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

[saminoz]

I have never said the police were not abusive to them ... unlike you though I do consider their admission to their own representatives relevant especially when the police were not there and they showed no fear of the police by saying they were abused. Further I find it relevant to the fact they changed their story. To not consider their free admission to embassy officials, lawyers and rights workers is to bury ones head in the sand and clearly shows a lack of being honest about the facts in this case. At the very minimum their credibility needs to be questioned but I personal believe combined with the others facts, you choose to ignore or discount, their admission is a clear indication of their guilt.

LMAO!!

JTJ questioning someone else's credibility!! Ironic or what?

JTJ, you keep forgetting that it is the same two lawyers that are alleged to have said that the B2 confessed the crime to them in an open meeting who later (within a couple of days) very publicly declared their innocence!!!

I would think that the latter statements hold more weight, don't they?

Early on you claimed to have no vested interest in this case, but pretty much all the dribble and claptrap, old posts and misrepresentations, blatant misdirection and nonsense you have come up with since, clearly have more give a truer picture fo your role than your earliest nonsensical claims statements.

Shill.

Cap

Fit

Wear

Edited August 1, 2015 by saminoz

[AleG]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

[BlahBlah23]

Bonez, you make the good point that no one has come forward etc.. Just a thought, David Miller came forward and he died for that. Wonder if some people having observed that have decided life beats death. Seems logical

Hi Glenmohr

I don't believe we will ever know the final sequence of events at the time the deceased were tragically taken away, this is for the authorities to piece together. I do hope David was a hero until the end, that's the picture i will embed in my mind.

The current situation is that the two Myanmar boys are in prison based on evidence the police have presented as part of their initial prosecution case, that a fact we have to realise, rightly or wrongly.

"Boys"? At what age in your country can a man legally get married, drink (baring Arabic and some other Countries), and join the Armed Forces to fight and possible die for his country. Age 40?

In my country, which is Thailand at the moment, i believe the legal age to get married is 17, as for drinking you can be any age in reality, but to legally purchase alcohol you need to be 20. as for joining the Army, 18 if voluntary, 21 for compulsory. Age 40 is a little bizarre...

[Linky]

AleG, if you think the investigation should terminate once scapegoats suspects are put in prison with not bail, then we don't agree. I think the investigation should be on-going. In countries like the US, France and UK, where investigative sciences are miles ahead of Thailand's, investigators sometimes even dust-off crime files that are years old, in order to see whether all avenues were investigated thoroughly, and whether the right people are incarcerated. Granted, it couldn't happen in Thailand, but there's hope that Thai investigators will learn how to do their jobs in at least a semi-professional capacity - .....in the future perhaps?

Police generally don't re-investigate crimes to find new suspects when they already believe they have all the right suspects in custody unless some very compelling evidence comes along. Doing so could in fact be used against them in court. If they are still investigating other people then clearly they are not confident that who they have charges is responsible. Even in the OJ Case, he was found not guilty but the police have not and will not actively search for another killer unless there was very credible evidence to follow-up on. The job in this instance of police it to solve a crime and once they believe they have, regardless of public opinion or if the person gets off, they are generally done and not going to waste resources and time going through motions especially because of nonsense and insignificant online conspiracy theories which in this case the police did waste time and resources initially considering.

Again utter rubbish from you.

Good police do investigate and it is rare for that to be used in court against them because the officer simply states in evidence that it is his job to investigate if any further suspects should be considered and indeed would be negligent in his duties as would indicate he has a closed mind on a persons guilt.

LMAO - you have no clue. You logic is like determining you have a flat tire and that is why your car is handling like crap but decided to pull the tranny to because some moron said it could be related to your tranny. A defense lawyer would have a field day with police if they continued to investigate other suspects while a trial was going on for the suspects they claim are the only ones responsible. This alone would cause reasonable doubt in many people's mind that the wrong people may be on trial.

Again rubbish. Inworked for prosecution and instructed counsel in more than 20 murder trials in oz. never ever has that been an issue.

