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

[smedly]

If I was PM Chan(O)Cha, I would get directly involved in this case and put together a team of trusted investigators and Forensic Scientists and do a full independent Fundamental Review of this whole thing from start to finish, he would gain some very good international PR and credibility from such a move.

Anyone that is discovered to have perverted the original investigation should then be arrested charged and jailed

I am certain of one thing, the PM has no time for incompetence cheats and people who make him look bad, I believe he actually is quite an honourable and proud man

JMO

[boomerangutang]

might be worth passing this info on to someone with access to the defence team, as I'm sure these jeans are held somewhere in the evidence pool - they will be saturated with DNA

Jeans on the beach at the crime scene? No problem, RTP's finest could explain them away in a heartbeat. They can just say, "didn't seem important to us, so we didn't look closely at them. Oh, and we burnt them and buried the ashes, so don't even bother us with asking to see or scrutinize those silly jeans. Next item, please."

[smedly]

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.

wow I actually agree with you....go figure

[AleG]

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.

Yes, all reports are that it was taken from inside; possibly at the scene, certainly during the post-mortem in Bangkok.

[LburtonL]

I feel soooooooooo sorry for the parents victims bcz since the begining it's a big LOL

[boomerangutang]

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.

Since we're getting in to psychological profiles here, let me add 2 satang's worth:

Nomsod has a brother who is an unabashed lady boy. Their daddy, the mafia-like Headman, had been grooming his non-effeminate son to take over the domain. Nomsod was probably under pressure, from a young age, to show his manliness, his take-control abilities. What better way (from a Thai perspective), than rape?

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin. For sure, many cute farang chicks lit up to his charms. Perhaps one unlucky cutie, with lovely face, shape and long blonde hair, didn't acquiesce to his charm-offensive the way he had hoped. One thing leads to another, and then.......

[eliotness]

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.

Yes, all reports are that it was taken from inside; possibly at the scene, certainly during the post-mortem in Bangkok.

So therefore there should be 2 sets of samples. This has never been mentioned. This is horrible to question, but if Hannah had been raped by 2 men, who had both ejaculated inside her vagina, then there would have been "leakage". Therefore there should have been an external swab of her "private parts" at the crime scene and an internal swab at the post mortem. There has never never been the mention of 2 sets of samples.

[Heisenbergg]

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.

Yaaas. This is what I feel.

Great comment.

[AleG]

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.

Yes of course, to what end?

What is this new scenario you and your friends are cooking up now?, that some nefarious people arrived at the crime scene and rearranged it as part of a cover-up... after taking photos of how things were before that then posted them on social media?

[Mooner]

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.

So in your opinion: Someone moved the clothes. So they picked up the clothes and placed them on a rock. These items are very significant evidence that could hold vital clues yet it was picked up and evidently someone without forensic experience because the items were not sealed, just placed on a rock. Who knows if this person took the methods of handling the items!!

He was confused: Ill give you that one. Seems the RTP are very confused about most aspects of the case.

In regards to the DNA found inside the victim. We havent got conclusive evidence of this as yet! Only the word of the RTP.

I admire your support of them and thats your prerogative. I would only ask what makes you believe in them so much after what has been coming out of the courts lately in regards to their obvious incompetence and unprofessionalism regarding this case?

If you dont fancy that question? Here is another. If the victims were your family. " Would you be happy with the quality of this investigation?". JTJ, and the rest of the crew. Feel free to answer this question!!

[Chetzee]

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.

Since we're getting in to psychological profiles here, let me add 2 satang's worth:

Nomsod has a brother who is an unabashed lady boy. Their daddy, the mafia-like Headman, had been grooming his non-effeminate son to take over the domain. Nomsod was probably under pressure, from a young age, to show his manliness, his take-control abilities. What better way (from a Thai perspective), than rape?

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin. For sure, many cute farang chicks lit up to his charms. Perhaps one unlucky cutie, with lovely face, shape and long blonde hair, didn't acquiesce to his charm-offensive the way he had hoped. One thing leads to another, and then.......

BT today you astound he , first time !

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin

should i read ........ handsome young thug with straight foppish hair

a spacky arm and a dropped shoulder .

[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.

Yes of course, to what end?

