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

[Thesticle]

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 . .

.

I agree that the coverage of what's actually been taking place in the courtroom has been minimal. It's hard to decipher how the case it being argued when all we get are soundbites or a short synopsis. It also doesn't help when journalists are obstructed ie: not being allowed to take notes , translators threatened off the job.

I don't really think you can deny that the police have made a pigs ear out of this case and in typical Thai fashion instead of accepting culpability have deflected criticism and dug a rather large hole for themselves.I find your arguments often rely on the ability to take the polices word as gospel. It's common knowledge here that RTP are notorious for conspiring to subvert justice to suit their nefarious agendas. I think you mean well but are just naive to the realities of dealing with Thai police, no offence. Nobody knows who did this but people are right to question the evidence as it has been shown time and time again that the police here do not always apply justice in a way would be considered fair by international standards.

[Chetzee]

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.

i'm no dude ! and i'm sure that we're reading off the same page , but detail is everything

and that guy does not have thick black curls IMHO

[Darkknight666]

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.

i'm no dude ! and i'm sure that we're reading off the same page , but detail is everything

and that guy does not have thick black curls IMHO

Who?

[AleG]

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.

"You really think news reports even from credible media outlets should be unbiased?"

Yes, absolutely they should be unbiased, this coming from someone that has repeated ad nauseam how he wants to see a Fair and Transparent trial is mind bogglingly ironic.

Being biased is practically the definition of being unfair...

Hell, here is the definition of unfair:

un·fair ˌənˈfer/

adjective

adjective: unfair; comparative adjective: unfairer; superlative adjective: unfairest

not based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice.

synonyms: unjust, inequitable, prejudiced, biased, discriminatory

Incredible, just incredible.

It explains a lot though.

[thailandchilli]

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.

"You really think news reports even from credible media outlets should be unbiased?"

Yes, absolutely they should be unbiased, this coming from someone that has repeated ad nauseam how he wants to see a Fair and Transparent trial is mind bogglingly ironic.

Being biased is practically the definition of being unfair...

Hell, here is the definition of unfair:

un·fair ˌənˈfer/

adjective

adjective: unfair; comparative adjective: unfairer; superlative adjective: unfairest

not based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice.

synonyms: unjust, inequitable, prejudiced, biased, discriminatory

Incredible, just incredible.

It explains a lot though.

I am completely bias and my bias is on the side of justice when I see what I perceive to be injustice happening in front of my eyes. so thanks for all the irrelevant definitions but as usual your information is not useful to me

Edited July 26, 2015 by thailandchilli

[Nigeone]

I think one thing that has been mostly overlooked on here is the fact that a lot of this anger and outpouring has been brewing for a long long time. The Thais as a nation are used to what goes on and almost accepts it as normal knowing it's hard or nigh on impossible to change the system. It's no coincidence that there is such a stink on here about the apparent injustice because basically in the main a situation of this magnitude would be unlikely to happen in the UK or USA. This lets be clear isn't the first case of cover ups but with the rise of social media it only needed a incident to spark off and bring out all that built up contained anger dormant beneath the surface. This has been coming and the RTP in this case are getting both barrels and while before it just would have been railroaded through its taken the horrific deaths for two UK citizens to bring it to a head. It's not before time that they are held accountable for there investigation work and subsequent sentences. It's Karma but sadly with two people already dead and family's torn apart by losing there loved ones. I agree with other posters if the general has been watching and getting reports he could do himself and Thailand a massive massive favor and come out in the next few days and call a stop to this charade and order a complete new investigation with perhaps even UK police and certainly forensic to help and advise so they can get procedures in place to prevent the like happening again.

[smedly]

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.

lets suppose for a moment that a certain brother of a certain headman was involved in this crime and charged.

Well wasn't he freely walking around the crime scene, perhaps it was this person that moved the clothes - handled the Hoe - and maybe even handled the bodies, I know one thing for sure, no DNA is ever going to convict him.....right

and as for news reporting, you are not going to get a full transcript of every word spoken in the court, you will get a summary of the key points only, if they are lies then there is a problem, to confirm such an accusation you would have needed to be present in the court room, they were we weren't

[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?

"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.

I think you'll find, although I could be wrong that the time 6.56 is low water therefore your quite a bit out. Of course like I said I could be wrong!

[smedly]

Oh and one more thing, it is a criminal offence for an investigating officer to withhold alter or manipulate evidence that would change or influence the outcome of a trial - of course I am stating the obvious, most people should be aware of this already.

[Mooner]

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.

Did you read my post? My problem is not with moving it. It is with how it was handled and stored.

My opinion on the ineptness of the RTP is not from online gossip its from reports from news media from the last few weeks in court. I know you have read them too.

