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

[jimmybkk]

To those who believe in the guilt of the 2 Burmese lads I would ask this:

The prosecution's case appears to be based mainly around the DNA evidence. DNA collection, preservation and analysis is an incredibly exacting scientific process that can be ruled as potentially contaminated and inadmissible if there are even the slightest errors made during this process. Please could you tell us what images you have seen and what information about the subsequent investigation has been reported that convinces you that the DNA evidence was most likely collected, preserved and analyzed in accordance with international standards, is uncontaminated and should therefore be trusted?

Or is it simply blind faith...?

[mcm991]

To those who believe in the guilt of the 2 Burmese lads I would ask this:

The prosecution's case appears to be based mainly around the DNA evidence. DNA collection, preservation and analysis is an incredibly exacting scientific process that can be ruled as potentially contaminated and inadmissible if there are even the slightest errors made during this process. Please could you tell us what images you have seen and what information about the subsequent investigation has been reported that convinces you that the DNA evidence was most likely collected, preserved and analyzed in accordance with international standards, is uncontaminated and should therefore be trusted?

Or is it simply blind faith...?

hmmmmm... I think you may be referring to DNA evidence presented in other countries.

The fact that every man and their dog trampled over the crime scene before any evidence was even collected did not stop the head honcho proclaiming a 'perfect job' by his boys.

Most here can't even spell DNA ......

[jdinasia]

To those who believe in the guilt of the 2 Burmese lads I would ask this:

The prosecution's case appears to be based mainly around the DNA evidence. DNA collection, preservation and analysis is an incredibly exacting scientific process that can be ruled as potentially contaminated and inadmissible if there are even the slightest errors made during this process. Please could you tell us what images you have seen and what information about the subsequent investigation has been reported that convinces you that the DNA evidence was most likely collected, preserved and analyzed in accordance with international standards, is uncontaminated and should therefore be trusted?

Or is it simply blind faith...?

Your concept of the prosecution case needs revisions

[Jai Dee]

Another personal attack (flame) and reply have been removed from this topic.

[berybert]

The video, in the post you quoted is "documentation of where Nomsod was the morning after the crime" are you just trolling now?

So now when you post something which is clearly unproven you accuse your accuser of being a troll ?

You said... 'The police had the full footage from many different cameras in Nomsod's dormitory to prove he was not in Koh Tao at the time of the murder, also statements and documents from the University placing him there at that time'....If you are trying to be clever and now think CCTV footage is a document then that is pretty poor work on your part. Does CCTV footage also count as a statement in your world ? CCTV, documents and statements = 3 things to most people.

I said there have never been any documents or statements to say he was at the university at the time. Something you are the only one who has claimed this to be so.

So again can you back up your claim of documents and statements ?

Clueless as usual.

""There are university documents that confirmed his class attendance and examination," the lawyer told reporters.

Last week police identified Mr. Warot as a primary suspect, claiming that he fled the island shortly after the bodies of Mr. Miller and Ms. Witheridge were found.

The police later retracted their statement and said Mr. Warot was no longer a suspect because he was in Bangkok when the murder took place."

The police confirmed his presence in Bangkok at the time based on the documentation provided, can't deal with the truth?, too bad.

His lawyer told reporters. His lawyer who is paid to defend him.

I said can you back up your claim. It seems you can't.

The police later retracted their statement and said Mr. Warot was no longer a suspect because he was in Bangkok when the murder took place."

You are now in fact talking for the police and you are claiming they have seen documentation claiming he was in Bangkok at the time the murder took place.

Now call me a liar if you want too. But in what part of the statement you pasted does it claim the police have seen documentation ?

[boomerangutang]

One last fact is that, for all the hot air and bandwidth spent by amateur investigators, not one single iota of evidence has been found directly connecting anyone else to the crimes, none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies.

Here's what AleG calls "not one single iota of evidence ....none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies."

CCTV from the island; 'Running Man.'

