saying they left the beach and were back sleeping at 2.30am. If that account is true and is used in court then I guess that's exactly what they'll be saying.

As I said, confusion and contradictions are currently present on both sides

Yes, the B2 have made contradictory statements, pre-trial. From a pragmatic POV, I suggest self-preservation while incarcerated takes priority, and they would have used the above statement. In other words, 'we know nothing about the murders, we were drunk'.

All B/S, IMO, but it keeps them safe until the trial.

Again, IMO, the pre-trial judge was bang out of order when he asked them if they knew who committed the crimes. <deleted> does he expect them to say? A gang of Thai thugs who are roaming the island with mates in the Samui prison?

Other statements:

What about the swimming near the AC bar where the guitar and clothes were stolen? Contradictory to the above?

What about the statement 'we think the real murderer has left the island'. Contradictory?

And no better if Nomsod was in the dock. As many contradictory statements emanating from him that tests credibility.

All in all, a right can of worms.

"Again, IMO, the pre-trial judge was bang out of order when he asked them if they knew who committed the crimes. <deleted> does he expect them to say?"

No, the judge was not out of order, what makes you think that? They should have said, this and that person are the real killers and we want to give testimony in exchange of protection.

So now the real murderers are a "gang of Thai thugs who are roaming the island with mates in the Samui prison" that are waiting until after the two Burmese spill the beans to kill them. Right... no sale.

[berybert]

I have said it before and I will say it again. Why do people use social media to tell people not to use social media ?

Same sort of reason top gov't leaders keep telling people they won't tolerate graft while they themselves are taking bribes. Or why fathers harangue their kids not to smoke cigs, while puffing on a cig.

...or why some posters herein tell everyone not to post - out of respect for the victims' families - while they themselves post feverishly.

Nobody is telling anyone not to use social media or post here, what the families said, and what those people, have said is that people have been peddling wild, baseless BS about this case that has caused damage to the families of the victims, to the investigation of the crime and the court proceedings (not to mention the slew of defamatory accusations against anyone that doesn't buy the conspiracies).

Baseless BS is what the police did when they told the world they had found Hannah's phone behind the Burmese residence. Social media helped them to get it right. So rather than damage, it fixed.

Now are you also telling us the case was pushed back as not having enough evidence 3 or 4 times was also the fault of social media ?

[fritzzz25]