Thai court grants Koh Tao evidence review for pair accused of Brit murders

[seahorse]

The defence team for two Myanmar migrant workers accused of murdering a pair of British holidaymakers in Thailand last year will be allowed to independently analyse the evidence against their clients, a Thai court ruled Thursday.

I wish they were allowed to independently analyze the evidence which police said proved Mon and Nomsod were involved in the murders.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

He is the brother of a village headman in Koh Tao.

He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said.

He also said another suspect is also a son of that village headman.

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

Pol Lt Gen Panya said a second suspect, who fled the resort island to Bangkok, will likely be taken into custody soon.

He said both suspects were captured by CCTV cameras and the police have gathered enough evidence to implicate them in the murders.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-suspect-arrested-another-on-the-run.html

[AleG]

I'd like to see the photos again, of the crime scene (perhaps someone could post 'em). From recollection, David's shorts were laid out flat on the sand, and they were not near Hannah (her body's final position). According to the RTP scenario, the two went to the rocky area, took their clothes off to have sex. Few observers believe that, but let's play along with what the RTP want us to believe. If a man is taking his clothes off to commence to have sex (as an aside: most men would not take all their clothes off on a public beach in that scenario, but that's a side issue) ....the man would very unlikely take his shorts and lay them flat on the sand, several meters from where the woman is. If a man took off his shorts, he would either drop them on the ground in a lump or put them up on the rock. It's just one more, of the hundreds of details which the RTP got wrong. Whether by stupidity or by scheming, we may never know.

Miller's shorts were not laid flat on the sand, you continue to make things up in order to create fanciful and fictitious scenarios; like the idea that someone took the time to was his clothes and return them to the crime scene, utterly ridiculous.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Just one question to the hang'em high-brigade: soooooo...let's assume for a second, that you are right (which you are not IMO) and the B2 killed and raped poor Hannah (which they did not IMO).

They didn't care to flee the island, they didn't care for the hoe, they didn't care throwing the victims phone (one of many, if we follow all the police reporting) behind their place and they are overall totally careless with important evidence.

How come, the second murder weapon was never found and there never was any mentioning of bloodstained clothes...and as I understand, there should have been lots of blood!

They didn't give two hot sh1ts for all the "evidence" presented, but they were careful enough to get rid of the clothes and the second murder weapon, right?!

Just asking your opinions, of course!

Okay! Who says they didn't take care of the Hoe? If I recall they didn't find any evidence on that Hoe. So it must have been washed clean from the Ocean Salt Water. It also wasn't found next to the bodies either. It was in fact put back to the Garden and where they got it from. To me, that tells me they tried to hide evidence and the Murder Weapon.

It was only by matching the Hoe to the wound on David Miller's Head that they deduced that this Hoe was in fact the Murder Weapon. The Accused must have figured that by trying to hide this Hoe someplace else would have raised the alarm bells, when the farmer reported it missing the next day. So since it was washed of evidence it was probably wiser to put it back.

So the first answer to you questions is, and like many Rapist Murderers, they didn't think they would get caught. It certainly took a long time to catch Ted Bundy and others like this. They knew that nobody else had witnessed their crime (with one guy probably being the Look Out) and the only 2 who could identify them they had killed. They must have felt so sure they wouldn't get caught, or be suspects, that they even took David Millers Cell Phone. Thinking nobody would look at them for it.

Now whether you think this was wise or even wonder why they would take such a risk, knowing that if they got caught with this phone it would link them to the murders, you have to remember this. They are Migrant Workers from a poor country and thus also poorly educated. As such, they were not hired to work their as Brain Surgeons. They were both hired and had low paying jobs. They probably also don't have much knowledge on DNA, and like we do There were (as they both admitted several times) drunk during this time. At the very least many people saw they were drinking. So there thought process that night, on top of there poor education, and everything else, was hindered.

Why they didn't find the second Murder Weapon that killed Hannah is for the same reason you first said they didn't do. Which was they took care of it. I don't think they even know for sure exactly what it was, except it was a Blunt Instrument. Thus can't be the Hoe. Perhaps some wooden stick or club, which after it is throw back into the Ocean it becomes Drift Wood again. But the fact they didn't find anything near the victims which would do that, then it is obvious they tried to hide it. They tried to hide evidence.

Why do you keep thinking there would be a lot of blood? They both were injured by head wounds, and not stabbed 100 times with a dull kitchen knife to the body. If you were hit in the face or on the nose, there would be blood. But they were hit on the tops and top sides of their heads, which doesn't produce much blood at all.

Why didn't they leave the island right after they committed this crime? It is probably a combination of several reasons.The most important one was they didn't think they would be suspects and thus get caught. But if they suddenly left and quit their jobs, this would arouse suspicious.They also were working without proper working papers, so there Visa may have expired as well. They also probably needed their jobs to help support their families back home. So since they probably didn't have much money, and also probably no family or friends on the main land, where could they run to. For them their employer is expect to pay there way home after a year, or sometimes longer.

I am surprised you didn't ask about the cigarette butts found near the Crime Scene. It never says they were taken 50 Meters away, at the log these guys sat on, but that's say this is so. The significance of the Cigarette Butts is the DNA Testing of those Butts also matched the sperm DNA Sample taken from Hannah. After talking to staff at the Resort, this is when they discovered that the accused where there that night playing their guitar. So it was these cigarettes Butts that led the Police to the suspects, and after DNA Sampling of them, which again matched the sperm found in Hannah, they were charged with Murder.

Its begining to make sense now. They were really drunk and being uneducated they didn't have a clue how they could get caught. So drunk in fact that while one of them was look out the other one killed a guy twice his size then raped the girl. Now don't forget the girl could have run while the boy was being murdered because the other one was keeping looky watch but she just sat and watched.

The weapon that killed Hannah was the hoe, you know the one that didn't have Davids DNA on it but did have Hannahs DNA on it.

The hoe was covered in Hannahs blood. That will be the blood you say was washed off by the sea water. This was done as you claim by two drunken boys who didn't have a clue what was happening because they were so drunk. As to why we think there was a lot of blood is because we have seen pictures of the bloody hoe, the beach the morning after the murder and the pictures of Hannahs broken body. You should go look at them and get a clue as to what happened to her.

What was the name of the famer who reported his hoe missing the following day ? Would it be the same one who found the hoe in the same place it was taken from ? How does something that is in the same place get reported missing ?

Hey heres a thought, maybe the log they were sitting on playing their guitar was what they used to kill Hannah, I mean David, god you got me confused now.

They then washed the log in the ocean to clean the blood off and put it back where they found it !! genius.

Well you have convinced me. Hang them high.

Easy to kill a guy twice your size when he is standing in front of you Butt Naked and you are holding a weapon!