Opposite in fact because police did not follow a lead there was an argument in the bar would show them incompetent. In fact there were times mid trial when police were found to have neglected to follow up and defense will call for that evidence in the court. If police say they didnt investigate it is not good for prosecution.

You really are just making things up

[Darkknight666]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Ever been threatened by RTP? Better yet threatened by someone you believe to be an embassy official from your homeland and RTP? How a threat works is - "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love.

Of course the ones doing the threatening need to be a credible source of this kind of fear, I believe they're more than capable considering they beat a taxi driver after not going along with their story and he is a Thai!

Add to that your boss and his family are the more likely credible threat than even the police and......

And all the evidence in this case comes from those same people involved in attempting prior frame ups.

That's why us rational folks don't take the confession as good evidence, none of them no matter who it was to, Because after that meeting the B2 return to the custody of RTP. They're in danger every second too... It's early yet, but we have an important witness just killed from Burma?

Explain that away, what is she mafia? Cleaning the beach as a disguise all the while running a hoarse of Burmese criminals? Wouldn't surprise me.

[smedly]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

and no doubt a certain interpreter was on hand to relay what they were saying .......right

and also the doctor who examined them said they confessed to him also through a certain interpreter, so in actual fact they did not confess to the doctor, the interpreter said they did - a different thing entirely

check his bank account

keep the feet for dancing

[Linky]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Blah blah blah.

You have been going on about letting the judge decide etc etc.

Well it is obvious he has already decided on the admission. If the judge considered the admission was reasonable we wouldnt be having a trial now, we would only be having sentencing submissions.

So the judge obviously has not accepted the admission of guilt, hence a trial.

So live by your own sword and deal with the fact the alledged admission of guilt has not been accepted by the judge.

[smedly]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Ever been threatened by RTP? Better yet threatened by someone you believe to be an embassy official from your homeland and RTP? How a threat works is - "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love.

Of course the ones doing the threatening need to be a credible source of this kind of fear, I believe they're more than capable considering they beat a taxi driver after not going along with their story and he is a Thai!

Add to that your boss and his family are the more likely credible threat than even the police and......

And all the evidence in this case comes from those same people involved in attempting prior frame ups.

That's why us rational folks don't take the confession as good evidence, none of them no matter who it was to, Because after that meeting the B2 return to the custody of RTP. They're in danger every second too... It's early yet, but we have an important witness just killed from Burma?

Explain that away, what is she mafia? Cleaning the beach as a disguise all the while running a hoarse of Burmese criminals? Wouldn't surprise me.

cleaning the beach and the Hoe as instructed by Mon then returning it to the crime scene, I hope the defence got a signed statement from her before she was removed from the equation

[BlahBlah23]

I want to see the cctv footage of the accused leaving the scene on their motorbike as claimed by the police in court

Good point and the time of said CCTV would be interesting more so. They obviously did leave the beach as they have never said they weren't there but time they left could be interesting.

yes why is it not in evidence ? something the defence should be focusing on, I'll wager any such evidence has been destroyed because it didn't fit with the prosecutions agenda, all cctv footage should have been handed over to the defence, why has this not happened, if the police used such footage during their investigation and the prosecution are using it in making their case then the defence should equally have access to all of it, anything collected by police is "in evidence" whether used or not

where is it ??????????????

The police have chosen a path in this investigation that is now being scrutinised across the world, if this does indeed turn out to be a "fit up" which I strongly suspect as I've seen nothing to make me think otherwise, we then face the horrific reality that a gang of brutal rapists and murderers are roaming freely on Ko Tao and will very likely strike again

A serious question, could this CCTV footage exist and has been presented in court, it has just not been reported in the media.... ? Did they not spend 12 hours reviewing footage during the latest court appearances, therefore logically, it may have been during that review.

