Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[stephenterry]

I'll take it one stage further:-

Judge - do you know who killed the victims?

B2 - yes, mister x and mister y.

J - do you have any proof?

B2 - yes, we were eye witnesses.

J - so you were at, or close to, the crime scene?

B2 - yes.

J - except you said you wasn't there?

B2 - we were afraid.

J - Hmm, explain why your DNA matches that found on the female victim. (And that mister x and mister y have been cleared by the RTP as not matching the DNA found)

B2 - it's not ours. That's all we know.

etc. etc. etc.....

[boomerangutang]

JLC - try and embrace the concept that the B2 probably do not know who are the killers, let alone have iron-clad evidence to warrant their immediate release. At best, their 'knowledge' could be just hearsay. I'm sure the defence would aim to reinforce the scenario that would entail the B2 NOT being at the crime scene - which means contesting the DNA evidence procured by the prosecution.

That's what could make or break the case against them - not some spurious claim that mister X and mister Y committed murder.

Try to embrace the concept that at least one possible reason they responded as they did is that they were lying when they responded to the Judge's query (according to The Telegraph):

'“Did you kill them or didn’t you kill them?” the judge asked at one point, according to Mr Hall.'

I can't speak for ST, but yes, the B2 may have been lying. Does that blow you away, in that context?

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but if you want to tally up the number of lies bandied around in this investigation (by Headman's people, cops, etc.), you've got a lot of tallying. ....and we haven't even got to the trial yet.

[stephenterry]

JLC - try and embrace the concept that the B2 probably do not know who are the killers, let alone have iron-clad evidence to warrant their immediate release. At best, their 'knowledge' could be just hearsay. I'm sure the defence would aim to reinforce the scenario that would entail the B2 NOT being at the crime scene - which means contesting the DNA evidence procured by the prosecution.

That's what could make or break the case against them - not some spurious claim that mister X and mister Y committed murder.

Try to embrace the concept that at least one possible reason they responded as they did is that they were lying when they responded to the Judge's query (according to The Telegraph):

'“Did you kill them or didn’t you kill them?” the judge asked at one point, according to Mr Hall.'

They've already pleaded not guilty. It's up to the court to assess both the prosecution and defence's case to judge whether reasonable doubt exists or not. And to answer your direct quote, yes, it is possible they lied, and it is possible that they are telling the truth.

[JLCrab]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

[stephenterry]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

And my belated response to that is it's not clear-cut. Some elements of the prosecution case could be based on factual circumstantial evidence that points a finger at the B2. The B2, themselves, have made contradictory statements regarding their whereabouts that night. It even could be that no-one knows for a fact whether the B2 are complicit or, in no way complicit.

While they could be convenient scape-goats, there could also be a genuine belief that they could have been the real killers. That's what will be discussed in court at the trial.

As I keep repeating ad nauseum, the case will make or break on the DNA evidence (or, in the defence's case, lack of it).

[boomerangutang]

How do you explain DNA matches etc? Necrophilia is a long standing custom in our culture.

Whose culture are you representing?

[jdinasia]

There have been about 80 or 90 people who have commented on the murder threads over the last 6 months. There are 4 people who are 100% sure the Burmese are the killers and are prepared to listen to no one who disagree with them.

10 or 20 who don't have a view as to guilty or not.

50 or 60 who believe the police have the wrong people.

For me 3 of the 4 are desperate for the Burmese to be found guilty. One even would refuse to believe they didn't do it if found not guilty.

I do wonder why they need the Burmese to be found guilty. They don't just want them found guilty they need them to be found guilty.

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

[jdinasia]

How do you explain DNA matches etc? Necrophilia is a long standing custom in our culture.

Whose culture are you representing?

You are the one that speculated on that earlier.

[berybert]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

And my belated response to that is it's not clear-cut. Some elements of the prosecution case could be based on factual circumstantial evidence that points a finger at the B2. The B2, themselves, have made contradictory statements regarding their whereabouts that night. It even could be that no-one knows for a fact whether the B2 are complicit or, in no way complicit.

While they could be convenient scape-goats, there could also be a genuine belief that they could have been the real killers. That's what will be discussed in court at the trial.

As I keep repeating ad nauseum, the case will make or break on the DNA evidence (or, in the defence's case, lack of it).

The Burmese have made no statements that you can claim from where they could be accused of lying.

They get asked a question in Thai which is translated into Burmese then again into English.

The contradictory reports could be explained as bad translation.

[stephenterry]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

And my belated response to that is it's not clear-cut. Some elements of the prosecution case could be based on factual circumstantial evidence that points a finger at the B2. The B2, themselves, have made contradictory statements regarding their whereabouts that night. It even could be that no-one knows for a fact whether the B2 are complicit or, in no way complicit.

