Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[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.

"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.

Maybe a plea bargaining is in place in your country, but as far as protection goes, here only money matters. My example is a rhetoric question, but perhaps my point has gone over your head. And, yes, there is always the risk of retribution, whoever spills the beans.

[JLCrab]

What point?

[stephenterry]

What point?

Tune into Fox Action movies. They're showing 'The Rock' this week starring Sean Connery and Nicholas Cage. SC, at one point (describing their predicament of choosing whether being killed by chemical gas or a bunch of marines) says, 'caught between a rock and a hard place'.

I'm sure you can take it from there, Jake.

[JLCrab]

What point?

Tune into Fox Action movies. They're showing 'The Rock' this week starring Sean Connery and Nicholas Cage. SC, at one point (describing their predicament of choosing whether being killed by chemical gas or a bunch of marines) says, 'caught between a rock and a hard place'.

I'm sure you can take it from there, Jake.

Tune what in?

[T_Dog]

Even Thai folks don't believe those two Burmese men did it. They had the culprits in the early stages, but money talks in Thailand. The taxi driver that was beaten for testimony deserves an award for truth! Anyone know whatever happened to him?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/thai-beach-murders-burmese-suspects-4641123

[boomerangutang]

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.

"it seems to me....." speculating are you? I thought AleG didn't want any speculation, and kept telling everyone to show facts and sources for everything they said.

Yes, we have the benefit of sitting back in our comfy chairs and taking tubs of time deciding what we might say in the same circumstance, facing execution, standing before a Thai judge who represents the entire taxpayer-paid establishment which includes prosecutors, RTP, The Headman, bureaucrats and the power brokers in Bangkok.

On the other side, here's what the defendants represent: Young migrant workers of questionable legality, dirt poor, probably uneducated (though their letters to Aung Saung Suu Chi looked rather well written), lower than the lowest rung of Thai society.

I completely understand their response to the judge's question, given the circumstances. If they lied a bit by saying they don't know anything, that's completely understandable given the lopsided dynamics of the situation.

What's the alternative? Telling what they know at the prelim hearing? There are several reasons why that would not be good for their defense nor good for their well being (they could be killed, for fingering VIP's, for example).

Hopefully, during the trial, they will feel freer to speak their minds.

[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.

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).

Most of what you call "wild, baseless BS about this case" are serious doubts most of us have about the investigation. Most of those doubts are backed by evidence. Some of the evidence is questionable, some is solid. Similarly, some of the evidence against the B2 is questionable and/or contrived (Hannah's phone found behind their residence, for example).

There are 2 other sets of parents who have victims involved in this case. I presume all four sets of parents seek the full truth about what happened that night. Hannah's and David's parents haven't called anything "wild and baseless BS" as far as I know. If they've said that, please provide a link.

Look at this Nation article dated 9 days after the crime. During the time Panya was leading the investigation.

Here's an excerpt of the first few sentences:

"Police seeking former village headman's son who fled island

Police are looking for the son of a former Koh Tao village headman in their pursuit of the killers of two British backpackers on the night of September 14, after learning that the man left the island the following morning.

A police source said the man they want to find landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Police say they want to interrogate him first."

It's clear, 9 days after the crime, police were looking for the Headman's son. They also surmise the son landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Where would he disappear to? Bangkok, of course, ....so he could try and and distance himself from the crime. Before that, police announce "...after learning the man (Nomsod) left the island the following morning." They probably said 'the following morning' because they were thinking the crime took place on the night of the 14th (as AleG thought, incorrectly, in an earlier post). I won't say it's a conspiracy between AleG and the cops (as jdinasia might say), but instead call it an oversight.

Even when allowing for such mistakes (thinking early morning of the 15th is the same as the night of the 14th), it still indicates the son was presumed to have left the island after the crime. It also dovetails with what Nomsod's father alluded to in the statement he made (my son left this morning for university), moments before he realized he shouldn't have said it.

[jimmybkk]

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.

Trick question, right? I seem to recall you and AleG were going to great lengths to assure us that he was promoted on the 12th September. I even recall you making some historic reference to an army general back in 2010 and military reshuffles to prove your point regarding the timing. Then, when pressed for a link to validate your assertion you suggested the announcement could be found in the Phuketwan or BP around the 12th September which proved to be a complete red herring and a waste of time. Meanwhile AleG was busy trying to convince anyone who would listen that a report from the 12th September that named a few police officers being promoted was proof in itself of K. Panya's promotion, despite his name appearing nowhere in the report. What kind of logic is that? Go figure, right...?

