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

[JLCrab]

This is my comment from 22 MARCH 2015:

If this is to be a case this summer made totally out of whole-cloth with 60-some prosecution witnesses providing a conga-line of perjured testimony (or what they believe to be truthful testimony even if it is perjured testimony) with the type of world-wide media attention this trial is to receive, I don't think the folks down there on Samui -- many of whom are one generation away from coconut farmers -- are good enough to pull that one off.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-27#entry9216525

Some lies are worse than others, and Reverend Wright might appreciate the hierarchical taxonomy for lies, damned lies, and (as he might put it) goddamned lies.

And the truth (in this case) lies somewhere in between.

I'll presume from the source there was something intended to be profound in there.

[stephenterry]

Stephen -

Not only is a murder weapon not required to get a murder conviction, your don't even need a corpse.

You saying it should be impossible doesn't make it true. There appears to be enough to get convictions on both of the 2 Burmese defendants.

Feel free to keep focusing on one of the 2 murders, but my guess is that the court will conclude that it is reasonable that both of the victims were killed by the same perpetrators.

JD - you're correct, but if you read what I wrote, the prosecution needs more, e.g. an eye-witness or several, or DM's blood found on the clothes that one of the B2 wore. Something material, not 'they happened to be in the vicinity at some point that evening'. And, as I've said, there is no disclosed evidence to support the view that the B2 killed either victim, so your statement is pure conjecture at this point in time. Wait for the defence's counter-arguments, before assuming a court's conclusion.

BTW, the defence has revealed they have one witness who is crucial to their case - whether the 60+ prosecution witnesses can counter that, is anyone's guess. I'm sure JLC would know...

[stephenterry]

This is my comment from 22 MARCH 2015:

If this is to be a case this summer made totally out of whole-cloth with 60-some prosecution witnesses providing a conga-line of perjured testimony (or what they believe to be truthful testimony even if it is perjured testimony) with the type of world-wide media attention this trial is to receive, I don't think the folks down there on Samui -- many of whom are one generation away from coconut farmers -- are good enough to pull that one off.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-27#entry9216525

Some lies are worse than others, and Reverend Wright might appreciate the hierarchical taxonomy for lies, damned lies, and (as he might put it) goddamned lies.

And the truth (in this case) lies somewhere in between.

I'll presume from the source there was something intended to be profound in there.

it was intended to be about as profound as your statement..

[jdinasia]

I would hope that the defense has more than 1 crucial witness.

I, of course, could be wrong but even if the confessions to the police are excluded. There's the first defense lawyer's public statements. The HRC commissioner's statement. The witness that puts the phone in their hands. The admissions of being present. The DNA...

[berybert]

I seems to recall the picture of the phone when It was found. It was nicely wrapped in a plastic bag. So we can assume the boys finger prints will still be on the phone.

[Si Thea01]

I have been following the posts in this incident with interest and cannot believe some of the ridiculous statements made in relation to the tampering with evidence. Those who are suggesting this, you know who you are, should tell us how this will take place, when and where and who will be involved, as given you posts you seem to know everything and are adamant that this will occur.

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Next, under the Thailand Penal Code (Specifying Crimes and Punishment) there is an offence of Malfeasance in Judicial Office.

Section 200.

Whoever, being an official in the post of a Public Prosecutor, an official conducting cases, an inquiry official, or an official who has the power to investigate the criminal cases or to execute a criminal warrant, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions in order to assist any person not to receive punishment or to receive less punishment, shall be punished with imprisonment of six months to seven years and fined of one thousand to
fourteen thousand Baht.

If such exercise or non-exercise is to maliciously cause any person to be punished, to be punished heavier or to be subjected to the measures of safety, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment of one to twenty years, and fined of two thousand to forty thousand Baht.

So for all you experts who are alluding that many of those judicially involved will be complicit in evidence tampering, I suggest that you know nothing and are just using false and misleading statements in your attempt to discredit the prosecution team by alluding that they will do anything to ensure the defendants are found guilty. I think before you post your denunciation of those involved, do some research, it may help to prevent you from looking foolish.

