Koh Tao: Trial opens for 2 accused of killing British tourists

[Artisi]

It's not the first time that this has happened, incomplete and inaccurate reports being published that later need to be amended. For example during the previous hearings it was reported that the man who originally found the garden hoe was "cajoled" into cleaning it, next thing we know:

"CORRECTION: The beach cleaner who removed the garden hoe from the crime scene did not tell the court he also washed the tool, as was originally reported."

So, was it cleaned later? Was it cleaned earlier? Why did it have no fingerprints or DNA evidence? Was there any blood on it? Were the forensic experts involved able to extract DNA from the blood if any was found? Was any of David's blood on the hoe?

From memory, way back wasn't it reported no blood etc on the hoe.

[AleG]

Police 'Never Checked' CCTV After Britons Killed

There are gasps in court as judges hear of a series of apparent blunders in the hours after the two Britons were found dead.

By Sarah McBride in Koh Samui

KOH SAMUI: Police failed to check CCTV images of a boat leaving a beach close to where two British backpackers were found murdered, a Thai court has heard.

There were gasps in the courtroom as Police Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha revealed a series of apparent blunders in the investigation into the deaths of David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the island of Koh Tao.

The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said.

Read more: http://news.sky.com/story/1523975/police-never-checked-cctv-after-britons-killed

Sky News 2015-07-23

Ok colonel Cherdpong , if this is true , that they actually have the footage , then for god sake check it now. So we at least can find out who the passengers on the boat were.

Very unlikely that a speedboat had left from the main pier, it is used by larger vessels; speedboats normally operate directly from the beach or from small piers at some resorts.

It says leaving a beach.

Nothing about a pier mentioned here.

This is truly ridiculous. how can folk continue to defend the RTP?

One defender usually comes across as quite a smart fella to me. Maybe with an agenda, but smart nonetheless. I wonder if he's miffed at having to try and defend this blatant pile of the proverbial as it's a total credibility crusher for now and the future imo. Can't help feeling it might be better letting some of the other more suitable, error prone, defenders do it.

Yes, it says leaving a beach, and then in two large font paragraphs it talks about that boat and the police not checking CCTV footage; the way it is written and emphasized it's very easy to end up with the impression that there is footage of that boat leaving the island.

For the nth time, I'm not defending the RTP, I believe information in a case like this should be presented in a clear and unbiased manner, IMO the way that article was written it completely fails at doing so.

[boomerangutang]

If this was my home country the case would have been tossed out by the judge already. Just like that.

I'm wondering if there's ever a time in Thailand where a judge sees that the prosecution can't prove its case "beyond a (any) reasonable doubt" and dismisses the case out of hand.

Does the Thai justice system even have that parameter, '....beyond a reasonable doubt' ?

More likely they have parameters like: 'Certain people, because of high social status, are untouchable' or 'if sufficient money is paid clandestinely, then things can be quietly taken care of.'

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

We both know that would not be possible. Police will say it's no longer available. Whether or not that's true, is moot, because like the DNA trail, all we have are police statements - thus far, with nothing to back them up. Agenda by cops and Headman? Nawww.

[Emster23]

Some rightfully question why RTP and powerful families might protect fire dancers or whoever.... Just want to toss this in.... once the cover up starts, it is hard to back down. At a minimum loss of face, up to crumble of whole infrastructure of corruption. Heads could roll, or at least get transferred to inactive post. Look what happened to Clinton. "Oh! what a tangled web we weave When first we practise to deceive!"

[AleG]

It's not the first time that this has happened, incomplete and inaccurate reports being published that later need to be amended. For example during the previous hearings it was reported that the man who originally found the garden hoe was "cajoled" into cleaning it, next thing we know:

"CORRECTION: The beach cleaner who removed the garden hoe from the crime scene did not tell the court he also washed the tool, as was originally reported."

And how do you know which report is correct?

I would place more credibility on later corrections, since time and time again initial reports have proven to be inaccurate, either emanating from the police flubbing over some point or the press misunderstanding something.