When pressed further to simply find the report of his promotion and advise on the date and name of the publication it appeared in you eventually made a claim that it was announced in the Royal Gazette on the 18th September. Again, it's a publication which is in Thai and so you cannot post a link to the relevant part, and nor can most TV members actually read it. I don't know if anyone bothered to read the entire publication or to have it read for them by someone who can read Thai, but I certainly didn't so I guess I will have to take your word for it that it did appear then, which to be honest, given your track record, is an undertaking I approach with extreme trepidation. Then I believe the first reports of K. Panya's promotion were revealed in the English language press around the 30th September, with The Nation reporting it on the 2nd October. Now, that's around 18-20 days after the date you stated it could be found in the Phuketwan or Bangkok Post. Is that kind of margin of error typical for you?

So anyway, your post is somewhat ambiguous regarding the admission you're waiting for - which date are you proposing as the date of his promotion? 12th September? 18th September? The date he was instructed to hand over the reigns of the investigation to his successor? (I don't know that date, so if you know it I'd be grateful if you could post a link), or the date he relocated and sat himself down behind his new desk at HQ in BKK? (I also don't know that date, so once again, please post the link if you do).

Oh and by the way, I think I am actually ahead of you in the queue because I am STILL waiting for you to provide the links to those daily reports from past murder trials...

[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).

Most of what you call "wild, baseless BS about this case" are serious doubts most of us have about the investigation. Most of those doubts are backed by evidence. Some of the evidence is questionable, some is solid. Similarly, some of the evidence against the B2 is questionable and/or contrived (Hannah's phone found behind their residence, for example).

There are 2 other sets of parents who have victims involved in this case. I presume all four sets of parents seek the full truth about what happened that night. Hannah's and David's parents haven't called anything "wild and baseless BS" as far as I know. If they've said that, please provide a link.

Look at this Nation article dated 9 days after the crime. During the time Panya was leading the investigation.

Here's an excerpt of the first few sentences:

"Police seeking former village headman's son who fled island

Police are looking for the son of a former Koh Tao village headman in their pursuit of the killers of two British backpackers on the night of September 14, after learning that the man left the island the following morning.

A police source said the man they want to find landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Police say they want to interrogate him first."

It's clear, 9 days after the crime, police were looking for the Headman's son. They also surmise the son landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Where would he disappear to? Bangkok, of course, ....so he could try and and distance himself from the crime. Before that, police announce "...after learning the man (Nomsod) left the island the following morning." They probably said 'the following morning' because they were thinking the crime took place on the night of the 14th (as AleG thought, incorrectly, in an earlier post). I won't say it's a conspiracy between AleG and the cops (as jdinasia might say), but instead call it an oversight.

Even when allowing for such mistakes (thinking early morning of the 15th is the same as the night of the 14th), it still indicates the son was presumed to have left the island after the crime. It also dovetails with what Nomsod's father alluded to in the statement he made (my son left this morning for university), moments before he realized he shouldn't have said it.

No, they didn't say "wild and baseless BS", I said it, if I would had been quoting them verbatim I would have used quotation marks.

This is what the parents said:

"In the meantime however, we ask that the speculative theories circulating on social media are not taken as fact. These interpretations are based on incomplete evidence and substantial conjecture.

The increasing sensationalism of this story in the media is emotionally hurtful to us and appears to be wide of the mark."

Paraphrasing, sensational, speculative theories based on incomplete evidence and substantial conjecture that are wide of the mark; that is a polite way of saying wild, baseless BS.

"Police seeking former village headman's son who fled island

Police are looking for the son of a former Koh Tao village headman in their pursuit of the killers of two British backpackers on the night of September 14, after learning that the man left the island the following morning.

A police source said the man they want to find landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Police say they want to interrogate him first."

Yes, and then what happened? What did the police said after they found him and he presented documentation proving he was in Bangkok at that time? You are stuck in time since September 23, 2014.

I'll help you to get up to speed, this is what happened after they found Nomsod:

"police questioned Mr. Warot and established that he was not on the island when the murder took place, deputy police chief Pol.Gen. Ake Angsananond said yesterday. Therefore, he is no longer being treated as a potential suspect, Pol.Gen. Ake said."

Now why would you let that out? What happened with caring for the Truth, the whole Truth?

"It also dovetails with what Nomsod's father alluded to in the statement he made (my son left this morning for university), moments before he realized he shouldn't have said it."