[thailandchilli]

yes why is it not in evidence ? something the defence should be focusing on, I'll wager any such evidence has been destroyed because it didn't fit with the prosecutions agenda, all cctv footage should have been handed over to the defence, why has this not happened, if the police used such footage during their investigation and the prosecution are using it in making their case then the defence should equally have access to all of it, anything collected by police is "in evidence" whether used or not

where is it ??????????????

The police have chosen a path in this investigation that is now being scrutinised across the world, if this does indeed turn out to be a "fit up" which I strongly suspect as I've seen nothing to make me think otherwise, we then face the horrific reality that a gang of brutal rapists and murderers are roaming freely on Ko Tao and will very likely strike again

A serious question, could this CCTV footage exist and has been presented in court, it has just not been reported in the media.... ? Did they not spend 12 hours reviewing footage during the latest court appearances, therefore logically, it may have been during that review.

Its possible this was shown in the court( although I'm guessing we would have had word from Andy Hall on that who gave an interview after stating what had been shown, or one of the many reporters inside the court), yes that would be the logical course of events. Unfortunately this is far from a logical trial or investigation.

The other piece of very significant cctv footage that I'm presuming was not shown was the running western woman who police suspected could either be Hannah or a witness

[Rykbanlor]

Not confirmed at the moment and may be rumour but i have seen this on a couple of different Facebook site.

"A witness of Koh Tao case, Ohn Mar, who saw the dead bodies ( Hannah and David) was murdered on 29th July."

Hey Stealth, where did you see this, could you PM a link perhaps,

Cheers.

[AleG]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Ever been threatened by RTP? Better yet threatened by someone you believe to be an embassy official from your homeland and RTP? How a threat works is - "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love.

Of course the ones doing the threatening need to be a credible source of this kind of fear, I believe they're more than capable considering they beat a taxi driver after not going along with their story and he is a Thai!

Add to that your boss and his family are the more likely credible threat than even the police and......

And all the evidence in this case comes from those same people involved in attempting prior frame ups.

That's why us rational folks don't take the confession as good evidence, none of them no matter who it was to, Because after that meeting the B2 return to the custody of RTP. They're in danger every second too... It's early yet, but we have an important witness just killed from Burma?

Explain that away, what is she mafia? Cleaning the beach as a disguise all the while running a hoarse of Burmese criminals? Wouldn't surprise me.

Made up justification: "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love."

Fact: they also told those people they were abused while in custody, was that another part the police threatened them to say?

Then of course there's the fact that for the last ten months that they have been in the hands of the police they have not once confessed again to anyone.

You are tilting at windmills.

[smedly]

yes why is it not in evidence ? something the defence should be focusing on, I'll wager any such evidence has been destroyed because it didn't fit with the prosecutions agenda, all cctv footage should have been handed over to the defence, why has this not happened, if the police used such footage during their investigation and the prosecution are using it in making their case then the defence should equally have access to all of it, anything collected by police is "in evidence" whether used or not

where is it ??????????????

The police have chosen a path in this investigation that is now being scrutinised across the world, if this does indeed turn out to be a "fit up" which I strongly suspect as I've seen nothing to make me think otherwise, we then face the horrific reality that a gang of brutal rapists and murderers are roaming freely on Ko Tao and will very likely strike again

A serious question, could this CCTV footage exist and has been presented in court, it has just not been reported in the media.... ? Did they not spend 12 hours reviewing footage during the latest court appearances, therefore logically, it may have been during that review.

Its possible this was shown in the court( although I'm guessing we would have had word from Andy Hall on that who gave an interview after stating what had been shown, or one of the many reporters inside the court), yes that would be the logical course of events. Unfortunately this is far from a logical trial or investigation.

The other piece of very significant cctv footage that I'm presuming was not shown was the running western woman who police suspected could either be Hannah or a witness

I agree the media may have reported it, but it would serve no benefit to Andy Hall and the defence team, given it is evidence directly against the Myanmar men on trial. Hopefully it will all come out in the next couple of months, but there is a lot of information we are not privy to, we have only observed snippets of it at this stage.