What is this new scenario you and your friends are cooking up now?, that some nefarious people arrived at the crime scene and rearranged it as part of a cover-up... after taking photos of how things were before that then posted them on social media?

What other reason would there be if he's lying after all its a possibility and at this moment in time nothing is proven and anything is possible

[Chetzee]

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.

Since we're getting in to psychological profiles here, let me add 2 satang's worth:

Nomsod has a brother who is an unabashed lady boy. Their daddy, the mafia-like Headman, had been grooming his non-effeminate son to take over the domain. Nomsod was probably under pressure, from a young age, to show his manliness, his take-control abilities. What better way (from a Thai perspective), than rape?

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin. For sure, many cute farang chicks lit up to his charms. Perhaps one unlucky cutie, with lovely face, shape and long blonde hair, didn't acquiesce to his charm-offensive the way he had hoped. One thing leads to another, and then.......

BT today you astound he , first time !

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin

should i read ........ handsome young thug with straight foppish hair

a spacky arm and a dropped shoulder .

[Nigeone]

On the semen angle. How does the condom with the alleged B2 or one of them at least DNA on the outside but nothing inside fit in.?

Also just again for your records AleG the tide was on the way out and when the pictures were taken with the scattered clothes the water was no where near the clothes. Are you also seriously saying that one or more of the 5 local police took DNA from inside Hannah at the crime scene?? I think your pushing your story a bit there aren't you?

[GOLDBUGGY]

I am sorry but there is one thing, and perhaps the last for awhile, that I must say.

This has got to be the worst Media Reporting that I have seen in my life-time!

That is including the covering any news. sporting or criminal event. I am not signaling out any one newspaper here as they all seem to be the same. You get the odd article one day, where it seems biased, but the next you get someone reporting 2 sentences on big news, and 6 paragraphs that seems like you are reading his opinion and not the news at all. How many more times do I have to read that Amnesty International is investigating any wrong doings in this case but not a bloody word as to their progress. Other then trying to set up some interviews months ago.

I mean even when they get news they don't report it the way it is stated. Like no we don't have that...no it was lost...no it was used up....yes! Who told you that, we have that? Or like this last link someone provided, which I will link later again. I was just proven by a poster here, and rightly so, that when Lin went to trial in December he showed his Passport to show he was in Thailand Legally. They never did report if he was or not, as they need that space to go on about Amnesty International again. So it is left up to us to assume.

But this link today says that the 2 accused were charged with illegally working in Thailand. So does that mean that Lin was here on a tourist visa but not allowed to work, or does this mean this statement is incorrect. Why do we constantly have to be guessing what the man is trying to say? Why not say Lin was allowed to be here but not allowed to work. Isn't there job to report the news clearly and so that we all understand what he is saying, and not have to keep guessing all the time?

Or the clothes for example at the crime scene. Originally shown not scattered but not in a neat pile.Then 11 months later they are in a neat pile. It is then media reported that the first officer on the scene found them this way. Then that got changed to the 2nd Police Officer on the scene. Then it is reported he didn't say anything about how the clothes were found but rather it was the Prosecutor who said this.

Then you get the Head of Forensics on the stand for what? Nearly a whole day was it? The the news comes out then next day and all you get is a few paragraphs. Only Hannah's Blood was found on the hoe and we duplicate and general save DNA and save that for 1 to 2 years. Surely in all this time she must have said more than just that. There may be a ban on publications, but if there is say so! Surely there is no ban on saying there is one.

Just take the time of death for instance. I would bet my bottom dollar that in a way earlier News Media Report they said the time of death was between the hours of 2 am and 4 am. Then someone posted to me that it was actually 4:30 am. Which even though I didn't see that time change, I couldn't contest as he could be right. Now from this link it says 5:30 am. Jesus Christ! Is the next time I hear this is it going to be on a different day. Did the media report this incorrectly? Did the person who said this change his mind? If that is so then tell us he did and why? That is your job and what you are suppose to do!

Even us Arm Chair Quarter Backs can do a better job then Media Reports. We know David hit the AC Bar at around 2 am to meet up with Hannah. Say an hour at least for some chit chat and a beer or 2 then they would have left around 3 am. Say another 20 minutes to stroll to the rocks, and another 10 minuted before being attacked and that places this time at 3;30 am. The Rapes must have taken some time at least before she was murdered, So say 30 minutes and now you got 4:00 am as the time of death. Beach Cleaner finds bodies at 5;45 am (or close to that) and there you have. Without even seeing the bodies we could have deduced the time of death from 4:00 am to 5;30 am. So who needs media to report to us the 3 different times of death when we could have done a better job on our own.