Now, how about you provide a link for that? The actual quote, not your mind reading act that lets you know even what he was thinking through space and time.

You won't, because he didn't say that.

While you are at it also provide a link to Hanna's phone being the one found behind the lodgings.

[rockingrobin]

Aleg

The quotes you allude to regarding Nomsod returning to uni and Hannahs phone have already been posted

[fritzzz25]

Is someone grasping at straws now??

[balo]

Congratulation reaching 1000 posts in this thread , keep it up while the rest of us are waiting for the trial.

[AleG]

Aleg

The quotes you allude to regarding Nomsod returning to uni and Hannahs phone have already been posted

No they haven't, where is a quote from the father saying saying that his son left on the morning of the murders? Or as boomerangutang claimed he said "my son left this morning for university".

I would expect the people that have obsessed over the issue to have it at their fingertips, so where did he say "my son left this morning for university"?

Where is a cite saying that the phone found behind the lodgings of the Burmese men was Hanna's phone? Not the one time during one press meeting that one policeman said it was Hanna's phone, and next time when asked about it admitted the mistake and said it was Miller's; what I want is a substantiation that it was Hanna's actual phone the one found there.

This keeps being wheeled out to suggest a conspiracy, that the police took her phone, planted it there and then announced the discovery to frame up the Burmese. Now, that phone near the lodgings was a different model, a different color and was smashed, not to mention that two witnesses said it was given to them by the two accused; furthermore Hanna's phone was returned to her family.

[rockingrobin]

Aleg

The quotes you want are in the public domain

On a personal issue I find your constant demands for proof and links quite tiresome, it should be remembered that I have no obligation to provide or prove anything for you.

[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.

"it seems to me....." speculating are you? I thought AleG didn't want any speculation, and kept telling everyone to show facts and sources for everything they said.

Yes, we have the benefit of sitting back in our comfy chairs and taking tubs of time deciding what we might say in the same circumstance, facing execution, standing before a Thai judge who represents the entire taxpayer-paid establishment which includes prosecutors, RTP, The Headman, bureaucrats and the power brokers in Bangkok.

On the other side, here's what the defendants represent: Young migrant workers of questionable legality, dirt poor, probably uneducated (though their letters to Aung Saung Suu Chi looked rather well written), lower than the lowest rung of Thai society.

I completely understand their response to the judge's question, given the circumstances. If they lied a bit by saying they don't know anything, that's completely understandable given the lopsided dynamics of the situation.

What's the alternative? Telling what they know at the prelim hearing? There are several reasons why that would not be good for their defense nor good for their well being (they could be killed, for fingering VIP's, for example).

Hopefully, during the trial, they will feel freer to speak their minds.

From the above: I completely understand their response to the judge's question, given the circumstances. Really? -- the circumstances may be that they may have given that response because they genuinely do not know what happened, they may have given that response because they know what happened and resorted to subterfuge because of strategic reasons as to when to divulge such knowledge, or they may have answered that way because they know who committed those crimes : They did it themselves.

And if they have the goods to put the REAL killers behind bars, then most likely the REAL killers know that so what are the REAL killers waiting for to make sure that they never get to sing like canaries?

[catsanddogs]

Aleg

The quotes you allude to regarding Nomsod returning to uni and Hannahs phone have already been posted

No they haven't, where is a quote from the father saying saying that his son left on the morning of the murders? Or as boomerangutang claimed he said "my son left this morning for university".

I would expect the people that have obsessed over the issue to have it at their fingertips, so where did he say "my son left this morning for university"?

Where is a cite saying that the phone found behind the lodgings of the Burmese men was Hanna's phone? Not the one time during one press meeting that one policeman said it was Hanna's phone, and next time when asked about it admitted the mistake and said it was Miller's; what I want is a substantiation that it was Hanna's actual phone the one found there.

This keeps being wheeled out to suggest a conspiracy, that the police took her phone, planted it there and then announced the discovery to frame up the Burmese. Now, that phone near the lodgings was a different model, a different color and was smashed, not to mention that two witnesses said it was given to them by the two accused; furthermore Hanna's phone was returned to her family.

A post of desperation, frustration and anger. Hope the answers you are seeking come soon for you.

[Eirene]

I have wondered if this incident with the boat had any bearing on a boat leaving in the early morning.