For at least a week, investigating cops were sure it was Nomsod. Did they ever announce it was not him? Not that I've seen or heard. A few posters on here demand 'facts' and won't accept any evidence which doesn't sinc with their desired scenario. Those same posters put forth their own soggy 'facts' a mile a minute. Similarly, those posters cherry pick which police statements they like (and those become facts for them), and which police statements they don't like (and those are swept under the rug).

A sample police statement AleG and jdinasia don't like (because it was found, by social media, to be planted evidence): Hanna's phone was found behind the Burmeses' room.

The Official Police statement that A and J like (so that becomes the announcement they embrace as 'fact'): Oops, sorry, mistake, it was David's phone found in the bushes near the Burmeses' room.

Police statement they don't like: We have seen CCTV from the island, taken just after the crime, and determined that Mr. Worat is a suspect. We are now looking for him. It appears he is evading arrest. Even so, we will search for him and will be making arrests soon.

Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out.

[AleG]

One last fact is that, for all the hot air and bandwidth spent by amateur investigators, not one single iota of evidence has been found directly connecting anyone else to the crimes, none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies.

Here's what AleG calls "not one single iota of evidence ....none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies."

CCTV from the island; 'Running Man.'

For at least a week, investigating cops were sure it was Nomsod. Did they ever announce it was not him? Not that I've seen or heard. A few posters on here demand 'facts' and won't accept any evidence which doesn't sinc with their desired scenario. Those same posters put forth their own soggy 'facts' a mile a minute. Similarly, those posters cherry pick which police statements they like (and those become facts for them), and which police statements they don't like (and those are swept under the rug).

A sample police statement AleG and jdinasia don't like (because it was found, by social media, to be planted evidence): Hanna's phone was found behind the Burmeses' room.

The Official Police statement that A and J like (so that becomes the announcement they embrace as 'fact'): Oops, sorry, mistake, it was David's phone found in the bushes near the Burmeses' room.

Police statement they don't like: We have seen CCTV from the island, taken just after the crime, and determined that Mr. Worat is a suspect. We are now looking for him. It appears he is evading arrest. Even so, we will search for him and will be making arrests soon.

Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out.

Again, as usual, you peddle false information. In particular regarding the "planted phone" you should have a word with the two accused that in the last hearing said they just happened to find Miller's phone somewhere. Not that it would stop you perpetrating your nonsense because you don't care one bit about the facts, only your theories.

More false information, that the police were looking for Nomsod for a week, it took four days from the time they announced they were looking for him to being cleared.

Then of course that you claim to recognize him on footage were facial features are indistinguishable only speaks of your lack of intellectual integrity.

Even more falsehoods:

"Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out. "

Bending down to pressure from social media he subsequently agreed to a DNA test by four different laboratories, not that it made any difference because the people emotionally invested on seen "their" man being guilty wouldn't care less about such things as actual proof of anything.

In sum, you have nothing of any value to contribute, only repeating the same debunked and false talking points. Anyone that would care to look at what you are peddling and the actual facts would quickly establish the complete lack of credibility behind your opinions and theories.

[mcm991]

One last fact is that, for all the hot air and bandwidth spent by amateur investigators, not one single iota of evidence has been found directly connecting anyone else to the crimes, none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies.

Here's what AleG calls "not one single iota of evidence ....none, zero, bugger all. It's all speculation, rumors, misinformation and outright lies."

CCTV from the island; 'Running Man.'

For at least a week, investigating cops were sure it was Nomsod. Did they ever announce it was not him? Not that I've seen or heard. A few posters on here demand 'facts' and won't accept any evidence which doesn't sinc with their desired scenario. Those same posters put forth their own soggy 'facts' a mile a minute. Similarly, those posters cherry pick which police statements they like (and those become facts for them), and which police statements they don't like (and those are swept under the rug).

A sample police statement AleG and jdinasia don't like (because it was found, by social media, to be planted evidence): Hanna's phone was found behind the Burmeses' room.