[JLCrab]

This is my comment from 22 MARCH 2015:

If this is to be a case this summer made totally out of whole-cloth with 60-some prosecution witnesses providing a conga-line of perjured testimony (or what they believe to be truthful testimony even if it is perjured testimony) with the type of world-wide media attention this trial is to receive, I don't think the folks down there on Samui -- many of whom are one generation away from coconut farmers -- are good enough to pull that one off.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/804973-capital-punishment-concerns-raised-over-thai-backpackers-murder-case/page-27#entry9216525

Some lies are worse than others, and Reverend Wright might appreciate the hierarchical taxonomy for lies, damned lies, and (as he might put it) goddamned lies.

And the truth (in this case) lies somewhere in between.

I'll presume from the source there was something intended to be profound in there.

it was intended to be about as profound as your statement..

Operative word: intended. I have no idea which Rev. Wright -- a friend of Disraeli? -- you are talking about but this is straight from Vincent LaGuardia Gambini in My Cousin Vinny:

The D.A.'s got to build a case. Building a case is like building a house. Each piece of evidence is just another building block. He wants to make a brick bunker of a building. He wants to use serious, solid-looking bricks, like, like these, right?

[puts his hand on the wall]

Bill: Right.

Vinny Gambini: Let me show you something.

[he holds up a playing card, with the face toward Billy]

Vinny Gambini: He's going to show you the bricks. He'll show you they got straight sides. He'll show you how they got the right shape. He'll show them to you in a very special way, so that they appear to have everything a brick should have. But there's one thing he's not gonna show you.

[turns the card, so that its edge is toward Billy]

Vinny Gambini: When you look at the bricks from the right angle, they're as thin as this playing card. His whole case is an illusion, a magic trick. It has to be an illusion, 'cause you're innocent. Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini, especially this one.

Edited May 3, 2015 by JLCrab

[jdinasia]

I seems to recall the picture of the phone when It was found. It was nicely wrapped in a plastic bag. So we can assume the boys finger prints will still be on the phone.

You may want to go back and check.

[stephenterry]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

[jdinasia]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

You may want to read the rest of his post.

[stephenterry]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

You may want to read the rest of his post.

I remember the first policeman stating that some people have tried to destroy evidence - and my point is that the evidence management displayed in this investigation falls far short of competent, whether or not it is accidental.

[Rimmer]

A vulgar troll post has been removed

[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>

You have got to be kidding me! Did you just read the story today and now concluded they are innocent.

Okay, let me help you out a little bit. You find a few fresh L&M Regular Cigarette Butts at the Crime Scene when neither of the victims smoke. By now you have suspects. Witnesses who saw them sitting on a Log, near the Crime Scene, in the early hours, and playing their guitar and drinking.You take a DNA Sample which matches one of the accused. You look in his pocket and discover he smokes L&M Regular. And exactly what they did do! You couldn't find a match for the other accused because he doesn't damned well smoke cigarettes. Geese!

You damned right that a second DNA Test was preformed, after everyone made such a big fuss about it being tainted, and it was sent to Singapore for an independent test. This is a know fact!

Who said they were both killed by a Hoe. David was, but Hannah had her pretty head bashed in, and as far as I know they did not find the weapon that did that.

An Alibi is being seen at the Police Man's Convention and having dinner with the Police Chief during the time of the murder! Or a Sporting Even when several witnesses can testify they saw you there or sat next to you. What an Alibi isn't is to have your co-accused say you both went to sleep but nobody else saw you.

And No! I am not going to did all this information up for you so you can sit on your Butt and play your game. It is all on the Internet. Dig it up yourself!

Most of that commentary of yours is not true although you do have an active imagination.

The cigarette butts were found about 50m way from the crime scene where the 2 admitted they were sitting and playing guitar.

None of the DNA testing was done outside Thailand.