The reason why Hannah did not run and cry for help was the same reason I knew from the beginning, and before it was reported, that there had to have been at least 2 people involved in these Murders. One fighting with David! One holding Hannah with a knife to her throat, and broken beer bottle, or whatever, to keep her still and quiet. No problem with a weapon to her throat and holding her by her hair and leading her over to the last rock and to the look out point.

You can't read and understand what you read can you? What I said was that they put the Hoe back to the Garden they took it from because they did not want to arouse suspicion. So since the Garden Hoe was back were it belonged it wasn't stolen. If it wasn't stolen then the farmer would not report it missing, now would he. Geese!

Them being drunk comes from both of the Accuses own testimony to the police, lawyers, and hell knows who else. I did not invent this, like the way you do with your stories here. There are also several witnesses you placed them near the crime scene and that they were drinking. So if you are calling the Accused Liars, then I agree with you 100%.

As I have said all along LINK a post that proves the DNA on the Hoe was just Hannah's, and who's it was. I would really like to see that LINK. The last I read about it they were not sure what killed Hannah. The originally thought maybe the Hoe, but changed their mind later after the autopsy. But go ahead and show me this proof. I will be waiting.

But either way, whether it was a Garden Hoe that killed Hanna, or a Ancient Egyptian Wooden Dildo, it does make these guy anymore innocent. Why can't you understand that? That just because they are not sure what killed her, or maybe not even have a murder weapon. doesn't make her any less dead and them more innocent!

Geese

Since you provided no LINK to prove anything you say I will give you one.

Notice in the middle paragraph they talk about the 2 Murder Weapons, being a Hoe and a Wooden Stick.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Investigation-into-Koh-Tao-murders-seriously-flawe-30244163.html

[Linky]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Just one question to the hang'em high-brigade: soooooo...let's assume for a second, that you are right (which you are not IMO) and the B2 killed and raped poor Hannah (which they did not IMO).

They didn't care to flee the island, they didn't care for the hoe, they didn't care throwing the victims phone (one of many, if we follow all the police reporting) behind their place and they are overall totally careless with important evidence.

How come, the second murder weapon was never found and there never was any mentioning of bloodstained clothes...and as I understand, there should have been lots of blood!

They didn't give two hot sh1ts for all the "evidence" presented, but they were careful enough to get rid of the clothes and the second murder weapon, right?!

Just asking your opinions, of course!

Okay! Who says they didn't take care of the Hoe? If I recall they didn't find any evidence on that Hoe. So it must have been washed clean from the Ocean Salt Water. It also wasn't found next to the bodies either. It was in fact put back to the Garden and where they got it from. To me, that tells me they tried to hide evidence and the Murder Weapon.

It was only by matching the Hoe to the wound on David Miller's Head that they deduced that this Hoe was in fact the Murder Weapon. The Accused must have figured that by trying to hide this Hoe someplace else would have raised the alarm bells, when the farmer reported it missing the next day. So since it was washed of evidence it was probably wiser to put it back.

So the first answer to you questions is, and like many Rapist Murderers, they didn't think they would get caught. It certainly took a long time to catch Ted Bundy and others like this. They knew that nobody else had witnessed their crime (with one guy probably being the Look Out) and the only 2 who could identify them they had killed. They must have felt so sure they wouldn't get caught, or be suspects, that they even took David Millers Cell Phone. Thinking nobody would look at them for it.

Now whether you think this was wise or even wonder why they would take such a risk, knowing that if they got caught with this phone it would link them to the murders, you have to remember this. They are Migrant Workers from a poor country and thus also poorly educated. As such, they were not hired to work their as Brain Surgeons. They were both hired and had low paying jobs. They probably also don't have much knowledge on DNA, and like we do There were (as they both admitted several times) drunk during this time. At the very least many people saw they were drinking. So there thought process that night, on top of there poor education, and everything else, was hindered.

Why they didn't find the second Murder Weapon that killed Hannah is for the same reason you first said they didn't do. Which was they took care of it. I don't think they even know for sure exactly what it was, except it was a Blunt Instrument. Thus can't be the Hoe. Perhaps some wooden stick or club, which after it is throw back into the Ocean it becomes Drift Wood again. But the fact they didn't find anything near the victims which would do that, then it is obvious they tried to hide it. They tried to hide evidence.

Why do you keep thinking there would be a lot of blood? They both were injured by head wounds, and not stabbed 100 times with a dull kitchen knife to the body. If you were hit in the face or on the nose, there would be blood. But they were hit on the tops and top sides of their heads, which doesn't produce much blood at all.

Why didn't they leave the island right after they committed this crime? It is probably a combination of several reasons.The most important one was they didn't think they would be suspects and thus get caught. But if they suddenly left and quit their jobs, this would arouse suspicious.They also were working without proper working papers, so there Visa may have expired as well. They also probably needed their jobs to help support their families back home. So since they probably didn't have much money, and also probably no family or friends on the main land, where could they run to. For them their employer is expect to pay there way home after a year, or sometimes longer.

I am surprised you didn't ask about the cigarette butts found near the Crime Scene. It never says they were taken 50 Meters away, at the log these guys sat on, but that's say this is so. The significance of the Cigarette Butts is the DNA Testing of those Butts also matched the sperm DNA Sample taken from Hannah. After talking to staff at the Resort, this is when they discovered that the accused where there that night playing their guitar. So it was these cigarettes Butts that led the Police to the suspects, and after DNA Sampling of them, which again matched the sperm found in Hannah, they were charged with Murder.

Its begining to make sense now. They were really drunk and being uneducated they didn't have a clue how they could get caught. So drunk in fact that while one of them was look out the other one killed a guy twice his size then raped the girl. Now don't forget the girl could have run while the boy was being murdered because the other one was keeping looky watch but she just sat and watched.

The weapon that killed Hannah was the hoe, you know the one that didn't have Davids DNA on it but did have Hannahs DNA on it.

The hoe was covered in Hannahs blood. That will be the blood you say was washed off by the sea water. This was done as you claim by two drunken boys who didn't have a clue what was happening because they were so drunk. As to why we think there was a lot of blood is because we have seen pictures of the bloody hoe, the beach the morning after the murder and the pictures of Hannahs broken body. You should go look at them and get a clue as to what happened to her.

What was the name of the famer who reported his hoe missing the following day ? Would it be the same one who found the hoe in the same place it was taken from ? How does something that is in the same place get reported missing ?

Hey heres a thought, maybe the log they were sitting on playing their guitar was what they used to kill Hannah, I mean David, god you got me confused now.

They then washed the log in the ocean to clean the blood off and put it back where they found it !! genius.

Well you have convinced me. Hang them high.

Easy to kill a guy twice your size when he is standing in front of you Butt Naked and you are holding a weapon!

The reason why Hannah did not run and cry for help was the same reason I knew from the beginning, and before it was reported, that there had to have been at least 2 people involved in these Murders. One fighting with David! One holding Hannah with a knife to her throat, and broken beer bottle, or whatever, to keep her still and quiet. No problem with a weapon to her throat and holding her by her hair and leading her over to the last rock and to the look out point.

You can't read and understand what you read can you? What I said was that they put the Hoe back to the Garden they took it from because they did not want to arouse suspicion. So since the Garden Hoe was back were it belonged it wasn't stolen. If it wasn't stolen then the farmer would not report it missing, now would he. Geese!

Them being drunk comes from both of the Accuses own testimony to the police, lawyers, and hell knows who else. I did not invent this, like the way you do with your stories here. There are also several witnesses you placed them near the crime scene and that they were drinking. So if you are calling the Accused Liars, then I agree with you 100%.

As I have said all along LINK a post that proves the DNA on the Hoe was just Hannah's, and who's it was. I would really like to see that LINK. The last I read about it they were not sure what killed Hannah. The originally thought maybe the Hoe, but changed their mind later after the autopsy. But go ahead and show me this proof. I will be waiting.

But either way, whether it was a Garden Hoe that killed Hanna, or a Ancient Egyptian Wooden Dildo, it does make these guy anymore innocent. Why can't you understand that? That just because they are not sure what killed her, or maybe not even have a murder weapon. doesn't make her any less dead and them more innocent!

Geese

Since you provided no LINK to prove anything you say I will give you one.

Notice in the middle paragraph they talk about the 2 Murder Weapons, being a Hoe and a Wooden Stick.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Investigation-into-Koh-Tao-murders-seriously-flawe-30244163.html

As you like quotes.

Please provide a link indicating the accused are murdering scum, that you described them as.

[stephenterry]

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Just one question to the hang'em high-brigade: soooooo...let's assume for a second, that you are right (which you are not IMO) and the B2 killed and raped poor Hannah (which they did not IMO).

They didn't care to flee the island, they didn't care for the hoe, they didn't care throwing the victims phone (one of many, if we follow all the police reporting) behind their place and they are overall totally careless with important evidence.

How come, the second murder weapon was never found and there never was any mentioning of bloodstained clothes...and as I understand, there should have been lots of blood!

They didn't give two hot sh1ts for all the "evidence" presented, but they were careful enough to get rid of the clothes and the second murder weapon, right?!

Just asking your opinions, of course!

Okay! Who says they didn't take care of the Hoe? If I recall they didn't find any evidence on that Hoe. So it must have been washed clean from the Ocean Salt Water. It also wasn't found next to the bodies either. It was in fact put back to the Garden and where they got it from. To me, that tells me they tried to hide evidence and the Murder Weapon.

It was only by matching the Hoe to the wound on David Miller's Head that they deduced that this Hoe was in fact the Murder Weapon. The Accused must have figured that by trying to hide this Hoe someplace else would have raised the alarm bells, when the farmer reported it missing the next day. So since it was washed of evidence it was probably wiser to put it back.

So the first answer to you questions is, and like many Rapist Murderers, they didn't think they would get caught. It certainly took a long time to catch Ted Bundy and others like this. They knew that nobody else had witnessed their crime (with one guy probably being the Look Out) and the only 2 who could identify them they had killed. They must have felt so sure they wouldn't get caught, or be suspects, that they even took David Millers Cell Phone. Thinking nobody would look at them for it.

Now whether you think this was wise or even wonder why they would take such a risk, knowing that if they got caught with this phone it would link them to the murders, you have to remember this. They are Migrant Workers from a poor country and thus also poorly educated. As such, they were not hired to work their as Brain Surgeons. They were both hired and had low paying jobs. They probably also don't have much knowledge on DNA, and like we do There were (as they both admitted several times) drunk during this time. At the very least many people saw they were drinking. So there thought process that night, on top of there poor education, and everything else, was hindered.

Why they didn't find the second Murder Weapon that killed Hannah is for the same reason you first said they didn't do. Which was they took care of it. I don't think they even know for sure exactly what it was, except it was a Blunt Instrument. Thus can't be the Hoe. Perhaps some wooden stick or club, which after it is throw back into the Ocean it becomes Drift Wood again. But the fact they didn't find anything near the victims which would do that, then it is obvious they tried to hide it. They tried to hide evidence.

Why do you keep thinking there would be a lot of blood? They both were injured by head wounds, and not stabbed 100 times with a dull kitchen knife to the body. If you were hit in the face or on the nose, there would be blood. But they were hit on the tops and top sides of their heads, which doesn't produce much blood at all.

Why didn't they leave the island right after they committed this crime? It is probably a combination of several reasons.The most important one was they didn't think they would be suspects and thus get caught. But if they suddenly left and quit their jobs, this would arouse suspicious.They also were working without proper working papers, so there Visa may have expired as well. They also probably needed their jobs to help support their families back home. So since they probably didn't have much money, and also probably no family or friends on the main land, where could they run to. For them their employer is expect to pay there way home after a year, or sometimes longer.

I am surprised you didn't ask about the cigarette butts found near the Crime Scene. It never says they were taken 50 Meters away, at the log these guys sat on, but that's say this is so. The significance of the Cigarette Butts is the DNA Testing of those Butts also matched the sperm DNA Sample taken from Hannah. After talking to staff at the Resort, this is when they discovered that the accused where there that night playing their guitar. So it was these cigarettes Butts that led the Police to the suspects, and after DNA Sampling of them, which again matched the sperm found in Hannah, they were charged with Murder.

Its begining to make sense now. They were really drunk and being uneducated they didn't have a clue how they could get caught. So drunk in fact that while one of them was look out the other one killed a guy twice his size then raped the girl. Now don't forget the girl could have run while the boy was being murdered because the other one was keeping looky watch but she just sat and watched.

The weapon that killed Hannah was the hoe, you know the one that didn't have Davids DNA on it but did have Hannahs DNA on it.

The hoe was covered in Hannahs blood. That will be the blood you say was washed off by the sea water. This was done as you claim by two drunken boys who didn't have a clue what was happening because they were so drunk. As to why we think there was a lot of blood is because we have seen pictures of the bloody hoe, the beach the morning after the murder and the pictures of Hannahs broken body. You should go look at them and get a clue as to what happened to her.

What was the name of the famer who reported his hoe missing the following day ? Would it be the same one who found the hoe in the same place it was taken from ? How does something that is in the same place get reported missing ?

Hey heres a thought, maybe the log they were sitting on playing their guitar was what they used to kill Hannah, I mean David, god you got me confused now.

They then washed the log in the ocean to clean the blood off and put it back where they found it !! genius.

Well you have convinced me. Hang them high.

It was your original post! Not Mine!

Geese! You can't even remember what you wrote. Yet have the gall to argue over it. To argue with yourself! Now I have seen everything!

[stephenterry]

The defence team for two Myanmar migrant workers accused of murdering a pair of British holidaymakers in Thailand last year will be allowed to independently analyse the evidence against their clients, a Thai court ruled Thursday.

I wish they were allowed to independently analyze the evidence which police said proved Mon and Nomsod were involved in the murders.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

He is the brother of a village headman in Koh Tao.

He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said.

He also said another suspect is also a son of that village headman.

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

Pol Lt Gen Panya said a second suspect, who fled the resort island to Bangkok, will likely be taken into custody soon.

He said both suspects were captured by CCTV cameras and the police have gathered enough evidence to implicate them in the murders.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-suspect-arrested-another-on-the-run.html

Maybe the defence will raise this issue at the trial on the basis of non-disclosure by the RTP (if it hasn't been). Any purported evidence pointing away from the B2 should be examined and questioned as to its veracity.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The defence team for two Myanmar migrant workers accused of murdering a pair of British holidaymakers in Thailand last year will be allowed to independently analyse the evidence against their clients, a Thai court ruled Thursday.

I wish they were allowed to independently analyze the evidence which police said proved Mon and Nomsod were involved in the murders.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

He is the brother of a village headman in Koh Tao.

He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said.

He also said another suspect is also a son of that village headman.

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

Pol Lt Gen Panya said a second suspect, who fled the resort island to Bangkok, will likely be taken into custody soon.

He said both suspects were captured by CCTV cameras and the police have gathered enough evidence to implicate them in the murders.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-suspect-arrested-another-on-the-run.html

Yes! And a couple days later they were released because their DNA Samples did not match.

And unlike the Accused!

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/police-release-suspects-in-murder-of-two-brits-in-koh-tao.html

[stephenterry]

As posters have been posting scenarios that stretch the imagination, here's another (in bad taste, apologies).

B2 alibi.

Sure we went down to the beach when we were woken up the following morning to see what the commotion was all about. Many locals were traipsing across a couple of bodies covered by a towel, picking up a hoe and a wooden stick, kicking a broken bottle into the sea, as if searching for something. Mon was there and his police friend, who looked worried. We lit up a couple of fags, a friend showed me a phone and sunglasses he'd found, gave it to us to sell, as we could speak English. We finished our fags and tossed them away. That's it.

Prove I'm wrong.

Edited May 6, 2015 by stephenterry

[seahorse]

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

Pol Maj Gen Kittipong Kaosam-ang, a Surat Thani police commander, asked the media not to report in-depth investigation results, saying it may give some clues to the culprits. But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

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

Who were these Thais who had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks? Who gave false information to police in a bid to divert attention? Why is this not being taken further? Where is this evidence now? Can the defence independently analyze it?

[mcm991]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Goldbuggy

Your response contains a number of errors , and ommissions that I am left to arrive at a conclusion that you are not really interested in the crime and posting with an intent of being vexatious

Oh?

Well I stand to be corrected.

Prove it!

Goldbuggy, as you are in fine form as your offensive and obnoxious style proves, let me ask you a serious question.

Do you trust the police in this country to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation and to not succumb to any levels of dishonesty or corruption ?

From the street Plod up to the highest officer ...... do you think that this investigation has been beyond reproach?

I'm assuming that you will not answer this question but I'd l be curious to know your views.

How about you JD? or AleG or JTJ?

[stephenterry]

Re 338. Yes! And a couple days later they were released because their DNA Samples did not match.

And unlike the Accused!

http://www.chiangrai...in-koh-tao.html

That's what has been reported by the RTP, and the DNA has yet to be independently tested to prove it. In regard to the B2, that is happening now. But more importantly is what evidence did the policeman have that initially implicated the Thais to the crime?

As Si Thea01 has been at pains to point out, nothing that has been released to the press by the RTP can be regarded as factual until it is substantiated. That's what this trial is all about..

[stephenterry]

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

Pol Maj Gen Kittipong Kaosam-ang, a Surat Thani police commander, asked the media not to report in-depth investigation results, saying it may give some clues to the culprits. But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

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

Who were these Thais who had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks? Who gave false information to police in a bid to divert attention? Why is this not being taken further? Where is this evidence now? Can the defence independently analyze it?

And from my 251 post:

If the Police Officer is correct in his statement, why would Thai people try and destroy evidence and why would some people on Koh Tao give false information to police in order to divert attention if no Thais were involved? I hope his allegations will be raised in court and be subject to further examination by the defence.

The alternative scenario, i.e. the PO made a mistake, is that the B2 (if complicit in the crimes) would have been marched into police HQ by the locals the following morning. Whichever way one looks at it, the actions of the Thai locals don't match the B2 scenario that has now been painted by the RTP.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

This LINK doesn't say the locals messed up evidence on purpose! When the bodies were discovered there must have been a big commotion their so they went to take a look. I would have to, if I was their, and without realizing I was missing up a Crime Scene.

I get the impression that you, and others, think that by messing up the Crime Scene they have destroyed all the Evidence. This is not so! They just make more work and investigating, thus tying up more police, and lab work, then which otherwise they would have been if they stayed out. So thus it makes it more time consuming to catch the real culprits.

Take for example the Cigarette Butts.If there was only a few at the Crime Scene, which should have belonged to the Murderer as neither David or Hannah Smokes, then it would have been easier to track down the accused with DNA Samples. But if 3 village people came over to the Crime Scene to see what the commotion was all about, and they all smoked cigarettes their, then they have added to the work load.

Now they have to test all the Cigarette Butts their and match them to the DNA that was taken from Hannah. Also more foot prints to cast, more paper wrappers they have to pick up and test, that should not be their, and the list goes on.. But I am sure nobody tampered with the DNA that was taken out of Hannah's Private Parts, and this would not change even if a Million People stood next to her and smoked cigarettes.

Why can you not get it that their is no dark side of Government Officials trying to Scapegoat some innocent Migrant Workers. Which would now have to include all the village people and lab testers in both Thailand and Singapore. I agree that the Government probably doesn't like these type of Migrant Workers coming there very much. Anymore than you would like it if they came to your country and without a proper Work Visa.

But to frame someone for murder which would involve several high ranking officials, and just because you don't like him very much, and falsifying evidence, which is a serious criminal offence, just doesn't make any sense at all. Especially when they found the real killers and the evidence to prove that.

So let them have a look at the evidence. Also let them retest whatever they like, as they are just going to find the same thing. Did you ever consider that there arrest took a long time? That if all they were looking for were Scapegoats, then they surely would have done that a lot sooner, and before all this Media Attention.

,

[Yunla]

I've really tried to avoid this story on the web, because it is all pure speculation, none of us were there at the time, the available evidence is still part of a very active trial and so it may be vague for legal or privacy reasons.

I can only comment that arresting people quickly doesn't really give closure at all. In my own life experiences I found that I was far happier if nobody was arrested for a long time, while all avenues were thoroughly investigated. I never really saw the value of quick arrests, which seem to placate the media for some reason. Unless it is a total 'redhanded' closed case scenario, of course.

Obviously I hope that the real killers have been / will be caught. But in the meantime, I will choose prayer over speculation, so I will continue to pray for the families of those two poor youngsters who met such a tragic end just as their lives were starting to bloom. Sadness beyond words. R.I.P.

[Jai Dee]

Comments are getting personal again.

If you want this topic to remain open I suggest that all of you read and abide by the following from the Forum Rules:

Posting Content & General Conduct

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

8) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

Pol Maj Gen Kittipong Kaosam-ang, a Surat Thani police commander, asked the media not to report in-depth investigation results, saying it may give some clues to the culprits. But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

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

Who were these Thais who had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks? Who gave false information to police in a bid to divert attention? Why is this not being taken further? Where is this evidence now? Can the defence independently analyze it?

It never said Thais tried to destroy evidence. What it said was the Thai's may have been involved (as the DNA, which was probably from Singapore as they already said their DNA Analysis could not determine this) showed it was Asian, and ( I repeat) AND evidence may have been (or was) destroyed. You keep linking these 2 together when they are in fact 2 separate issues. Keep in mind the poor translation we get sometimes also.

[stephenterry]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

This LINK doesn't say the locals messed up evidence on purpose! When the bodies were discovered there must have been a big commotion their so they went to take a look. I would have to, if I was their, and without realizing I was missing up a Crime Scene.

I get the impression that you, and others, think that by messing up the Crime Scene they have destroyed all the Evidence. This is not so! They just make more work and investigating, thus tying up more police, and lab work, then which otherwise they would have been if they stayed out. So thus it makes it more time consuming to catch the real culprits.

Take for example the Cigarette Butts.If there was only a few at the Crime Scene, which should have belonged to the Murderer as neither David or Hannah Smokes, then it would have been easier to track down the accused with DNA Samples. But if 3 village people came over to the Crime Scene to see what the commotion was all about, and they all smoked cigarettes their, then they have added to the work load.

Now they have to test all the Cigarette Butts their and match them to the DNA that was taken from Hannah. Also more foot prints to cast, more paper wrappers they have to pick up and test, that should not be their, and the list goes on.. But I am sure nobody tampered with the DNA that was taken out of Hannah's Private Parts, and this would not change even if a Million People stood next to her and smoked cigarettes.

Why can you not get it that their is no dark side of Government Officials trying to Scapegoat some innocent Migrant Workers. Which would now have to include all the village people and lab testers in both Thailand and Singapore. I agree that the Government probably doesn't like these type of Migrant Workers coming there very much. Anymore than you would like it if they came to your country and without a proper Work Visa.

But to frame someone for murder which would involve several high ranking officials, and just because you don't like him very much, and falsifying evidence, which is a serious criminal offence, just doesn't make any sense at all. Especially when they found the real killers and the evidence to prove that.

So let them have a look at the evidence. Also let them retest whatever they like, as they are just going to find the same thing. Did you ever consider that there arrest took a long time? That if all they were looking for were Scapegoats, then they surely would have done that a lot sooner, and before all this Media Attention.

,

The issue is, goldbuggy, you don't accept all of your statements are conjecture. You don't KNOW, you can only guess by what has been reported but not yet substantiated. And it's only the prosecution's side that has been reported and that which you are set to believe. That is what this trial is all about. Showing both sides. That means listening to the evidence supplied by the defence before you jump to the conclusion that the accused are the criminals..

The very fact that the crime scene was contaminated, the initial DNA samples held in the Headman's fridge until forensics arrived, is enough to cast doubt on the DNA custody chain. However, the defence has been allowed to independently test this, and they could be able to either accept or challenge the RTP's allegations of a DNA match. Same with the cigarette butts.

However, I accept that the very close attention by the world's media could have caused the RTP to try and obtain a guilty party ASAP, once the initial suspects dried up. It is not beyond reason that scapegoats had to be found to protect its tourist image. It's happened before, so why not again? I will point out that I am not saying it happened in this case, but no-one could rule it out.

[Rimmer]

A most disagreeable post has been removed along with one altering the members name and the reply to it.

[stephenterry]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re post 333 goldbuggy

Nation -26 September

Also, before local police officers arrived at the crime scene at dawn on September 15, many locals had already messed up the evidence by moving the two murder weapons - a hoe and a wooden stick - and thereby affecting the fingerprints.

Ahh. Many locals messing up the evidence, huh? Why would many locals mess up the evidence? To protect the Burmese? And what happened to the wooden stick? First and last time it was mentioned. Or it changed into a bottle according to the Myanmar pancake man when interrogating the B2. Or perhaps the Nation got it all wrong.

Pol Maj Gen Kittipong Kaosam-ang, a Surat Thani police commander, asked the media not to report in-depth investigation results, saying it may give some clues to the culprits. But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

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

Who were these Thais who had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks? Who gave false information to police in a bid to divert attention? Why is this not being taken further? Where is this evidence now? Can the defence independently analyze it?

It never said Thais tried to destroy evidence. What it said was the Thai's may have been involved (as the DNA, which was probably from Singapore as they already said their DNA Analysis could not determine this) showed it was Asian, and ( I repeat) AND evidence may have been (or was) destroyed. You keep linking these 2 together when they are in fact 2 separate issues. Keep in mind the poor translation we get sometimes also.

But he revealed that Thais may have been involved in the murders and had tried to destroy evidence linking them to the attacks. Some people on Koh Tao had given false information to police in a bid to divert attention.

Actually, yes it did. Or can't you read the words? And had tried to destroy evidence. To clarify, the initial 'may' in English grammar refers to the subject Thais, not the outcome. And the second sentence, which supports the English used in the first sentence, is quite clear and is crucial. Why would a local try to divert attention?

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Goldbuggy

Your response contains a number of errors , and ommissions that I am left to arrive at a conclusion that you are not really interested in the crime and posting with an intent of being vexatious

Oh?

Well I stand to be corrected.

Prove it!

Goldbuggy, as you are in fine form as your offensive and obnoxious style proves, let me ask you a serious question.

Do you trust the police in this country to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation and to not succumb to any levels of dishonesty or corruption ?

From the street Plod up to the highest officer ...... do you think that this investigation has been beyond reproach?

I'm assuming that you will not answer this question but I'd l be curious to know your views.

How about you JD? or AleG or JTJ?

Sure I will answer your question but who do you want me to compare these Police in Thailand to? To my home country Police? To Nigerian Police?

Do I think in this case they carried out an impartial investigation? Yes! I do! Do you recall the very first suspect in this case? It was David Millers (White UK) Friend and the friend he came to Thailand with. He was questioned and cleared based on his Alibi, (think he was at the hospital getting his bandage changed during the time of the murders) but it doesn't matter where he was, or if his DNA was checked, but he was released. That to me, and you, should tell you they were not zeroing in on some Poor Migrant Workers.

Next they questioned and detained the Thai Bar Man, who so happened to be the Bar Owners Brother, who so happened to be the Headsman. The Bar Owners Son at that time was in Bangkok and also a suspect, but apparently had a solid clad Alibi. But both had there DNA. When there DNA did not match that of Hannah the Bar Man was released and they were taken off the list of suspects. Again I did not see any picking on some poor Migrant Workers.

The next suspects were again Thai Men. They were 3 Speed Boat Attendants. They were quested about the Murderers, and dropped as suspects which I think was because of another Alibi or was it DNA Testing? So for the third time no picking on some poor migrant workers.

It was only because of some Cigarettes Butts, found at the Crime Scene, and/or near it, which matched Hannah's collected DNA Sperm Samples they were able to narrow this down. The Cigarette Butts led them to the log and more Cigarette Butts, in which 3 Migrant Workers where seen there the night of the murders playing a guitar.

The Migrant Workers only became suspects then. A Search Warrant was issued and David's Cell phone was discovered in the place they were staying. DNA Samples were collected and they matched that of Hannah's. They were held in custody, on Work Permit Issues, and until they could be charge officially. ut contrary to your belief, in now way did I see them picking on some Poor Migrant Works. Then or Now!

Are the Thai Police as efficient and as well equipped as the F.B.I., Scotland Yard, or the Royal Canadian Mounter Police? I don't really know but I highly doubt they are. But they don't need to be to catch dumb criminals like that, who would hold a cell phone for days from a murder victim. They also don't need to be as this is Thailand, and not the USA, UK, or Canada. As such, they didn't have to let the UK send anyone here to observe. They don't have to tell us anything, or give any information over to anyone. Which in my country they would not until after the trial. Or very little information to say the lease..

You seem to think that if a Police Man takes an on the spot traffic ticket he is rotten to the core. In many other countries this is the custom their. Poland is part of the EU but yet I know of 3 instances when my x-Polish Wife paid a small fine to Policemen there to get out a Traffic Ticket. Another time in Lithuania. But just because she could get out of a Traffic Ticket, it doesn't mean that she would get away with Murder. Which you seem to think is the same.

These so called Innocent Migrant Workers you talk so much about were Illegal Aliens. Here without permission, which is breaking the law. That is why many there were avoiding the police. They were not trying to cover up anything or protect other migrant workers. It is just that they to did not want to get caught without a Visa or Work Permit.

These Migrant Workers are Poor. If I was a corrupt Police General what would I stand to gain by arresting them? They can't pay me any money. I would be better off if I framed a rich tourist than someone like that. Don't you think? But since you are so against the Thai Police, may I suggest you just never come here! Which from your Computer Stool knowledge have never been here anyway.

[jdinasia]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Goldbuggy

Your response contains a number of errors , and ommissions that I am left to arrive at a conclusion that you are not really interested in the crime and posting with an intent of being vexatious

Oh?

Well I stand to be corrected.

Prove it!

Goldbuggy, as you are in fine form as your offensive and obnoxious style proves, let me ask you a serious question.

Do you trust the police in this country to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation and to not succumb to any levels of dishonesty or corruption ?

From the street Plod up to the highest officer ...... do you think that this investigation has been beyond reproach?

I'm assuming that you will not answer this question but I'd l be curious to know your views.

How about you JD? or AleG or JTJ?

First statement is simply an ad hominem.

The answer to the first question is : yes

The answer to the third question is : no

I have stated ( since the beginning) that there have been flaws in the investigation. I don't think those flaws are fatal flaws.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re 338. Yes! And a couple days later they were released because their DNA Samples did not match.

And unlike the Accused!

http://www.chiangrai...in-koh-tao.html

That's what has been reported by the RTP, and the DNA has yet to be independently tested to prove it. In regard to the B2, that is happening now. But more importantly is what evidence did the policeman have that initially implicated the Thais to the crime?

As Si Thea01 has been at pains to point out, nothing that has been released to the press by the RTP can be regarded as factual until it is substantiated. That's what this trial is all about..

Does DNA have to be independently tested in your country to be considered proof? So if it doesn't why do you assume it has to be done here. Because it doesn't have to be done here either.

But besides all that, for the 100th time. It was Independently Tested. In Singapore!

Geese!

[stephenterry]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re 338. Yes! And a couple days later they were released because their DNA Samples did not match.

And unlike the Accused!

http://www.chiangrai...in-koh-tao.html

That's what has been reported by the RTP, and the DNA has yet to be independently tested to prove it. In regard to the B2, that is happening now. But more importantly is what evidence did the policeman have that initially implicated the Thais to the crime?

As Si Thea01 has been at pains to point out, nothing that has been released to the press by the RTP can be regarded as factual until it is substantiated. That's what this trial is all about..

Does DNA have to be independently tested in your country to be considered proof? So if it doesn't why do you assume it has to be done here. Because it doesn't have to be done here either.

But besides all that, for the 100th time. It was Independently Tested. In Singapore!

Geese!

It's actually, Jeez, a shortened and slang version of Jesus Christ. Geese are fowl. The B2 samples weren't sent to Singapore because of the time frame in which a 'match' was said to have been made. Nor indeed, were the initial samples taken at the crime site. They were spread around the country, a lot here in hospitals in Chiang Mai. That's normal, I have no beef with that.

However, the independence check comes from the comparison of the two samples - that's what's happening now. In England, DNA can be tested by both prosecution and defence - not here, initially. And in England, DNA evidence on its own is not conclusive enough to obtain a conviction. It's regarded as circumstantial, not more.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Re 338. Yes! And a couple days later they were released because their DNA Samples did not match.

And unlike the Accused!

http://www.chiangrai...in-koh-tao.html

That's what has been reported by the RTP, and the DNA has yet to be independently tested to prove it. In regard to the B2, that is happening now. But more importantly is what evidence did the policeman have that initially implicated the Thais to the crime?

As Si Thea01 has been at pains to point out, nothing that has been released to the press by the RTP can be regarded as factual until it is substantiated. That's what this trial is all about..

Does DNA have to be independently tested in your country to be considered proof? So if it doesn't why do you assume it has to be done here. Because it doesn't have to be done here either.

But besides all that, for the 100th time. It was Independently Tested. In Singapore!

Geese!

It's actually, Jeez, a shortened and slang version of Jesus Christ. Geese are fowl. The B2 samples weren't sent to Singapore because of the time frame in which a 'match' was said to have been made. Nor indeed, were the initial samples taken at the crime site. They were spread around the country, a lot here in hospitals in Chiang Mai. That's normal, I have no beef with that.

However, the independence check comes from the comparison of the two samples - that's what's happening now. In England, DNA can be tested by both prosecution and defence - not here, initially. And in England, DNA evidence on its own is not conclusive enough to obtain a conviction. It's regarded as circumstantial, not more.

Never said that. I asked if in your country they have to have a DNA tested by an Independent Source before it is considered evidence.

Yes, DNA Evidence alone is not enough to convict someone in my country either. But adding in other factors, like being in possession of the victims cell phone, being seen near the crime scene when the murders took place, not having a good alibi, and hell knows what else that hasn't been disclosed yet, or from the 100 witnesses they have, would certainly add to this.

I used to be neutral about this case until I kept reading over and over again from all you Bleeding Hearts, screaming every time this type of news came out that they are framed, that Thai police are so corrupt, that these Poor Boys are innocent. But in all this time I have never seen anyone of them post something even 1 time, that proves they are as innocent as you all believe.

To you, every piece of evidence has been planted by the police or is false. Every News article that disproves your own personal theory you consider to be false. Every DNA Sample was not collected correctly or tainted by some Lab Tech. Every CCTV footage was tampered with, or changed, or something deleted. All confessions were made under torture. That it was just a strange coincidence that the accused happen to find the Cell Phone of one of the victims, on the night he was killed, but you see this as perfectly understandable. And this goes on and on.

What surprises me the most is that you have zero faith in the Police here, or Prosecutor, but yet you put so much faith in the Trail Judge here. That is interesting. Can't wait to see where you fit him in your corruption stories, after he finds them guilty.

I am sorry but this is my last post on this subject. It is just my Nature to feel sorry for the Victims and their Families, and not sorry to the guys who did that. Even with a death sentence, they will live much longer than Hannah and David did.

[berybert]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Just one question to the hang'em high-brigade: soooooo...let's assume for a second, that you are right (which you are not IMO) and the B2 killed and raped poor Hannah (which they did not IMO).

They didn't care to flee the island, they didn't care for the hoe, they didn't care throwing the victims phone (one of many, if we follow all the police reporting) behind their place and they are overall totally careless with important evidence.

How come, the second murder weapon was never found and there never was any mentioning of bloodstained clothes...and as I understand, there should have been lots of blood!

They didn't give two hot sh1ts for all the "evidence" presented, but they were careful enough to get rid of the clothes and the second murder weapon, right?!

Just asking your opinions, of course!

Okay! Who says they didn't take care of the Hoe? If I recall they didn't find any evidence on that Hoe. So it must have been washed clean from the Ocean Salt Water. It also wasn't found next to the bodies either. It was in fact put back to the Garden and where they got it from. To me, that tells me they tried to hide evidence and the Murder Weapon.

It was only by matching the Hoe to the wound on David Miller's Head that they deduced that this Hoe was in fact the Murder Weapon. The Accused must have figured that by trying to hide this Hoe someplace else would have raised the alarm bells, when the farmer reported it missing the next day. So since it was washed of evidence it was probably wiser to put it back.

So the first answer to you questions is, and like many Rapist Murderers, they didn't think they would get caught. It certainly took a long time to catch Ted Bundy and others like this. They knew that nobody else had witnessed their crime (with one guy probably being the Look Out) and the only 2 who could identify them they had killed. They must have felt so sure they wouldn't get caught, or be suspects, that they even took David Millers Cell Phone. Thinking nobody would look at them for it.

Now whether you think this was wise or even wonder why they would take such a risk, knowing that if they got caught with this phone it would link them to the murders, you have to remember this. They are Migrant Workers from a poor country and thus also poorly educated. As such, they were not hired to work their as Brain Surgeons. They were both hired and had low paying jobs. They probably also don't have much knowledge on DNA, and like we do There were (as they both admitted several times) drunk during this time. At the very least many people saw they were drinking. So there thought process that night, on top of there poor education, and everything else, was hindered.

Why they didn't find the second Murder Weapon that killed Hannah is for the same reason you first said they didn't do. Which was they took care of it. I don't think they even know for sure exactly what it was, except it was a Blunt Instrument. Thus can't be the Hoe. Perhaps some wooden stick or club, which after it is throw back into the Ocean it becomes Drift Wood again. But the fact they didn't find anything near the victims which would do that, then it is obvious they tried to hide it. They tried to hide evidence.

Why do you keep thinking there would be a lot of blood? They both were injured by head wounds, and not stabbed 100 times with a dull kitchen knife to the body. If you were hit in the face or on the nose, there would be blood. But they were hit on the tops and top sides of their heads, which doesn't produce much blood at all.

Why didn't they leave the island right after they committed this crime? It is probably a combination of several reasons.The most important one was they didn't think they would be suspects and thus get caught. But if they suddenly left and quit their jobs, this would arouse suspicious.They also were working without proper working papers, so there Visa may have expired as well. They also probably needed their jobs to help support their families back home. So since they probably didn't have much money, and also probably no family or friends on the main land, where could they run to. For them their employer is expect to pay there way home after a year, or sometimes longer.

I am surprised you didn't ask about the cigarette butts found near the Crime Scene. It never says they were taken 50 Meters away, at the log these guys sat on, but that's say this is so. The significance of the Cigarette Butts is the DNA Testing of those Butts also matched the sperm DNA Sample taken from Hannah. After talking to staff at the Resort, this is when they discovered that the accused where there that night playing their guitar. So it was these cigarettes Butts that led the Police to the suspects, and after DNA Sampling of them, which again matched the sperm found in Hannah, they were charged with Murder.

Its begining to make sense now. They were really drunk and being uneducated they didn't have a clue how they could get caught. So drunk in fact that while one of them was look out the other one killed a guy twice his size then raped the girl. Now don't forget the girl could have run while the boy was being murdered because the other one was keeping looky watch but she just sat and watched.

The weapon that killed Hannah was the hoe, you know the one that didn't have Davids DNA on it but did have Hannahs DNA on it.

The hoe was covered in Hannahs blood. That will be the blood you say was washed off by the sea water. This was done as you claim by two drunken boys who didn't have a clue what was happening because they were so drunk. As to why we think there was a lot of blood is because we have seen pictures of the bloody hoe, the beach the morning after the murder and the pictures of Hannahs broken body. You should go look at them and get a clue as to what happened to her.

What was the name of the famer who reported his hoe missing the following day ? Would it be the same one who found the hoe in the same place it was taken from ? How does something that is in the same place get reported missing ?

Hey heres a thought, maybe the log they were sitting on playing their guitar was what they used to kill Hannah, I mean David, god you got me confused now.

They then washed the log in the ocean to clean the blood off and put it back where they found it !! genius.

Well you have convinced me. Hang them high.

Easy to kill a guy twice your size when he is standing in front of you Butt Naked and you are holding a weapon!

The reason why Hannah did not run and cry for help was the same reason I knew from the beginning, and before it was reported, that there had to have been at least 2 people involved in these Murders. One fighting with David! One holding Hannah with a knife to her throat, and broken beer bottle, or whatever, to keep her still and quiet. No problem with a weapon to her throat and holding her by her hair and leading her over to the last rock and to the look out point.

You can't read and understand what you read can you? What I said was that they put the Hoe back to the Garden they took it from because they did not want to arouse suspicion. So since the Garden Hoe was back were it belonged it wasn't stolen. If it wasn't stolen then the farmer would not report it missing, now would he. Geese!

Them being drunk comes from both of the Accuses own testimony to the police, lawyers, and hell knows who else. I did not invent this, like the way you do with your stories here. There are also several witnesses you placed them near the crime scene and that they were drinking. So if you are calling the Accused Liars, then I agree with you 100%.

As I have said all along LINK a post that proves the DNA on the Hoe was just Hannah's, and who's it was. I would really like to see that LINK. The last I read about it they were not sure what killed Hannah. The originally thought maybe the Hoe, but changed their mind later after the autopsy. But go ahead and show me this proof. I will be waiting.

But either way, whether it was a Garden Hoe that killed Hanna, or a Ancient Egyptian Wooden Dildo, it does make these guy anymore innocent. Why can't you understand that? That just because they are not sure what killed her, or maybe not even have a murder weapon. doesn't make her any less dead and them more innocent!

Geese

Got it. The person whos garden the hoe was found in was the person who stole the hoe. A lovely clean hoe that had no blood on it or no DNA standing the the same place it was left.

So the police who got the call from the farmer desperately looking for his missing hoe, rushed to the scene of the garden and without asking either the person who owned the house or the famer decided hmmmm this lovely clean hoe that we don't know if it has been stolen or not and has no blood on it looks very much like a murder weapon.

They proceeded to match the wounds on David to the size of the blunt size of the hoe and hey presto it fitted. And so it should because if you burst a blunt hoe onto someones face it will just leave a mark the size of the blade. No chance of the mark getting any bigger after it has been crashed into a face.

Now I guess the most important question is, did the farmer get his hoe back ?

[catsanddogs]

Just a thought, but considering David's body was found nude: Was there blood on his torso and in his hair? How much? Granted, he was purportedly dragged in to the water, but that's not going to wash off all blood.

Perhaps more to the point: his clothes. Even if taken off before the confrontation, one would expect them to have at least some blood splatter if the clothing was nearby. It points to a possibility of clothes being taken from the scene (perhaps taken off his body) laundered, and then returned to the scene of the crime to dry in the sun. How late in the morning did police arrive? Some say hours. Even when they arrived, they probably didn't move clothing around, so the clothing would have added time to dry in the sun. Where are the closest places to the crime scene - to get clothing laundered? All would be needed is a water tap and some soap. Who would do that? Someone who was involved in the crime would do that if they thought some of their own blood/DNA/fingerprints might show up on the clothing. Perhaps it's seems very odd for someone to take bloody clothes from a crime scene, launder the clothes, ......then why return them? Perhaps to try and make the scene plausible (David would not be walking around the beach nude). Also, criminals don't often do reasonable things in the heat of the moment. They've got adrenaline going like a freight train, it's dark, they're scared .....weird actions often ensue.

That's a good point BTang. It would have been possible to do this, yes. The fact that it was reported that the police took hours to get to the crime scene would seem to imply that they were delayed deliberately for a reason...if so by whom?

[berybert]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Goldbuggy

Your response contains a number of errors , and ommissions that I am left to arrive at a conclusion that you are not really interested in the crime and posting with an intent of being vexatious

Oh?

Well I stand to be corrected.

Prove it!

Goldbuggy, as you are in fine form as your offensive and obnoxious style proves, let me ask you a serious question.

Do you trust the police in this country to carry out a thorough, impartial investigation and to not succumb to any levels of dishonesty or corruption ?

From the street Plod up to the highest officer ...... do you think that this investigation has been beyond reproach?

I'm assuming that you will not answer this question but I'd l be curious to know your views.

How about you JD? or AleG or JTJ?

First statement is simply an ad hominem.

The answer to the first question is : yes

The answer to the third question is : no

I have stated ( since the beginning) that there have been flaws in the investigation. I don't think those flaws are fatal flaws.

2 simple questions that require a yes no answer and even that has had a spin put on it.

You answer question number one with a yes. You then proceed to answer question number 3 ? What was question number 3 ... Do you think the police have carried out a 100% honest case.

[catsanddogs]

These are the pictures that first made me wonder why there was no blood on David's clothing

blood on beach.jpgshorts.jpg

Also just for goldbuggy here is a picture of the hoe.

bloody hoe.jpg

Finally this has always amused me.

hats.jpghats.jpg

Why on earth did they make the 2 lads wear hats ? to protect them from the violent mob on the beach who were going to go mad and start throwing rocks at them.

Not sure if the man in charge realized that not all missiles hit there target. So why didn't the police officers also wear helmets ? Because they knew it was going to be more of a party atmosphere because there was not 1 person in the crowd who thought the Burmese were the killers.

And another one in which Mon seems to be helping out. Bless him.

[AleG]

The issue is, goldbuggy, you don't accept all of your statements are conjecture. You don't KNOW, you can only guess by what has been reported but not yet substantiated. And it's only the prosecution's side that has been reported and that which you are set to believe. That is what this trial is all about. Showing both sides. That means listening to the evidence supplied by the defence before you jump to the conclusion that the accused are the criminals..

The very fact that the crime scene was contaminated, the initial DNA samples held in the Headman's fridge until forensics arrived, is enough to cast doubt on the DNA custody chain. However, the defence has been allowed to independently test this, and they could be able to either accept or challenge the RTP's allegations of a DNA match. Same with the cigarette butts.

However, I accept that the very close attention by the world's media could have caused the RTP to try and obtain a guilty party ASAP, once the initial suspects dried up. It is not beyond reason that scapegoats had to be found to protect its tourist image. It's happened before, so why not again? I will point out that I am not saying it happened in this case, but no-one could rule it out.

"the initial DNA samples held in the Headman's fridge until forensics arrived"

Even if that is true, and there's only Boomerangutang's fertile imagination to back it up, the forensic examinations were not done in Koh Tao, so it's a moot point.

"It is not beyond reason that scapegoats had to be found to protect its tourist image. It's happened before"

Yes, when and where? I heard that argument repeated often, never heard it substantiated.