Thailand Brit murder suspects 'still waiting' on evidence review

[JLCrab]

K. Porntip is recognized as a forensics expert and may serve as an expert witness for the defense. The prosecution may very well have their own expert witnesses who might say, regardless, of what Dr. Porntip says, the evidence is reliable and should be admitted.

If they can prove that the defendents were threatened with violence during their interrogation, that would scupper half the case. As for collecting DNA, these guys have been in custody for months. I am sure the Thai police are more than capable of getting DNA from them. What odds you reckon that there is a complete chain of custody and duplicates for all of the sample?

Thus, if this was a grown up, proper case, any reasonable lawyer would then get the DNA evidence removed from the court. And there would be basically absolutely no case to prove anything. As for Pornthip, she is a completely discredited witness of any sort, and since she wasn't involved from the first go, most of her evidence would be surmising and 3rd hand.

I fear that the Thai legal system will open itself up to massive ridicule when this case starts, so if I was one of the defendents, I would be pretty scared that I might just accidentally hang myself from the shame of it.......

This is Thailand. Thailand has Rules of Criminal Procedure. This is not yours or anyone else's fantasy land as to what you think should or ought to happen.

Edited June 9, 2015 by JLCrab

[cumgranosalum]

Not opinion.

Not one has come forward.

Again, no facts to substantiate this. Mere speculation.

http://news.sky.com/story/1339247/thai-murders-hannah-dna-matches-asian-men

Amazing how the guy who shakes hand with David on the video has exactly the same walk as Fresh milk!!!!

Interesting that although it is almost impossible to tell someone's race from DNA - the police feel they could say this only a short time after the event.

"there is more variability _within_ each race than _between_ them"

Edited June 9, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[Linky]

Strangely people are still ignoring that in the center of the selfie universe, on a tourist island nobody can put the people Boomerangutang is accusing on the island that night.


Not one of the inhabitants, not one of the tourists, absolutely nobody has come forward.

.... in your opinion.

Not opinion.

Not one has come forward.

Again, no facts to substantiate this. Mere speculation.

Cannot prove a negative other than the fact that there are no reports of anyone placing him on the island. No pictures. No press statements that were not later refuted.


No foreigners have come forward from the safety of their own country....

Nada zilch nothing

But you stated it as a fact. Unless you know what evidence both the police have and the defence have then it is not a fact but merely your decidedly one sided opinion.

Something you have accused others of ad nauseum.

[JLCrab]

So it's back to the Perry Mason defense where Mason proves his client is not guilty of murder by proving that someone else did it.

[Thai at Heart]

K. Porntip is recognized as a forensics expert and may serve as an expert witness for the defense. The prosecution may very well have their own expert witnesses who might say, regardless, of what Dr. Porntip says, the evidence is reliable and should be admitted.

If they can prove that the defendents were threatened with violence during their interrogation, that would scupper half the case. As for collecting DNA, these guys have been in custody for months. I am sure the Thai police are more than capable of getting DNA from them. What odds you reckon that there is a complete chain of custody and duplicates for all of the sample?

Thus, if this was a grown up, proper case, any reasonable lawyer would then get the DNA evidence removed from the court. And there would be basically absolutely no case to prove anything. As for Pornthip, she is a completely discredited witness of any sort, and since she wasn't involved from the first go, most of her evidence would be surmising and 3rd hand.

I fear that the Thai legal system will open itself up to massive ridicule when this case starts, so if I was one of the defendents, I would be pretty scared that I might just accidentally hang myself from the shame of it.......

This is Thailand. Thailand has Rules of Criminal Procedure. This is not yours or anyone else's fantasy land as to what you think should or ought to happen.

This is a chatroom

[JLCrab]

I wish Thailand would conduct a fair trial just like we have back home ...

[ScarpoFongness4U]

Where is Sean?

He should feel safe enough by now to speak out

[jdinasia]

Strangely people are still ignoring that in the center of the selfie universe, on a tourist island nobody can put the people Boomerangutang is accusing on the island that night.