Police said they were both killed with the hoe and the re-enactment depicted that.

So to you this proves they are innocent?

Whow! If I ever get charged for murder I hope you will be on the jury.

[JohnThailandJohn]

Pity goldbuggy isn't a witness for the prosecution. The defence could rip his incorrect testimony to shreds. Let's just pick one major flaw into all of the hang-em-high brigade. David Miller's DNA wasn't found on the hoe. No mention of his DNA on either of the B2 nor the B2's DNA on the hoe that was used to kill the female victim. So how was DM killed, and by who? The RTP would state that an unnamed and missing weapon was used.

Without any DNA evidence or murder weapon to link the B2 to DM, they have no DNA case to answer in respect of DM's death. However you guys put a 'spin' on it, it should be impossible (beyond reasonable doubt) for the court to convict the B2 of his death because they happened to be in the vicinity of the murder scene at 1am (and found sleeping in their beds at 5am). The prosecution needs more circumstantial evidence to strengthen their case.

Finally, for this post, all TVF have been privy to is the RTP's version of events, which is yet to be accepted as 'factual' by the court. No-one on here has had any feedback from the defence's counter arguments, other than the defence is confident that their case is strong enough to set the B2 free.

So, assuming (incorrectly) we know all the facts and evidence in the case and assuming (incorrectly) all news reports are true and the two on trial semen was found in one of the victims, one of the victims property was found outside their home and a witness says he was given the property to destroy along with numerous other witnesses' and physical evidence putting them at the rape and murder scene around the time frame the crime occurred .... you figure the judges would believe without reasonable doubt that they killed or raped one of victims but not killed the other because they couldn't find one of the murder weapons?

It is sick the extent some will got to in order to defend these two very likely rapist murdering scum.

[JohnThailandJohn]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

You may want to read the rest of his post.

I remember the first policeman stating that some people have tried to destroy evidence - and my point is that the evidence management displayed in this investigation falls far short of competent, whether or not it is accidental.

Was this in some personal conversation you had with a policeman or something you can share a link to a news report with this quote?

One thing that was widely reported earlier was they confessed to police and then met with lawyers, embassy officials and human rights worker outside of police presence and once again admitted the were responsible. Of course later they said they were threatened by police and now the word tortured is being used despite no physical evidence to suggest such a thing and physical evidence (medical exams) to disprove this.

[GOLDBUGGY]

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

Regardless of the fact that " A Thai court has allowed independent verification of the DNA evidence against the two suspects" and there is no reasonable reason to doubt it will come back matching these two "alleged" rapist murdering thugs, those who continue their faux support of them will continue with conspiracy and far fetched theories because of their own personal issues. Justice is not a motivation for most of them and they could care less if the guilty walk free to rape and murder more innocent people as long as it means they can continue to find ways to spread their hatred towards their own lives Thailand.

Excellent Post John. I couldn't have said it better.

The main interest for them isn't guilt or innocents. It is just another opportunity to do some more Thai Police Bashing, because they got a speeding ticket that week.

I am still waiting for someone to show some real proof and evidence to suggest these guys are innocent like they claim. But all I keep seeing is more Hot Air and more Jaw Boning!

[GOLDBUGGY]

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

Pity goldbuggy isn't a witness for the prosecution. The defence could rip his incorrect testimony to shreds. Let's just pick one major flaw into all of the hang-em-high brigade. David Miller's DNA wasn't found on the hoe. No mention of his DNA on either of the B2 nor the B2's DNA on the hoe that was used to kill the female victim. So how was DM killed, and by who? The RTP would state that an unnamed and missing weapon was used.

Without any DNA evidence or murder weapon to link the B2 to DM, they have no DNA case to answer in respect of DM's death. However you guys put a 'spin' on it, it should be impossible (beyond reasonable doubt) for the court to convict the B2 of his death because they happened to be in the vicinity of the murder scene at 1am (and found sleeping in their beds at 5am). The prosecution needs more circumstantial evidence to strengthen their case.