It most certainly would, it is strongly suggested that this crime took place between 4am and 5am, if the footage shows them going home at 3-3:30am it is quite significant, police have a witness statement from two French girls who said they heard screaming coming from the beach at around 4am, you can complete the dots yourself

this is very very significant and even critical evidence

[AleG]

Its possible this was shown in the court( although I'm guessing we would have had word from Andy Hall on that who gave an interview after stating what had been shown, or one of the many reporters inside the court), yes that would be the logical course of events. Unfortunately this is far from a logical trial or investigation.

The other piece of very significant cctv footage that I'm presuming was not shown was the running western woman who police suspected could either be Hannah or a witness

I agree the media may have reported it, but it would serve no benefit to Andy Hall and the defence team, given it is evidence directly against the Myanmar men on trial. Hopefully it will all come out in the next couple of months, but there is a lot of information we are not privy to, we have only observed snippets of it at this stage.

Most, if not all, the reports coming from the hearings have either been from the defense team or from media that has by and large shown a clear bias in favour of the defense; on top of that it appears journalists may be using interpreters provided by the defense.

I don't expect much coverage of facts that point at the two men on trial being guilty. The last hearing was about the DNA analysis, the most important element of the investigation and there was hardly anything reported about it.

[thailandchilli]

A serious question, could this CCTV footage exist and has been presented in court, it has just not been reported in the media.... ? Did they not spend 12 hours reviewing footage during the latest court appearances, therefore logically, it may have been during that review.

Its possible this was shown in the court( although I'm guessing we would have had word from Andy Hall on that who gave an interview after stating what had been shown, or one of the many reporters inside the court), yes that would be the logical course of events. Unfortunately this is far from a logical trial or investigation.

The other piece of very significant cctv footage that I'm presuming was not shown was the running western woman who police suspected could either be Hannah or a witness

I agree the media may have reported it, but it would serve no benefit to Andy Hall and the defence team, given it is evidence directly against the Myanmar men on trial. Hopefully it will all come out in the next couple of months, but there is a lot of information we are not privy to, we have only observed snippets of it at this stage.

I dont think you or anyone can presume it is evidence directly against the B2, and it could be possible that the reason its not shown (if thats the case) is that it can in fact confirm their own story and fits in with their timeline and the 3rd witness who said he saw them asleep in bed at 5am.

We have already had reports of the prosecution with holding crucial evidence albeit by saying they didnt have the budget to bring it.

I would like to see if this video cctv was also shown as this has the running man captured at 5.41am

Edited August 1, 2015 by thailandchilli

[smedly]

A serious question, could this CCTV footage exist and has been presented in court, it has just not been reported in the media.... ? Did they not spend 12 hours reviewing footage during the latest court appearances, therefore logically, it may have been during that review.

Its possible this was shown in the court( although I'm guessing we would have had word from Andy Hall on that who gave an interview after stating what had been shown, or one of the many reporters inside the court), yes that would be the logical course of events. Unfortunately this is far from a logical trial or investigation.

The other piece of very significant cctv footage that I'm presuming was not shown was the running western woman who police suspected could either be Hannah or a witness

I agree the media may have reported it, but it would serve no benefit to Andy Hall and the defence team, given it is evidence directly against the Myanmar men on trial. Hopefully it will all come out in the next couple of months, but there is a lot of information we are not privy to, we have only observed snippets of it at this stage.

I dont think you or anyone can presume it is evidence directly against the B2, and it could be possible that the reason its not shown (if thats the case) is that it can in fact confirm their own story and fits in with their timeline and the 3rd witness who said he saw them asleep in bed at 5am.

We have already had reports of the prosecution with holding crucial evidence albeit by saying they didnt have the budget to bring it.