I know I have bumped heads here with a lot of you, but please don't take this personal. I now I don't. Except for Name Calling. I know many here have very strong feelings and opinions about this case. Some justified. Some not so much. But I was only expressing my opinion to at that time, and I honestly felt like it based it on what I had read in the media, reporting about this case, and from the evidence they were said to be holding.

At the moment I have very little faith in the News Media Reporting this case. If you have to go to a Human Rights Activist to get your news, you should know something is wrong right from the start. This is not meant to be an insult to these people as I am sure they have a good place in society. I am merely pointing out that it would be difficult for them to be biased when I think news reporting should be,

I honestly don't know how you guys feel about what has been reported on this case, but I know how I feel about it.

http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/families-hear-gruesome-details-as-trial-for-thailand-murders-of-two-british-tourists-begins/story-fnh81fz8-1227434677803 . .

.

[boomerangutang]

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.

see my response, below .....

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.

"Additionally, if the phone allegedly taken from Miller," Sorry AleG, the "David's Phone" thing is looking less and less plausible, as each day goes by. The Daily Mail is saying as much (that it can't be shown to be David's), taken from the DM's reporter who was in court. You may recall, I said David's phone was reported to have been found ON THE BEACH the day of the murders. That's proving to be true. Plus, how do you know for sure who's phone it is? If you lost your phone, would the person finding it know it was yours? How? Do you have your name taped to the outside of it? If it's functional, I guess an inspector (more canny than any Thai inspector) could call some numbers and ask who's shown to be calling.

As for DNA. All we and the defense and judges have to go by, at this time, is just THE WORD OF THAI TOP BRASS. That's all. Thus far, no DNA has been re-examined (that we know of), the Brits haven't disclosed anything that we know of. The general public have to rely 100% on the honesty of top police brass - the same brass who have proven, over and over, that they lie. They have an agenda to shield the H's people. All their actions, including obscuring/delaying DNA re-testing, is pointed in that direction.

[AleG]

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.

So in your opinion: Someone moved the clothes. So they picked up the clothes and placed them on a rock. These items are very significant evidence that could hold vital clues yet it was picked up and evidently someone without forensic experience because the items were not sealed, just placed on a rock. Who knows if this person took the methods of handling the items!!

He was confused: Ill give you that one. Seems the RTP are very confused about most aspects of the case.

In regards to the DNA found inside the victim. We havent got conclusive evidence of this as yet! Only the word of the RTP.

I admire your support of them and thats your prerogative. I would only ask what makes you believe in them so much after what has been coming out of the courts lately in regards to their obvious incompetence and unprofessionalism regarding this case?

If you dont fancy that question? Here is another. If the victims were your family. " Would you be happy with the quality of this investigation?". JTJ, and the rest of the crew. Feel free to answer this question!!

Would you have preferred they left the clothes in place as the tide was coming?

As for your questions, I believe them more than I believe the many (often self contradictory) wild theories being thrown about online; the second one I care about results, I don't care how much fumbling and blundering happens as long as in the end the results prove conclusively who did the crime. Just because they may had blown that part of the investigation it doesn't mean they blew this other part and so on and so forth.

As I said, from my point of view there are a few key elements of the investigation, DNA and the belongings of Miller, if those two stand up against scrutiny then, IMHO, case closed.

And no, I don't take people walking around the crime scene and moving clothes as a basis to throw away the results from DNA analysis because, once again, there's no way that would result in the DNA (from semen at that) from the two men on trial end up where it ended up if they weren't there.

The "planting" angle doesn't work either because 1) I would expect the two Burmese would have noticed the incriminating evidence being taken from them, 2) It doesn't make sense to plant the evidence and then run around making fools of themselves before "uncovering" the truth and 3) It would necessitate the complicity of the UK government (to say nothing of all the people in labs in Thailand) to play along and say nothing if their own testing shows something different.

[thailandchilli]

I am sorry but there is one thing, and perhaps the last for awhile, that I must say.