Another clear example is the controversy surrounding the phone found behind the two suspect's lodgings. During a press conference a policeman said it belonged to Whiteridge, instead of Miller; that set Social Media on fire with claims that proved there was a cover up since there were pictures of Witheridge's phone being handed to the police. Next day the police issued a correction, they misspoke, it was Miller's phone, that didn't sway the Internet detectives, neither did when two witnesses testified that the two men on trial had given them that phone to dispose of, or when the two men on trial said that they found that phone on the night of the murders.

The "They planted Hannah's phone" meme still pops up now and then even if it's been thoroughly discredited by now.

So yes, I'd wait to have those comments about the hoe explained in more detail.

the two men on trial said that they found that phone on the night of the murders

Source please. Was this in their "confessions"?

No, it was during the pre-trial hearings months ago, I'm not going to link to the website because there is a forum rule against doing so for sites that ask for donations but you can search for:

"21st Oct: Wai Phyo reported that he simply came across possessions allegedly belonging to the deceased"

This is in reference to the witness testimony that:

"14th Sept The witnesses testify: (1) Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo were on Sairee Beach on 14th Sept. night close to the place where the bodies of Hannah and David were found; (2) Wai Phyo came across a mobile phone he said he found that may have belonged to David but passed it onto his friend."

Which of course refers to the phone found behind their room found by the police on the day of their arrest.

It all adds up to the claim that the police planted that phone (let alone that it was Witheridge's phone) being completely debunked.

[stephenterry]

Police 'Never Checked' CCTV After Britons Killed

There are gasps in court as judges hear of a series of apparent blunders in the hours after the two Britons were found dead.

By Sarah McBride in Koh Samui

KOH SAMUI: Police failed to check CCTV images of a boat leaving a beach close to where two British backpackers were found murdered, a Thai court has heard.

There were gasps in the courtroom as Police Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha revealed a series of apparent blunders in the investigation into the deaths of David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the island of Koh Tao.

The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said.

Read more: http://news.sky.com/story/1523975/police-never-checked-cctv-after-britons-killed

Sky News 2015-07-23

Ok colonel Cherdpong , if this is true , that they actually have the footage , then for god sake check it now. So we at least can find out who the passengers on the boat were.

Very unlikely that a speedboat had left from the main pier, it is used by larger vessels; speedboats normally operate directly from the beach or from small piers at some resorts.

It says leaving a beach.

Nothing about a pier mentioned here.

This is truly ridiculous. how can folk continue to defend the RTP?

One defender usually comes across as quite a smart fella to me. Maybe with an agenda, but smart nonetheless. I wonder if he's miffed at having to try and defend this blatant pile of the proverbial as it's a total credibility crusher for now and the future imo. Can't help feeling it might be better letting some of the other more suitable, error prone, defenders do it.

Yes, it says leaving a beach, and then in two large font paragraphs it talks about that boat and the police not checking CCTV footage; the way it is written and emphasized it's very easy to end up with the impression that there is footage of that boat leaving the island.

For the nth time, I'm not defending the RTP, I believe information in a case like this should be presented in a clear and unbiased manner, IMO the way that article was written it completely fails at doing so.

bottom line is the rtp didn't check the Cctv. As was admitted in court.

[newcomer71]

Very unlikely that a speedboat had left from the main pier, it is used by larger vessels; speedboats normally operate directly from the beach or from small piers at some resorts.

Irrelevant dont you think, the point is the cctv was not checked in a double murder case and to this day know body knows. We also know they were looking and checking local fishing boats but failed to check the pier cctv..............

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

[AleG]

It's not the first time that this has happened, incomplete and inaccurate reports being published that later need to be amended. For example during the previous hearings it was reported that the man who originally found the garden hoe was "cajoled" into cleaning it, next thing we know:

"CORRECTION: The beach cleaner who removed the garden hoe from the crime scene did not tell the court he also washed the tool, as was originally reported."