While they could be convenient scape-goats, there could also be a genuine belief that they could have been the real killers. That's what will be discussed in court at the trial.

As I keep repeating ad nauseum, the case will make or break on the DNA evidence (or, in the defence's case, lack of it).

The Burmese have made no statements that you can claim from where they could be accused of lying.

They get asked a question in Thai which is translated into Burmese then again into English.

The contradictory reports could be explained as bad translation.

See my post 30 March 11.26 am reposted below.

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.

[berybert]

There have been about 80 or 90 people who have commented on the murder threads over the last 6 months. There are 4 people who are 100% sure the Burmese are the killers and are prepared to listen to no one who disagree with them.

10 or 20 who don't have a view as to guilty or not.

50 or 60 who believe the police have the wrong people.

For me 3 of the 4 are desperate for the Burmese to be found guilty. One even would refuse to believe they didn't do it if found not guilty.

I do wonder why they need the Burmese to be found guilty. They don't just want them found guilty they need them to be found guilty.

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

You are at least a 1000% sure of guilt, maybe you have some information you would like to share with us to prove it.

Lets play a game, watch when someone mentions something like Hannah's phone or Davids phone. look to see who other than yourself, the posters who will shout out CT and ask for proof. Then when proof is giving .... You may have noticed one of the four has giving up using CT and now seems to have taken a liking to using BS instead.

As for JTJ he got so excited using the term 'semen found in the body' he no longer seems able to post. Stroke about getting so excited possibly.

So that's 3 of the four. The other one makes really stupid posts to make himself look clever. It aint working.

[berybert]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

And my belated response to that is it's not clear-cut. Some elements of the prosecution case could be based on factual circumstantial evidence that points a finger at the B2. The B2, themselves, have made contradictory statements regarding their whereabouts that night. It even could be that no-one knows for a fact whether the B2 are complicit or, in no way complicit.

While they could be convenient scape-goats, there could also be a genuine belief that they could have been the real killers. That's what will be discussed in court at the trial.

As I keep repeating ad nauseum, the case will make or break on the DNA evidence (or, in the defence's case, lack of it).

The Burmese have made no statements that you can claim from where they could be accused of lying.

They get asked a question in Thai which is translated into Burmese then again into English.

The contradictory reports could be explained as bad translation.

See my post 30 March 11.26 am reposted below.

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.

To believe what you have written Muang Muang should also be in the dock.

He stated the 2 were in bed when he got back from his girlfriends at 5am, which is the estimated time the crime took place.

How can they say they know who committed the crime when they were in bed ? If they were not in bed but were indeed at the crime scene then Muang Muang is lying.

Sorry I don't believe they were at the crime scene at all. Their clothes and guitar we can assume would have been stolen at the same time, guitar handing into the police, clothes not. So I don't believe any clothes were stolen. And one would imagine the key to their room would have been in one of the trouser pockets. How did they manage to get into their room with no key ? Did they wake any other friends to let them in ?

I do wonder why David was naked baring a sock yet Hannah was fully dressed. David was dragged into the sea to drown. It would have taken both of them to drag him into the water. And all the while Hannah sat on her own watching this go on and did nothing ?

[JLCrab]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

And my belated response to that is it's not clear-cut. Some elements of the prosecution case could be based on factual circumstantial evidence that points a finger at the B2. The B2, themselves, have made contradictory statements regarding their whereabouts that night. It even could be that no-one knows for a fact whether the B2 are complicit or, in no way complicit.

While they could be convenient scape-goats, there could also be a genuine belief that they could have been the real killers. That's what will be discussed in court at the trial.

As I keep repeating ad nauseum, the case will make or break on the DNA evidence (or, in the defence's case, lack of it).

As I keep repeating ad nauseum ... Truer words were never spoken.

[thailandchilli]

There have been about 80 or 90 people who have commented on the murder threads over the last 6 months. There are 4 people who are 100% sure the Burmese are the killers and are prepared to listen to no one who disagree with them.

10 or 20 who don't have a view as to guilty or not.

50 or 60 who believe the police have the wrong people.

For me 3 of the 4 are desperate for the Burmese to be found guilty. One even would refuse to believe they didn't do it if found not guilty.

I do wonder why they need the Burmese to be found guilty. They don't just want them found guilty they need them to be found guilty.