I would like to see if this video cctv was also shown as this has the running man captured at 5.41am

running man footage was earlier than that 3:44 and 4:49 and perhaps as you say even later or the camera time was not accurate on the 2 sets of cameras

Edited August 1, 2015 by smedly

[GOLDBUGGY]

Bonez, you make the good point that no one has come forward etc.. Just a thought, David Miller came forward and he died for that. Wonder if some people having observed that have decided life beats death. Seems logical

Hi Glenmohr

I don't believe we will ever know the final sequence of events at the time the deceased were tragically taken away, this is for the authorities to piece together. I do hope David was a hero until the end, that's the picture i will embed in my mind.

The current situation is that the two Myanmar boys are in prison based on evidence the police have presented as part of their initial prosecution case, that a fact we have to realise, rightly or wrongly.

"Boys"? At what age in your country can a man legally get married, drink (baring Arabic and some other Countries), and join the Armed Forces to fight and possible die for his country. Age 40?

In my country, which is Thailand at the moment, i believe the legal age to get married is 17, as for drinking you can be any age in reality, but to legally purchase alcohol you need to be 20. as for joining the Army, 18 if voluntary, 21 for compulsory. Age 40 is a little bizarre...

To me, calling someone a Boy when he is 22 Years Old is the part I think is Bizarre.

[thailandchilli]

I agree the media may have reported it, but it would serve no benefit to Andy Hall and the defence team, given it is evidence directly against the Myanmar men on trial. Hopefully it will all come out in the next couple of months, but there is a lot of information we are not privy to, we have only observed snippets of it at this stage.

I dont think you or anyone can presume it is evidence directly against the B2, and it could be possible that the reason its not shown (if thats the case) is that it can in fact confirm their own story and fits in with their timeline and the 3rd witness who said he saw them asleep in bed at 5am.

We have already had reports of the prosecution with holding crucial evidence albeit by saying they didnt have the budget to bring it.

I would like to see if this video cctv was also shown as this has the running man captured at 5.41am

running man footage was earlier than that 3:44 and 4:49 and perhaps as you say even later or the camera time was not accurate on the 2 sets of cameras

Yes thats the records I have, the first shots at 3.44 and then the last at 5.41, here's another one of the one at 5.41am. As an after thought, what time did the cleaners who found the bodies say they arrived at the scene?

Edited August 1, 2015 by thailandchilli

[tomacht8]

Can someone confirm?

A garbage collector who found David's and Hannah's bodies was murdered on July 29th. Her name is Oh Mar. She was a first person found the bodies in the morning of September 15.

[Tony121]

Have a read of what the great human rights defender Andy Hall has hidden in his small print on the 21st october.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case/#/story.

also here

http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1430880746/vlwjlxyhvartbhkkux4b.pdf

[Rykbanlor]

Have a read of what the great human rights defender Andy Hall has hidden in his small print on the 21st october.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case/#/story.

also here

http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1430880746/vlwjlxyhvartbhkkux4b.pdf

What are we looking for?

[thailandchilli]

Have a read of what the great human rights defender Andy Hall has hidden in his small print on the 21st october.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case/#/story.

also here

http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1430880746/vlwjlxyhvartbhkkux4b.pdf

Cant see anything hidden, its on a website open for viewing for the whole world to read..................do you want to be just a tad more specific

[stephenterry]

Made up justification: "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love."

Fact: they also told those people they were abused while in custody, was that another part the police threatened them to say?

Then of course there's the fact that for the last ten months that they have been in the hands of the police they have not once confessed again to anyone.

You are tilting at windmills.

An extrajudicial confession obtained by the police is strictly prohibited from being used as evidence in Thai court without legal foundation. In Thailand suspects have the right to remain silent, the right to counsel and a lawyer at police interrogation. Observed? Not known. Allegations of torture have yet to be answered by the RTP as they have persistently failed to attend the Human Rights Assoc hearings.

The fact that they confessed to others outside the RTP, and the subsequent retraction by their lawyers is where it stands today. Seems like no legal foundation to pursue this any further.

