BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I wish I could opine the same, but many indications point elsewhere. ".....if the defendants don't plead guilty prior to the verdict." That's like the German team conceding defeat to the Brazilians during the prior World Cup, when the Germans were ahead 5 - 0. At the start of the trial, their lawyer actually stated this was a possibility. It is a simple matter of reality. It is always an option, but I would appreciate a source for the lawyer spelling it out. It is somewhere on this thread. I don't recall the rest of the article it was part of to google search it but is out there just as their first lawyer from the embassy who publicly stated they confided in him their guilt while also stating they were abused by police. I believe the lawyer stated in an interview something like it was still a possibility depending on how the case goes or the evidence ... something to that affect. Nothing surprising just common sense or a reality at least. OK, so to clarify, this was from a Burmese lawyer in October 2014, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfox Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Not sure if this is what you mean from the lobby or the uni. Hannah-Fresh-milk.jpg Just ran a straight edge across the letters and numbers. There not in line and yet the door framing is. I would say this still,is doctored. You could tell if you could get the original and check the pixels for sure For the eighth time, see the Thai PBS report: Not 100%. Could still be doctored, but not an obvious fake. Note at 02.35 into the video, there's questioning over the change in colour on the time display (seconds) from white (si khaw) to black (si da [dum]), and his true whereabouts. This is my understanding yet I don't have anyone near (Thai) to corroborate this. As another said, perhaps we shouldn't be focusing on this little prick just now...all in due course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 So there we have it, the verdict is a formality Three judges oversaw the trial today. The lead judge, who was highly engaged throughout the hearing, suggested that the verdict in October is unlikely to settle the matter once and for all; he personally advised the prosecutor to prepare the CCTV footage in a more simple format so that it will be easy for both of you in the Appeal Court. The trial is just a sick show http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437573990 My opininion only the way I look at this is the judge can see that many holes in the prosecutions side he has enough info now to hint that the B2 are not guilty . To many people watching this one , I know this is Thailand and corruption reigns but watch this space. I agree that they didn't allow for social media and it's plainly obvious that a hole is getting deeper. However I'm still waiting for any sign of a case put forward by the prosecution. The selective ctv and DNA supposedly available does not show signs of a remotely strong case. The worry is how are they going to get out of it without a massive loss of face . The judge I'm sure knows this and unless something startling comes out which I can't believe the RTP are in possession off its going to be a interesting 1 month between the next session. JTJ has tried to persuade me that the prosecution case is just building foundations. Well I'm sorry but you wouldn't put up a tent on the foundation case put forward up to now. As I have said before the best defence at the moment is the prosecution. The prosecution's case is being built on quicksand. The judge giving them advanced advice for appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Not sure if this is what you mean from the lobby or the uni. Hannah-Fresh-milk.jpg Just ran a straight edge across the letters and numbers. There not in line and yet the door framing is. I would say this still,is doctored. You could tell if you could get the original and check the pixels for sure Sorry, i have probably confused the Uni with the residence lobby. But have noticed that figures printed in different shades. Something that would be mighty strange in a photoshopped image, but very logical when the CCTV software automatically changes the date/time stamp color depending on the color of the image behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfox Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 On the Sean situation correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there a msg maybe Facebook or somewhere from him recently saying he didn't know anything about the murder as he was sleeping. And yet I was on here that night when he stated they were after him and saw the comments and went to his Facebook page with the mssgs going backwards and forwards and he cetainly made some accusations and posted pictures would indicated he did know something. He does need to man up but he's not going to I don't think! How many here that were threatened by the Thai mafia with death, wold willingly re-enter the country to give evidence against someone in their own back yard? He is not stupid. Is there a way to then have he and others appear before the court on video link supported with Thai translators? I'm unsure if Thai court allows but in other countries yes. It then saves the the little cry baby from wetting his pants at the thought or request of returning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) How many here that were threatened by the Thai mafia with death, wold willingly re-enter the country to give evidence against someone in their own back yard? He is not stupid. No I agree with you and I'm sure I would be worried about something happening but that there's ways around that and a statement could be made from him. Even video link with the reason given for his non appearance was fears of his safety. There's