Finally, for this post, all TVF have been privy to is the RTP's version of events, which is yet to be accepted as 'factual' by the court. No-one on here has had any feedback from the defence's counter arguments, other than the defence is confident that their case is strong enough to set the B2 free.

I couldn't be a witness for the defense as I did not conduct any DNA Test, like the sperm samples found inside of Hannah, or saw them at the bench playing there guitar. So everything I have, and you have, is Here Say.

David Miller drowned, and this is a know fact. He was hit over the head first, which the cut on his head seemed to match a hoe. Hannah had head head bashed in and I am not certain if even they know for sure what did that. But it doesn't really matter as you do not need a murder weapon to get a conviction. This also does not prove they are innocent either.

The only people putting a spin on things here are the ones constantly pleading they are innocent, when they have zero proof to back one of there words. This is because they are more interested in Thai Bashing of Policemen here then who is guilty or innocent. That is obvious to see.

[jdinasia]

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

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

You have got to be kidding me! Did you just read the story today and now concluded they are innocent.

Okay, let me help you out a little bit. You find a few fresh L&M Regular Cigarette Butts at the Crime Scene when neither of the victims smoke. By now you have suspects. Witnesses who saw them sitting on a Log, near the Crime Scene, in the early hours, and playing their guitar and drinking.You take a DNA Sample which matches one of the accused. You look in his pocket and discover he smokes L&M Regular. And exactly what they did do! You couldn't find a match for the other accused because he doesn't damned well smoke cigarettes. Geese!

You damned right that a second DNA Test was preformed, after everyone made such a big fuss about it being tainted, and it was sent to Singapore for an independent test. This is a know fact!

Who said they were both killed by a Hoe. David was, but Hannah had her pretty head bashed in, and as far as I know they did not find the weapon that did that.

An Alibi is being seen at the Police Man's Convention and having dinner with the Police Chief during the time of the murder! Or a Sporting Even when several witnesses can testify they saw you there or sat next to you. What an Alibi isn't is to have your co-accused say you both went to sleep but nobody else saw you.

And No! I am not going to did all this information up for you so you can sit on your Butt and play your game. It is all on the Internet. Dig it up yourself!

Most of that commentary of yours is not true although you do have an active imagination.

The cigarette butts were found about 50m way from the crime scene where the 2 admitted they were sitting and playing guitar.

None of the DNA testing was done outside Thailand.

Police said they were both killed with the hoe and the re-enactment depicted that.

So to you this proves they are innocent?

Whow! If I ever get charged for murder I hope you will be on the jury.

No jury system in Thailand

[jdinasia]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

You may want to read the rest of his post.

I remember the first policeman stating that some people have tried to destroy evidence - and my point is that the evidence management displayed in this investigation falls far short of competent, whether or not it is accidental.

Was this in some personal conversation you had with a policeman or something you can share a link to a news report with this quote?

One thing that was widely reported earlier was they confessed to police and then met with lawyers, embassy officials and human rights worker outside of police presence and once again admitted the were responsible. Of course later they said they were threatened by police and now the word tortured is being used despite no physical evidence to suggest such a thing and physical evidence (medical exams) to disprove this.

Probably not in a personal conversation. When, briefly, Mon was a suspect due to Social media ; a statement was made.

To deny that would be cherry picking. Then again, to bring it up after the people in the statement were cleared is cherry picking of a higher order

[JohnThailandJohn]

If I remember correctly no DNA testing was done outside the country. Initally it was to be in the US then changed to Singapore then finally decided it could be done here. Read into that what you want !

Where does it say it was never sent to Singapore?