This has got to be the worst Media Reporting that I have seen in my life-time!

That is including the covering any news. sporting or criminal event. I am not signaling out any one newspaper here as they all seem to be the same. You get the odd article one day, where it seems biased, but the next you get someone reporting 2 sentences on big news, and 6 paragraphs that seems like you are reading his opinion and not the news at all. How many more times do I have to read that Amnesty International is investigating any wrong doings in this case but not a bloody word as to their progress. Other then trying to set up some interviews months ago.

I mean even when they get news they don't report it the way it is stated. Like no we don't have that...no it was lost...no it was used up....yes! Who told you that, we have that? Or like this last link someone provided, which I will link later again. I was just proven by a poster here, and rightly so, that when Lin went to trial in December he showed his Passport to show he was in Thailand Legally. They never did report if he was or not, as they need that space to go on about Amnesty International again. So it is left up to us to assume.

But this link today says that the 2 accused were charged with illegally working in Thailand. So does that mean that Lin was here on a tourist visa but not allowed to work, or does this mean this statement is incorrect. Why do we constantly have to be guessing what the man is trying to say? Why not say Lin was allowed to be here but not allowed to work. Isn't there job to report the news clearly and so that we all understand what he is saying, and not have to keep guessing all the time?

Or the clothes for example at the crime scene. Originally shown not scattered but not in a neat pile.Then 11 months later they are in a neat pile. It is then media reported that the first officer on the scene found them this way. Then that got changed to the 2nd Police Officer on the scene. Then it is reported he didn't say anything about how the clothes were found but rather it was the Prosecutor who said this.

Then you get the Head of Forensics on the stand for what? Nearly a whole day was it? The the news comes out then next day and all you get is a few paragraphs. Only Hannah's Blood was found on the hoe and we duplicate and general save DNA and save that for 1 to 2 years. Surely in all this time she must have said more than just that. There may be a ban on publications, but if there is say so! Surely there is no ban on saying there is one.

Just take the time of death for instance. I would bet my bottom dollar that in a way earlier News Media Report they said the time of death was between the hours of 2 am and 4 am. Then someone posted to me that it was actually 4:30 am. Which even though I didn't see that time change, I couldn't contest as he could be right. Now from this link it says 5:30 am. Jesus Christ! Is the next time I hear this is it going to be on a different day. Did the media report this incorrectly? Did the person who said this change his mind? If that is so then tell us he did and why? That is your job and what you are suppose to do!

Even us Arm Chair Quarter Backs can do a better job then Media Reports. We know David hit the AC Bar at around 2 am to meet up with Hannah. Say an hour at least for some chit chat and a beer or 2 then they would have left around 3 am. Say another 20 minutes to stroll to the rocks, and another 10 minuted before being attacked and that places this time at 3;30 am. The Rapes must have taken some time at least before she was murdered, So say 30 minutes and now you got 4:00 am as the time of death. Beach Cleaner finds bodies at 5;45 am (or close to that) and there you have. Without even seeing the bodies we could have deduced the time of death from 4:00 am to 5;30 am. So who needs media to report to us the 3 different times of death when we could have done a better job on our own.

I know I have bumped heads here with a lot of you, but please don't take this personal. I now I don't. Except for Name Calling. I know many here have very strong feelings and opinions about this case. Some justified. Some not so much. But I was only expressing my opinion to at that time, and I honestly felt like it based it on what I had read in the media, reporting about this case, and from the evidence they were said to be holding.

At the moment I have very little faith in the News Media Reporting this case. If you have to go to a Human Rights Activist to get your news, you should know something is wrong right from the start. This is not meant to be an insult to these people as I am sure they have a good place in society. I am merely pointing out that it would be difficult for them to be biased when I think news reporting should be,

I honestly don't know how you guys feel about what has been reported on this case, but I know how I feel about it.

http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/families-hear-gruesome-details-as-trial-for-thailand-murders-of-two-british-tourists-begins/story-fnh81fz8-1227434677803 . .

.

You really think news reports even from credible media outlets should be unbiased?? Man this is a free world, free press and the international press will in most instances run stories as they see fit, which quite rightly goes on the side of human rights violations and what is perceived to be injustice in the world.

