Thailand Brit murder suspects 'still waiting' on evidence review

[sambum]

PaPiPuPePo, on 04 Jun 2015 - 19:09, said:

you are beyond hope of understanding anything.

So really, you should let the discussion to people that can grok the issues and stop embarrassing yourself.

Just two examples of the nearly constant stream of disparagement and rudeness issuing from this one member, who gets much more sincere attention in return from other members than he deserves. I long ago put him on ignore but can't avoid seeing his low-class condescension visited on other apparently sincere and upstanding members of this forum. If I didn't think he is a true believer (because I've yet to see him provide a cohesive argument for his 100% belief in the guilt of the B2, my reasonable suggestion that he put it all up on his own web or Facebook page was, tellingly, ignored) I'd be sure he was a troll. I really don't see why he hasn't been banned for his constant belligerent disrespect of others.

If nothing else I suggest those who continue to engage him stop; without that attention to feed on he can either make his case in toto here or elsewhere, or if he's only about talking like an aggressive drunk, go sully some other part of the internet.

Completely agree with this post - the member that he refers to seems to be incapable of delivering a non-confrontational statement of any kind. He sets out deliberately to be argumentative and rude, and consequently gets much more attention than he deserves.

With all due respect to the powers that be on this website, I am also baffled as to why he is allowed to continue posting in this fashion, as I am sure that it contravenes the rules of the Forum

There are certain types who feed on controversy. I once wrote a regular weekly column for a newspaper in California. I was paired off with a guy - because the editor knew I was a liberal and the other fellow, a conservative. It was almost comical how the other guy could always be contrarian on every issue. Even if the topic was a proposed new park for the town, he could find ways to poop on the idea. The only thing we agreed upon was our mutual admiration for Native Americans. Sorry if it sounds like I'm straying off-topic, but the point is: if a person decides to be contrarian, it's not hard to do, and it garners attention in a scrooge-like way. Often they're attention-seekers, because that's probably the only way they can garner it - like the naughty boy in a big family. By being naughty, he demands the most attention. A cynic is an optimist gone sour.

If you have to say 'the point is', that means you didn't make it.

Oh, I think he obviously did make his point going by your reaction! We were referring to someone else, but obviously, if the cap fits .........

Edited June 5, 2015 by sambum

[sambum]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

[JLCrab]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

It's an occasional treat I give myself in exchange for dealing with life's other hardships.

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

Edited June 5, 2015 by JLCrab

[catsanddogs]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

It's an occasional treat I give myself in exchange for dealing with life's other hardships.

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

Is is possible to save the petty bickering to nearest and dearest? I don't come on TV to read this constant rubbish.

[JLCrab]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

It's an occasional treat I give myself in exchange for dealing with life's other hardships.

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

Is is possible to save the petty bickering to nearest and dearest? I don't come on TV to read this constant rubbish.

Brilliant post. 'coudn't have said it better myself. When will they go after the REAL killers?

[ScarpoFongness4U]

Did someone say there is now a British CSI team on the case?

[metisdead]

A post containing unsubstantiated information has been removed, if you cannot link to it, don't post it.

[JLCrab]

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case#/updates

...the Koh Tao murder case legal defense team key members and a number of defense supporters were able to arrange to fund to spend the last 4 full days working intensively with expert British crime scene investigation (CSI) consultant Mike Moulden preparing the Koh Tao murder case accused Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo's defense strategy. Mike is a renowned CSI expert in the UK police force and with the UN.

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[boomerangutang]

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

Crab, I think you're a native English speaker. As such, you should know that it's perfectly ok to use that phrase 'the point is...' in a latter part of an opinion piece. Maybe you skipped school the day Mrs. Park (4th grade, Lincoln Elementary school) tought that lesson. If there are several items bundled together to make a point in a paragraph, then closing that paragraph with a sentence preceded by 'the point is;....' is fine. It's akin to someone writing, "the gist of the matter is...." or "above all....." or "what I'm trying to say, is......."

Did someone say there is now a British CSI team on the case?