"Somyot said the DNA of two Asian men was found at the crime scene and had been sent to Singapore for advanced analysis"

It certainly may not have been but I don't recall reading any news report saying it was not sent to Singapore. I have read on the other hand that the DNA from the crime scene was sent to numerous separate labs within Thailand that were trying to keep up with comparing it to the hundreds of samples they collected from potential suspects. In other words, the DNA from the crime scene is on file in numerous places including labs at universities. The DNA tested from the crime scene is also going to have a HUGE paper trail both physical papers and within numerous computer systems. So unless you believe the police planted these suspects DNA at the crime scene the day it was collected from the crime scene there is no reasonable way to dispute follow-up tests that confirm it was their DNA (sperm) in the victim was from the suspects. It also in illogical to believe the police and lab believed they'd get away with falssifying the original DNA comparison that identified these two. All the police with access to the original DNA findings as well as all the labs and technicians involved in comparing samples early on are not part of some grand conspiracy to protect some tiny island headsman's son whose DNA did not match and has credible proof he was in Bangkok at the time of the murders despite early rumors.

So your way of trying to convince people that the DNA was sent to Singapore is to tell them it was sent to many different labs within Thailand.

I hope this is the kind of reasoning the prosecution use.

That is an incredibly strange reasoning and thought process you are using. Is this for real or are you just purposely being obtuse as so many are when it comes to this case. The point I made is extremely clear as is the fact I state it may not have been sent to Singapore but the only thing I know that was reported is it was (never saw a report saying it was not) and numerous labs being used in Thailand have nothing to do with it being sent to Singapore and there is not even the slightest hint or suggestion in my post it does.

Is the above reasoning the same type you use when considering this case? You really have to ask yourself what is your true motivation.

Edited May 3, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn

[Si Thea01]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

Are you a fully fledged fool or just practicing? In previous posts I've acknowledged concerns over the contamination of the crime scene, however, my understanding is that this post relates to the handover of evidence to the defence team for review. So, when reading some of the posts I noted that a number of members were intimating or were adamant that the evidence held, and was to be handed over for review, would be tampered with or even substituted. Hence my reference to evidence management.

Why be selective when you respond, what picture are you trying to paint by drawing on the one aspect you have chosen. If you are so concerned why not highlight the laws that I referenced and are in place to protect the defendants from such criminal activity and specifically refer to investigators. prosecutors, judicial officers. and judges. The penalties are quite harsh for anyone undertaking an activity that may cause defendants to suffer further through a criminal act.

So please, don't suggest that I need to re-think, I leave that to you and then maybe you can explain why you are selective when quoting others. If you used the whole response then people would see that there I referenced two subjects, not just the one you referred to. Or is the answer that you take this tack because using the total post does not suit your agenda?

. .

Edited May 3, 2015 by Si Thea01

[JohnThailandJohn]

The victims' families have said they have seen strong evidence against the suspects and expressed confidence in the case.

These are the only people involved in the case whose motivation to see the real killers brought to justice shouldn't be questioned. And nobody can dispute they know more about the evidence and case then any of us.

[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>


You have got to be kidding me! Did you just read the story today and now concluded they are innocent.

Okay, let me help you out a little bit. You find a few fresh L&M Regular Cigarette Butts at the Crime Scene when neither of the victims smoke. By now you have suspects. Witnesses who saw them sitting on a Log, near the Crime Scene, in the early hours, and playing their guitar and drinking.You take a DNA Sample which matches one of the accused. You look in his pocket and discover he smokes L&M Regular. And exactly what they did do! You couldn't find a match for the other accused because he doesn't damned well smoke cigarettes. Geese!

You damned right that a second DNA Test was preformed, after everyone made such a big fuss about it being tainted, and it was sent to Singapore for an independent test. This is a know fact!

Who said they were both killed by a Hoe. David was, but Hannah had her pretty head bashed in, and as far as I know they did not find the weapon that did that.

An Alibi is being seen at the Police Man's Convention and having dinner with the Police Chief during the time of the murder! Or a Sporting Even when several witnesses can testify they saw you there or sat next to you. What an Alibi isn't is to have your co-accused say you both went to sleep but nobody else saw you.