The Official Police statement that A and J like (so that becomes the announcement they embrace as 'fact'): Oops, sorry, mistake, it was David's phone found in the bushes near the Burmeses' room.

Police statement they don't like: We have seen CCTV from the island, taken just after the crime, and determined that Mr. Worat is a suspect. We are now looking for him. It appears he is evading arrest. Even so, we will search for him and will be making arrests soon.

Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out.

Again, as usual, you peddle false information. In particular regarding the "planted phone" you should have a word with the two accused that in the last hearing said they just happened to find Miller's phone somewhere. Not that it would stop you perpetrating your nonsense because you don't care one bit about the facts, only your theories.

More false information, that the police were looking for Nomsod for a week, it took four days from the time they announced they were looking for him to being cleared.

Then of course that you claim to recognize him on footage were facial features are indistinguishable only speaks of your lack of intellectual integrity.

Even more falsehoods:

"Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out. "

Bending down to pressure from social media he subsequently agreed to a DNA test by four different laboratories, not that it made any difference because the people emotionally invested on seen "their" man being guilty wouldn't care less about such things as actual proof of anything.

In sum, you have nothing of any value to contribute, only repeating the same debunked and false talking points. Anyone that would care to look at what you are peddling and the actual facts would quickly establish the complete lack of credibility behind your opinions and theories.

That's the problem with not being in Group 1.

As far as you are concerned, the facts are anything the police have said and anything else is 'peddling nonsense'.

Surely, even you AleG can see that there is little common ground. Are you sure you need to make your point again?

You are a 2 or 3.

[IslandLover]

A fine point made. Another question regard the clothing, can you explain why David's shirt was quite a distance from the rest of his clothing ?

shorts.jpg

And even further away from Hannah's flip flops. Must have been quite an energetic session. And she didn't even get her clothes off.

Apologize to Cha cha cah.

The shirt isn't that far away from the rest of his clothing. But the shorts that David was wearing that night are quite a distance from the rest of his clothing - they're not even in that photograph. Those are dark shorts. He was wearing light shorts. Yet somehow the light shorts appeared in the official police photographs of his belongings. How did the police get them?

Don't forget running man was wearing light shorts in the video, so it must have been David's light shorts that he was wearing and those dark shorts must be running man's. Now why would running man be wearing David's shorts and leave his own behind? He must have taken his own shorts off and put David's on in the dark. Why would he take his shorts off? To rape Hannah. So running man must be the rapist.

And we all know who running man was by now, don't we?

So how did they get from running man to the police photograph?

The shorts are visible in the photo posted by berybert. They are in the far left of the image, just behind a rock. Here is another photo of the crime scene taken from a different angle. The two photos need to be viewed together to understand the position of the clothing.

Crimescene 1a.jpg

David's shorts are not there. There is a pair of dark shorts with a pair of grey boxer pants on top of them. There is David's t-shirt nearer where the body lay, a pair of woman's panties in the foreground (presumably Hannah's) and Hannah's flip flops to the right. Behind where the body lay, there is one of David's shoes, a mystery white object and a yellow towel over a rock.

In the police display photograph of David's clothes, the dark shorts and the grey boxer shorts do not appear. Instead they show his light shorts and a skimpy pair of striped briefs, along with his t-shirt, both his shoes and Hannah's flip flops and panties. The mystery white object and yellow towel do not appear. Unfortunately I don't know how to post this picture but I'm sure someone else could.

So whose are the dark shorts and light grey boxer shorts?

You mean this photo?

There has been much discussion on this forum about the crumpled shorts found on the beach. Some have said that they are David's beige shorts turned inside out, but like you, I'm not so sure.

Edited May 7, 2015 by IslandLover

[IslandLover]

The shorts are visible in the photo posted by berybert. They are in the far left of the image, just behind a rock. Here is another photo of the crime scene taken from a different angle. The two photos need to be viewed together to understand the position of the clothing.