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

I think most people have seen your taunts and that of AleG as a sign of desperation. When you struggle to win a debate on the battlefield you resort to labeling, diversion, even swearing. But don't worry when we see that the rest of us know you've obviously lost the argument and have nothing else to use other than CT. B.S. or now the new one which by the way could easily be mirrored to you - Narcissism

[AleG]

A few more than 3 of 4. A couple of them, I could mention names, who haven't posted in awhile. And yes, fixation to that extent stinkof some sort of relationship with those who were prime suspects, but who were suddenly excused for the flimsiest of reasons. If there is a relationship (friend, family member, biz associate) it would be eye-opening if they would come clean, but that's not possible.

It's not possible because that is all in your imagination.

Interesting that AleG is so self-assured about his knowledge of the private lives of several posters herein.

Every time you have accused people of being in some way complicit or connected with your imaginary cover-up you have been told in no uncertain words that you are wrong.

Yet, you keep at it, it's one of those things that clearly demonstrates how, A) You don't care about the truth, and B ) you don't care about Justice; because if you did you wouldn't be spreading rumours and innuendo with the intention of besmirching and discrediting people.

[boomerangutang]

There have been about 80 or 90 people who have commented on the murder threads over the last 6 months. There are 4 people who are 100% sure the Burmese are the killers and are prepared to listen to no one who disagree with them.

10 or 20 who don't have a view as to guilty or not.

50 or 60 who believe the police have the wrong people.

For me 3 of the 4 are desperate for the Burmese to be found guilty. One even would refuse to believe they didn't do it if found not guilty.

I do wonder why they need the Burmese to be found guilty. They don't just want them found guilty they need them to be found guilty.

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

You are at least a 1000% sure of guilt, maybe you have some information you would like to share with us to prove it.

Lets play a game, watch when someone mentions something like Hannah's phone or Davids phone. look to see who other than yourself, the posters who will shout out CT and ask for proof. Then when proof is giving .... You may have noticed one of the four has giving up using CT and now seems to have taken a liking to using BS instead.

As for JTJ he got so excited using the term 'semen found in the body' he no longer seems able to post. Stroke about getting so excited possibly.

So that's 3 of the four. The other one makes really stupid posts to make himself look clever. It aint working.

I acknowledge passions can get lit when discussing this topic. There were two obvious victims to start, and now there are two others who may also be victims. However, I suggest you don't bait the police echoers, as it won't do anyone any good. It's like tossing a red rubber ball by a cat - she can't avoid lunging after it.

[AleG]

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

I think most people have seen your taunts and that of AleG as a sign of desperation. When you struggle to win a debate on the battlefield you resort to labeling, diversion, even swearing. But don't worry when we see that the rest of us know you've obviously lost the argument and have nothing else to use other than CT. B.S. or now the new one which by the way could easily be mirrored to you - Narcissism

Desperation is to declare yourself the winner by the sheer brilliance of your own self esteem.

When you are done with that you may want to try some facts, for example how come, in view of the speculation that Hanna's phone was planted, the phone found behind the lodgings of the two Burmese men was not the same model or color as Hanna's. Of course the actual forensic results from the phone, such as the data it contained and any fingerprints or whatnot, is something that will, probably, presented during the case.

But why wait for that when you can milk the mistake of one person saying "Hanna" instead of "David" during one press conference to support all sort of speculation?

Edited April 1, 2015 by AleG

[JLCrab]

And even if discussions are passionate about who has been or who might have been/should have been charged with these crimes, will it make any tangible difference when the trial starts this July?

[boomerangutang]

How do you explain DNA matches etc? Necrophilia is a long standing custom in our culture.

Whose culture are you representing?

You are the one that speculated on that earlier.

Yes I alluded to that earlier (in relation to remote possibilities), but JLCrab appears to be embracing necrophilia as being "a long standing custom in our culture." I'm curious whose culture he's making that sweeping statement about. If he's American, is he insinuating that necrophilia is a long standing American custom? Maybe I shouldn't ask, but it just seems an odd statement by the poster. Note: I didn't use that word in any of my prior posts. It was JL who introduced that word, bandied it around, and went on to expand upon it.

[AleG]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

For reference there's the recent case of the biker shot by a policeman, it took all of a day to uncover the attempt to cover it up. That's how the world works this days.

Besides that there's a schizoid logic from some quarters of, saying on one hand how incompetent and stupid the police are, and on the other how they are pulling off a vast, well organized and airtight cover-up.

[boomerangutang]

A few more than 3 of 4. A couple of them, I could mention names, who haven't posted in awhile. And yes, fixation to that extent stinkof some sort of relationship with those who were prime suspects, but who were suddenly excused for the flimsiest of reasons. If there is a relationship (friend, family member, biz associate) it would be eye-opening if they would come clean, but that's not possible.