Also my post said nothing of DNA planting so dont reply to my question with it. And can you please answer the question i asked without the tangents.

" If the victims were your family would you be happy with the quality of this investigation?"

[Nigeone]

AliG

So by the definition below then you wouldn't expect, say, the RTP to be biased then would you?

Because quite honesty that's just what most would say they have been , unfair! And stronger!

Post below by AliG in talking about the media. I feel it fits the RTP too!

Yes, absolutely they should be unbiased, this coming from someone that has repeated ad nauseam how he wants to see a Fair and Transparent trial is mind bogglingly ironic.

Being biased is practically the definition of being unfair...

Hell, here is the definition of unfair:

un·fair ˌənˈfer/

adjective

adjective: unfair; comparative adjective: unfairer; superlative adjective: unfairest

not based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice.

synonyms: unjust, inequitable, prejudiced, biased, discriminatory

Incredible, just incredible.

It explains a lot though.

I kept the above parting shot ie incredible etc from your post as I couldn't have said it better myself.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Nigeone

[thailandchilli]

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.

I think you'll find, although I could be wrong that the time 6.56 is low water therefore your quite a bit out. Of course like I said I could be wrong!

Here's a couple of pics to confirm the tide was nowhere near the clothes so there was no need to move them on to a rock. In addition we can see the clothes where scattered for a considerable amount of time as there are already many people on the scene. The clothes where then moved onto the rock and photos taken. The other photo with Hannahs feet clearly shows the high tide had receded some time before

[smedly]

Oh and one more thing, it is a criminal offence for an investigating officer to withhold alter or manipulate evidence that would change or influence the outcome of a trial - of course I am stating the obvious, most people should be aware of this already.

some simple reading

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoliation_of_evidence

[Mooner]

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.

I think you'll find, although I could be wrong that the time 6.56 is low water therefore your quite a bit out. Of course like I said I could be wrong!

Here's a couple of pics to confirm the tide was nowhere near the clothes so there was no need to move them on to a rock. In addition we can see the clothes where scattered for a considerable amount of time as there are already many people on the scene. The clothes where then moved onto the rock and photos taken. The other photo with Hannahs feet clearly shows the high tide had receded some time before

Well played!!

[apetley]

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.

If I were the defence I would argue very forcibly that the lack of continuity of DNA samples demanded a retest at the very least.

Without such it can easily be argued that the comparison DNA matched with the semen DNA had nothing to do with the 2 Burmese.

If a fresh sample of the Burmese's DNA matches the semen DNA then they are in serious trouble. If a new sample is found not to be a match then they are free to go imo.

[Basil B]

If I were the defence I would argue very forcibly that the lack of continuity of DNA samples demanded a retest at the very least.

Without such it can easily be argued that the comparison DNA matched with the semen DNA had nothing to do with the 2 Burmese.

If a fresh sample of the Burmese's DNA matches the semen DNA then they are in serious trouble. If a new sample is found not to be a match then they are free to go imo.

Sorry but there is to much doubt as to the creditability of any DNA held, retesting is now pointless.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Basil B

[smedly]

If I were the defence I would argue very forcibly that the lack of continuity of DNA samples demanded a retest at the very least.

Without such it can easily be argued that the comparison DNA matched with the semen DNA had nothing to do with the 2 Burmese.

If a fresh sample of the Burmese's DNA matches the semen DNA then they are in serious trouble. If a new sample is found not to be a match then they are free to go imo.

I believe that just about sums up what most people think and is also the right of the defence and the accused to also have this confirmation

If it comes back as a match I will gladly go down there and pummel these two Burmese boys with the same Hoe

[BritTim]

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 . .

There has been a systematic attempt to make reporting as difficult as possible. The prosecution strategy seems to be to avoid saying anything that would give the defense a hook on which to ask questions. So, the prosecution witnesses know nothing, investigated nothing. Where a witness says something meaningful, as often as not a different story is told outside the court or by another witness. Keeping most of the media out of the courtroom, trying to deprive them of translators, and forbidding the taking of notes compounds the problem. I am as frustrated as you are, but kind of fascinated by the prosecution's strategy which is quite clever.

[Basil B]

If I were the defence I would argue very forcibly that the lack of continuity of DNA samples demanded a retest at the very least.

Without such it can easily be argued that the comparison DNA matched with the semen DNA had nothing to do with the 2 Burmese.

If a fresh sample of the Burmese's DNA matches the semen DNA then they are in serious trouble. If a new sample is found not to be a match then they are free to go imo.

I believe that just about sums up what most people think and is also the right of the defence and the accused to also have this confirmation

If it comes back as a match I will gladly go down there and pummel these two Burmese boys with the same Hoe

It could well be possible that the DNA is the B2's but the way this investigation has been handled there is no proof the samples have not been switched...