Its not that they are being unfair, they are highlighting blunders in the investigation that could lead to miscarriage of justice.

You don't see any injustice in this case thats why your complaining at their reporting, everybody else (well almost apart from the RTP) do see the potential for a huge miscarriage of justice. Media coverage in this case can hopefully help to stop this happening.

[Linky]

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.

Its also about justice for the accused, somehing you consistntly fail to recognise.

[AleG]

"He was confused or the statement mistranslated"

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

Yes of course, to what end?

What is this new scenario you and your friends are cooking up now?, that some nefarious people arrived at the crime scene and rearranged it as part of a cover-up... after taking photos of how things were before that then posted them on social media?

What other reason would there be if he's lying after all its a possibility and at this moment in time nothing is proven and anything is possible

You forgot to bold the part were I demonstrated why that scenario would be nonsense.

[boomerangutang]

I am sorry but there is one thing, and perhaps the last for awhile, that I must say.

This has got to be the worst Media Reporting that I have seen in my life-time!

It's so bad, in your view, because what they're reporting isn't what you want to hear. If they were reporting that the prosecution's case was proceeding seamlessly toward a conviction, then you'd be satisfied. yes or no?

Also, don't forget the court itself puts nearly a gag order on proceedings. Only the judges are allowed recording devices. Attendees aren't even allowed to take notes. ....and then there are translation issues which aren't made any easier when translators are bullied to stay away, and also when RTP reps, when caught in one of their many lies, say it was due to a mis-translation.

[thailandchilli]

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.

So in your opinion: Someone moved the clothes. So they picked up the clothes and placed them on a rock. These items are very significant evidence that could hold vital clues yet it was picked up and evidently someone without forensic experience because the items were not sealed, just placed on a rock. Who knows if this person took the methods of handling the items!!

He was confused: Ill give you that one. Seems the RTP are very confused about most aspects of the case.

In regards to the DNA found inside the victim. We havent got conclusive evidence of this as yet! Only the word of the RTP.

I admire your support of them and thats your prerogative. I would only ask what makes you believe in them so much after what has been coming out of the courts lately in regards to their obvious incompetence and unprofessionalism regarding this case?

If you dont fancy that question? Here is another. If the victims were your family. " Would you be happy with the quality of this investigation?". JTJ, and the rest of the crew. Feel free to answer this question!!

Would you have preferred they left the clothes in place as the tide was coming?

As for your questions, I believe them more than I believe the many (often self contradictory) wild theories being thrown about online; the second one I care about results, I don't care how much fumbling and blundering happens as long as in the end the results prove conclusively who did the crime. Just because they may had blown that part of the investigation it doesn't mean they blew this other part and so on and so forth.

As I said, from my point of view there are a few key elements of the investigation, DNA and the belongings of Miller, if those two stand up against scrutiny then, IMHO, case closed.

And no, I don't take people walking around the crime scene and moving clothes as a basis to throw away the results from DNA analysis because, once again, there's no way that would result in the DNA (from semen at that) from the two men on trial end up where it ended up if they weren't there.

The "planting" angle doesn't work either because 1) I would expect the two Burmese would have noticed the incriminating evidence being taken from them, 2) It doesn't make sense to plant the evidence and then run around making fools of themselves before "uncovering" the truth and 3) It would necessitate the complicity of the UK government (to say nothing of all the people in labs in Thailand) to play along and say nothing if their own testing shows something different.

Would you have preferred they left the clothes in place as the tide was coming?

Why do you insist on making this claim when it highly likely to be untrue given the fact that the tide had already receded from Hannah's feet which can be seen clearly. The tide was not coming in nor was it near the clothing in any way.

[Nigeone]

I am sorry but there is one thing, and perhaps the last for awhile, that I must say.

This has got to be the worst Media Reporting that I have seen in my life-time!

That is including the covering any news. sporting or criminal event. I am not signaling out any one newspaper here as they all seem to be the same. You get the odd article one day, where it seems biased, but the next you get someone reporting 2 sentences on big news, and 6 paragraphs that seems like you are reading his opinion and not the news at all. How many more times do I have to read that Amnesty International is investigating any wrong doings in this case but not a bloody word as to their progress. Other then trying to set up some interviews months ago.