It's not possible because that is all in your imagination.

Interesting that AleG is so self-assured about his knowledge of the private lives of several posters herein.

Every time you have accused people of being in some way complicit or connected with your imaginary cover-up you have been told in no uncertain words that you are wrong.

Yet, you keep at it, it's one of those things that clearly demonstrates how, A) You don't care about the truth, and B ) you don't care about Justice; because if you did you wouldn't be spreading rumours and innuendo with the intention of besmirching and discrediting people.

Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others. If I was in some way connected to or friends with Nomsod or Mon, I would mention it, in relation to this discussion. Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters. You're so self-assured they've got no connections to the former prime suspects. I'm not assured about the private goings-on of anyone posting herein, except myself.

[AleG]

Every time you have accused people of being in some way complicit or connected with your imaginary cover-up you have been told in no uncertain words that you are wrong.

Yet, you keep at it, it's one of those things that clearly demonstrates how, A) You don't care about the truth, and B ) you don't care about Justice; because if you did you wouldn't be spreading rumours and innuendo with the intention of besmirching and discrediting people.

Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others. If I was in some way connected to or friends with Nomsod or Mon, I would mention it, in relation to this discussion. Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters. You're so self-assured they've got no connections to the former prime suspects. I'm not assured about the private goings-on of anyone posting herein, except myself.

"Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others."

Trolling or paranoia, which one is it?

"Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters."

You missed the part in the post where I explained just that.

All in all, get a grip.

[boomerangutang]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

For reference there's the recent case of the biker shot by a policeman, it took all of a day to uncover the attempt to cover it up. That's how the world works this days.

Besides that there's a schizoid logic from some quarters of, saying on one hand how incompetent and stupid the police are, and on the other how they are pulling off a vast, well organized and airtight cover-up.

With a cursory glance, yes, it does appear counter intuitive. However, they're not "pulling off a vast, well organized and airtight cover-up." The proof of that is the hundreds of posts showing gaping holes, switch-backs, omissions, and obfuscations in how the police have mis-handled the 'cover-up' (to use AleG's term). Shall I make another list to refresh some peoples' memories?

Here's something to chew on: after the staged production to show the foregone conclusion that Nomsod's DNA didn't match, ...police brass immediately declared they would not show Nomsod's DNA typing to the Brits. What else have the Thai officials not shown to the Brits? Even with their enforced 'observer-only' status, the Brits are being kept in the dark.

[boomerangutang]

"Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others."

Trolling or paranoia, which one is it?

"Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters."

You missed the part in the post where I explained just that.

All in all, get a grip.

It's Trollanoia, ha ha. Some posters may be curious to know how you know (and how much you know) about their private lives.

My grip is pretty good, thanks, even though 2 years ago, I broke a wrist and shattered the other one (not to mention cracking a heel bone in two pieces). Since then, I've gone back to doing some some rock climbing. Thanks for the encouragement.

[thailandchilli]

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

I think most people have seen your taunts and that of AleG as a sign of desperation. When you struggle to win a debate on the battlefield you resort to labeling, diversion, even swearing. But don't worry when we see that the rest of us know you've obviously lost the argument and have nothing else to use other than CT. B.S. or now the new one which by the way could easily be mirrored to you - Narcissism

Desperation is to declare yourself the winner by the sheer brilliance of your own self esteem.

When you are done with that you may want to try some facts, for example how come, in view of the speculation that Hanna's phone was planted, the phone found behind the lodgings of the two Burmese men was not the same model or color as Hanna's. Of course the actual forensic results from the phone, such as the data it contained and any fingerprints or whatnot, is something that will, probably, presented during the case.

But why wait for that when you can milk the mistake of one person saying "Hanna" instead of "David" during one press conference to support all sort of speculation?

Desperation is to declare yourself a winner? Really, ok I take your word for it AleG but perhaps you may want to point out just where anyone me or anyone have declared themselves to be winners? If I did see that my opinion of that person would not be one of desperation but one of immature intellect.

Regards the phone, yes I know different colour entirely. Begs the question how on earth did the RTP and not just one of them make such a glaring 'mistake' and even saying that they could no longer locate it as it had disappeared, my my!

[AleG]

Please tell us all, exactly which "4 people who are 100% sure..." are.

In fact, while you are at it, please include a list of each group, including those that are positive the Burmese are involved in some way.

You did demonstrate the group narcissism so aptly pointed out above.

I think most people have seen your taunts and that of AleG as a sign of desperation. When you struggle to win a debate on the battlefield you resort to labeling, diversion, even swearing. But don't worry when we see that the rest of us know you've obviously lost the argument and have nothing else to use other than CT. B.S. or now the new one which by the way could easily be mirrored to you - Narcissism

Desperation is to declare yourself the winner by the sheer brilliance of your own self esteem.

When you are done with that you may want to try some facts, for example how come, in view of the speculation that Hanna's phone was planted, the phone found behind the lodgings of the two Burmese men was not the same model or color as Hanna's. Of course the actual forensic results from the phone, such as the data it contained and any fingerprints or whatnot, is something that will, probably, presented during the case.

But why wait for that when you can milk the mistake of one person saying "Hanna" instead of "David" during one press conference to support all sort of speculation?

Desperation is to declare yourself a winner? Really, ok I take your word for it AleG but perhaps you may want to point out just where anyone me or anyone have declared themselves to be winners? If I did see that my opinion of that person would not be one of desperation but one of immature intellect.

Regards the phone, yes I know different colour entirely. Begs the question how on earth did the RTP and not just one of them make such a glaring 'mistake' and even saying that they could no longer locate it as it had disappeared, my my!

"you may want to point out just where anyone me or anyone have declared themselves to be winners?"

From your previous post:

"But don't worry when we see that the rest of us know you've obviously lost the argument"

So, immature intellect you said?

[AleG]

"Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others."

Trolling or paranoia, which one is it?

"Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters."

You missed the part in the post where I explained just that.

All in all, get a grip.

It's Trollanoia, ha ha. Some posters may be curious to know how you know (and how much you know) about their private lives.

My grip is pretty good, thanks, even though 2 years ago, I broke a wrist and shattered the other one (not to mention cracking a heel bone in two pieces). Since then, I've gone back to doing some some rock climbing. Thanks for the encouragement.

It's "Trollanoia", admitting to trolling is not a smooth move.

"Some posters may be curious to know how you know (and how much you know) about their private lives."

You've been told many times by those you accused of having a vested interest or connection to the murders that you are completely off-base, with that you choose to believe they are lying; so how do you come to know so much about their private lives that you can tell they are lying? You are the one claiming special knowledge, not me.

[AleG]

My post from 3 days ago:

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.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-39#entry9243604

For reference there's the recent case of the biker shot by a policeman, it took all of a day to uncover the attempt to cover it up. That's how the world works this days.

Besides that there's a schizoid logic from some quarters of, saying on one hand how incompetent and stupid the police are, and on the other how they are pulling off a vast, well organized and airtight cover-up.

With a cursory glance, yes, it does appear counter intuitive. However, they're not "pulling off a vast, well organized and airtight cover-up." The proof of that is the hundreds of posts showing gaping holes, switch-backs, omissions, and obfuscations in how the police have mis-handled the 'cover-up' (to use AleG's term). Shall I make another list to refresh some peoples' memories?

Here's something to chew on: after the staged production to show the foregone conclusion that Nomsod's DNA didn't match, ...police brass immediately declared they would not show Nomsod's DNA typing to the Brits. What else have the Thai officials not shown to the Brits? Even with their enforced 'observer-only' status, the Brits are being kept in the dark.

That would be the list were Nomsod was a suspect from the first week of the murders, that he then hid from the police for a week, that the course of the investigation change after Panya's promotion and other thoroughly debunked, demonstrably false and/or unverifiable made up claims?

The police didn't provide the DNA results because he was cleared, he was not on the island, no matter how much you want to believe on something, the facts are not on your side:

[catsanddogs]

Hannah and friends were sharing a room as was David and his friends. If I was out with my girlfriends and I got back to my room in the early hours of the morning and one of my friends wasn't there I would be a bit worried - unless they had told me where they were going and with whom. There has been no mention of when Hannah's friends returned to their hotel rooms on the morning of 15th September. Maybe there were unconcerned that she did not return because they knew she had an appointment with someone. I would have thought they would have been concerned if the scenario of the altercation has any truth in it. Maybe one of them went to look for her at some point - farang running woman RTP said was caught on CCTV maybe? Just thoughts.

[JLCrab]

"Written by someone who sounds like he has something to hide and/or is covering for others."

Trolling or paranoia, which one is it?

"Yet, AleG, you still haven't told us how you know for certain about the private lives of other posters."

You missed the part in the post where I explained just that.

All in all, get a grip.

It's Trollanoia, ha ha. Some posters may be curious to know how you know (and how much you know) about their private lives.

My grip is pretty good, thanks, even though 2 years ago, I broke a wrist and shattered the other one (not to mention cracking a heel bone in two pieces). Since then, I've gone back to doing some some rock climbing. Thanks for the encouragement.

I know a bit about your private life because I remember who you were before you were Banned.