So, was it cleaned later? Was it cleaned earlier? Why did it have no fingerprints or DNA evidence? Was there any blood on it? Were the forensic experts involved able to extract DNA from the blood if any was found? Was any of David's blood on the hoe?

Since the report that it had been cleaned was recanted, why do you ask when something that didn't happen happened?

For the rest of your questions, that's what the defense should be asking to the people that actually examined the hoe, but suffice to say that obviously there was blood on the hoe so your next to last question is also moot.

As far as I remembered they only matched Witheridge's DNA to the blood on the hoe and that was that.

[AleG]

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

[boomerangutang]

Some rightfully question why RTP and powerful families might protect fire dancers or whoever.... Just want to toss this in.... once the cover up starts, it is hard to back down. At a minimum loss of face, up to crumble of whole infrastructure of corruption. Heads could roll, or at least get transferred to inactive post. Look what happened to Clinton. "Oh! what a tangled web we weave When first we practise to deceive!"

You're right. When top brass first decided to enact the framing of the Burmese - RTP had no idea the ensuing months would put their feet to the fire. They've been totally broadsided by social media, and now the world's press corps. I think the Thai press will join in soon, when they see the firestorm this has ignited ww, even though the PM has probably told them to mute their coverage.

What we have now is a farang (AH) giving updates to reporters representing some of the top ww news outlets. A Thai journalist should be doing that, not a farang (I think Andrew's doing an exemplary job, btw). But no Thai is up to the job right now, either because they can't speak English well-enough, or they don't comprehend the significance of the trial, or (most likely) they're under a gag order from the PM. Other possible reasons it's not a Thai: threats to back-down from suspicious locals and/or lack of focus during long boring trial sessions lasting up to 12 hours. ...oh, and no note-taking/recording devices allowed.

If nothing else, this fiasco should serve as a warning to RTP that 'business as usual' won't be as easy in the future. People are watching. People want truth. They want professionalism, and social media can't be shut up with a wave of a general's hand.

[newcomer71]

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

Okay, I guess you expressed your view perfectly. Glad to see you still see no flaws in the investigation.

-SIC-

[Lite Beer]

Koh Tao Murder Trial: More Forensic Evidence Available for Re-Test, Witness Reveals

By Khaosod Eng.

The mothers of Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo with their defense lawyers outside the Koh Samui court, 23 July 2015.

SURAT THANI — Challenging previous testimony provided by police, a forensic expert told the court where two Burmese men are being tried for murdering British tourists on a Thai island that more evidence is available for the independent re-test requested by the defence team earlier this month.

Her testimony contradicted what police witnesses told the court during the first three days of the trial on July 8-10: that only four items were available for a re-examination because other key pieces of evidence, such swabs of DNA taken from the victims’ bodies, were "used up."

Today’s witness, a scientist from police’s forensic division named Kewalee Chanpan, said that "all" genetic material tested in the lab is replicated for future processing.

Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who was in charge of testing several items in the investigation, also said that original pieces of evidence, such as a condom found at the crime scene, are still in police custody, though she added that the DNA traces on the objects diminish over time.

The availability of more forensic evidence is seen as a huge victory for the defense team, which has repeatedly protested their inability to access the alleged DNA match that police say incriminates the two suspects, who names are Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo.

The pair has been charged with raping and murdering Hannah Witheridge, 23, and murdering David Miller, 24, on the island of Koh Tao in September 2014. If found guilty, the 22-year-olds could face the death penalty.

Police’s internal processing of the forensic tests - which were conducted privately in police lab - and the prosecution’s efforts to evade an independent re-examination of the evidence have fed long-running suspicions that the two Burmese migrant workers were framed.

Read More: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437661326

-- Khaosod English 2015-07-23

[boomerangutang]

AleG, you're embarrassing yourself, trying so hard to eke out paltry excuses for the multiple and compound screw-ups of the so-called investigators. Keep going if you want, but you're only assisting the RTP digging a big stinky crap hole.

[Thesticle]

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

You're really clutching at straws trying to weasel and worm the scenario to fit an agenda. Undoubtably we will hear the same kind of drivel tomorrow when the RTP give their excuses. They have trodden in

a massive dog s**t and now they stink.

[MikeENZ]

Do people on here honestly think that my account's been hacked or something? What do I need to do - post an image of me holding a newspaper for proof of life or something?

[bunglebag]

Wee need to know what happened inside the AC bar involving David and/or Hannah or any other venue they may have visited. Was there an altercation or words with anyone in that bar on that night and if so who were they? If there was an altercation , then we need to know what may have occurred as a result of that and where does it lead. Every crime has to have some motive. Part of the investigation determines who may have had a motive. I wonder if the defense team has their own investigator doing a complete time line on this case and all of the potential witnesses. Everyone wants the truth and justice for the deceased and their families as well as the accused. Someone had to see something that will shed real light on this case and someone will talk-eventually.

I think this could be the crux. Any incident inside AC bar (that night or previously) or on the beach outside (beach party that night) would be my first line of investigation. Could have been whilst it was busy or later when it was getting quieter. How unfortunate that there does not appear to be any cctv available from the minute they entered the bar.

I saw one report from the early days that mentioned an altercation in intouch bar but that could have been erroneous reporting. It wouldn't be the first time.

How the policeman witness who watched the cctv could deduce that this was not premeditated when the last time he was able to see David was 2am and Hannah even earlier, and he saw nothing of them once they entered the bar is beyond me.

Plus he made a few assumptions with his 'evidence' such as the fact that David was looking for somewhere to drink and got pointed to AC by tourists (Could equally be he knew them or knew they knew Hannah and was asking if they knew where she was? Was it not the case that he had told Mr Ware at the apartment that he was going back out to look for her? Open to correction if that is not the case)

[boomerangutang]

Now we hear that a forensic specialist from police’s forensic division named Kewalee Chanpan says "all" genetic material tested in the lab is replicated for future processing. I hope 'replicated' means 'available' in this case. I also hope Ms Kewalee is an objective professional who is not under the thumb of her higher ranked bosses. Let the re-testing begin. While you're at it, compare it to test results which should have been done by Brit forensic experts.

And also, (maybe I'm asking for too much) compare DNA typing found in/on Hannah with 'people of interest' connected to the Headman. I know the usual RTP echoers will say, "No, they've already been cleared. Leave them out of this. Plus, they're not on trial."

.......ummm ok, but reasonable people say: 'that's what should be done in the name of fairness, and in the pursuit of finding who the real criminals are.'

Just for fun, let's pretend the Thai criminal system is trying to find who really committed the crimes. Do wide-sweeping DNA comparisons, if they dare.

[Happy Grumpy]

The RTP really are showing how to investigate a case that you don't want properly solved.

[SiSePuede419]

Anyone remember this snippet:

A CCTV video of a woman running near the scene is described but not released. Police say it could be of a witness to the double murder, a suspect or of Miss Witheridge herself.

Reported September 20th, source http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2764038/Did-Thai-murder-victims-argue-island-gangster-hour-brutally-killed-Locals-claim-no-one-speak-scared.html.

Anyone think the court will ever see this? It does not fit well with the sneak attack on David theory does it?

"...Another traveller, James Isaacs, told the Telegraph two British girls had been mugged by a gang of motorbike thugs the previous day on the same beach..."

How did these moto-thugs escape? Down the beach? Or down the road lined with CCTV cameras?

Could these murders be the same thugs? Maybe these tourists resisted and they escalated?

[HUH]

Good point made by the BBC reporter

https://twitter.com/pakhead/status/624225098141011968

[HUH]

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

No its up to the police to have done their job, its only because of the defense questions this has been revealed. No cctv examination of the pier, carry on your defense of that, there is none, by the way its gone viral and millions of people throughout the world will be reading this online and in print over the coming days.