Crimescene 1a.jpg

Thanks for posting the pic. That's why I asked for a re-posting of pics taken from crime scene. They're significant. I was wrong about the shorts being laid out flat on the sand. I had the pic of the evidence after the crime (laid out neatly for pics) in my mind, rather than the shorts as they were purportedly found on the beach. Even so, by the way they're crumpled, they appear as though they were taken off a man, rather than taken off by the wearer. Maybe insignificant, but 'no stone unturned' should be the guide for investigators. Rather than, 'We, your superiors tell you what to think, and all investigative work should back that up.' Lot of blood - a reminder of what a violent and sad end it must have been for the two victims.

Any blood splatter on clothing? Not if RTP don't want there to be.

Then we have these two photos. Not a speck of blood to be seen.

[IslandLover]

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

Wrong. Nomsod was in the clear days before his DNA was taken, typed (very quickly!) , and found not to match DNA found in/on Hannah. Indeed, Nomsod was cleared on the bases of two still 'grabs' (waved around by his lawyer) taken from questionable CCTV footage taken in Bkk, nearly 5 hours after the crime. I don't think the RTP themselves ever declared it was not Nomsod on the island CCTV minutes after the crime. Though RTP did claim they were sure it was him earlier. If anyone can source a quote where RTP claim it WAS NOT him on the island CCTV, please let us know.

You know this not to be true:

"Nomsod was cleared on the bases of two still 'grabs' (waved around by his lawyer) taken from questionable CCTV footage"

Therefore you are deliberately lying with an intention to deceive.

The police had the full footage from many different cameras in Nomsod's dormitory to prove he was not in Koh Tao at the time of the murder, also statements and documents from the University placing him there at that time.

Here's the full footage I referred to, as examined in full by journalists:

Regards the youtube video , does anybody notice an oddity at the following point in time

youtube video time 3.25

Timestamp on video 06:35 :31 and 06:36:46

I notice a few strange things in this video. Each time I play it frame by frame I see something different. At one point there is a girl sitting on the wooden bench in the lobby and the next time I play it she is gone. Weird. Why does it suddenly jump from B&W to full colour?

The most noticeable thing for me is that the person walking has the same walk as the guy in the No. 9 football shirt who is seen in the KT CCTV footage shaking hands with David Miller.

[ScarpoFongness4U]

Everyone knows the cell phone was planted.

It was exposed by social media at the time

There was no blood evidence that left the scene indicating the murderers left by boat

That boat, has disappeared.

The crazed man in the cave, and the other people on the boat that was seen escaping the island by police,

Were never named.

Fair trial?

[rockingrobin]

Who do the pink coloured flip flops belong to ?, if I recall correctly Hannahs was not wearing pink footwear on the night

[IslandLover]

Who do the pink coloured flip flops belong to ?, if I recall correctly Hannahs was not wearing pink footwear on the night

They are presumed to be Hannah's although there has not been any clear CCTV footage to tell what she was wearing on her feet that night.

[AleG]

Again, as usual, you peddle false information. In particular regarding the "planted phone" you should have a word with the two accused that in the last hearing said they just happened to find Miller's phone somewhere. Not that it would stop you perpetrating your nonsense because you don't care one bit about the facts, only your theories.

More false information, that the police were looking for Nomsod for a week, it took four days from the time they announced they were looking for him to being cleared.

Then of course that you claim to recognize him on footage were facial features are indistinguishable only speaks of your lack of intellectual integrity.

Even more falsehoods:

"Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out. "

Bending down to pressure from social media he subsequently agreed to a DNA test by four different laboratories, not that it made any difference because the people emotionally invested on seen "their" man being guilty wouldn't care less about such things as actual proof of anything.

In sum, you have nothing of any value to contribute, only repeating the same debunked and false talking points. Anyone that would care to look at what you are peddling and the actual facts would quickly establish the complete lack of credibility behind your opinions and theories.

That's the problem with not being in Group 1.

As far as you are concerned, the facts are anything the police have said and anything else is 'peddling nonsense'.

Surely, even you AleG can see that there is little common ground. Are you sure you need to make your point again?