I mean even when they get news they don't report it the way it is stated. Like no we don't have that...no it was lost...no it was used up....yes! Who told you that, we have that? Or like this last link someone provided, which I will link later again. I was just proven by a poster here, and rightly so, that when Lin went to trial in December he showed his Passport to show he was in Thailand Legally. They never did report if he was or not, as they need that space to go on about Amnesty International again. So it is left up to us to assume.

But this link today says that the 2 accused were charged with illegally working in Thailand. So does that mean that Lin was here on a tourist visa but not allowed to work, or does this mean this statement is incorrect. Why do we constantly have to be guessing what the man is trying to say? Why not say Lin was allowed to be here but not allowed to work. Isn't there job to report the news clearly and so that we all understand what he is saying, and not have to keep guessing all the time?

Or the clothes for example at the crime scene. Originally shown not scattered but not in a neat pile.Then 11 months later they are in a neat pile. It is then media reported that the first officer on the scene found them this way. Then that got changed to the 2nd Police Officer on the scene. Then it is reported he didn't say anything about how the clothes were found but rather it was the Prosecutor who said this.

Then you get the Head of Forensics on the stand for what? Nearly a whole day was it? The the news comes out then next day and all you get is a few paragraphs. Only Hannah's Blood was found on the hoe and we duplicate and general save DNA and save that for 1 to 2 years. Surely in all this time she must have said more than just that. There may be a ban on publications, but if there is say so! Surely there is no ban on saying there is one.

Just take the time of death for instance. I would bet my bottom dollar that in a way earlier News Media Report they said the time of death was between the hours of 2 am and 4 am. Then someone posted to me that it was actually 4:30 am. Which even though I didn't see that time change, I couldn't contest as he could be right. Now from this link it says 5:30 am. Jesus Christ! Is the next time I hear this is it going to be on a different day. Did the media report this incorrectly? Did the person who said this change his mind? If that is so then tell us he did and why? That is your job and what you are suppose to do!

Even us Arm Chair Quarter Backs can do a better job then Media Reports. We know David hit the AC Bar at around 2 am to meet up with Hannah. Say an hour at least for some chit chat and a beer or 2 then they would have left around 3 am. Say another 20 minutes to stroll to the rocks, and another 10 minuted before being attacked and that places this time at 3;30 am. The Rapes must have taken some time at least before she was murdered, So say 30 minutes and now you got 4:00 am as the time of death. Beach Cleaner finds bodies at 5;45 am (or close to that) and there you have. Without even seeing the bodies we could have deduced the time of death from 4:00 am to 5;30 am. So who needs media to report to us the 3 different times of death when we could have done a better job on our own.

I know I have bumped heads here with a lot of you, but please don't take this personal. I now I don't. Except for Name Calling. I know many here have very strong feelings and opinions about this case. Some justified. Some not so much. But I was only expressing my opinion to at that time, and I honestly felt like it based it on what I had read in the media, reporting about this case, and from the evidence they were said to be holding.

At the moment I have very little faith in the News Media Reporting this case. If you have to go to a Human Rights Activist to get your news, you should know something is wrong right from the start. This is not meant to be an insult to these people as I am sure they have a good place in society. I am merely pointing out that it would be difficult for them to be biased when I think news reporting should be,

I honestly don't know how you guys feel about what has been reported on this case, but I know how I feel about it.

http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/families-hear-gruesome-details-as-trial-for-thailand-murders-of-two-british-tourists-begins/story-fnh81fz8-1227434677803 . .

.

Fair play to you GB . I have sensed you have been starting to see things from a broader base and I admire you for saying as good as. While you make absolutely correct observations of the lack of media coverage ask yourself who banned reporting from the courtroom.? Who has lent on the local media to not report or at best minimum reports on the case? Then there is the stories of translators being lent on too which makes it difficult for international media to report anything. Andy Hall has stated on his Twitter feed he was amazed by the lack of local media. Looking in from the wide outside why would this be? I also apologise to you for getting personal and it's something I'm not proud off but as you say you get caught up in what to many of us is a complete unjust and flawed investigation which could have massive further repercussions . I've said it a few times I and most on here want justice and what ever that is going to be so be it.