[Tony121]

Have a read of what the great human rights defender Andy Hall has hidden in his small print on the 21st october.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case/#/story.

also here

http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1430880746/vlwjlxyhvartbhkkux4b.pdf

Cant see anything hidden, its on a website open for viewing for the whole world to read..................do you want to be just a tad more specific

They admit to "finding" (robbing) Davids phone, oh yeah even though they were so drunk they couldn't walk,

No wonder the only thing that keeps coming out of Andys mouth is DNA DNA he should have worked for OJ.

[GOLDBUGGY]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Blah blah blah.

You have been going on about letting the judge decide etc etc.

Well it is obvious he has already decided on the admission. If the judge considered the admission was reasonable we wouldnt be having a trial now, we would only be having sentencing submissions.

So the judge obviously has not accepted the admission of guilt, hence a trial.

So live by your own sword and deal with the fact the alledged admission of guilt has not been accepted by the judge.

No! It is not obvious what has been decided already.

A Confession is only part of the total Evidence of the Prosecution, just like DNA is. In a Trail the Court hears both sides of the case, Prosecution and Defense, then makes a decision based on the total.

What you are saying is the same as saying the DNA collected is not believed as the Trial is still ongoing, which could be completely false. Or a Witness! Or anything the Prosecution presents.

[Lozza]

Can someone confirm?

A garbage collector who found David's and Hannah's bodies was murdered on July 29th. Her name is Oh Mar. She was a first person found the bodies in the morning of September 15.

It's on facebook csila David is waiting for confirmation from Koh Tao

[thailandchilli]

Have a read of what the great human rights defender Andy Hall has hidden in his small print on the 21st october.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/justice-koh-tao-murder-case/#/story.

also here

http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1430880746/vlwjlxyhvartbhkkux4b.pdf

Cant see anything hidden, its on a website open for viewing for the whole world to read..................do you want to be just a tad more specific

They admit to "finding" (robbing) Davids phone, oh yeah even though they were so drunk they couldn't walk,

No wonder the only thing that keeps coming out of Andys mouth is DNA DNA he should have worked for OJ.

Oh I see where your coming from, so because Andy publishes a balanced & transparent report you then say its hidden and say he should of worked for OJ. Well Tony121 hang em high eh we can see how biased you are. You took ZERO notice of anything else on the report so I want bother going through it with you.

Edited August 1, 2015 by thailandchilli

[Linky]

You seem to be the worst poster here now for picking up old reports where its clear things have moved on. Should we all do the same in return, lets see how many we can wade through, should we start with previous suspects like Chris Ware, or Mon, or the caveman speedboat captain or, or............

Whats next, the families statements again?

LMAO - this is a fact. This happened just as other evidence collected early on. NOTHING has been said to contradict this happened. The two defendants admitted their guilt to their representatives outside police presence while not showing any fear of talking bad about the police because they said at the same time they were abused. If you choose to ignore this then you are the one that is choosing to selectively look at facts. This is not the same at all as the conspiracy theorist pretending early reports from police are true after subsequent information shows that info was false. This is something that happened and it is fact now that the defendants have given two contradictory statements to their own representatives about their involvement. EXTREMELY RELEVANT unless you are somebody living in fairy tale land and all that matters is what you want to imagine is true.

Again it's worth pointing out that they also confessed at least three other times to other people, the doctor that examined them, a Human Rights Commission representative and of course the police.

Evidently the police have not changed their stance, the doctor presented that confession when questioned as a witness in court, and the HRC has not, to the best of my knowledge, came out to say they believe their confession to be false.

Their story changed the moment the defense lawyers started to build a case, from telling people that they did it and providing details on it to "we were too drunk to remember anything", on three bottles of beer and one bottle of wine split between three men... and the third man didn't seem to have any problem recalling events from that night. To me it sounds like a cop-out.

Blah blah blah.

You have been going on about letting the judge decide etc etc.

Well it is obvious he has already decided on the admission. If the judge considered the admission was reasonable we wouldnt be having a trial now, we would only be having sentencing submissions.