been enough reports about translators etc been threatened. A statement if he knew Nomsad was there that night would go along way. Or any other relevant information. I didn't say he had to go back there. , just man up and say what he knows Sean could give an interview on prime time TV, and it would have absolutely zero impact on the trial unless he was willing to go to Koh Samui and give evidence in person. I understand what and why your saying that but if!! He had something really relevant that he cam out with be it on prime time or other ways it would invite a media scramble and add to the already growing media attention. It would cast even more doubts on the prosecution case. All hypothetical I know but nobody knows what he knows about the night in question. He also has many contacts there so directly even if he doesn't know about the goings on he certainly knows who does.So I don't agree in the slightest that it would have zero impact as indirectly it could have a massive effect. Anyway we can agree to disagree Edited July 23, 2015 by Nigeone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 For the eighth time, see the Thai PBS report: Not 100%. Could still be doctored, but not an obvious fake. Note at 02.35 into the video, there's questioning over the change in colour on the time display (seconds) from white (si khaw) to black (si da [dum]), and his true whereabouts. This is my understanding yet I don't have anyone near (Thai) to corroborate this. As another said, perhaps we shouldn't be focusing on this little prick just now...all in due course. The explanation is that the change in color is normal. The CCTV software does that automatically to enhance the readability of the display depending on the color of the image behind it. Yes, probably quite enough for now. The fresh milk is positively curdled by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 B2 are small. man on vidéo is not. this is a fact showed by computer analysis... what the judge will believe ? the facts or the words of witness police officer ???? https://www.facebook.com/CSILA90210/photos/pb.596740650403664.-2207520000.1437590450./727855663958828/?type=3&theater Minus the helmet and shoes we're talking midgets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnThailandJohn Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind with is just so hard to comprehend. Lets not forget if he was drunk and the goal is to make that point the video and the fact he was at bars until the early morning will just go along with the toxicology reports and if such reports don't show him being drunk then not going to look good for them. My money and logic is he was at least legally drunk. Bottom line not speculation if they know from the toxicology reports he was. Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind I have looked at all the photos available of David. The pattern of his many woulds does not include any evidence that he was smashed on the head from behind. Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. Would think an unsuspecting victim at night being attacked by surprise by two armed people (despite their being short) is very plausible but again I have just assumed but not considered it to be fact they likely hit him from behind first. Bottom line is I do believe the judges will rule correctly in this case and also believe their legal team will do the right thing and plead if the evidence is going to lead to a guilty verdict. I highly doubt there is going to be much room for doubt either way. Everything right now is building the foundation of the case and they are going to tie a lot of circumstantial stuff together but what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence. This is what their (both sides) whole case will come down to. The defense knows this and why they are doing their best now bring that up now both in court and in public. If the sperm DNA matches and the defense can't come up with a credible reason to dispute this then all the other evidence is going to swing against them. If it doesn't match or they come up with a decent explanation why it is incorrect then all the other evidence will be cast in doubt too. Even if the confessions are considered they would swing one way or another based on the DNA. One scenario they were false and gotten under duress and the other yea the police were rough on them but they got the truth out of them. This of course assumes there is no very damaging surprise evidence we are unaware. Again, all comes down to the DNA and why the defense team is so eager to see if there is anything there is going to be any way to poke holes in it and of course verify there is a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Koh Tao murders: Fateful last night replayed in court Two Burmese nationals accused of killing a pair of British holidaymakers in Thailand were seen on CCTV playing guitar near the crime scene, a court heard on Wednesday, as their lawyer decried a lack of re-testable DNA evidence to bolster the defence case. Migrant workers Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Tun are on trial for the murder of 24-year-old David Miller and the rape and murder of Hannah Witheridge, 23, on Koh Tao in September. Both have pleaded not guilty and face the death penalty if convicted over a case which damaged Thailand’s reputation as a tourist haven and saw the police accused of bungling the investigation. Prosecutors say DNA evidence points towards the two 22-year-old suspects, but the defence alleges that the men have been scapegoated by an under pressure police force and coerced confessions from the pair. CCTV images of the British backpackers’ final hours were played to a court on the neighbouring island of Koh Samui where the trial is being heard in stages over the next two months. Reporters are not allowed to take