One final point with regard to the media. Ask yourself what possible reason could they be for the media been warned off along with the stopping of notes and reporting from the courtroom. Most people on here will answer that question with the same answer.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Nigeone

[thailandchilli]

"He was confused or the statement mistranslated"

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

Yes of course, to what end?

What is this new scenario you and your friends are cooking up now?, that some nefarious people arrived at the crime scene and rearranged it as part of a cover-up... after taking photos of how things were before that then posted them on social media?

What other reason would there be if he's lying after all its a possibility and at this moment in time nothing is proven and anything is possible

You forgot to bold the part were I demonstrated why that scenario would be nonsense.

Thats because your scenario is nonsense and anything that does not follow the RTP version of events is nonsense to you despite what we and the world see going on here you still have faith in their story.

[AleG]

BT today you astound he , first time !

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin

should i read ........ handsome young thug with straight foppish hair

a spacky arm and a dropped shoulder .

Oh well, since the person on the CCTV footage doesn't have a mouth, or nipples then it conclusively proves that it can't be the same person it is being compared to.

The point being, it's impossible to make out enough features to make a positive match from that footage. Anyone that sees that photo and concludes they are the same person is simply fooling him/herself.

[boomerangutang]

Since we're getting in to psychological profiles here, let me add 2 satang's worth:

Nomsod has a brother who is an unabashed lady boy. Their daddy, the mafia-like Headman, had been grooming his non-effeminate son to take over the domain. Nomsod was probably under pressure, from a young age, to show his manliness, his take-control abilities. What better way (from a Thai perspective), than rape?

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin. For sure, many cute farang chicks lit up to his charms. Perhaps one unlucky cutie, with lovely face, shape and long blonde hair, didn't acquiesce to his charm-offensive the way he had hoped. One thing leads to another, and then.......

BT today you astound he , first time !

He's also a handsome young fellow, with thick black curls, amber skin

should i read ........ handsome young thug with straight foppish hair

a spacky arm and a dropped shoulder .

dude, I was referring when he's in his uncle's bar, with same-aged cute farang chicks all around, everyone drunk, colored lights blinking, music blaring loud enough to be heard a mile away.....

Farang girls are not much different than farang guys, in how 'opposites attract' ....in how they're attracted to dark features skinny guys from faraway lands. ...particularly at a beach resort, where everyone at the clubs tries mightily to party hardy. that's all I'm going to post on this issue. You can decide what you want to decide. I just think that the boy-meets-girl dynamic is a factor in this crime.

Edited July 26, 2015 by boomerangutang

[Chetzee]

On the semen angle. How does the condom with the alleged B2 or one of them at least DNA on the outside but nothing inside fit in.?

Also just again for your records AleG the tide was on the way out and when the pictures were taken with the scattered clothes the water was no where near the clothes. Are you also seriously saying that one or more of the 5 local police took DNA from inside Hannah at the crime scene?? I think your pushing your story a bit there aren't you?

the condon does not fit in , by police accounts there was a speck of H 's blood on it , from splatter

[Darkknight666]

What a tragedy this trial has been, A complete farce all along and going quite high up.

I'm starting to think the bosses are noticing the writing on the wall now regarding public opinion and just how terrible the RTP's case is. I'm hopeful there may be justice for all involved... Just doesn't seem likely the true killers will be caught.

[AleG]

On the semen angle. How does the condom with the alleged B2 or one of them at least DNA on the outside but nothing inside fit in.?

Also just again for your records AleG the tide was on the way out and when the pictures were taken with the scattered clothes the water was no where near the clothes. Are you also seriously saying that one or more of the 5 local police took DNA from inside Hannah at the crime scene?? I think your pushing your story a bit there aren't you?

"On the semen angle. How does the condom with the alleged B2 or one of them at least DNA on the outside but nothing inside fit in.?"

Nobody has say that, so it doesn't fit in with anything.

The tide turned at 6:56, the witness said he arrived at 6:30, so I was off by 20 minutes.

"Are you also seriously saying that one or more of the 5 local police took DNA from inside Hannah at the crime scene?"

No, I didn't say that...

"I think your pushing your story a bit there aren't you?"

I don't have a story to push.

[loonodingle]

The Judge has already Indicated his intentions. Case inconclusive not guilty. He advised the Police if they want to appeal then get your sheet together.

I wonder if its a done deal already. That was a significant statement