[bunglebag]

The court was told officers had inspected it with a magnifying glass but deemed there were no viable fingerprints on it, and no DNA evidence to collect.

http://news.sky.com/story/1523975/police-never-checked-cctv-after-britons-killed

H12.jpg

Unbelievable incompetence, or not?!

Edited July 23, 2015 by bunglebag

[arrowsdawdle]

As a footnote I think the anger and interest shown on here and elsewear is magnified as we all know to an extent how evidence and trials are gathered and presented. In this case there's too many wrong procedures from day one and continued from then for a person of any sort of intelligence not to be galvanized into voicing a opinion. Too many bullets to fire I'm afraid . I have never imagined that in these days that a law enforcement agency could be so amateurish and downright crooked.

Thai law is different, just like Thai electricity.

[NeverSure]

Now we hear that a forensic specialist from police’s forensic division named Kewalee Chanpan says "all" genetic material tested in the lab is replicated for future processing. I hope 'replicated' means 'available' in this case. I also hope Ms Kewalee is an objective professional who is not under the thumb of her higher ranked bosses. Let the re-testing begin. While you're at it, compare it to test results which should have been done by Brit forensic experts.

And also, (maybe I'm asking for too much) compare DNA typing found in/on Hannah with 'people of interest' connected to the Headman. I know the usual RTP echoers will say, "No, they've already been cleared. Leave them out of this. Plus, they're not on trial."

.......ummm ok, but reasonable people say: 'that's what should be done in the name of fairness, and in the pursuit of finding who the real criminals are.'

Just for fun, let's pretend the Thai criminal system is trying to find who really committed the crimes. Do wide-sweeping DNA comparisons, if they dare.

I have a question I've never seen answered. Is it known that there is true DNA from Hannah? The news said that her body was cleaned and embalmed before being sent to the UK. I haven't read anything that said Scotland Yard recovered DNA from Hannah. Who would we trust? What is there to compare to today that would be known to have been at the crime scene?

Cheers.

[arrowsdawdle]

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

No its up to the police to have done their job, its only because of the defense questions this has been revealed. No cctv examination of the pier, carry on your defense of that, there is none, by the way its gone viral and millions of people throughout the world will be reading this online and in print over the coming days.

Why is most everyone on this forum under the misconception that the investigation and trial are in service of justice, when all indications are in service of protecting individuals with a predetermined outcome?

[ffaarraanngg]

Now we hear that a forensic specialist from police’s forensic division named Kewalee Chanpan says "all" genetic material tested in the lab is replicated for future processing. I hope 'replicated' means 'available' in this case. I also hope Ms Kewalee is an objective professional who is not under the thumb of her higher ranked bosses. Let the re-testing begin. While you're at it, compare it to test results which should have been done by Brit forensic experts.

And also, (maybe I'm asking for too much) compare DNA typing found in/on Hannah with 'people of interest' connected to the Headman. I know the usual RTP echoers will say, "No, they've already been cleared. Leave them out of this. Plus, they're not on trial."

.......ummm ok, but reasonable people say: 'that's what should be done in the name of fairness, and in the pursuit of finding who the real criminals are.'

Just for fun, let's pretend the Thai criminal system is trying to find who really committed the crimes. Do wide-sweeping DNA comparisons, if they dare.

I have a question I've never seen answered. Is it known that there is true DNA from Hannah? The news said that her body was cleaned and embalmed before being sent to the UK. I haven't read anything that said Scotland Yard recovered DNA from Hannah. Who would we trust? What is there to compare to today that would be known to have been at the crime scene?

Cheers.

Surely to god there is, surely the autopsy that was done in the UK would have taken such samples, the chances of every last drop of semen being cleaned away must be zero.

[bunglebag]

*[too many quoted blocks to repost so have chopped 2 out]*

Very unlikely that a speedboat had left from the main pier, it is used by larger vessels; speedboats normally operate directly from the beach or from small piers at some resorts.

It says leaving a beach.