You are a 2 or 3.

You seem to be as oblivious of the meaning of "fact" as Boomerangutang is, a fact is not something someone says, a fact is something that has a real and verifiable existence.

If you would had actually bothered to read what I wrote, instead of simply doing what was expected of you to do (that is a knee-jerk dismissal and demonization) you may have noticed that in my post I pointed at something the two Burmese said during their latest hearing (not the police), something a calendar says (as in the time frame between Nomsod named a suspect and him being cleared) and one more statement of fact, Nomsod being cleared by analysis from four different laboratories many days after the police had already removed him from the suspect list, which is directly contrary to Boomerangutang's false claims that no further inquiry into his involvement was pursued after he was cleared.

None of that is me repeating what the police said, what I pointed at are actual, verifiable facts; but then again you are evidently quite intent on living in a world of your own, what with your self-serving categorizations and all that.

[AleG]

Who do the pink coloured flip flops belong to ?, if I recall correctly Hannahs was not wearing pink footwear on the night

You don't recall correctly, she was wearing pink sandals.

[AleG]

Everyone knows the cell phone was planted.

It was exposed by social media at the time

There was no blood evidence that left the scene indicating the murderers left by boat

That boat, has disappeared.

The crazed man in the cave, and the other people on the boat that was seen escaping the island by police,

Were never named.

Fair trial?

"Everyone knows the cell phone was planted."

Really? then how come the two men under trial don't know that? They said during the last hearing that they just happened to found that phone on the night of the murders.

Makes one wonder what else this social media detectives may have gotten wrong, or if they got anything right at all, because "Hanna's phone was planted! We busted the police/mafia/government conspiracy!" has been one of the greatest achievements of their investigation.

[AleG]

Thanks for posting the pic. That's why I asked for a re-posting of pics taken from crime scene. They're significant. I was wrong about the shorts being laid out flat on the sand. I had the pic of the evidence after the crime (laid out neatly for pics) in my mind, rather than the shorts as they were purportedly found on the beach. Even so, by the way they're crumpled, they appear as though they were taken off a man, rather than taken off by the wearer. Maybe insignificant, but 'no stone unturned' should be the guide for investigators. Rather than, 'We, your superiors tell you what to think, and all investigative work should back that up.' Lot of blood - a reminder of what a violent and sad end it must have been for the two victims.

Any blood splatter on clothing? Not if RTP don't want there to be.

Then we have these two photos. Not a speck of blood to be seen.

crimescene 3.jpgShorts.jpg

The difference between a real investigator and one that plays at it on the Internet is that the real one can pick up the clothes, turn them around and verify whether there really are "specks" of blood or not.

The Internet "investigator" sees a low quality photo, decides that it can safely ignore the "specks" seen on the fabric (such as the one near the right pocket) as not being blood and declare his theories validated.

This reminds me once again of the Dunning-Kruger Effect:

"The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude"

Or in simpler terms, people that are really bad at something lack the skills to actually understand how bad they are at that.

[rockingrobin]

Who do the pink coloured flip flops belong to ?, if I recall correctly Hannahs was not wearing pink footwear on the night

You don't recall correctly, she was wearing pink sandals.

Would you please provide the verifiable fact that she was wearing pink sandals

[catsanddogs]

Re the video in post 431

Certainly seems to be fingering his hair like a person who's just had a new style. And what's he looking at in the mirror on his forehead at 1.15 into the video? A cut or scratch maybe?

[mcm991]

Again, as usual, you peddle false information. In particular regarding the "planted phone" you should have a word with the two accused that in the last hearing said they just happened to find Miller's phone somewhere. Not that it would stop you perpetrating your nonsense because you don't care one bit about the facts, only your theories.

More false information, that the police were looking for Nomsod for a week, it took four days from the time they announced they were looking for him to being cleared.

Then of course that you claim to recognize him on footage were facial features are indistinguishable only speaks of your lack of intellectual integrity.