And No! I am not going to did all this information up for you so you can sit on your Butt and play your game. It is all on the Internet. Dig it up yourself!

Most of that commentary of yours is not true although you do have an active imagination.

The cigarette butts were found about 50m way from the crime scene where the 2 admitted they were sitting and playing guitar.

None of the DNA testing was done outside Thailand.

Police said they were both killed with the hoe and the re-enactment depicted that.

So to you this proves they are innocent?

Whow! If I ever get charged for murder I hope you will be on the jury.

No jury system in Thailand

I know!

But I don't recall saying I wanted him on the jury when I was convicted of a crime in Thailand. Did you read someplace where I said that?

[JohnThailandJohn]

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

Is that not standard practice here then ?

I find it hard to believe defence have to beg to be given the evidence before a trial.

In more enlightened parts of the world the prosecution must provide ALL evidence to the defence, even if it is evidence that goes against the prosecution case.

I guess you mean the US, because many other western countries like UK, Germany etc. have different rules - not enlightened by your standards I assume.

Of course we all know that the US have the perfect legal system (ever read a John Grisham novel?).

Dont assume.

I was talking of Australia, NZ, UK.

Yes the UK does also require the prosecution to divulge all evidence to defence whether it strengthens or weakens the case does not matter. That's where Oz and NZ get it from, the UK.

I can only speak for the US but the prosecution does NOT just turn over evidence. A discovery request needs to be made and motion filed with the court before prosecution has to turn over evidence. Discovery includes reports and statements and list of evidence and does NOT include turning over the actual evidence as this would be another request needed to be made through the court for independent testing of specific evidence ... sound a little bit familiar?

The prosecution in the US also doesn't need to turn over evidence that they created or even statements from government witnesses. The prosecution in the US is also entitled to defense evidence that will be used in trial.

Edit: for further understanding http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/criminal-law-right-to-evidence-disclosure.html

Bottom line is court systems and procedures vary by country and often areas within a country. You can find negatives and positives for most countries as compared to others .... sadly what is true almost universally is those with money are going to usually get a fairer trial than the poor except in cases like this where the attention has brought the financially poor defendants an entire legal team and multi-national interest in the case.

Edited May 3, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn

[Si Thea01]

Re Si Thea01

Firstly, there is such a thing as evidence management, which is practiced by the RTP and those within the judiciary, and if you doubt this, do some research and you will find out that it is fact and only highlights just how ludicrous your statements are.

Is the wanton contamination of a murder crime scene an example of evidence management ? I would suggest you re-think.

You may want to read the rest of his post.

I remember the first policeman stating that some people have tried to destroy evidence - and my point is that the evidence management displayed in this investigation falls far short of competent, whether or not it is accidental.

Not only are you selective but you also base your theories on memory and hearsay. Did you, in relation to the policeman's alleged statement, take contemporaneous notes at the time or is it all stored in the brain. The latter can play funny tricks on one's ability to recall you know. So they tried to destroy evidence, not destroyed evidence. If they tried, then they weren't successful, which is what the statement you mention alludes to, then I would say that the evidence management was in place and put there by competent people.

Now, if you know what is involved in evidence management, which I doubt very much you do, as you are now suggesting that the management is incompetent, whether or not it is accidental. How in the hell can it be accidental? Either the people have the skills to implement it successfully or they don't. Also, there are many people involved in the safe management of evidence, so are you saying that they're all incompetent, just a few, one or two, how many? Don't be so ambiguous in your postings or is it you just have a problem in dealing with the facts?

Edited May 3, 2015 by Si Thea01

[boomerangutang]

ZERO proof anyone on the island had anything to do with this except the two in custody....

For the first 10 days after the crime, police claimed they had two prime suspects, one of whom was evading arrest. Chief cop claimed he had solid evidence and would be making arrests soon. CCTV footage was part of that evidence, and would still be, were it not for the self-appointment of a new head cop (who out-ranked the prior head-cop), and that's where the investigation did a 180 degree turn, and from that moment on, no evidence was sought for the original two prime suspects.