Not one of the inhabitants, not one of the tourists, absolutely nobody has come forward.

.... in your opinion.

Not opinion.

Not one has come forward.

Again, no facts to substantiate this. Mere speculation.

Cannot prove a negative other than the fact that there are no reports of anyone placing him on the island. No pictures. No press statements that were not later refuted.


No foreigners have come forward from the safety of their own country....

Nada zilch nothing

But you stated it as a fact. Unless you know what evidence both the police have and the defence have then it is not a fact but merely your decidedly one sided opinion.

Something you have accused others of ad nauseum.

Nope read the first post again

[joebrown]

Many posters have commented on the fact that the beach (supposed) crime scene was accessed by people not directly responsible for investigating these horrific murders. rape and mutilation.

What intrigues me is the collection of forensic evidence and it's likely significance in the prosecution's case against the B2. My understanding , as a layman is that if DNA is used as a 'cornerstone' in this trial, there has to be a strictly controlled/recorded chain of responsibility from the point of gathering the evidence right through to the submission of evidence in court.

I think the prosecution might have a considerable problem with DNA evidence, not only from the fact that the (supposed) crime scene was corrupted by outsiders, but also by the published statement by Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand (Head of Thai Forensic Institute) who lambasted the RTP for the inept way they handled the collection of forensic evidence. IMHO her comments should be used by the defence lawyers in support of their case.

For those of you who feel the impulse to mock K. Pornthip, don't forget that this thread is about the Koh Tao murders and not GT200 'bomb detectors'.

Furthermore, K. Pornthip was appointed to her present position at the Thai Forensic Institute by the current government.

Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods.

If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul

Predictably, you chose to ignore the penultimate sentence of my post! Obviously she wasn't discredited enough since she was appointed to her present position by the current government. K. Pornthip has already stated her opinion as to the validity of the crime scene forensic evidence, so your last comment is strange to say the least. It's always possible, of course that she might make a gigantic 'U-turn', similar to that which the RTP took when they dismissed the strong evidence they had against the KT VIPs in the early days of their investigation.

Not ignored at all. If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers people will cry that as someone appointed by the NCPO that it is collusion.

BTW - she stated that trained crime scene investigators should have collected the evidence. She didn't remark about the evidence itself.

In post #351 you say "Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods." and.."If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul."

I'm unsure as to what you're trying to say, because if in your opinion she's severly damaged her reputation. I think anyone believing what you say might then question her judgement if she confirms the B2 are the killers. What credence would YOU place on such a person who has a discredited reputation?

I won't add to your last sentence about collection of evidence. You've said enough in those few words to confirm the inadequacy in the RTP's methods.

[catsanddogs]

The man, believed to be tourist Sean McAnna from Lanarkshire, Scotland, claims he saw two Thai men trying to molest 23-year-old Witheridge before Miller intervened to stop the pair's advances hours before they were found murdered.

http://www.ibtimes.c...uspects-1466751

Edited June 9, 2015 by Rimmer
Link fixed

[berybert]

Many posters have commented on the fact that the beach (supposed) crime scene was accessed by people not directly responsible for investigating these horrific murders. rape and mutilation.

What intrigues me is the collection of forensic evidence and it's likely significance in the prosecution's case against the B2. My understanding , as a layman is that if DNA is used as a 'cornerstone' in this trial, there has to be a strictly controlled/recorded chain of responsibility from the point of gathering the evidence right through to the submission of evidence in court.

I think the prosecution might have a considerable problem with DNA evidence, not only from the fact that the (supposed) crime scene was corrupted by outsiders, but also by the published statement by Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand (Head of Thai Forensic Institute) who lambasted the RTP for the inept way they handled the collection of forensic evidence. IMHO her comments should be used by the defence lawyers in support of their case.

For those of you who feel the impulse to mock K. Pornthip, don't forget that this thread is about the Koh Tao murders and not GT200 'bomb detectors'.

Furthermore, K. Pornthip was appointed to her present position at the Thai Forensic Institute by the current government.

Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods.

If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul

Crazy. Like a goal keeper being dropped because he missed a penalty in a shootout. Sorry you bought some dowsing rods so have no idea about DNA.

Lets hope the prosecution use this reason as their reasoning to keep her away from the case.

mind you there is British DNA expert on the case now, so dousing rods may not have to be shown in court to prove someone knows nothing about DNA.

[JLCrab]

The man, believed to be tourist Sean McAnna from Lanarkshire, Scotland, claims he saw two Thai men trying to molest 23-year-old Witheridge before Miller intervened to stop the pair's advances hours before they were found murdered.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/greece-economy-imf-debt-repayment-delay-negotiating-tactic-1504713

I believe this may be the link you're after from 24 SEP 2014

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/koh-tao-thailand-photo-david-miller-hannah-witheridge-murder-suspects-1466751

Edited June 9, 2015 by JLCrab

[berybert]

As for how DNA was taken etc. There was a condom found at the scene with DNA on the outside but none in the inside ? or was it the other way round ?

Hasn't this now been disregarded as evidence. A condom found at the scene at the time of the murder along with a blond hair from a black haired person, both now none evidence. Yes certain people are still sticking to the RTP version of events. One of which is the guys buying a packet of L&M cigarettes from a 7-11 store. Has anyone seen evidence they did buy L&M'S or are they choosing to cherry pick this bit of hearsay as fact ?

[jdinasia]

Many posters have commented on the fact that the beach (supposed) crime scene was accessed by people not directly responsible for investigating these horrific murders. rape and mutilation.

What intrigues me is the collection of forensic evidence and it's likely significance in the prosecution's case against the B2. My understanding , as a layman is that if DNA is used as a 'cornerstone' in this trial, there has to be a strictly controlled/recorded chain of responsibility from the point of gathering the evidence right through to the submission of evidence in court.

I think the prosecution might have a considerable problem with DNA evidence, not only from the fact that the (supposed) crime scene was corrupted by outsiders, but also by the published statement by Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand (Head of Thai Forensic Institute) who lambasted the RTP for the inept way they handled the collection of forensic evidence. IMHO her comments should be used by the defence lawyers in support of their case.

For those of you who feel the impulse to mock K. Pornthip, don't forget that this thread is about the Koh Tao murders and not GT200 'bomb detectors'.

Furthermore, K. Pornthip was appointed to her present position at the Thai Forensic Institute by the current government.

Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods.

If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul

Crazy. Like a goal keeper being dropped because he missed a penalty in a shootout. Sorry you bought some dowsing rods so have no idea about DNA.

Lets hope the prosecution use this reason as their reasoning to keep her away from the case.

mind you there is British DNA expert on the case now, so dousing rods may not have to be shown in court to prove someone knows nothing about DNA.

Try again. Sorry, you claim to be a scientist, but claimed to be able to make dowsing rods work ( scientifically)..... You did so in support of the cost spent by the military. The same people who appointed you.

Now why would the conspiracy theorists object if she found that the 2 Burmese defendants are guilty based on DNA?

[berybert]

Many posters have commented on the fact that the beach (supposed) crime scene was accessed by people not directly responsible for investigating these horrific murders. rape and mutilation.

What intrigues me is the collection of forensic evidence and it's likely significance in the prosecution's case against the B2. My understanding , as a layman is that if DNA is used as a 'cornerstone' in this trial, there has to be a strictly controlled/recorded chain of responsibility from the point of gathering the evidence right through to the submission of evidence in court.

I think the prosecution might have a considerable problem with DNA evidence, not only from the fact that the (supposed) crime scene was corrupted by outsiders, but also by the published statement by Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand (Head of Thai Forensic Institute) who lambasted the RTP for the inept way they handled the collection of forensic evidence. IMHO her comments should be used by the defence lawyers in support of their case.

For those of you who feel the impulse to mock K. Pornthip, don't forget that this thread is about the Koh Tao murders and not GT200 'bomb detectors'.

Furthermore, K. Pornthip was appointed to her present position at the Thai Forensic Institute by the current government.

Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods.

If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul

Crazy. Like a goal keeper being dropped because he missed a penalty in a shootout. Sorry you bought some dowsing rods so have no idea about DNA.

Lets hope the prosecution use this reason as their reasoning to keep her away from the case.

mind you there is British DNA expert on the case now, so dousing rods may not have to be shown in court to prove someone knows nothing about DNA.

Try again. Sorry, you claim to be a scientist, but claimed to be able to make dowsing rods work ( scientifically)..... You did so in support of the cost spent by the military. The same people who appointed you.

Now why would the conspiracy theorists object if she found that the 2 Burmese defendants are guilty based on DNA?

Well as I have said there now seems to be a Brit expert working on the defense team so this is a non issue.

But you are aware there is more than one field of scientistry ?

[Linky]

Many posters have commented on the fact that the beach (supposed) crime scene was accessed by people not directly responsible for investigating these horrific murders. rape and mutilation.

What intrigues me is the collection of forensic evidence and it's likely significance in the prosecution's case against the B2. My understanding , as a layman is that if DNA is used as a 'cornerstone' in this trial, there has to be a strictly controlled/recorded chain of responsibility from the point of gathering the evidence right through to the submission of evidence in court.

I think the prosecution might have a considerable problem with DNA evidence, not only from the fact that the (supposed) crime scene was corrupted by outsiders, but also by the published statement by Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand (Head of Thai Forensic Institute) who lambasted the RTP for the inept way they handled the collection of forensic evidence. IMHO her comments should be used by the defence lawyers in support of their case.

For those of you who feel the impulse to mock K. Pornthip, don't forget that this thread is about the Koh Tao murders and not GT200 'bomb detectors'.

Furthermore, K. Pornthip was appointed to her present position at the Thai Forensic Institute by the current government.

Pornthip has severely damaged her reputation supporting the Army's purchase of the dowsing rods.

If she confirms that the 2 Burmese defendants are the killers, the conspiracy theorists will be crying foul

Crazy. Like a goal keeper being dropped because he missed a penalty in a shootout. Sorry you bought some dowsing rods so have no idea about DNA.

Lets hope the prosecution use this reason as their reasoning to keep her away from the case.

mind you there is British DNA expert on the case now, so dousing rods may not have to be shown in court to prove someone knows nothing about DNA.

Try again. Sorry, you claim to be a scientist, but claimed to be able to make dowsing rods work ( scientifically)..... You did so in support of the cost spent by the military. The same people who appointed you.

Now why would the conspiracy theorists object if she found that the 2 Burmese defendants are guilty based on DNA?

Im sure you will be furiously calling her out on her ineptitude if she confirms the 2 dna. NOT.

Sounds like you you already know the dna is a ruse.

Is there something you aren't telling us? Oh please dont answer.

[jdinasia]

CIFS -- http://www.cifs.moj.go.th/eng/index.php/2013-07-03-08-06-04/vision-mission

[AleG]

By those standards any and all evidence from a crime scene that is not immediately cordoned off by the police is to be summarily dismissed.

"Where the crime occurred has absolutely nothing to do with how the evidence was handled"

Of course it has to do with how the evidence was handled, to begin with the crime took place in an area subject to tides, one of the bodies was in fact in the water; should they have waited to collect evidence and the bodies until a proper forensic team was assembled in the mainland and transported to the island even if that meant the crime scene would had been washed away by the sea? Or leave the bodies under the hot sun or let them float around for all the hours that would have taken?

"it is EVIDENCE that is compromised no matter where it comes from."

How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?

Simply declaring that all the evidence from the crime scene has to be dismissed, no matter what, is not the basis to establish anything; first you need to see if the evidence was compromised and if so to what degree, then decide if its valid or not, your proposed approach is completely negligent.

"How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?" - this has to be just about the most facile comment on the whole thread......