Even more falsehoods:

"Police statement they like: Forget what we said a few days earlier. Mr. Worat's lawyer assures us he should not be a suspect. The lawyer showed us alibi info, so the young man is completely clean, and we won't be scrutinizing him or his alibi or anything else regarding him, from here on out. "

Bending down to pressure from social media he subsequently agreed to a DNA test by four different laboratories, not that it made any difference because the people emotionally invested on seen "their" man being guilty wouldn't care less about such things as actual proof of anything.

In sum, you have nothing of any value to contribute, only repeating the same debunked and false talking points. Anyone that would care to look at what you are peddling and the actual facts would quickly establish the complete lack of credibility behind your opinions and theories.

That's the problem with not being in Group 1.

As far as you are concerned, the facts are anything the police have said and anything else is 'peddling nonsense'.

Surely, even you AleG can see that there is little common ground. Are you sure you need to make your point again?

You are a 2 or 3.

You seem to be as oblivious of the meaning of "fact" as Boomerangutang is, a fact is not something someone says, a fact is something that has a real and verifiable existence.

If you would had actually bothered to read what I wrote, instead of simply doing what was expected of you to do (that is a knee-jerk dismissal and demonization) you may have noticed that in my post I pointed at something the two Burmese said during their latest hearing (not the police), something a calendar says (as in the time frame between Nomsod named a suspect and him being cleared) and one more statement of fact, Nomsod being cleared by analysis from four different laboratories many days after the police had already removed him from the suspect list, which is directly contrary to Boomerangutang's false claims that no further inquiry into his involvement was pursued after he was cleared.

None of that is me repeating what the police said, what I pointed at are actual, verifiable facts; but then again you are evidently quite intent on living in a world of your own, what with your self-serving categorizations and all that.

No. I think you miss the larger pont that the spectacle of Nomsod giving his sample was nothing more than a staged publicity stunt with none other than his Dad and the chief of police holding his hands and grinning like cheshire cats.

It is a verifiable fact that he did it but the important issue that you miss - is that the results were as anticipated by all of the known universe. As if any other option was a possibility..... ha ha ...... funny. Then right after the event the police tell everyone that the results will not be shared with anyone and please take their word for it all.

All Facts.

So the fact as you state it becomes irrelevant to Group 1 and does nothing to further your position.

Everyone lives in a world of their own - why is it so important to you to have everyone come into your world?

[jdinasia]

If you know that you weren't there, and the police investigation revealed that you weren't there....

Why would you or the police look as if any other result was possible?

Of course it was a foregone conclusion.

[JLCrab]

If you know that you weren't there, and the police investigation revealed that you weren't there....

Why would you or the police look as if any other result was possible?

Of course it was a foregone conclusion.

Sure JD but you're forgetting what in the Catechism might be called the "Immaculate Escape".

[jdinasia]

If you know that you weren't there, and the police investigation revealed that you weren't there....

Why would you or the police look as if any other result was possible?

Of course it was a foregone conclusion.

Sure JD but you're forgetting what in the Catechism might be called the "Immaculate Escape".

LOL

[boomerangutang]

Re the video in post 431

Certainly seems to be fingering his hair like a person who's just had a new style. And what's he looking at in the mirror on his forehead at 1.15 into the video? A cut or scratch maybe?

Interesting observations by some posters - re; the video. We, the general public, are supposed to accept the video and the lawyer's and the polices' assessment of it, with barely a cursory view, because lawyers and cops never lie, do they? Particularly if they have an agenda. Oh, and last time I checked, when a student goes to class, he/she carries books or a notebook and/or small pack.

If you know that you weren't there, and the police investigation revealed that you weren't there....

Why would you or the police look as if any other result was possible?

Of course it was a foregone conclusion.

Who is 'you' in your missive? ....and what on Bob's green earth are you referring to? <snip>

Edited May 8, 2015 by Jai Dee
Flame deleted

[AleG]

You seem to be as oblivious of the meaning of "fact" as Boomerangutang is, a fact is not something someone says, a fact is something that has a real and verifiable existence.