Here's some more of what JTJ would call 'ZERO proof' (actually 'evidence' would be a better word). Proof is we're hoping will be determined at the trial.

>>> CCTV footage and witness accounts of activities in the two beach bars, on that fateful night. Ooops sorry, almost forgot, the CCTV footage was not handed over by the families of the prime suspects. Oh well, guess we can't use any of that.

>>> Weaponized finger ring seen on a man (who should be a prime suspect also) which matches David's wounds. Indeed, that's why police have always stuck to their ridiculous assertion that the sharp end of the hoe caused David's wounds - because cops have been trying to divert attention from the real weapon. They've fooled no one with that conspirational ruse, except perhaps JTJ, Jdinasis, and AleG.

>>> Assertions by Sean, backed by a photo. It's no surprise to any of us seeking justice, that Sean was shunted out of the country a.s.a.p., and as quick as possible. If Sean is sought as a witness by the defense, you can bet your '64 Ford Mustang there are powerful entities who will do all they can to ensure that never happens.

Edited May 3, 2015 by boomerangutang

[boomerangutang]

The victims' families have said they have seen strong evidence against the suspects and expressed confidence in the case.

These are the only people involved in the case whose motivation to see the real killers brought to justice shouldn't be questioned. And nobody can dispute they know more about the evidence and case then any of us.

I'll admit they may have some evidence that posters on T.Visa don't have. However, I doubt the Brit victim's families (as opposed to the Burmese victims' families) know as much about how things operate in Thailand as some posters here.

Don't forget John, Brit experts were expressly forbidden from doing any investigating whatsoever. They were only on the island for a matter of hours. We saw one photo (in a newspaper) of them standing on a beach with some Thai cop minders, and it wasn't even the crime scene (there were trees all around).

[JohnThailandJohn]

The victims' families have said they have seen strong evidence against the suspects and expressed confidence in the case.

These are the only people involved in the case whose motivation to see the real killers brought to justice shouldn't be questioned. And nobody can dispute they know more about the evidence and case then any of us.

I'll admit they may have some evidence that posters on T.Visa don't have. However, I doubt the Brit victim's families (as opposed to the Burmese victims' families) know as much about how things operate in Thailand as some posters here.

Don't forget John, Brit experts were expressly forbidden from doing any investigating whatsoever. They were only on the island for a matter of hours. We saw one photo (in a newspaper) of them standing on a beach with some Thai cop minders, and it wasn't even the crime scene (there were trees all around).

Yes because we know the Britts are morons and sent morons who had no idea how Thailand operates and simply believed everything they were told and had no clue they came to deal with skepticism of the case and that their fear of Thai relations trumps any desire for justice for their own citizens. As for many Thaivisa posters, it is clear they know little to nothing about Thailand and spend their time complaining with other unhappy people as opposed to the millions upon millions who live or flock to Thailand year after year because of all the beauty this country and its people have. If you knew anything about Miramar (an actual 3rd world country) then you would know the defendant's families realize Thailand is a much fairer place for them to be put on trial and accused of a crime.

Miramar is one of the worst countries in the world when it comes to human rights and rape is not only common but common and accepted use of control by the military and police. These two defendants come from a place in Miramar that has seen some of the worst acts of violence and rape in that country.

But yes, you and other TV posters are more superior and know more than Britt officials, Thai officials, the victim's families and in this case are as informed as poor Burmese whose family sneak into Thailand for a better life.

Edit: and the news reported UK investigators had been on the island at least a day before the official trip with Thai police ... not that it takes that long to view and understand where a crime previously occurred.

Edited May 3, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn

[JohnThailandJohn]

ZERO proof anyone on the island had anything to do with this except the two in custody....

For the first 10 days after the crime, police claimed <snip>

You do realize this case like most all murder investigations evolved as the investigation proceeded and police ruled out original suspects.

Edited May 3, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn

[englishoak]

Dont feed the Trolls