"Some fishermen fishing off Kanom district in Nakhon Si Thammarat province alerted police that they found a Thai man on a speedboat named "Little Duck" speeding south from Koh Pha Ngan. The man stopped by and asked for directions to Naiprao Island in the district. But he changed direction to Pakpanang district in the same province after his boat encountered a marine police boat on Naiprao beach." http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Koh-Tao-police-fail-another-day-30243890.html

There is also the cave folks on Koh Samui that could have left early as well. Was there a report of a boat that burned up and sank? Might be confusing this with another case.

ETA : sorry messed up quote:

boomerangutang, on 30 Mar 2015 - 05:24, said:

Most of what you call "wild, baseless BS about this case" are serious doubts most of us have about the investigation. Most of those doubts are backed by evidence. Some of the evidence is questionable, some is solid. Similarly, some of the evidence against the B2 is questionable and/or contrived (Hannah's phone found behind their residence, for example).

There are 2 other sets of parents who have victims involved in this case. I presume all four sets of parents seek the full truth about what happened that night. Hannah's and David's parents haven't called anything "wild and baseless BS" as far as I know. If they've said that, please provide a link.

Look at this Nation article dated 9 days after the crime. During the time Panya was leading the investigation.
Here's an excerpt of the first few sentences:

"Police seeking former village headman's son who fled island

Police are looking for the son of a former Koh Tao village headman in their pursuit of the killers of two British backpackers on the night of September 14, after learning that the man left the island the following morning.

A police source said the man they want to find landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Police say they want to interrogate him first."

It's clear, 9 days after the crime, police were looking for the Headman's son. They also surmise the son landed on the Surat Thani coast and disappeared. Where would he disappear to? Bangkok, of course, ....so he could try and and distance himself from the crime. Before that, police announce "...after learning the man (Nomsod) left the island the following morning." They probably said 'the following morning' because they were thinking the crime took place on the night of the 14th (as AleG thought, incorrectly, in an earlier post). I won't say it's a conspiracy between AleG and the cops (as jdinasia might say), but instead call it an oversight.

Even when allowing for such mistakes (thinking early morning of the 15th is the same as the night of the 14th), it still indicates the son was presumed to have left the island after the crime. It also dovetails with what Nomsod's father alluded to in the statement he made (my son left this morning for university), moments before he realized he shouldn't have said it.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Eirene

[boomerangutang]

Thanks Eirene for finding that article and reminding us (those of us seeking the unvarnished truth of what really happened) of some items of interest. . . .

Police have held one man, however, identified as Lerpong Suksomboon, an attendant on a speedboat for tourists between Koh Samui and Koh Tao. He was detained after residents alerted police that he was hiding in a cave on Koh Samui - and came out from time to time and asked for food.

Under influence of drugs

Police on Sunday night questioned Lerpong but he appeared to be under the influence of drugs. He reportedly kept saying he did not beat to death the tourists. Police collected samples of his hair and fingernails for DNA tests at the Institute of Forensic Medicine of Police General Hospital.

Police yesterday took two of his friends into custody; one was also high on drugs and the other, identified as Jom, is the driver of a long-tail boat. Police learnt that they had been on Koh Tao on the day of the murder.

Some fishermen fishing off Kanom district in Nakhon Si Thammarat province alerted police that they found a Thai man on a speedboat named "Little Duck" speeding south from Koh Pha Ngan. The man stopped by and asked for directions to Naiprao Island in the district. But he changed direction to Pakpanang district in the same province after his boat encountered a marine police boat on Naiprao beach.

source: Nation newspaper, 8 days after crime

Putting some of those speedboat operators on the stand at the trial could prove to be interesting. However, Nomsod is not a defendant,So the prosecution and judges can bar any appearance by island speedboat drives - by saying they're immaterial - as they don't add anything to incriminating the B2.

Just wonderin': if police start to question a man, and he's too drugged out to give coherent answers, do police then let him go forever? ....or do they come back and question him again, when he's not so drugged-out? Nothing would surprise me about RTP tactics in this case.

[boomerangutang]

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.

"it seems to me....." speculating are you? I thought AleG didn't want any speculation, and kept telling everyone to show facts and sources for everything they said.

Yes, we have the benefit of sitting back in our comfy chairs and taking tubs of time deciding what we might say in the same circumstance, facing execution, standing before a Thai judge who represents the entire taxpayer-paid establishment which includes prosecutors, RTP, The Headman, bureaucrats and the power brokers in Bangkok.

On the other side, here's what the defendants represent: Young migrant workers of questionable legality, dirt poor, probably uneducated (though their letters to Aung Saung Suu Chi looked rather well written), lower than the lowest rung of Thai society.