If you would had actually bothered to read what I wrote, instead of simply doing what was expected of you to do (that is a knee-jerk dismissal and demonization) you may have noticed that in my post I pointed at something the two Burmese said during their latest hearing (not the police), something a calendar says (as in the time frame between Nomsod named a suspect and him being cleared) and one more statement of fact, Nomsod being cleared by analysis from four different laboratories many days after the police had already removed him from the suspect list, which is directly contrary to Boomerangutang's false claims that no further inquiry into his involvement was pursued after he was cleared.

None of that is me repeating what the police said, what I pointed at are actual, verifiable facts; but then again you are evidently quite intent on living in a world of your own, what with your self-serving categorizations and all that.

No. I think you miss the larger pont that the spectacle of Nomsod giving his sample was nothing more than a staged publicity stunt with none other than his Dad and the chief of police holding his hands and grinning like cheshire cats.

It is a verifiable fact that he did it but the important issue that you miss - is that the results were as anticipated by all of the known universe. As if any other option was a possibility..... ha ha ...... funny. Then right after the event the police tell everyone that the results will not be shared with anyone and please take their word for it all.

All Facts.

So the fact as you state it becomes irrelevant to Group 1 and does nothing to further your position.

Everyone lives in a world of their own - why is it so important to you to have everyone come into your world?

Again, you don't understand what a fact is, your speculation (as in the first two paragraphs) are not facts, that's things you just made up in order to hold on to your beliefs on the face of no real evidence to support them.

Then again the point I made was that Boomerangootang claimed that he was not subject to any further inquiery after providing an alibi and being cleared by the police, even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory the fact is that Boomerangutang's claim was false; it's very telling that you have a problem with me demonstrating something is false instead of with the person making false claims.

The problem with your world is that it is a world were people end up being harassed, persecuted or even killed based on speculation; I prefer to live in a world were justice depends on an objective and rational analysis of fact.

[AleG]

You don't recall correctly, she was wearing pink sandals.

Would you please provide the verifiable fact that she was wearing pink sandals

Those are the sandals found at the crime scene, none with actual knowledge on the matter (such as friends or family of the victim) has contested that fact, the only people contesting it are online speculators that are systematically looking for straws to clutch.

That and CCTV footage that shows her wearing them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cw6wj73yuEQ

[boomerangutang]

You seem to be as oblivious of the meaning of "fact" as Boomerangutang is, a fact is not something someone says, a fact is something that has a real and verifiable existence.

If you would had actually bothered to read what I wrote, instead of simply doing what was expected of you to do (that is a knee-jerk dismissal and demonization) you may have noticed that in my post I pointed at something the two Burmese said during their latest hearing (not the police), something a calendar says (as in the time frame between Nomsod named a suspect and him being cleared) and one more statement of fact, Nomsod being cleared by analysis from four different laboratories many days after the police had already removed him from the suspect list, which is directly contrary to Boomerangutang's false claims that no further inquiry into his involvement was pursued after he was cleared.

None of that is me repeating what the police said, what I pointed at are actual, verifiable facts; but then again you are evidently quite intent on living in a world of your own, what with your self-serving categorizations and all that.

No. I think you miss the larger point that the spectacle of Nomsod giving his sample was nothing more than a staged publicity stunt with none other than his Dad and the chief of police holding his hands and grinning like cheshire cats.

It is a verifiable fact that he did it but the important issue that you miss - is that the results were as anticipated by all of the known universe. As if any other option was a possibility..... ha ha ...... funny. Then right after the event the police tell everyone that the results will not be shared with anyone and please take their word for it all.

All Facts.

So the fact as you state it becomes irrelevant to Group 1 and does nothing to further your position.

Everyone lives in a world of their own - why is it so important to you to have everyone come into your world?

Again, you don't understand what a fact is, your speculation (as in the first two paragraphs) are not facts, that's things you just made up in order to hold on to your beliefs on the face of no real evidence to support them.