Nothing about a pier mentioned here.

This is truly ridiculous. how can folk continue to defend the RTP?

One defender usually comes across as quite a smart fella to me. Maybe with an agenda, but smart nonetheless. I wonder if he's miffed at having to try and defend this blatant pile of the proverbial as it's a total credibility crusher for now and the future imo. Can't help feeling it might be better letting some of the other more suitable, error prone, defenders do it.

Yes, it says leaving a beach, and then in two large font paragraphs it talks about that boat and the police not checking CCTV footage; the way it is written and emphasized it's very easy to end up with the impression that there is footage of that boat leaving the island.

For the nth time, I'm not defending the RTP, I believe information in a case like this should be presented in a clear and unbiased manner, IMO the way that article was written it completely fails at doing so.

Hi AleG,

I was not referring to you when mentioning 'one defender', 'twas a more prolific one on this thread. So apologies, I should have maybe put that in a separate post.

Personally I feel that although you may have a different ideas about what *might* have happened compared to me your posts are often valid, quite unbiased, and not full of outdated or twisted information. I think I might even have 'like'd a couple but I don't keep track of things like that so could be wrong.

Also since my original reply I've seen plenty of mentions of a pier in other articles. As seems to often be the case there seems to be a little confusion. How inconvenient that practically no translators are available

[bunglebag]

No, I don't think it's irrelevant.

As I said the pier is normally used for larger vessels and it would be easy to check if any left during the relevant time.

Before things get even more twisted it should be pointed that this:

"The court in Koh Samui heard that the senior investigating police chief and his officers did not believe the killer would have taken that boat, which left an hour or so after the estimated time of death of the pair.

"We have the footage, but we never checked it," Police Colonel Cherdpong said."

Is conflating two things, one the footage from the pier and two the allegations that a speedboat left the island from somewhere else one hour after the murder. They way it has been edited it makes it look as if there is footage of that boat leaving from the pier that the police refused to examine.

Having said that the defense should ask for the footage from the pier and examine it to their full satisfaction.

But for God's sake! This is a top profile murder, a freaking detective MUST follow any lead! How can this lead be left out???

How can you even think to give an excuse to RTP for this (among the thousand other) utter proof of incompetence and total lack of professionalism???

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

Darnnit then you go and say that!

IMO it is indefensible to say that they may have had a valid reason for not checking it, just my opinion though

Edited July 23, 2015 by bunglebag

[AleG]

Yes, they should investigate every lead, but just because they didn't review the CCTV footage it doesn't mean they didn't.

They collected the footage, so evidently they checked out the pier but for some reason didn't consider it worthwhile to review the footage from the cameras, maybe they just established that no boats left from the pier during that time by interviewing people there; it's up to the defense to ask for the reasons behind that decision and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

Okay, I guess you expressed your view perfectly. Glad to see you still see no flaws in the investigation.

-SIC-

I've never said there were no flaws in the investigation, for what is worth I think they should have taken the time to review the footage from the pier and if they didn't give a clear explanation of why they didn't they should.

Edited July 23, 2015 by AleG

[ffaarraanngg]

This court case has been staggering and shows how dumb the upper echelons of the RTP are.

But are they seriously telling the world that they have CCTV footage of the pier which is the major route in and out of Koh Tao and they haven't bothered to look at it. I just can't quite get my head around this and the fact my taxpayers money has paid for British police to fly over there ... surely they must have known this and the one statement the UK govt have come out with which should have had them up for contempt of court for prejudicing a trial claims there is strong evidence and a case to answer, seems as is the scum filth the world over stick together.

Could i ask the people that are defending the prominent family of Koh Tao if they would be happy if the police investigating the brutal murder of their family members would think this acceptable if this was to happen to them be it in Thailand or anywhere on this earth?

You people make me sick, you're the kind of scum who'd befriend Moira Hindley the Yorkshire ripper and other brutal murderers.

Edited July 23, 2015 by ffaarraanngg