notes during the trial. Footage from 17 cameras on the island showed the young holidaymakers enjoying a night out with friends. https://www.dvb.no/news/koh-tao-murders-fateful-last-night-replayed-in-court-burma-myanmar-thailand/55064 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfox Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Thanks BritTim. I wasn't aware. My apologies for the misinformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind with is just so hard to comprehend. Lets not forget if he was drunk and the goal is to make that point the video and the fact he was at bars until the early morning will just go along with the toxicology reports and if such reports don't show him being drunk then not going to look good for them. My money and logic is he was at least legally drunk. Bottom line not speculation if they know from the toxicology reports he was. Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind I have looked at all the photos available of David. The pattern of his many woulds does not include any evidence that he was smashed on the head from behind. Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. Would think an unsuspecting victim at night being attacked by surprise by two armed people (despite their being short) is very plausible but again I have just assumed but not considered it to be fact they likely hit him from behind first. Bottom line is I do believe the judges will rule correctly in this case and also believe their legal team will do the right thing and plead if the evidence is going to lead to a guilty verdict. I highly doubt there is going to be much room for doubt either way. Everything right now is building the foundation of the case and they are going to tie a lot of circumstantial stuff together but what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence. This is what their (both sides) whole case will come down to. The defense knows this and why they are doing their best now bring that up now both in court and in public. If the sperm DNA matches and the defense can't come up with a credible reason to dispute this then all the other evidence is going to swing against them. If it doesn't match or they come up with a decent explanation why it is incorrect then all the other evidence will be cast in doubt too. Even if the confessions are considered they would swing one way or another based on the DNA. One scenario they were false and gotten under duress and the other yea the police were rough on them but they got the truth out of them. This of course assumes there is no very damaging surprise evidence we are unaware. Again, all comes down to the DNA and why the defense team is so eager to see if there is anything there is going to be any way to poke holes in it and of course verify there is a match. what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence Right, the DNA evidence from the semen samples that are used up, the hair in Hannah's hand that has been lost, and one of the alleged murder weapons that has been washed (but strangely was reported originally as blood stained). The DNA from the cigarettes (unless we believe that the non smoker Hannah shared the cigarette with them) is irrelevant as the defendants do not deny being smokers, and admit being on the beach earlier. The cigarette butts (also sadly misplaced) would have been interesting to see if lipstick had been planted on them, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 https://twitter.com/ssmairs/status/624061192126869504'> Wonder about the recordings of the interview. That could make interesting listening. But let me guess it's not available or the recorder didn't work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 What do the RTP home to gain by implying he was drunk ? From a Thai perspective: Drunk = more likely to crave sex. Drunk = more surly, more apt to do & say stupid things which could offend easily-offended Asians. Drunk = less adept at self-defense, therefore more easily overpowered. Bottom line not speculation if they know from the toxicology reports he was. RTP purposefully DID NOT release toxicology reports right after the crime, when they should have. Their soggy reason: it might upset the victims' families, which to me, is BS. The victims' families were already devastated upon hearing of the demise of their lovely offspring, why would hearing toxicology reports upset them further? My supposition of why RTP did that, is one or more of the following: >>> RTP may not have had the equipment or proper experts on hand to do toxicology. >>> RTP may have found some illegal drugs in the victims' blood, and announcing that would open a can or worms: 'Where did they get such drugs. The beach party bars?!' >>> It's not unusual for a pretty young farang backpacker to get slipped a mickey (clandestinely given a drug concoction with hopes of sex later on). It happens at most beach resorts, on both sides of the isthmus. Many reports come out of Phi Phi - some with fatalities/overdoses. In a related note: it's doubtful that RTP did any toxicology tests on Mon or any of his tough-guy buddies. By the time RTP caught up with NS, it was too late. If pressed on the issue, RTP could always say 'no drugs were found being used by any of the Headman's family or friends that night' .....since RTP are so accustomed to just saying whatever suits their agenda, and everyone is obliged to believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krataiboy Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Three hundred CCTV cameras in one small part of a tiny island? And there was me thinking the UK was the surveillance capital of the world! Edited July 23, 2015 by Krataiboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkknight666 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 https://twitter.com/ssmairs/status/624061192126869504'> I feel bad laughing anywhere in this post, but come on. No CCTV of the interrogation? What? WAT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. From the diagram I saw, it looks like the top of his head, not the back. More important, are the many stab wounds, most are to the right side of his neck. RTP claims they're from a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. That's ridiculous. Brit forensics should shed light on all of David's wounds, but waiting for Brit forensics is like waiting for Boy George to be declared next Pope by the Vatican. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. How can you ascertain that? Because he was lying on his back when forensics arrived? He was moved away from the surf prior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritzzz25 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 is ANYONE surprised at this? oh wait, there will be about 6 posters on here that will have excuses why there is no video..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thesticle Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I think it's very strange that the prosecution has brought Nom Sods name into the trial. Are the defense now allowed to use him as part of their stratagy or actually challenge and delve into his alibi? Perhaps the prosecution is trying to preempt some evidence that it thinks the defense has? Why would you bring his name into it if he has been cleared and should be irrelevant to the case at hand? I don't know much about Thai law but it would seem to me that if the prosecution brings his name into it the defense has the right to challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 A post containing flaming personal attack comments directed to another poster has been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnThailandJohn Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 At the start of the trial, their lawyer actually stated this was a possibility. It is a simple matter of reality. It is always an option, but I would appreciate a source for the lawyer spelling it out. It is somewhere on this thread. I don't recall the rest of the article it was part of to google search it but is out there just as their first lawyer from the embassy who publicly stated they confided in him their guilt while also stating they were abused by police. I believe the lawyer stated in an interview something like it was still a possibility depending on how the case goes or the evidence ... something to that affect. Nothing surprising just common sense or a reality at least. OK, so to clarify, this was from a Burmese lawyer in October 2014, right? The one they confessed to, yes or their about. The other comment was from somebody on their legal team and made recently. Tried doing a google search for the main lawyers name and the word guilty and evidence but a ton is coming up. My VPN is not working right now but it could be this link ... Thailand Brit murder suspects 'still waiting' on evidence review Daily Mail-May 30, 2558 BE Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Tun have pleaded not guilty to the murder of ... concerned at this developing situation," Nakhon Chomphuchatsaid in a ... If I recall write it was a link somebody had shared on this thread (so above may not be the right one or it could also contain it) for another reason and as I read the article about 2/3's into it there was a couple quotes from one of the lawyers (assuming Chomphuchat) who made the comment but was worded in a way that made it seem like common season a plea could still be on the table ... and of course it is common sense especially since the defense hasn't yet confirmed the DNA evidence. Even Andy Hall said something recently which indicated the two might be guilty ... to be clear he didn't say that but stated something about how his motives were not about innocence or guilt but rather making sure these two had a fair trial and/or treated properly in terms of having adequate defense and human rights. It would just be idiotic for somebody, especially their lawyers, to not consider the possibility they may be guilty. A lot of lawyers don't even want to know and won't ask their client directly. Not sure it applies in Thailand but in the US it would be unethical and punishable for a defense attorney to defend a case by way of representing their client is Innocent if they know they are guilty. They certainly could question evidence but they couldn't do things like put on an alibi witness because they would be presenting perjury to the court. Again, not sure about Thailand but defense attorneys in the US are considered officers of the court too and have certain duties they must uphold when presenting a defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I think it's very strange that the prosecution has brought Nom Sods name into the trial. Are the defense now allowed to use him as part of their stratagy or actually challenge and delve into his alibi? Perhaps the prosecution is trying to preempt some evidence that it thinks the defense has? Why would you bring his name into it if he has been cleared and should be irrelevant to the case at hand? I don't know much about Thai law but it would seem to me that if the prosecution brings his name into it the defense has the right to challenge. The prosecution may want to see us focusing on Nomsod rather than the woman reported as running on CCTV (reported by the police on September 20th). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rykbanlor Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. From the diagram I saw, it looks like the top of his head, not the back. More important, are the many stab wounds, most are to the right side of his neck. RTP claims they're from a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. That's ridiculous. Brit forensics should shed light on all of David's wounds, but waiting for Brit forensics is like waiting for Boy George to be declared next Pope by the Vatican. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. How can you ascertain that? Because he was lying on his back when forensics arrived? He was moved away from the surf prior. I think making any type of judgement whilst referencing the RE_ENACTMENT is ill-advised. JTJ you have always pushed us to rely on fact when making our arguments so you would be better served doing the same yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 OK, so to clarify, this was from a Burmese lawyer in October 2014, right? The one they confessed to, yes or their about. The other comment was from somebody on their legal team and made recently. Tried doing a google search for the main lawyers name and the word guilty and evidence but a ton is coming up. My VPN is not working right now but it could be this link ... Thailand Brit murder suspects 'still waiting' on evidence review Daily Mail-May 30, 2558 BE Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Tun have pleaded not guilty to the murder of ... concerned at this developing situation," Nakhon Chomphuchatsaid in a ... If I recall write it was a link somebody had shared on this thread (so above may not be the right one or it could also contain it) for another reason and as I read the article about 2/3's into it there was a couple quotes from one of the lawyers (assuming Chomphuchat) who made the comment but was worded in a way that made it seem like common season a plea could still be on the table ... and of course it is common sense especially since the defense hasn't yet confirmed the DNA evidence. Even Andy Hall said something recently which indicated the two might be guilty ... to be clear he didn't say that but stated something about how his motives were not about innocence or guilt but rather making sure these two had a fair trial and/or treated properly in terms of having adequate defense and human rights. It would just be idiotic for somebody, especially their lawyers, to not consider the possibility they may be guilty. A lot of lawyers don't even want to know and won't ask their client directly. Not sure it applies in Thailand but in the US it would be unethical and punishable for a defense attorney to defend a case by way of representing their client is Innocent if they know they are guilty. They certainly could question evidence but they couldn't do things like put on an alibi witness because they would be presenting perjury to the court. Again, not sure about Thailand but defense attorneys in the US are considered officers of the court too and have certain duties they must uphold when presenting a defense. The Daily Mail article just contains the standard complaints of the defense lawyers about the obstruction of their attempts to check the prosecution evidence. There is nothing suggesting any guilty plea. My Google foo is pretty good, but I can find no reference to any of the Thai legal team at any stage suggesting anything other than a robust claim of innocence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnThailandJohn Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. From the diagram I saw, it looks like the top of his head, not the back. More important, are the many stab wounds, most are to the right side of his neck. RTP claims they're from a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. That's ridiculous. Brit forensics should shed light on all of David's wounds, but waiting for Brit forensics is like waiting for Boy George to be declared next Pope by the Vatican. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. How can you ascertain that? Because he was lying on his back when forensics arrived? He was moved away from the surf prior. I don't remember the wounds he had but thought very early on it was the back of his head but may have been the top ... same difference in terms of being struck from behind especially when you are talking about a hoe with a curved end. (if you suspect the hoe was not the weapon then fine, that subject has already been speculated beyond any point) I said reenactment photo ... the one were one of the defendant is standing above one of the people pretending to be the victim lying on his back and the defendant holding a representation of the weapon, what I believe was a dust pan on stick in the photo, appearing to simulate a blow to the head. It actually doesn't concern me as being all that relevant in terms of prosecutors being able to give an exact detail of how things went down (they were not there). Unless they are sure and can prove the exact sequence of events on the beach it would be stupid to present a scenario when another scenario is just as plausible This case is going to come down to DNA and all the other evidence will fall inline from there. Edited July 23, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind with is just so hard to comprehend. Lets not forget if he was drunk and the goal is to make that point the video and the fact he was at bars until the early morning will just go along with the toxicology reports and if such reports don't show him being drunk then not going to look good for them. My money and logic is he was at least legally drunk. Bottom line not speculation if they know from the toxicology reports he was. Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind I have looked at all the photos available of David. The pattern of his many woulds does not include any evidence that he was smashed on the head from behind. Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. Would think an unsuspecting victim at night being attacked by surprise by two armed people (despite their being short) is very plausible but again I have just assumed but not considered it to be fact they likely hit him from behind first. Bottom line is I do believe the judges will rule correctly in this case and also believe their legal team will do the right thing and plead if the evidence is going to lead to a guilty verdict. I highly doubt there is going to be much room for doubt either way. Everything right now is building the foundation of the case and they are going to tie a lot of circumstantial stuff together but what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence. This is what their (both sides) whole case will come down to. The defense knows this and why they are doing their best now bring that up now both in court and in public. If the sperm DNA matches and the defense can't come up with a credible reason to dispute this then all the other evidence is going to swing against them. If it doesn't match or they come up with a decent explanation why it is incorrect then all the other evidence will be cast in doubt too. Even if the confessions are considered they would swing one way or another based on the DNA. One scenario they were false and gotten under duress and the other yea the police were rough on them but they got the truth out of them. This of course assumes there is no very damaging surprise evidence we are unaware. Again, all comes down to the DNA and why the defense team is so eager to see if there is anything there is going to be any way to poke holes in it and of course verify there is a match. what DNA evidence ? have you been following this at all The defence team has requested it but it doesn't exist and therefore also does not exist to this trial, which part of that is difficult to grasp ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnThailandJohn Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind with is just so hard to comprehend. Lets not forget if he was drunk and the goal is to make that point the video and the fact he was at bars until the early morning will just go along with the toxicology reports and if such reports don't show him being drunk then not going to look good for them. My money and logic is he was at least legally drunk. Bottom line not speculation if they know from the toxicology reports he was. Because two short people smashing an unarmed person in the head from behind I have looked at all the photos available of David. The pattern of his many woulds does not include any evidence that he was smashed on the head from behind. Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. Would think an unsuspecting victim at night being attacked by surprise by two armed people (despite their being short) is very plausible but again I have just assumed but not considered it to be fact they likely hit him from behind first. Bottom line is I do believe the judges will rule correctly in this case and also believe their legal team will do the right thing and plead if the evidence is going to lead to a guilty verdict. I highly doubt there is going to be much room for doubt either way. Everything right now is building the foundation of the case and they are going to tie a lot of circumstantial stuff together but what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence. This is what their (both sides) whole case will come down to. The defense knows this and why they are doing their best now bring that up now both in court and in public. If the sperm DNA matches and the defense can't come up with a credible reason to dispute this then all the other evidence is going to swing against them. If it doesn't match or they come up with a decent explanation why it is incorrect then all the other evidence will be cast in doubt too. Even if the confessions are considered they would swing one way or another based on the DNA. One scenario they were false and gotten under duress and the other yea the police were rough on them but they got the truth out of them. This of course assumes there is no very damaging surprise evidence we are unaware. Again, all comes down to the DNA and why the defense team is so eager to see if there is anything there is going to be any way to poke holes in it and of course verify there is a match. what DNA evidence ? have you been following this at all The defence team has requested it but it doesn't exist and therefore also does not exist to this trial, which part of that is difficult to grasp ? Yawn ... why don't we wait until the DNA is presented or in your mind when no DNA evidence is presented before continuing to spout something that was contradicted and explained almost immediately after it was reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Thought he had wound(s) to the back of the head. Also photos from the reenactment show him being struck again while laying in his back. Would think an unsuspecting victim at night being attacked by surprise by two armed people (despite their being short) is very plausible but again I have just assumed but not considered it to be fact they likely hit him from behind first. Bottom line is I do believe the judges will rule correctly in this case and also believe their legal team will do the right thing and plead if the evidence is going to lead to a guilty verdict. I highly doubt there is going to be much room for doubt either way. Everything right now is building the foundation of the case and they are going to tie a lot of circumstantial stuff together but what it is going to come down to is if the defense is able to present a credible doubt to the DNA evidence. This is what their (both sides) whole case will come down to. The defense knows this and why they are doing their best now bring that up now both in court and in public. If the sperm DNA matches and the defense can't come up with a credible reason to dispute this then all the other evidence is going to swing against them. If it doesn't match or they come up with a decent