DNA is not some instant solution to a crime, like everything else it is EVIDENCE that is up to interpretation.

I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis? - and how/where it was found and handled afterwards together with any conclusions drawn are intrinsically up for debate.

and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable.

Facile comment?

OK then, if it's so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to explain how semen from the two men arrested over three weeks after the murders found it's way into the body via people walking around the crime scene, which you know of because there were others taking photos and videos at that time.

"I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis?"

No, I don't realize that, unless you are going to say that all the laboratories in Thailand that provide DNA analysis services are lying.

"and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable."

Because you say so? Maybe your argument would be more compelling if you would explain why.

[berybert]

By those standards any and all evidence from a crime scene that is not immediately cordoned off by the police is to be summarily dismissed.

"Where the crime occurred has absolutely nothing to do with how the evidence was handled"

Of course it has to do with how the evidence was handled, to begin with the crime took place in an area subject to tides, one of the bodies was in fact in the water; should they have waited to collect evidence and the bodies until a proper forensic team was assembled in the mainland and transported to the island even if that meant the crime scene would had been washed away by the sea? Or leave the bodies under the hot sun or let them float around for all the hours that would have taken?

"it is EVIDENCE that is compromised no matter where it comes from."

How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?

Simply declaring that all the evidence from the crime scene has to be dismissed, no matter what, is not the basis to establish anything; first you need to see if the evidence was compromised and if so to what degree, then decide if its valid or not, your proposed approach is completely negligent.

"How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?" - this has to be just about the most facile comment on the whole thread......

DNA is not some instant solution to a crime, like everything else it is EVIDENCE that is up to interpretation.

I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis? - and how/where it was found and handled afterwards together with any conclusions drawn are intrinsically up for debate.

and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable.

Facile comment?

OK then, if it's so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to explain how semen from the two men arrested over three weeks after the murders found it's way into the body via people walking around the crime scene, which you know of because there were others taking photos and videos at that time.

"I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis?"

No, I don't realize that, unless you are going to say that all the laboratories in Thailand that provide DNA analysis services are lying.

"and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable."

Because you say so? Maybe your argument would be more compelling if you would explain why.

Ok then can you give us proof that the semen found in the body belonged to the Burmese. This is the whole point of this thread. The defense asking to see evidence. There have been many cases around the world of evidence being planted. Do you think a force as corrupt as Thailands would be against such a practice ?

What happened to the 3 set of DNA that was found on the body ? forgotten about. You seem to have no worries about someone who left semen on the body to be totally forgotten about. Blond hairs, hoes that make shapes that no hoe could ever make, condoms with DNA on one side but not the other. And not one bit of this you question.

[cumgranosalum]

By those standards any and all evidence from a crime scene that is not immediately cordoned off by the police is to be summarily dismissed.

"Where the crime occurred has absolutely nothing to do with how the evidence was handled"

Of course it has to do with how the evidence was handled, to begin with the crime took place in an area subject to tides, one of the bodies was in fact in the water; should they have waited to collect evidence and the bodies until a proper forensic team was assembled in the mainland and transported to the island even if that meant the crime scene would had been washed away by the sea? Or leave the bodies under the hot sun or let them float around for all the hours that would have taken?

"it is EVIDENCE that is compromised no matter where it comes from."

How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?

Simply declaring that all the evidence from the crime scene has to be dismissed, no matter what, is not the basis to establish anything; first you need to see if the evidence was compromised and if so to what degree, then decide if its valid or not, your proposed approach is completely negligent.

"How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?" - this has to be just about the most facile comment on the whole thread......

DNA is not some instant solution to a crime, like everything else it is EVIDENCE that is up to interpretation.

I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis? - and how/where it was found and handled afterwards together with any conclusions drawn are intrinsically up for debate.

and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable.

Facile comment?

OK then, if it's so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to explain how semen from the two men arrested over three weeks after the murders found it's way into the body via people walking around the crime scene, which you know of because there were others taking photos and videos at that time.

"I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis?"

No, I don't realize that, unless you are going to say that all the laboratories in Thailand that provide DNA analysis services are lying.

"and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable."

Because you say so? Maybe your argument would be more compelling if you would explain why.

Yes facile.......you simply don't seem to be getting the whole picture - Your naivety is jaw-dropping - you don't seem to have any grasp on how evidence is/should be presented and how in court the principle - -according to international laws - of "beyond reasonable doubt" is the norm.

BTW - have a word with your mum, she'll explain about semen and how it gets everywhere - it seems you weren't listening the first time....BTW here's a clue it doesn't usually involve murder....but when a crime is committed it does involve due process and proper handling of evidence and no sub-judice rantings by police or media....or members of ThaVisa. - i expect you don't know of the case whee Thai police actually attempted to masturbate a suspect in order to get a semen sample?

you just seem to engage in gainsaying and cyclical arguments even though you really don't understand the basic processes involved.

Edited June 9, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[jdinasia]

Sub-judice - apparently doesn't apply here. It is not universal in the West. Apparently not even the UK government thinks Sub-judice applies in Thailand

[cumgranosalum]

Sub-judice - apparently doesn't apply here. It is not universal in the West. Apparently not even the UK government thinks Sub-judice applies in Thailand

i think you'll find the concept exists even if not properly enforced. It is tangential to my argument anyhow as I believe that for a fair trial to take place these basic tenets of international law were not adhered to in this case which means regardless of Thai law the trial is inherently flawed from the beginning.

The authorities in Thailand are very much in the international public eye as regards to this and there is a lot of pressure to do the right thing. there is of course also a lot of pressure for those more stupid and inane people to think that a "strong solution" to the crime whether right or wrong is paramount.....it is this attitude that the government needs to address if they wish to avoid looking like complete fools in the eyes of the world.

[AleG]

Ok then can you give us proof that the semen found in the body belonged to the Burmese. This is the whole point of this thread. The defense asking to see evidence. There have been many cases around the world of evidence being planted. Do you think a force as corrupt as Thailands would be against such a practice ?

What happened to the 3 set of DNA that was found on the body ? forgotten about. You seem to have no worries about someone who left semen on the body to be totally forgotten about. Blond hairs, hoes that make shapes that no hoe could ever make, condoms with DNA on one side but not the other. And not one bit of this you question.

The argument is about crime scene contamination, and how semen from men caught three weeks later could end up there due to said contamination.

You say it was planted? Then what?, the police went around like headless chicken for three weeks until they though the time was right to arrest the men they had framed all along?

Never mind explaining how and when they got the samples from the "scapegoats" in the first place (which they somehow forgot about since they haven't mentioned any of it)

Try to think things through.

As for the 3 sets of DNA, you are confabulating things, it was two from the accused in the body and the third in a cigarette butt. I think I explained that to you before, didn't I? With citations and all that. Are you going to keep asking the same questions, or rather peddling the same innuendo, over and over again?

"Blond hairs" found in the body of a blond person, that recently hung around with blond friends... yes, what of it? The police said they couldn't extract DNA from it so it was a dead end as far as I know. You know better, I'm all ears.

"hoes that make shapes that no hoe could ever make," Well, thank you for your expert forensic analysis, but one thing, how do you know those cuts were caused by the hoe?

"condoms with DNA on one side but not the other" One condom, so you are already up to a shaky start; what I know about that is that it was determined to not be related to the crime, it was just laying there and blood drops fell on it. And yes, condoms laying on the beach, specially in a "party" island is not uncommon.

As for the defense seeing the evidence that's what a trial is for.

[JLCrab]

So you believe an unfair trial is going to place even before the trial takes place.

[mcm991]

So you believe an unfair trial is going to place even before the trial takes place.

Yes ... by Western, first world standards, I would say it is almost certain.

[jdinasia]

So you believe an unfair trial is going to place even before the trial takes place.

Yes ... by Western, first world standards, I would say it is almost certain.

Didn't you say that the 2 Burmese defendants would be dead already, in the thread about the first hearing being moved to December 26th?