I completely understand their response to the judge's question, given the circumstances. If they lied a bit by saying they don't know anything, that's completely understandable given the lopsided dynamics of the situation.

What's the alternative? Telling what they know at the prelim hearing? There are several reasons why that would not be good for their defense nor good for their well being (they could be killed, for fingering VIP's, for example).

Hopefully, during the trial, they will feel freer to speak their minds.

From the above: I completely understand their response to the judge's question, given the circumstances. Really? -- the circumstances may be that they may have given that response because they genuinely do not know what happened, they may have given that response because they know what happened and resorted to subterfuge because of strategic reasons as to when to divulge such knowledge, or they may have answered that way because they know who committed those crimes : They did it themselves.

And if they have the goods to put the REAL killers behind bars, then most likely the REAL killers know that so what are the REAL killers waiting for to make sure that they never get to sing like canaries?

JLCrab, you may want to remind yourself of the meaning of the word 'speculation.' You layer speculations upon speculations and get a multi-layered sandwich that Dagwood would be impressed by. And you may want to consider a sideline career - writing pulp fiction.

[JLCrab]

Thank you but I will speculate all I want as to the choice of procedural tactics by either the Prosecution or the Defense. As for pulp fiction, there are already enough frustrated authors that choose to expound on this website where at least they know someone will read what they choose to write herein.

Edited March 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[boomerangutang]

November 10, 2014L

“Thailand’s police chief General Somyot Poompanmoung – traveled to Koh Tao to oversee the investigation. He said the victims had been tested for drugs but he refused to disclose the results ‘out of respect for the family’.”

Police respect the family (victims' families) enough to not disclose results of drug tests ....but don't respect them enough to not show photos of dead bodies.

Results of drug tests could provide clues to solving the case. For example, if it's shown that Hannah was 'slipped a mickey' (clandestinely given a date-rape drug), then it would behoove police to find who did that and when. Again, it's a situation where police may have that info, but want to stuff it because it implicates people they want to shield from scrutiny. Declining to divulge drug info is another way of hiding evidence. Add that to not taking CCTV from beach bars, and a whole bunch of other things (phone records, bloody clothes) cops either didn't look for, or are hiding.

Discerning drugs in Brit murder victims is part of the job description of the British Coroner, but we've come to expect no data from them. As for comparing notes, between what the Thai investigators and Brit investigators find: don't expect much, as Thai officials have already announced there are things they won't share with the Brits.

[boomerangutang]

Thank you but I will speculate all I want as to the choice of procedural tactics by either the Prosecution or the Defense. As for pulp fiction, there are already enough frustrated authors that choose to expound on this website where at least they know someone will read what they choose to write herein.

Are you alluding to me as being one of the 'frustrated authors.' Ok, I'll accept that. However, I did write a several-page overview of the botched investigation. I can't put the internet link here because it would be called self-promotion (or something like that). However, if you send me a message requesting the printed paper, plus 6.50 baht (4 baht postage, 1 baht for paper, 1 baht for envelope, and 50 satang profit) .....I'll send it to you.

[JLCrab]

I wasn't alluding to anyone in particular. I have never speculated as to whom may be responsible for these crimes. I have said it may be those who are accused and will stand trial in a few months. it may be those who everyone who knows who did it did, or it may be a party or parties that have so far never been mentioned by the RTP, the Media, social media, or on these pages.

BTW thanks for the author but when they find the taxi driver in Chumphon who took a guy off the speedboat to Bangkok early on you know what day I'll be more likely to want to read what is on here your already proven verbosity.

Edited March 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[thailandchilli]

November 10, 2014L

“Thailand’s police chief General Somyot Poompanmoung – traveled to Koh Tao to oversee the investigation. He said the victims had been tested for drugs but he refused to disclose the results ‘out of respect for the family’.”

Police respect the family (victims' families) enough to not disclose results of drug tests ....but don't respect them enough to not show photos of dead bodies.

Results of drug tests could provide clues to solving the case. For example, if it's shown that Hannah was 'slipped a mickey' (clandestinely given a date-rape drug), then it would behoove police to find who did that and when. Again, it's a situation where police may have that info, but want to stuff it because it implicates people they want to shield from scrutiny. Declining to divulge drug info is another way of hiding evidence. Add that to not taking CCTV from beach bars, and a whole bunch of other things (phone records, bloody clothes) cops either didn't look for, or are hiding.

Discerning drugs in Brit murder victims is part of the job description of the British Coroner, but we've come to expect no data from them. As for comparing notes, between what the Thai investigators and Brit investigators find: don't expect much, as Thai officials have already announced there are things they won't share with the Brits.

"He said the victims had been tested for drugs but refused to disclose the results 'out of respect for the families'

This statement has always disturbed me, it was reported that the toxicology tests came back clean after the autposy, which one would assume means no drugs found in bodies. Why would the top cop then make such a remark knowing that this statement would lead people to believe that there were drugs found? What was his motive for this? Of were the toxicology reports incorrect?

Another massive contradiction that can only lead to suspicion and speculation

[stephenterry]

JLC said: And if they have the goods to put the REAL killers behind bars, then most likely the REAL killers know that so what are the REAL killers waiting for to make sure that they never get to sing like canaries?

Not very well thought out. If the real killers bump off the B2, everyone would know that the real killers are still at large. What the real killers are hoping is that the B2 are found guilty.

[stephenterry]

November 10, 2014L

“Thailand’s police chief General Somyot Poompanmoung – traveled to Koh Tao to oversee the investigation. He said the victims had been tested for drugs but he refused to disclose the results ‘out of respect for the family’.”

Police respect the family (victims' families) enough to not disclose results of drug tests ....but don't respect them enough to not show photos of dead bodies.

Results of drug tests could provide clues to solving the case. For example, if it's shown that Hannah was 'slipped a mickey' (clandestinely given a date-rape drug), then it would behoove police to find who did that and when. Again, it's a situation where police may have that info, but want to stuff it because it implicates people they want to shield from scrutiny. Declining to divulge drug info is another way of hiding evidence. Add that to not taking CCTV from beach bars, and a whole bunch of other things (phone records, bloody clothes) cops either didn't look for, or are hiding.

Discerning drugs in Brit murder victims is part of the job description of the British Coroner, but we've come to expect no data from them. As for comparing notes, between what the Thai investigators and Brit investigators find: don't expect much, as Thai officials have already announced there are things they won't share with the Brits.

"He said the victims had been tested for drugs but refused to disclose the results 'out of respect for the families'

This statement has always disturbed me, it was reported that the toxicology tests came back clean after the autposy, which one would assume means no drugs found in bodies. Why would the top cop then make such a remark knowing that this statement would lead people to believe that there were drugs found? What was his motive for this? Of were the toxicology reports incorrect?

Another massive contradiction that can only lead to suspicion and speculation

More probable is the amount of alcohol in the blood - no doubt the top cop would not want to publicise the levels, so his statement is being diplomatic.

[JLCrab]

If the B2 and the defense had credible, demonstrable, corroborable information as to who committed these crimes, this whole thing may have never not gotten past the preliminary hearing so much of this discussion is moot point anyway.

[stephenterry]

If the B2 and the defense had credible, demonstrable, corroborable information as to who committed these crimes, this whole thing may have never not gotten past the preliminary hearing so much of this discussion is moot point anyway.

Possibly. However, I don't think either the prosecution or defence has - the prosecution are sticking to the B2 case, and the defence are not carrying out an independent investigation, are they? You need to be realistic, this is not a cut and dried case that's being acted out on a movie screen. The B2 possibly know or have heard on the migrant grapevine that so and so could have been involved -but if they weren't actually at the crime scene (which is what the defence will aim to prove) it's all hearsay.

And you are correct in your observation that there isn't a complete answer to these crimes - that's why this thread discussion has over 1000 posts

[JLCrab]

No comment for now except -- being a Yank -- thanks to you I now know that 'grass' can be a verb.

[AleG]

Aleg

The quotes you want are in the public domain

On a personal issue I find your constant demands for proof and links quite tiresome, it should be remembered that I have no obligation to provide or prove anything for you.

No, they are not in the public domain, just because you say so it doesn't make it so.

"On a personal issue I find your constant demands for proof and links quite tiresome"

Well, who wants facts to get on the way of a good story?

So you can't show where is the father quoted as saying his son left on the morning of the murders or that it was Hanna's actual phone the one behind the lodgings of the Burmese men. If you tried to find corroboration for that you know both things are not true, that is why you (and by that I mean rockingrobin and those that endorsed your post) are fine with just saying it's out there without actually substantiating it.

A post of desperation, frustration and anger. Hope the answers you are seeking come soon for you.

Desperation and frustration is to cling to a fantasy to avoid facing being wrong.

What Boomerangutang said is just not true, and it's not the first time his BS has been proven to not be true such as Nomsod being a suspect since the first week, him hiding from the police for a week, the course of the investigation changing after Panya's promotion, etc, etc...