[Basil B]

Virtually everybody has a mobile phone, surely looking at phone activity my hold some clues.

I bet the perpetrators made a call to at least one person after the murder...

How many boat owners got a call in the early hours? and then their phone signal was registered within two or three hours on the mainland or Samui?

surely there must be software/systems available to detect from the phone companies records any phone that was on the island at the time Hannah and David was seen alive and appeared on the mainland or Samui before the first ferries.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Basil B

[Darkknight666]

Virtually everybody has a mobile phone, surely looking at phone activity my hold some clues.

I bet the perpetrators made a call to at least one person after the murder...

How many boat owners got a call in the early hours? and then their phone signal was registered within two or three hours on the mainland or Samui?

The problem is there should be plenty of evidence to clear the other accused party here. All of the necessary info is being withheld from the public or has already been destroyed.

[BritTim]

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.

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

According to your link, it turned at 7:33.

[Darkknight666]

Sean McAnna completely refusing to comment is ridiculous. Or Gianni DiLupo whatever that nonce is calling himself these days.

[apetley]

If I were the defence I would argue very forcibly that the lack of continuity of DNA samples demanded a retest at the very least.

Without such it can easily be argued that the comparison DNA matched with the semen DNA had nothing to do with the 2 Burmese.

If a fresh sample of the Burmese's DNA matches the semen DNA then they are in serious trouble. If a new sample is found not to be a match then they are free to go imo.

I believe that just about sums up what most people think and is also the right of the defence and the accused to also have this confirmation

If it comes back as a match I will gladly go down there and pummel these two Burmese boys with the same Hoe

It could well be possible that the DNA is the B2's but the way this investigation has been handled there is no proof the samples have not been switched...

That is exactly what the Bangkok Police Forensic Inst said because normal checks to ensure such a thing weren't in place when they tested the Burmese DNA against samples.

I am assuming it would be near impossible to get fresh semen from the Burmese as fake evidence so if there can be a fresh test of a properly documented sample of their DNA against the existing semen sample found in Hanna this would clear up a lot of doubt one way or another.

[loonodingle]

Virtually everybody has a mobile phone, surely looking at phone activity my hold some clues.

I bet the perpetrators made a call to at least one person after the murder...

How many boat owners got a call in the early hours? and then their phone signal was registered within two or three hours on the mainland or Samui?

surely there must be software/systems available to detect from the phone companies records any phone that was on the island at the time Hannah and David was seen alive and appeared on the mainland or Samui before the first ferries.

Basil,

No one in power wants to look M8. Not at the CCTV not at anything that wouldn't support their theory.

Sit back and wait for the next round. You will see some revelations coming that will shake the RTP to the core

[smedly]

going to try and make this my last comment today on this thread

My mind keeps going back to the "running man" cctv and how it is definitely not any of the accused and I am 100% sure of that - body and clothing do not match and no wristbands.

It is also an extreme likeness for Nomsod in so many ways

I'll bet the transferred cop is being cursed every day for releasing that footage to the public otherwise I honestly don't believe we'd ever have seen it

[Heisenbergg]

going to try and make this my last comment today on this thread

My mind keeps going back to the "running man" cctv and how it is definitely not any of the accused and I am 100% sure of that - body and clothing do not match and no wristbands.

It is also an extreme likeness for Nomsod in so many ways

I'll bet the transferred cop is being cursed every day for releasing that footage to the public otherwise I honestly don't believe we'd ever have seen it

Agree, and secretly I hope he got on the case as soon as he could and got the tape out as fast as possible, before he would be transferred and silenced.

That tape is damning. I bet it gives the killer nightmares, actually, I hope it does.

[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?

"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.

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

According to your link, it turned at 7:33.

Your right BritTim and that was low tide too as the pictures prove

[evadgib]

going to try and make this my last comment today on this thread

My mind keeps going back to the "running man" cctv and how it is definitely not any of the accused and I am 100% sure of that - body and clothing do not match and no wristbands.

It is also an extreme likeness for Nomsod in so many ways

I'll bet the transferred cop is being cursed every day for releasing that footage to the public otherwise I honestly don't believe we'd ever have seen it

When was he last seen publicly?

[loonodingle]

Sean McAnna completely refusing to comment is ridiculous. Or Gianni DiLupo whatever that nonce is calling himself these days.

What can you expect from a thing who takes pleasure in child porn. He is sat in Milan with his Italian buddys I bet they don't know his history. Still maybe someday someone will post his details to his friends pages and he will be shunned.

credits to Daily Record. Information in public domain

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/revealed-scot-who-fled-thai-4306609