[JLCrab]

So you believe an unfair trial is going to place even before the trial takes place.

Yes ... by Western, first world standards, I would say it is almost certain.

I think you will find that all international covenants to which Thailand may or may not be a signatory deal with death penalty cases that are determined to be unfair AFTER a trial has been conducted.

[Thai at Heart]

By those standards any and all evidence from a crime scene that is not immediately cordoned off by the police is to be summarily dismissed.

"Where the crime occurred has absolutely nothing to do with how the evidence was handled"

Of course it has to do with how the evidence was handled, to begin with the crime took place in an area subject to tides, one of the bodies was in fact in the water; should they have waited to collect evidence and the bodies until a proper forensic team was assembled in the mainland and transported to the island even if that meant the crime scene would had been washed away by the sea? Or leave the bodies under the hot sun or let them float around for all the hours that would have taken?

"it is EVIDENCE that is compromised no matter where it comes from."

How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?

Simply declaring that all the evidence from the crime scene has to be dismissed, no matter what, is not the basis to establish anything; first you need to see if the evidence was compromised and if so to what degree, then decide if its valid or not, your proposed approach is completely negligent.

"How can DNA evidence collected from inside the body of one of the victims be compromised by someone walking around the crime scene, specially while people are taking photos and videos at the time?" - this has to be just about the most facile comment on the whole thread......

DNA is not some instant solution to a crime, like everything else it is EVIDENCE that is up to interpretation.

I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis? - and how/where it was found and handled afterwards together with any conclusions drawn are intrinsically up for debate.

and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable.

Facile comment?

OK then, if it's so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to explain how semen from the two men arrested over three weeks after the murders found it's way into the body via people walking around the crime scene, which you know of because there were others taking photos and videos at that time.

"I can't believe you are serious! You do realise that Thailand doesn't even have an internationally recognise lab capable of handling DNA analysis?"

No, I don't realize that, unless you are going to say that all the laboratories in Thailand that provide DNA analysis services are lying.

"and your perception of the validity of video/photographic evidence is just laughable."

Because you say so? Maybe your argument would be more compelling if you would explain why.

Yes facile.......you simply don't seem to be getting the whole picture - Your naivety is jaw-dropping - you don't seem to have any grasp on how evidence is/should be presented and how in court the principle - -according to international laws - of "beyond reasonable doubt" is the norm.

BTW - have a word with your mum, she'll explain about semen and how it gets everywhere - it seems you weren't listening the first time....BTW here's a clue it doesn't usually involve murder....but when a crime is committed it does involve due process and proper handling of evidence and no sub-judice rantings by police or media....or members of ThaVisa. - i expect you don't know of the case whee Thai police actually attempted to masturbate a suspect in order to get a semen sample?

you just seem to engage in gainsaying and cyclical arguments even though you really don't understand the basic processes involved.

That is the whole point of condoms though. It stops the stuff getting everywhere.

[mcm991]

So you believe an unfair trial is going to place even before the trial takes place.

Yes ... by Western, first world standards, I would say it is almost certain.

I think you will find that all international covenants to which Thailand may or may not be a signatory deal with death penalty cases that are determined to be unfair AFTER a trial has been conducted.

Everything depends on your reference point.

The expectations of justice in a feudal society is different to that of a first world democracy.

Fairness is relative.

[sambum]

I fail to see discussing whether or not the 2 accused are innocent or not has any real relevance to the problem

the problem as I see it is that the whole issue from beginning to end has been handled so ineptly by the police, that it breaches almost all the norms for presentation of evidence and handling of a serious crime....the only conclusion one can reasonably come to is that ANY court case is so flawed that it has to be thrown out.

in other words guilty or not the trial should never take place for these guys and probably anyone else.

Thanks to the handling of this case.

And even at least one of the infamous three or four RTP apologists on here has virtually said that the RTP made a complete B@#$%^p of the investigation - that in itself is reason enough to have the case thrown out (sarcasm intended!)