Not sure about 'team', but it sounds as tho there's at least one Brit expert assisting the defense. Chances are, Thai officials are seeing what they can do to trip him up.

[z42]

Lets be fair the RTP investigation almost from the get go was unprofessional & downright farcical at times. The spokespeople & sources close to or inside of the police who continued to make all kinds of claims, many contradictory, on an almost daily basis in the first few weeks after the killings took place.

Add to that the place where supposed confessions took place, a safe house, not a police station like any other person accused of a crime would expect to be questioned. Then the utter farce that was the re enactment of the crime where the B2 seemed to be being choreographed by senior cops.
The DNA has never been scrutinized in any way, shape or form. We still don't know if Thailand has the capability to do forensic DNA profiling, if it does then it would be good to have it confirmed.

This was a horrendous crime, and with all the question marks surrounding conflicting police statements, appalling investigative work and an almost freakish reluctance by the authorities to keep an open mind about any additional evidence, motives or suspects to come to light is bloody suspicious. And now that the judge is making steps that could be seen to jeapordizing the fairness of the trial, well it is just starting to stink to high heaven. These 2 lads are done, it looks like a fit up and railroading to conviction. Truly dreadful imo, very 3rd world

[joebrown]

We can call it deduction or suppositions based on 34 years being involved with Thais in Thailand and having a pretty good idea of how things work here. No, I don't know exactly what was said from one person to another, any more than you do or any more than RTP know what happened that awful night. I'm asking the types of questions that investigators should have been asking, but aren't. I don't think they're being inept, as much as they're purposefully trying to obscure the truth, while supressing evidence. We know why they're doing it. Will they succeed? Yes, I think they will. Will it be awful for Thailand's reputation? Yes. But it will fade, as all news stories tend to do.

There were two victims inititally; David and Hannah. Now there are three added victims: The two Burmese and whatever tattered remnant Thailand may have had of a decent justice system.

Somalia is famous for pirates. Papua New Guinea is famous for penis gourds, Amazon jungles have shrunken heads. Thailand is setting itself up to be famous for an unfair justice system.

If you want to call suspected killers for victims you can do that , maybe they are all victims. But you dont know that , I dont know that , we're all waiting for a trial . Nothing new here . I give the burmese a 50/50 chance , I still personally believe they are involved in this crime .

Of course the B2 ARE involved in this crime now. The big question is WERE they directly involved in the horrendous murders & rape, or just happened to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time? Having read-up on the RTP stated events many times, I have serious doubts about who, how, why, what and where the crimes actually occurred, and IMHO the beach was merely the the place where David and Hannah were found. My firm belief is that Hannah 'lost her face' because she caused one of the local 'low-life' to lose face, for whatever reason.

[bruceybonus]

The same people who claim that "the DNA evidence is sacrosanct" are wilfully ignoring the fact that there was a lot of funny business around the collection and preservation of the DNA evidence.

First it pointed one way, then another.

The "conclusive" results were obtained within 24 hours.

It was at first maintained that it could only point towards a person with Asian genetics.

A condom was found supposedly with Hannah's DNA on the outside; who's was inside? No answer.

The condom was never linked to David. What rapist wears a condom while raping someone then takes it off so he can leave the world's most conclusive evidence behind? Not wearing one at all and doing the same, stupid as it is, is much more believable.

And we're to believe that either these two guys beat David into unconsciousness with a hoe, inflicting small-diamter wounds on him that couldn't have been made by a hoe (but are identical to those on Sean and look precisely what the shark-tooth ring would cause), while Hannah stood by waiting to be raped, then raped her without receiving any scratches or wounds, and then one of them held her down so the other could make two precision strikes with the hoe, one right across her eyes, the other splitting her mouth open virtually to her jaws, but neither got blood-spattered, and there was no shadow in the blood spatter all over the rocks around her head.

And this was a crime of lust, never mind that it's rare for rape to be a crime of lust, and horrifically chopping up the victim's face is something a lusty rapist does, never mind that it's beyond rare in rape case for this kind of Jack-the-Ripper stuff to happen.

And then these two guys hung out on KT and showed up for the DNA tests because they were so sure they'd covered their tracks and would never be scapegoated.

This was an unusually violent double-murder. That's just as plain as day. Whoever did it is a monster/are monsters in human form. The rape was part of the violence visited upon this poor young woman, not the main thing.

Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to "grok the issues and stop embarrassing himself." I wonder why anyone would expend so much effort and verbiage trying to convince others of this ridiculous narrative about the B2 killing and mutilating this young woman out of lust unless they are delusional, somehow involved even in a peripheral way (i.e. don't want the rep. of KT to be further sullied) or are harbouring some very dark obsessions or compulsions. Whether it's the Dr. Jekyl- or the Mr. Hyde-type character (the latter must be on vacation), there's something quite odd about it.

Strange how Ali G hasn't responded to this post!!!

It's a great post by PaPi and most of us could probably add another 50 inconsistencies in this case!!

In a 'real' country the B2 wouldn't even have been held for 24 hours & I think this is what really pisses most of us off! How is a country with strong alliances to the West allowed to act like this without serious sanctions? How is a country like this allowed to promote Tourism in western countries? It is disgusting and just shows how much money trumps human life!

[boomerangutang]

Are there any laws in Thailand re; 'obstructing justice'? If so, that could be troubling for RTP who may have intentionally skewed data and/or didn't garner evidence which was readily available. Some of many examples:

>>> if the DNA trail was intentionally altered (by mis-labeling or hiding findings, or purposefully not looking at evidence in plain sight),

>>> if CCTV was taken at the beach bars that night, and was refused (by bar managers) to be given to police investigators, then both those who refused (withholding evidence) and the RTP who didn't insist on obtaining it (didn't do their jobs) - would possibly be guilty of obstructing justice.

...but that's only applicable if there was such a provisions as 'obstructing justice' ....in Thailand. It may be that such laws exist but, as happens with so many laws in Thailand, ....are not enforced. Or, if they're enforced, it's likely subjective, predicated on a person's social standing and wealth.

Just heard that two men, who aided the convicted 'Boston Marathon bomber' were sentenced to 3 and 3.5 years respectively. One hid a backpack of the bomber's, and the other didn't tell the truth when asked by police where the bomber was. Can you imagine someone getting in trouble, in Thailand, for telling a lie in regard to a crime investigation?!? It would be a comical supposition, if it didn't have such dire implications.

[Tchooptip]

BBC are also on to it LINK

Seeing the picture of those two smiling young people, I am so sad thinking some human being somewhere are capable to steal young lives, simply to satisfy a sudden sexual desire

[JLCrab]

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

Crab, I think you're a native English speaker. As such, you should know that it's perfectly ok to use that phrase 'the point is...' in a latter part of an opinion piece. Maybe you skipped school the day Mrs. Park (4th grade, Lincoln Elementary school) tought that lesson. If there are several items bundled together to make a point in a paragraph, then closing that paragraph with a sentence preceded by 'the point is;....' is fine. It's akin to someone writing, "the gist of the matter is...." or "above all....." or "what I'm trying to say, is......."

Did someone say there is now a British CSI team on the case?

Not sure about 'team', but it sounds as tho there's at least one Brit expert assisting the defense. Chances are, Thai officials are seeing what they can do to trip him up.

The phrase 'the point is' is a linguistic crutch when you were not able to previously coherently make your point, perfectly acceptable or not.

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[JLCrab]

Are there any laws in Thailand re; 'obstructing justice'? If so, that could be troubling for RTP who may have intentionally skewed data and/or didn't garner evidence which was readily available. Some of many examples:

>>> if the DNA trail was intentionally altered (by mis-labeling or hiding findings, or purposefully not looking at evidence in plain sight),

>>> if CCTV was taken at the beach bars that night, and was refused (by bar managers) to be given to police investigators, then both those who refused (withholding evidence) and the RTP who didn't insist on obtaining it (didn't do their jobs) - would possibly be guilty of obstructing justice.

...but that's only applicable if there was such a provisions as 'obstructing justice' ....in Thailand. It may be that such laws exist but, as happens with so many laws in Thailand, ....are not enforced. Or, if they're enforced, it's likely subjective, predicated on a person's social standing and wealth.

Just heard that two men, who aided the convicted 'Boston Marathon bomber' were sentenced to 3 and 3.5 years respectively. One hid a backpack of the bomber's, and the other didn't tell the truth when asked by police where the bomber was. Can you imagine someone getting in trouble, in Thailand, for telling a lie in regard to a crime investigation?!? It would be a comical supposition, if it didn't have such dire implications.

THAILAND CRIMINAL CODE B.E. 2499 (as amended up to 2003) - CHAPTER 2

MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE

Section 165 Whoever, to be official to have the duty to execute the law or order given for executing the law, to prevent or to obstruct the execution of such law or order, shall be imprisoned not out of one year or fined not out of two thousand Baht, or both.

(Translation of SamuiForSale.com)

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[boomerangutang]

The phrase 'the point is' is a linguistic crutch when you were not able to previously coherently make your point, perfectly acceptable or not.

It's a phrase used for emphasis and clarity.

[JLCrab]

The phrase 'the point is' is a linguistic crutch when you were not able to previously coherently make your point, perfectly acceptable or not.

It's a phrase used for emphasis and clarity.

It's a phrase used for emphasis and clarity when you haven't made clear or been able to emphasize what it is you were previously trying to say.

You are fun to razz -- some of the other people I like to razz (mostly but not exclusively on Twitter) are MacArthur Foundation (genius grant) Fellows who aren't used to being razzed by anyone.

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[phuketandsee]

Boomer, why don't you just ignore him?

[JLCrab]

Boomer, why don't you just ignore him?

No fun in that.

While there certainly is a horrendous crime underlying all this , a lot of what gets posted on here is total speculation about why those charged are innocent and who may be the REAL guilty party ... and what those responsible for the investigation coulda shoulda had oughta done if they really knew their stuff like some of those posting on here.

Much of it reads like the old pulp true crime magazines:

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[sambum]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

It's an occasional treat I give myself in exchange for dealing with life's other hardships.

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

And also no need for you to repeat your comment about "the point is ..." - see you're doing it yourself now!

Edited June 6, 2015 by sambum

[JLCrab]

Thank you. This is an anonymous forum. If somebody wants to call me an idiot or say my posts are ridiculous, so what. Nothing more than the cards to Alice. Will they still let me buy a Coke at the 7-11?

I don't see why not, and they'll probably let you sit on the step outside and drink it - but you should know that it's not really good for you - too much sugar - might make you hyperactive.

It's an occasional treat I give myself in exchange for dealing with life's other hardships.

BTW there are too many nested quotes to respond to the above directly, but if one adequately makes their point, there is no need to superfluously comment that 'The point is ...' and then try to make it again.

And also no need for you to repeat your comment about "the point is ..." - see you're doing it yourself now!

I have a well honed writing style such that I write with brevity -- as opposed to the many voluble on here -- and the reader often has finished reading what I wrote before they realize they wished they hadn't read it.

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[sambum]

Boomer, why don't you just ignore him?

No fun in that.

While there certainly is a horrendous crime underlying all this , a lot of what gets posted on here is total speculation about why those charged are innocent and who may be the REAL guilty party ... and what those responsible for the investigation coulda shoulda had oughta done if they really knew their stuff like some of those posting on here.

Much of it reads like the old pulp true crime magazines:

The point is... that you are even having to resort to clips from old movies or magazines to get YOUR

point across!

[JLCrab]

I don't have a point.

A lot of my time these days goes to reading documents related the the Trans Pacific Partnership and the legislation in the US House and Senate of so-called fast track trade authority for the US President. After reading that fascinating but rather dry stuff, I come on here for a little diversion and entertainment which I thank you and some of the others for supplying.

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[sambum]

We can call it deduction or suppositions based on 34 years being involved with Thais in Thailand and having a pretty good idea of how things work here. No, I don't know exactly what was said from one person to another, any more than you do or any more than RTP know what happened that awful night. I'm asking the types of questions that investigators should have been asking, but aren't. I don't think they're being inept, as much as they're purposefully trying to obscure the truth, while supressing evidence. We know why they're doing it. Will they succeed? Yes, I think they will. Will it be awful for Thailand's reputation? Yes. But it will fade, as all news stories tend to do.

There were two victims inititally; David and Hannah. Now there are three added victims: The two Burmese and whatever tattered remnant Thailand may have had of a decent justice system.

Somalia is famous for pirates. Papua New Guinea is famous for penis gourds, Amazon jungles have shrunken heads. Thailand is setting itself up to be famous for an unfair justice system.

If you want to call suspected killers for victims you can do that , maybe they are all victims. But you dont know that , I dont know that , we're all waiting for a trial . Nothing new here . I give the burmese a 50/50 chance , I still personally believe they are involved in this crime .

Of course the B2 ARE involved in this crime now. The big question is WERE they directly involved in the horrendous murders & rape, or just happened to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time? Having read-up on the RTP stated events many times, I have serious doubts about who, how, why, what and where the crimes actually occurred, and IMHO the beach was merely the the place where David and Hannah were found. My firm belief is that Hannah 'lost her face' because she caused one of the local 'low-life' to lose face, for whatever reason.

Good post - brought up a couple of points that I hadn't thought of before, and could be right!

[sambum]

I don't have a point.

In that case as a previous poster suggested, I shall ignore you, and try to get back to the topic.

Have a nice day!

Edited June 6, 2015 by sambum

[JLCrab]

I don't have a point.

In that case as a previous poster suggested, I shall ignore you, and try to get back to the topic.

Have a nice day!

Oh no! I''m being ignored. Mother of Mercy -- Is this the end of Rico?

Edited June 6, 2015 by JLCrab

[sambum]

I don't have a point.

In that case as a previous poster suggested, I shall ignore you, and try to get back to the topic.

Have a nice day!

Oh no! I''m being ignored. Mother of Mercy -- Is this the end of Rico?

Hah - same as your cohorts that have "J" and "D" and "T" in their avatars - you just HAVE to get the last word in - pathetic!

[JLCrab]

I don't have a point.

In that case as a previous poster suggested, I shall ignore you, and try to get back to the topic.

Have a nice day!

Oh no! I''m being ignored. Mother of Mercy -- Is this the end of Rico?

Hah - same as your cohorts that have "J" and "D" and "T" in their avatars - you just HAVE to get the last word in - pathetic!

I guess you didn't put me on ignore.

[boomerangutang]

I seek clarification: Did the judge say he will allow review of evidence - starting the first day of the trial, or that he may allow..... ?

Also, what sorts of restrictions are Thai authorities (judge included) putting on what can be reviewed? In the April announcement by the judge, bloody clothing was mentioned. Is bloody clothing still one of the categories which the judge will allow to be reviewed? How about the hoe?

Of course, the list of evidenciary things in this case which should be reviewed by professionals is long, but unfortunately (for the defendants and for the general public) the judge has a lot of power in deciding what can be reviewed. He may even want to micro-manage how it's reviewed. In other words, he may say the bloody hoe can be scrutinized for blood, but not for fingerprints. He may say only clothing found at the crime scene can be reviewed, but no other clothing. Ideally, everything related to the crime would be open for review by experts, but that's expecting too much. Lest we forget, even those who may be allowed to review evidence - are ONLY people from the ranks of Thai officialdom. Outsiders are precluded.

Is the judge aware that such reviews of evidence, will likely take days or weeks? Another judge earlier placed a 7 month time lag between arraignment and beginning trial date. Yet a replacement judge puts a SAME DAY time-frame for allowing the evidence to be reviewed. That's a ratio of over 200 to 1 when comparing the time for defense and prosecution to prepare for the trial, and the time allowance for review of evidence in relation to the trial start-date.