So the judge obviously has not accepted the admission of guilt, hence a trial.

So live by your own sword and deal with the fact the alledged admission of guilt has not been accepted by the judge.

No! It is not obvious what has been decided already.

A Confession is only part of the total Evidence of the Prosecution, just like DNA is. In a Trail the Court hears both sides of the case, Prosecution and Defense, then makes a decision based on the total.

What you are saying is the same as saying the DNA collected is not believed as the Trial is still ongoing, which could be completely false. Or a Witness! Or anything the Prosecution presents.

Wrong. And I'm sick of explaining to muppets who have no idea. Carry on.

[Darkknight666]

Made up justification: "you will say what we ask you to say or you will be killed/electrocuted/family sold to fishing slavery- IF you don't play along for the cameras and officials we will do these horrible things to you, and anyone we can find that you love."

Fact: they also told those people they were abused while in custody, was that another part the police threatened them to say?

Then of course there's the fact that for the last ten months that they have been in the hands of the police they have not once confessed again to anyone.

You are tilting at windmills.

An extrajudicial confession obtained by the police is strictly prohibited from being used as evidence in Thai court without legal foundation. In Thailand suspects have the right to remain silent, the right to counsel and a lawyer at police interrogation. Observed? Not known. Allegations of torture have yet to be answered by the RTP as they have persistently failed to attend the Human Rights Assoc hearings.

The fact that they confessed to others outside the RTP, and the subsequent retraction by their lawyers is where it stands today. Seems like no legal foundation to pursue this any further.

Add to that the fact that there is no recording of the interrogation, it's 2015.... Cops the world over know how crucial video evidence is these days and yet they don't have records of the confession? No video? Well why not, maybe because you were beating and threatening the guys?

The taxi driver thing was the RTP trying to influence the case with a bribe (it's not s reward when you give false testimony, as this taxi man would have to do if he agreed) it's corruption! There's no way to spin that story boys, RTP got caught out trying to unjustly influence the case.

We also have no detailed crime scene photos cause "no budget" but they were taken at the scene, just not presented as evidence. Only, the idiot who took the crime scene photos ran directly to imgur and gore sites and had them posted! What a bonehead move that was.... So the photos are still available to anyone willing to look for them.

If the police are running a fair and transparent investigation why are there so many major mistakes?

The case wasn't sent back to the prosecutor for minor clerical errors, It was sent back because what was presented wasn't even close enough to probable. They claim they had NS DNA tested!? Ok did you test it against the DNA from the crime scene or just to make sure he indeed has any DNA? Ummmm.. "I don't know".

Ok, Mr. Lead Police Man..... Did you test the DNA from the B2 against DNA found at the scene? Ummm "I don't know" Well, who does know!? Anyone?

From David and Hannah's last breath this case has been CORRUPT. Almost everyone can see that. The ones who can't are very few indeed.

[Si Thea01]

Linky States:-

Quote.>Again rubbish. In worked for prosecution and instructed counsel in more than 20 murder trials in oz. never ever has that been an issue.

Opposite in fact because police did not follow a lead there was an argument in the bar would show them incompetent. In fact there were times mid trial when police were found to have neglected to follow up and defense will call for that evidence in the court. If police say they didnt investigate it is not good for prosecution.

You really are just making things up<End quote

I hope you don't mind me asking a few questions, not to buy into your debate with JTJ but to clarify a couple of things. You worked for the prosecution, was that in the local court, the district court, supreme court or high court's jurisdiction? What state or territory? If you were a little more specific, it would allow those of us who have been involved with enforcement and prosecution to understand more clearly the debate that is ongoing and where is heading between you two. Were you actually a prosecutor and a qualified solicitor? Who employed you, the DPP, the CDPP, or the Police prosecution branch which, if the latter, you would also be a sworn Police Officer? And you instructed counsel in more than 20 trials, so you were or still are an instructing solicitor, maybe a Barrister? I hope you don't mind my asking, just curious?