Then again the point I made was that Boomerangootang claimed that he was not subject to any further inquiery after providing an alibi and being cleared by the police, even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory the fact is that Boomerangutang's claim was false; it's very telling that you have a problem with me demonstrating something is false instead of with the person making false claims.

The problem with your world is that it is a world were people end up being harassed, persecuted or even killed based on speculation; I prefer to live in a world were justice depends on an objective and rational analysis of fact.

I agree with MCM that the press conference/photo op with Nomsod (who never says anything publicly) his lawyer, his dad, their top brass buddies ....was totally staged. There was no doubt in anyone's mind what the result would be. Level of mystery and anticipation = zero.

AleG writes; "even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory" ....oh no, how could anyone think that media event was part of a conspiracy theory, <snip>

Edited May 8, 2015 by Jai Dee
Flame deleted

[jimmybkk]

Relying on FB assertions again.

For those of us seeking truth and justice, thank Bob for FB. Without FB we wouldn't have known so quickly that the RTP was trying to 'plant' false evidence hear the B's room. Without FB we wouldn't have seen those photos of H's people (M and 'Stingray Man') proudly sporting shark tooth rings - the type of weapon which fits with David's wounds.

How many times did you say that the police theory changed after Panya was promoted?

I had initially mentioned it, yes. Then was corrected and realized I was off by a couple of days. I admitted it and have posted a slightly more accurate assessment since then, a number of times. It's interesting that you admit 'the police theory changed', at least we can agree on that. Anyone who knows anything about Thailand knows that most, if not all serious political matters stem from Bangkok. Top players in Bkk had taken a keen interest in this case from the get-go (the PM himself had made public comments often). The top cop in Bkk also let his opinions be known. Much pressure from Bangkok on poor Panya to alter the course of his investigation:

'Don't focus on the H's people. Find others to nail, and do it quick! Because the longer this drags out (no indictments) the worse it is for Ko Toa's and Thailand's tourist image!' (or words to that effect).

Panya complied, but days later, his superior officer appointed himself anyway. Panya was ushered to a desk job, never to heard of again in regard to this case. Smiles all around.

If I was leading the defense team, the first person I'd call would be Panya. I don't think he was doing a great job in his 10 days or so at the helm of the investigation, but he wasn't orchestrating a cover-up - as his replacements appear to be doing.

Can you provide the timeline you are referring to regarding news of Panya's promotion being released? I hope you're not relying on a certain poster's assertion of the date it appeared in the Royal Gazette, because that same poster also asserted that it was reported in the Bangkok Post and PhuketWan which was proved to be nothing but lies, and only when pressed further did that poster then come up with this Royal Gazette story, which is probably as factual as his previous assertion.

[AleG]

Again, you don't understand what a fact is, your speculation (as in the first two paragraphs) are not facts, that's things you just made up in order to hold on to your beliefs on the face of no real evidence to support them.

Then again the point I made was that Boomerangootang claimed that he was not subject to any further inquiery after providing an alibi and being cleared by the police, even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory the fact is that Boomerangutang's claim was false; it's very telling that you have a problem with me demonstrating something is false instead of with the person making false claims.

The problem with your world is that it is a world were people end up being harassed, persecuted or even killed based on speculation; I prefer to live in a world were justice depends on an objective and rational analysis of fact.

I agree with MCM that the press conference/photo op with Nomsod (who never says anything publicly) his lawyer, his dad, their top brass buddies ....was totally staged. There was no doubt in anyone's mind what the result would be. Level of mystery and anticipation = zero.

AleG writes; "even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory" ....oh no, how could anyone think that media event was part of a conspiracy theory, <snip>

You cut what I wrote short, here's the sentence in full:

"even if you think that the DNA testing done days after that is all part of a conspiracy theory the fact is that Boomerangutang's claim was false"

The fact is you are in the habit of telling falsehoods regarding this case (I don't know if your lack of honesty extends to other areas of your life), you should own up to your own beheaviour instead of trying to be funny.