explanation why it is incorrect then all the other evidence will be cast in doubt too. Even if the confessions are considered they would swing one way or another based on the DNA. One scenario they were false and gotten under duress and the other yea the police were rough on them but they got the truth out of them. This of course assumes there is no very damaging surprise evidence we are unaware. Again, all comes down to the DNA and why the defense team is so eager to see if there is anything there is going to be any way to poke holes in it and of course verify there is a match. what DNA evidence ? have you been following this at all The defence team has requested it but it doesn't exist and therefore also does not exist to this trial, which part of that is difficult to grasp ? I wish! Obviously, that should be the case but, in Thailand, that is entirely up to the judges. If they want to accept the RTP's assurances that the DNA evidence did once exist then the defense can do nothing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) MikeENZ, who apparently provided some insights about life on KT and KP for the TIME Magazine "The Sceptic Isle" story casts doubt on the possibility that the son of an influential figure on the sceptic island could have committed or been involved in the rape and murders because he would have had too much too lose. Personally I have no idea who committed the crimes and don't wish to point the finger of suspicion at anyone in particular. However, I would like to point out that MikeENZ's theory is inconsistent with the observed behaviour of the sons of wealthy and influential figures in Thailand. Without naming names or citing dates, I list from memory some incidents I recall over the years in Thailand. - The son of an influential politician was alleged to have shot a policeman in the head at point blank range in a disco over an argument about someone stepping on his toe. No conviction. - The son of a gangster associated with gambling dens in Bangkok shot the nephew of a Thai diplomat in the face non-fatally in a disco in Bangkok after the victim allegedly stepped on his toe. No prosecution. - The son of an influential politician became irate when a pick-up truck cut in front of him on a Bangkok street. The pick-up truck was pulled over by bodyguards travelling in another car and the driver was beaten. The politician's son walked towards him and fired a shot that missed. Then he pointed the gun right at his head and pulled the trigger but it failed to fire. No prosecution. - The son of an influential politician was pulled over by a traffic cop on Pattanakarn Road in Bangkok for a minor violation and got irate when the cop refused to let him go without booking him. So he pulled out his gun and shot the cop in the face non-fatally. No charges pressed after a financial settlement. - The son of an influential politician abducted a police sergeant over an unknown dispute and incarcerated him for 2 or 3 days. No charges pressed after a financial settlement. - The son of a billionaire who sells cafeinated sugar water to gullible fools all over the world ran over a police sergeant and dragged him on the car's bonnet for 220 metres before tipping him on the road, ensuring death, if it had not already occurred. Then he attempted to get a family servant to claim responsibility for the crime in his place. He was charged but there has been no attempt to bring him to court and almost certainly the case will be allowed expire under Thailand's ridiculous statute of limitations. - The son of an influential Isaan politician became irate when he was travelling in was overtaken by a pick-up truck on an isolated country road. He speeded up and overtook the pick-up so that he and at least one of his buddies could fire into the pick-up repeatedly with their illegally carried handguns but missed him completely. The pick-up truck owner, a building contractor, was ready for them and returned fire with his own illegal handgun, killing the politician's son instantly. LOL. The pick-up truck owner was prosecuted. I could go on but I think this pattern illustrates something in the Thai psyche that MikeENZ obviously failed to learn during his brief stint in Thailand as an illegal worker in tourist resorts. Sons of wealthy and influential people are brought up with a sense of entitlement and impunity which makes them believe they can and have and do whatever they want and never have to face any consequences because Daddy will fix any problems that result. The above list indicates that they are often right. This makes their reflexes different from most less privileged people in Thailand or people living in rule of law jurisdictions, who are more likely to stop short at a point where they should be able to see a possibility of spending many years in prison. Since they don't feel they will have to face the consequences of their actions, they don't see any need to control their flashpoints and, in a country where face is so important, this can lead to some ugly situations. Some of these spoiled brats think nothing of killing some one who accidentally steps on their toe. You can imagine how they would feel if they have been slighted sexually and lost face in front of their buddies and servants. Another point has been raised by other posters, i.e. why would police go to so much trouble and why would the case be escalated to such a high level to protect a fire dancing drifter, even if he was Thai. In the case of the Katherine Horton murder in Samui, the authorities were happy to arrest and convict two Thai fishermen. No doubt Burmese fishermen would have been preferable but Thai fishermen are only a couple of rungs up the ladder and are also of no consequence, as are Thai fire dancers.. Edited July 23, 2015 by Dogmatix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts