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

[Thaddeus]

I would love to know honestly if this was your daughter or son murdered in these circumstances would you still be happy with the RTP case!

My guess is my statement would be right in line with that of the actual victim's families who have expressed confidence in the evidence and case and believe the right people are on trial and like them would encourage people to let the case play out in court.

Why have to speculate about me when you have the actual families who have released multiple statements.

They have not expressed confidence that the right people are on trial.... Where exactly did you get that information from?

Received today's posting instructions, obviously.

[Konaboy1]

soooo..If the judge finds the 2 men from Myanmar guilty( distinctly possible) where does that leave all the chatter on TV?

Are we all just doomed to continue to repeat our various positions ad nauseam?

alternatively, if not guilty, are we doomed, once again to be bombarded with 'I told you so" as well as new angles concerning who is really guilty now?

Seems we are all just Doomed!!!

[stephenterry]

On reflection over the last few days I am beginning to understand why the RTP are being shown up as incompetent at best, and corrupt at worst. Andy Hall's conflagration with the RTP outside the courtroom, them basically stating the defence should be supporting the prosecution in respecting the victims families is key.

IMO, I believe the pressure from above was to instruct the RTP to find the culprits, PDQ. This was motivated by two aspects;

1) Thailand's image as a safe place for tourists

2) to bring closure to the victims parents - who are not Thais, but Brits (thus a focus on International relations is a factor).

It didn't really matter who was put in the frame, but it couldn't be influential Thais, because that would tarnish Thailand's image. Hence, the avoidance of pursuing any lead that led to the Headman's family. The B2 happened to be both unimportant (in Thais eyes) and were in no position to challenge the RTP or had sufficient funds to buy them out.

In 'normal' circumstances (as has been the case for many decades) the prosecution would have gained a quick conviction, the suspects would have been incarcerated, and the victims families would have been assured justice had been carried out. Thus gaining the closure they require.

So what we have seen during this trial is the exact re-enaction of 'normal' behaviour. And the lack of Thai media (even if they had been warned off) is also 'normal behaviour. The victims parents are going to get justice, aren't they? So what's the problem?

And that's the problem...

[Lozza]

I would like to ask JTJ, AleG and jdinasia if he is still around a question.

The prosecution said the clothes were piled neatly on a rock. Up until they showed that picture of the clothes piled neatly on a rock I have never seen it before.

What I have seen is clothes tossed all over the beach around lots of blood.

Are you saying the pictures of the clothes tossed on the beach don't exist and are a figment of a CT's mind ?

When you see things with your own eyes and then someone in a uniform tells you what you have seen doesn't exist then I think it only fair to call them liars.

blood on beach.jpg

Is this picture real or am I dreaming it ?

You have to assume that the court has not seen the picture of the scattered clothes and David's body out to sea? Otherwise that would show the first on scene policeman's testimony to be untrue.

If the prosecution choose to only show certain cctv footage to the court then I presume they also do the same with pictures (although they did say they did not have the budget to store some - what does a flash drive cost? not much more than a few rotis).

I assume the judges make their decisions based on what 'evidence' is presented to the court, which is basically anything the RTP want to show or say to try and help their story make a semblance of sense. The picture showing the scattered clothes and David in the sea - Would it have been possible for the defence to show that or do they not get to do that sort of thing?

My personal view is that these clothes were not piled up neatly when found. Just lately is the first time I ever saw them piled up neatly. First time I also heard the Prosecutor ever said this. Can you link that? Not to say I am calling you a Liar. I am just saying I would like to review that whole page.

I just got shocked to find out that a Media Report said Lin was their legally and had to bring in his passport to show the Prosecution that. So I am finding it difficult to believe anything that is written now. I does take the fun out of not being able to believe anything anymore. Ever what is being reported by the Court Media Reporters

Explanation from going from messy to neat? There are many which I am sure you know. Prevent the tide from washing them out to sea. Getting them ready to put in a bag and send to Forensics. Who knows. .

like my previous post - who was wearing jeans ????????

I queried this way back Davids shorts are cream and the inner lining is blue making it look like denim..

[smedly]

like my previous post - who was wearing jeans ????????

I queried this way back Davids shorts are cream and the inner lining is blue making it look like denim..

yes very possible, hard to tell from photos

[Heisenbergg]

Could those of you who were brave enough to view the pictures of Hannah and particularly David confirm that the injuries to him could have been made by the blunt end of a hoe!! From everything I have seen and taken in his injuries were not consistent with a implement like that. I'm sure somebody will confirm or deny the possibility. Thanks

There was no wound to the back of David's head. There were a couple of wounds on the side of the head, but most of the wounds (similar looking) are on the front.

To my eyes, the pattern of David's wounds are consistent only with a protracted fight. The wounds do not look consistent with a blunt instrument.

The only possible explanation I can concoct (and concoct is the word) is that the single blow from behind that incapacitated David and left him to drown in the sea left no mark (being a blow in an area covered by hair from a blunt instrument) and the visible wounds were inflicted by sharp shells or other objects after he fell. Realistically, the RTP story is a load of round objects.

I'm not sure what the blunt end of a hoe means but I am sure that if you hit someone with either corner of the working end of a hoe it could leave wounds consistent with what I unfortunately viewed in the photos.

I take the blunt end of a hoe to mean the opposite side as in 180% from the active spade like digging end. Which from what I owned previously in my country is basically a casting which fits around the wooden handle.

So as somebody earlier said it would be like getting hit with say a lump hammer without the weight behind it. There could be possible breaking of skin etc but not deep incisions. From what I have had explained on here not wanting to see the pics David's wounds would not be received by the back of a hoe. And obviously if hit with the other end the wounds could be very deep but also quite extensive. Almost like a blunt axe type injury. Not sure if that's a good explanation or not. Incidently as the poster has quite rightly pointed out and provided a picture of a English style hoe the hoe I had was very very similar to the one in the crime pictures with the blood/not blood on it. Just to clarify .

David had several incisions to his head and face he also had one on his right cheekbone and under his jaw. If it were the hoe they are saying he was murdered with there is no way a hoe could have been used firstly his cheek bone would have been crushed and how could a hoe that size leave an incision under his Jaw which would shatter his jaw bone.

That's what I've been saying. That hoe couldn't produce those kinds of wounds on David's head and face, a full force swing with the corner of the Business end of the hoe couldn't puncture without also smashing... Not possible. For an example compare Hannah's wounds to David's, it's really easy to see.

[Nigeone]

Visited the clothes pictures again on my home computer and it's not clear they are jeans. I'm sorry if I've agreed with something out there that perhaps isn't true. It certainly looks like jeans on my iPad but on the bigger screen etc and resolution not so much.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Nigeone

[AleG]

Okay so here you go. And it's very topical around your post.

Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened. Remember he said this in a court of law and as you say it must be credible otherwise it would be perjury..I'm really interested in your answer. And I suggest before you do answer you take a look at the pictures of the crime scene posted above. Quote!

Yes, the answer is very basic: if someone claims something, in testimony to court of law, they have the means to substantiate what they say and those means are open to scrutiny it makes them more credible than someone that says something on the Internet and only has his say so to substantiate it.

"Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened"

No, it means that is how the first policeman that arrived at the scene found them, if someone moved the clothes before he arrived, and after taking photos of the original location, would you prefer the man lie about what he really saw when he got there?

Actually, I'm going to amend the post, the article were this information comes from identifies the policeman as the first one to give testimony, not the first one to arrive at the crime scene; nothing indicates that other policemen hadn't arrived earlier or at what time he arrive there.

Edited July 26, 2015 by AleG

[falangjim]

With everything going the wrong way for the prosecution it really makes me think that this Facebook report back in 0ct 2014 could has some truth to it.

mm3.jpg

Was this actually written by someone named Muang Muang or is he just passing it along? What's a quasi-educated Burmese man doing on Koh Tao? Despite the several errors in spellings and grammar, he's put together a decently written post. Am I naive in thinking only under-educated Burmese inhabit that island? I'm curious how Muang Muang can write well enough to post this. Thoughts?

[Thesticle]

I've just read the latest daily mail article wich gives the most detailed account of Friday's trial that I've seen. The daily mail is banned in Thailand but there are ways to get round this. If you haven't read it, read it! More police incompetence or criminality,make of it what you will. If any of the morons apologists try and spin this one there will be no doubt as to their motives!

[loonodingle]

The whole case centre's around DNA which the police processed in house. They repeatedly refused to allow verification. By the UK police or the Singapore labs or the USA labs and even the Thai Forensic experts. This is the case in a nutshell. So for everyones harping on about this scenario and another just ask yourselves Why? Why did they keep it in house in the highest profile case in Thailands for a decade would tbey do that UNLESS they had something to hide. And thats why I think the B2 are Innocent. That very reason.

[metisdead]

When posting updates please stay within the forum rules:

6) You will not post comments that could be reasonably construed as defamation or libel.

Defamation is the issuance of a statement about another person or business which causes that person to suffer harm. It does not have to be false to be defamatory. Libel is when the defamatory statement is published either in a drawing, painting, cinematography, film, picture or letters made visible by any means, or any other recording instruments, recording picture or letters, or by broadcasting or spreading picture, or by propagation by any other means. Defamation is both a civil and criminal charge in Thailand.

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.

26) The Bangkok Post and Phuketwan do not allow quotes from their news articles or other material to appear on Thaivisa.com. Neither do they allow links to their publications. Posts from members containing quotes from or links to Bangkok Post or Phuketwan publications will be deleted from the forum.

These restrictions are put in place by the above publications, not Thaivisa.com

In rare cases, forum Administrators or the news team may use these sources under special permission.

Be advised content from CSI LA is not deemed as a credible news source. Posts containing content from CSI LA will simply continue to disappear.

Edited July 26, 2015 by metisdead

[loonodingle]

The other thing that bothers me from the NS supporters is they like to say NS had a girlfriend at the time, so he wouldn't need to rape...... That's that Thai logic getting them screwed at every turn.

NS lives in Bangkok. He comes from a wealthy family. I am sure he could easily find many single girls at university, who would want to latch on some of his wealth, or he could easily pay for it.

But since you keep suggesting he is a rapist then why not do that in Bangkok, and were he lives? Why would he come out to an Island on a weekend, and where his Father, Uncle, and perhaps other family members have a vested interest in Tourism, to do this? That a crime like this would hurt tourism, and thus hurt his family. He is a university student so surely he would know this before hand.

You posted here what you think is Thai Logic and like you are some professional with this, and speaking for all Thai's, which I doubt you are Thai. So let me make it easy for you and give you some Good Old Fashioned American Logic.

"You don't bite the hand that is feeding you!"

Nope..no farang girl would be interested in him.

now you are touching on the psychology and motive behind this heinous crime, add power and money into the mix and you have narrowed the suspect pool down to a hand full of people

Well, Let's see. Why would someone choose to go home and commit a crime? I don't think that was the intention. I think he went home for a weekend for whatever reason and during his time on the island he felt insulted, slighted, whatever. Now, he knows he's on an island his family controls, 100%... Who's gonna stop him from teaching these tourists a lesson? Nobody, not with Mr. Shark Tooth and Big Ears around.

Why not do it in Bangkok? Simple, dads power only reaches so far, waaay more empty palms up here to grease.

Oh, but he's a young rich guy why does he need to rape? Classic rapist apologist thinking. He needs to rape because he like to exert his power over people who he may feel inferior to in some way. Rape isn't about sex, normal sex isn't as big a turn on for a rapists because they're not exerting their power.

Kind of like how I don't find rape arousing, because it sickens me and any woman who doesn't want to be with me, won't turn me on.

There are patterns here, garing ugly patterns.

There is a reason certain people are under a microscope.

You're average Thai boy gets very little discipline, they're doted over and their mistakes laughed at. How do you think growing up with nobody telling you "No" ... You gain a massive sense of entitlement.

The kind of entitlement that makes you confident enough to commit a major crime in your family backyard because, Just like your crappy nappies, the maid will be by in the morning to clean things up... While you catch a nap.

Perhaps she laughed at his tiny Thai winky... whatever happened someone was extremely upset to do what they did..

[BoristheBlade]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

[BritTim]

Ok another apparent lie to the judge, thats the first I heard that the officer said that Davids body was found face down in the water? We all know this is not the case! This is extremely serious or at least would be in any international court. A mistake made here and there can be understandable but this is now a catalogue of clearly false statements being made to the Judges in the trial. How can any logical minded person now keep supporting the RTP version of events is completely beyond any reasonable thinking person.

The first policeman on the scene, Lt. Jakrapan Kaewkao, told the court that he received a call at 6.30am that morning about two tourists’ bodies found on the beach. He said he discovered a gruesome scene on arrival, with Miller “face down” in the shallow surf. http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/families-hear-gruesome-details-as-trial-for-thailand-murders-of-two-british-tourists-begins/story-fnh81fz8-1227434677803

This definitely requires explanation, but (although incompetent) I could imagine the policeman turning the body over before the first photo was taken. It may not actually be perjury.

[Nigeone]

Okay so here you go. And it's very topical around your post.

Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened. Remember he said this in a court of law and as you say it must be credible otherwise it would be perjury..I'm really interested in your answer. And I suggest before you do answer you take a look at the pictures of the crime scene posted above. Quote!

Yes, the answer is very basic: if someone claims something, in testimony to court of law, they have the means to substantiate what they say and those means are open to scrutiny it makes them more credible than someone that says something on the Internet and only has his say so to substantiate it.

"Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened"

No, it means that is how the first policeman that arrived at the scene found them, if someone moved the clothes before he arrived, and after taking photos of the original location, would you prefer the man lie about what he really saw when he got there?

Actually, I'm going to amend the post, the article were this information comes from identifies the policeman as the first one to give testimony, not the first one to arrive at the crime scene; nothing indicates that other policemen hadn't arrived earlier or at what time he arrive there.

Just for your records!

The first policeman on the scene, Lt. Jakrapan Kaewkao, told the court that he received a call at 6.30am that morning about two tourists bodies found on the beach. He said he discovered a gruesome scene on arrival, with Miller face down in the shallow surf.

[BritTim]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

Burmese DNA on the cigarettes is to be expected. No one is denying that they smoked cigarettes that night.

There was, according to the current police evidence (and thus subject to later explanations of mistranslation) no DNA on the hoe.

The individual who tested the semen samples said he was given a DNA profile to check against. We do not know how that DNA profile was derived.

The defense cannot just say ignore the DNA without giving clear arguments why. A general "we do not trust the police" is not sufficient for the judge.

[BoristheBlade]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

Burmese DNA on the cigarettes is to be expected. No one is denying that they smoked cigarettes that night.

There was, according to the current police evidence (and thus subject to later explanations of mistranslation) no DNA on the hoe.

The individual who tested the semen samples said he was given a DNA profile to check against. We do not know how that DNA profile was derived.

The defense cannot just say ignore the DNA without giving clear arguments why. A general "we do not trust the police" is not sufficient for the judge.

The handling and care of duty of DNA samples is very relevant.

The RTP has previous concerning this, there was a high profile case in which the RTP forced a semen sample from an "accused".

[BritTim]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

Burmese DNA on the cigarettes is to be expected. No one is denying that they smoked cigarettes that night.

There was, according to the current police evidence (and thus subject to later explanations of mistranslation) no DNA on the hoe.

The individual who tested the semen samples said he was given a DNA profile to check against. We do not know how that DNA profile was derived.

The defense cannot just say ignore the DNA without giving clear arguments why. A general "we do not trust the police" is not sufficient for the judge.

The handling and care of duty of DNA samples is very relevant.

The RTP has previous concerning this, there was a high profile case in which the RTP forced a semen sample from an "accused".

All very true. Is this sufficient reason to disallow DNA evidence in all trials in Thailand? If not, give the grounds, with specificity (not a general they did not do it properly) why all the DNA evidence should be discarded in this case.

[BoristheBlade]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

Burmese DNA on the cigarettes is to be expected. No one is denying that they smoked cigarettes that night.

There was, according to the current police evidence (and thus subject to later explanations of mistranslation) no DNA on the hoe.

The individual who tested the semen samples said he was given a DNA profile to check against. We do not know how that DNA profile was derived.

The defense cannot just say ignore the DNA without giving clear arguments why. A general "we do not trust the police" is not sufficient for the judge.

The handling and care of duty of DNA samples is very relevant.

The RTP has previous concerning this, there was a high profile case in which the RTP forced a semen sample from an "accused".

All very true. Is this sufficient reason to disallow DNA evidence in all trials in Thailand? If not, give the grounds, with specificity (not a general they did not do it properly) why all the DNA evidence should be discarded in this case.

Who said not to allow DNA evidence in all Thai trials?

The prosecution case has shown a complete and total disregard for the DNA in this case.

The RTP are confused within themselves about what DNA they have checked and what DNA is still available to re check.

If that is not a clear and total case of gross incompetence, I don't know what is!

[BritTim]

All very true. Is this sufficient reason to disallow DNA evidence in all trials in Thailand? If not, give the grounds, with specificity (not a general they did not do it properly) why all the DNA evidence should be discarded in this case.

Who said not to allow DNA evidence in all Thai trials?

The prosecution case has shown a complete and total disregard for the DNA in this case.

The RTP are confused within themselves about what DNA they have checked and what DNA is still available to re check.

If that is not a clear and total case of gross incompetence, I don't know what is!

Again, I completely agree with you, but

The police did a grossly incompetent job, and have not properly explained what they did. Disallow all the DNA evidence your honor

is not a sufficient legal argument. I am not saying a motion to discard much of the DNA evidence is not possible. I am saying that the defense will have a hard time compiling the grounds for such a motion. Remember, the defense has no access to the chains of custody, and the RTP is doing a fine job of obfuscating what they did.

In a Western court, this would be sorted out with the judge insisting on clear answers to how, where, when and by whom the DNA collection and testing was done. In Thailand, the police can just act dumb and the judge will most likely let them get away with it.

Edited July 26, 2015 by BritTim

[BoristheBlade]

All very true. Is this sufficient reason to disallow DNA evidence in all trials in Thailand? If not, give the grounds, with specificity (not a general they did not do it properly) why all the DNA evidence should be discarded in this case.

Who said not to allow DNA evidence in all Thai trials?

The prosecution case has shown a complete and total disregard for the DNA in this case.

The RTP are confused within themselves about what DNA they have checked and what DNA is still available to re check.

If that is not a clear and total case of gross incompetence, I don't know what is!

Again, I completely agree with you, but

The police did a grossly incompetent job, and have not properly explained what they did. Disallow all the DNA evidence your honor

is not a sufficient legal argument. I am not saying a motion to discard much of the DNA evidence is not possible. I am saying that the defense will have a hard time compiling the grounds for such a motion. Remember, the defense has no access to the chains of custody, and the RTP is doing a fine job of obfuscating what they did.

In a Western court, this would be sorted out with the judge insisting on clear answers to how, where, when and by whom the DNA collection and testing was done. In Thailand, the police can just act dumb and the judge will most likely let them get away with it.

Agreed, but even in a Thai court, especially in a very, very high profile case like this, a conviction made on DNA evidence alone would be a huge risk to take for Thailand.

Lots of "face" has already been lost by the big chiefs who think this is the perfect investigation, will they risk loosing more?

The best we are going to get here is the case thrown out, and no new investigation launched.

[AleG]

Okay so here you go. And it's very topical around your post.

Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened. Remember he said this in a court of law and as you say it must be credible otherwise it would be perjury..I'm really interested in your answer. And I suggest before you do answer you take a look at the pictures of the crime scene posted above. Quote!

Yes, the answer is very basic: if someone claims something, in testimony to court of law, they have the means to substantiate what they say and those means are open to scrutiny it makes them more credible than someone that says something on the Internet and only has his say so to substantiate it.

"Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened"

No, it means that is how the first policeman that arrived at the scene found them, if someone moved the clothes before he arrived, and after taking photos of the original location, would you prefer the man lie about what he really saw when he got there?

Actually, I'm going to amend the post, the article were this information comes from identifies the policeman as the first one to give testimony, not the first one to arrive at the crime scene; nothing indicates that other policemen hadn't arrived earlier or at what time he arrive there.

Just for your records!

The first policeman on the scene, Lt. Jakrapan Kaewkao, told the court that he received a call at 6.30am that morning about two tourists bodies found on the beach. He said he discovered a gruesome scene on arrival, with Miller face down in the shallow surf.

Very well then either someone move the clothes before he arrived (the tide was coming in), he was confused or the statement mistranslated.

None of that would explain why the DNA from the two men on trial would end up inside the rape victim, which is the main piece of evidence.

[BritTim]

All very true. Is this sufficient reason to disallow DNA evidence in all trials in Thailand? If not, give the grounds, with specificity (not a general they did not do it properly) why all the DNA evidence should be discarded in this case.

Who said not to allow DNA evidence in all Thai trials?

The prosecution case has shown a complete and total disregard for the DNA in this case.

The RTP are confused within themselves about what DNA they have checked and what DNA is still available to re check.

If that is not a clear and total case of gross incompetence, I don't know what is!

Again, I completely agree with you, but

The police did a grossly incompetent job, and have not properly explained what they did. Disallow all the DNA evidence your honor

is not a sufficient legal argument. I am not saying a motion to discard much of the DNA evidence is not possible. I am saying that the defense will have a hard time compiling the grounds for such a motion. Remember, the defense has no access to the chains of custody, and the RTP is doing a fine job of obfuscating what they did.

In a Western court, this would be sorted out with the judge insisting on clear answers to how, where, when and by whom the DNA collection and testing was done. In Thailand, the police can just act dumb and the judge will most likely let them get away with it.

Agreed, but even in a Thai court, especially in a very, very high profile case like this, a conviction made on DNA evidence alone would be a huge risk to take for Thailand.

Lots of "face" has already been lost by the big chiefs who think this is the perfect investigation, will they risk loosing more?

The best we are going to get here is the case thrown out, and no new investigation launched.

Best case: Burmese not guilty. Lip service paid to renewed investigation then silence.

Worst case: Burmese guilty. Two year wait in jail for an appeal where they are probably freed (no compensation).

[Fat Haggis]

I would like to ask JTJ, AleG and jdinasia if he is still around a question.

The prosecution said the clothes were piled neatly on a rock. Up until they showed that picture of the clothes piled neatly on a rock I have never seen it before.

What I have seen is clothes tossed all over the beach around lots of blood.

Are you saying the pictures of the clothes tossed on the beach don't exist and are a figment of a CT's mind ?

When you see things with your own eyes and then someone in a uniform tells you what you have seen doesn't exist then I think it only fair to call them liars.

blood on beach.jpg

Is this picture real or am I dreaming it ?

You have to assume that the court has not seen the picture of the scattered clothes and David's body out to sea? Otherwise that would show the first on scene policeman's testimony to be untrue.

If the prosecution choose to only show certain cctv footage to the court then I presume they also do the same with pictures (although they did say they did not have the budget to store some - what does a flash drive cost? not much more than a few rotis).

I assume the judges make their decisions based on what 'evidence' is presented to the court, which is basically anything the RTP want to show or say to try and help their story make a semblance of sense. The picture showing the scattered clothes and David in the sea - Would it have been possible for the defence to show that or do they not get to do that sort of thing?

That's a good point and your right why didn't they challenge that. I can't imagine that the defense don't know about the scattered clothes pictures. Maybe there holding back and using it to prove the crime scene was compromised and bodies etc had been moved. Maybe in the Thai court system you can't challenge but they put questions to other witness for the prosecution. Maybe they haven't seen the pics !! Or of course they could have something that blows the whole case out of the water anyway and it isn't that relevant. All speculation but keeps us engaged

Here it is again maybe he missed it.

clothes2.jpg

In case nobody else has noticed, the photo of the clothes piled neatly on the rock was taken later in the day than the first crime scene photo of the clothes scattered all over the beach and David's body floating in the water, which has been in the public domain since Day 1. How do I know this? Well look at the sunlight and shadow in that photo of the clothes on the rock. This is completely absent in the first crime scene photos which were taken at dawn. This same police witness also testified that David's body was floating in the water face down - WRONG - it was floating face up! Are these prosecution witnesses deliberately lying in court? It was said in court that the RTP had no budget to store the crime scene photos, therefore they were unavailable. Well, they could have asked ThaiVisa members to supply them!

Considering on of the coppers from the crime scene posted personal pictures to his Facebook of rh victims, his phone had crime scene pictures ghosted on the memory card, pretty sure a good team would be able to pull such pictures from his phone.

It's a loss poor excuse to say there was NO BUDGET to store crime scene pictures, how much does a thumb drive cost? Even a 1 TB external hard drive isn't that much From JIB computers.

It's excuse after excuse after excuse, and it's galling, as that judge hasn't ripped these guys a new one for pretty much abysmal police and detective work, which really doesn't seem to bode well for the accused.

How the two families could have ever come away with the statement that the evidence was "overwhelming " is beyond me, as so far the evidence has been piss poor!!

[eliotness]

Again, all this talk of DNA is now totally irrelevant. The RTP clearly will go to any lengths to convince the scapegoats.

It would have been very simple for the RTP during the violent interrogations of the two Burmese to extract DNA and then put it on to the relevant hoe, cigarette butt or whatever other evidence was lying about.

The defence must insist the judge ignores all DNA evidence as it clearly has no credibility.

If the judge does that, the case collapses, there is simply no evidence or intent.

That is why I posted earlier that there should have been 2 sets of semen samples, one from a surface swab at the beach and another, internal at the post mortem. I can find no reference to there being 2 sets of semen samples anywhere, which to me seems very indicative of what was really going on.

[AleG]

You are both right so why argue?

However when using a word one should look at the context in which it is used. One place crime scene investigators can look to make certain that evidence is of the highest quality is contamination Yes, a crime scene can be comprised but through the contamination of that scene. Contamination is the introduction of something to a scene that was not previously there. Investigators can even compromise and contaminate the scene with their own footprints.

If I was referring to this matter, as you two gentleman are, I would say that the crime scene has been contaminated thus compromising the investigation given what is now known to have occurred there. As such, one could reasonably state that any evidence collected there and possibly elsewhere, has been compromised. Careful appraisal is required so that a plan can be created so one knows what needs to be collected and the best way to do so but after looking at the evidence coming from the court, it appears this did not occur and the matter has been a monumental stuff up from the beginning.

Evaluating a scene before anyone enters can be the key to keeping contamination to a minimum. When doing a preliminary survey of the crime scene one needs to know what his/hers equipment and manpower needs are. Some scenes may require the presence of specialists, so maybe someone can answer this? When were the first specialist police called to the scene? I mean forensic and crime scene investigators, not the local BIB.

I have also read, with interest, that many people are criticising the DNA obtained. I do not know what procedures were followed by police but given what is coming out now then one would have to say that police failed to ensure the integrity of the DNA. Samples must be properly collected and care must be taken not to taint it, so given what has come to light regarding the DNA then it can reasonably assumed that it has been tainted therefore, compromised.

Looking at the overall situation, there has to be questions raised as to the credibility of police and why those who were first in attendance failed to carry out the very basics of policing, (securing the crime scene) thus giving rise to a flawed investigation. We can also do without all the outside influence and the irrational statements being made by some in authority. If this were back in my country it could result in mistrial or even those sprouting off being held in contempt of the Court.

I don't assume or presume as some have indicated, nor do I want to get involved in conspiracy theories, who thinks who is involved, the mafia, the headman, his sons or brothers, if the boys are innocent or guilty, how their confessions were obtained or whatever. I have in the past sided with police, as being an ex-copper one hopes that things are above board and that the investigation was carried out in a manner that would see justice prevail, one way or another. However, from what is now evident then the veracity of the police evidence must be called into question and their procedures closely scrutinised to ensure that from now and into the future this does not occur, there is transparency in all matters, fairness provided to all alleged offenders and that the families of the victims get closure.

Unfortunately, non of this has appears to have occurred in this case. I am not saying that all police have acted in a manner that would discredit them but certainly many have and they should be called to task for what they have done, many, at the very least, should be charged with neglect of duty or at the worst, a criminal offence. I know many will say this is Thailand, sure it is but unfortunately this is the way they operate. Hopefully, in time, the good cops will prevail and rid the system of inept and corrupt officers and the judicial system will get a long need overhaul. Sure, it will take time, many, many years, maybe not in my life time, but if and when this happens, then the hopefully people will find that Thailand is not so bad after all and the disgusting criticism now being displayed by some on this forum will cease.

In so far as the two alleged offenders, I do not know if they are guilty or innocent. No one on here does either. What everyone needs to understand that we were not there, we do not know what occurred, although many assume or say for certain they are guilty, some the opposite, they are innocent. I think emotions are playing a big role in this and should be put to one side. If they are convicted on the evidence obtained or not obtained, contaminated or concocted, then justice will have to be called into question. If they are found not guilty, then one needs to evaluate the overall situation and determine if they were innocent because they were, or if the decision was made because of a technicality or other undue outside influences. I really don't know in regards to the last two scenarios but one way or another this matter will come to it's conclusion and the whole process will start over, those on this side, those on that side, berating each because they believe they are right.

That the scene of the crime was not taken care up to exacting standards is beyond dispute, but keeping in mind that this happened on a small island with only 5 policemen and no history of such crimes being committed, coupled with the location of the crime scene, on the edge of the water with a tide rising (plus the TiT factor) that not all ts were crossed and is dotted is not just unsurprising it would be surprising if it haven't had happened.

As I mentioned in my previous post the key evidence is DNA taken from inside the victim, that DNA typing was used for weeks before the men on trial were arrested so the notion that a compromised crime scene would somehow yield a DNA match is very far fetched.

Additionally,i f the phone allegedly taken from Miller, which they admit they "found" on the night of the murder is validated, IMHO, that's it for those men, they did it; there's no reasonable explanation on how both things would had come to be without them being the perpetrators.

[eliotness]

Okay so here you go. And it's very topical around your post.

Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened. Remember he said this in a court of law and as you say it must be credible otherwise it would be perjury..I'm really interested in your answer. And I suggest before you do answer you take a look at the pictures of the crime scene posted above. Quote!

Yes, the answer is very basic: if someone claims something, in testimony to court of law, they have the means to substantiate what they say and those means are open to scrutiny it makes them more credible than someone that says something on the Internet and only has his say so to substantiate it.

"Does the police guy in court indicating that the clothes were found neatly piled on a rock mean that's is what happened"

No, it means that is how the first policeman that arrived at the scene found them, if someone moved the clothes before he arrived, and after taking photos of the original location, would you prefer the man lie about what he really saw when he got there?

Actually, I'm going to amend the post, the article were this information comes from identifies the policeman as the first one to give testimony, not the first one to arrive at the crime scene; nothing indicates that other policemen hadn't arrived earlier or at what time he arrive there.

Just for your records!

The first policeman on the scene, Lt. Jakrapan Kaewkao, told the court that he received a call at 6.30am that morning about two tourists bodies found on the beach. He said he discovered a gruesome scene on arrival, with Miller face down in the shallow surf.

Very well then either someone move the clothes before he arrived (the tide was coming in), he was confused or the statement mistranslated.

None of that would explain why the DNA from the two men on trial would end up inside the rape victim, which is the main piece of evidence.

Was the semen taken from inside the victim ? By the police at the scene ? Proof please.

[AleG]

Agreed, but even in a Thai court, especially in a very, very high profile case like this, a conviction made on DNA evidence alone would be a huge risk to take for Thailand.

Lots of "face" has already been lost by the big chiefs who think this is the perfect investigation, will they risk loosing more?

The best we are going to get here is the case thrown out, and no new investigation launched.

Best case: Burmese not guilty. Lip service paid to renewed investigation then silence.

Worst case: Burmese guilty. Two year wait in jail for an appeal where they are probably freed (no compensation).

No....

Best case: Justice is done, regardless of who did it.

Worst case: Justice is not done, regardless of who did it.

This is not about finding ways to bash Thailand and its people, this is about David Miller and Hannah Witheridge right to justice.

[thailandchilli]

Just for your records!

The first policeman on the scene, Lt. Jakrapan Kaewkao, told the court that he received a call at 6.30am that morning about two tourists bodies found on the beach. He said he discovered a gruesome scene on arrival, with Miller face down in the shallow surf.

Very well then either someone move the clothes before he arrived (the tide was coming in), he was confused or the statement mistranslated.

None of that would explain why the DNA from the two men on trial would end up inside the rape victim, which is the main piece of evidence.

"He was confused or the statement mistranslated"

You forgot one other possibility, he could also have been lying.