Fat Haggis Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Just who is the antagonist in all of the closed threads? who is the common denominator? and they seem to get away with it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 You wrote: Suffice to say that one of the persons being accused of disturbing the crime scene was responsible for retrieving the murder weapon back to where it was originally found, that's not the actions of someone wrecking the scene, that's the actions of someone trying to preserve it How does this person know that the hoe was the murder weapon? Unless this person personally wielded it or was witness to it being used on one or more of the victims? I can just imagine the scenario. Perpetrator arrives to the beach early in the morning, swaggering along, confident in the knowledge that the inept RTP cannot possibly miss the murder weapon which was conveniently left close by. But wait!! The hoe's gone!!?? What the heck?!? That darn blind gardener had moved it from where it was strategically placed! No, we can't be having that. Where the hell is the gardener?? Hey you, what did you do with the hoe? What? Go and get it and bring it back to where you found it, pronto. After all, don't you know that it's stupid to disturb a murder scene?? "How does this person know that the hoe was the murder weapon?" Just a guess, maybe it was all that blood encrusted on the business end. As for scenario, see previous answer to BritTim. Sorry fail. A better guess would be that the person knows it was the murder weapon. As for scenario, see my slowly typed post. I know you don't realize how absurd your "scenarios" are. You are arguing that someone connected with the murder went out of his way to bring back the murder weapon to the crime scene. We are way under the Dunning-Kruger effect threshold now. Is this as absurd as the scenarios of pictures of the crime scene issued by the police showing the neat pile of clothes and indicating that Hannah and David had got together before being murdered. Oh wait..then there's the previous pictures splattered on Facebook showing the real crime scene,before rearranging,, of the said clothes scattered all over the place....Don't bother to answer AleG....you can't explain it without looking too much of a defender of the indefensible..! As for the hoe being moved. It was as pictures again showing on the internet confirm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 And as for the phone. Nobody as far as I know has confirmed who the actual phone mentioned so many times in here, be it smashed,broken,intact or what make or model, actually belongs to the deceased. All this speculation over a phone and where it was found. What has it to do with the murder if no DNA or fingerprints have been found on it. Even then it doesn't prove murder just that somebody might have been there or more likely it was planted by those mysterious 'unknown' rearanging of the site operator !. Actually I don't think he is unknown just not willing to put his head above the parapet ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Since you are so obsessed with the phone, care to share with us what significance you feel it has?I know you weren't addressing that Q to me, but I'll venture an answer: For a prosecution's case to be valid, it needs at least some of the following avenues of evidence; eyewitnesses, DNA, fingerprints, bloody clothes, connection with weapon(s), motive, means, proof of hassles (with victims) prior to crime and one or more items which connect the suspects with the victims. Thus far, the prosecution has been firing blanks except maybe the phone. They presume to have DNA evidence, but they haven't been able to submit anything other than verbal assertions. So, all they have left is a possible connection between one of the defendants and one of the victims: the phone. It's a very tenuous connection, as proven by the many posts on this thread. Even if it was David's (we're not sure) and wasn't planted (also not sure) ....all that the phone shows is one of the defendants may have pilfered a mobile phone from near or at the crime scene: before? during? or after the crime? It doesn't prove murder or rape. I still can't forget that the phone was initially claimed by RTP to be Hannah's. As soon as RTP heard the upswell from social media showing it couldn't have been Hannah's, then RTP changed their tune and said it was David's phone. However, RTP also announced they had David's phone from the crime scene. No problem (for RTP), just tell the dumb-ass gullible public that David had two phones, ......on & on ad nauseum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Agreed but its very difficult when people make incorrect statements and they are called on it, then they still come back and attempt to play with words in a dishonest debate to try and hide their inaccuracies then its very difficult to resist. But I am trying T&C - you just need to correct the incorrect statements referencing a link and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philr Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) With respect to bickering; if someone makes a comment you do not agree with please make a comment, respectfully, once. Don't add anything personal. It's clear what the consequences will be. Closed thread, a disruption in dissemination of information and suspensions for those that have breached the clear, succinct guidance that has been given. This plays totally into the hands of those that may not want an open discussion of the topic and to no one else. It certainly does not contribute to an open discussion of the thread or to the delivery of justice for the sadly deceased, their families, the accused or to the perpetrators of this horrific crime. Whomever they are. If anyone needs a dog to walk or kettle to boil PM me. Respectfully, please think before hitting Post. Edited September 1, 2015 by philr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Just who is the antagonist in all of the closed threads? who is the common denominator? and they seem to get away with it too. Come on, let's leave all this out of the threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Seriously, is this true?????? Are you 100% sure that it were the "witnesses" that testified and not the suspects? If so, then AleG is really the lowest of the lowYes correct, it was the witnesses who testified in Oct on this. The B2 did not claim this in court on the 14th Oct. More misinformation from AleG that he claims as fact Misinformation bothering on outright lies. In order not to get drawn in and suspended for bickering, I'm glad that our command and comprehension of the English language is such that we fully understand the semantics of the English language to draw the right conclusion. No need to confer, haha. In my travels around the world, I notice sometimes that Spanish speakers struggle with it. I know that you, Thailandchilli and the rest of the gang think they are clever with your games about my identity, but in doing so you are just showing the faults on your character and how desperate you are to silence people through bullying and intimidation. I don't care who you are,what you are and if your male or female or alien. I do care however about right and wrong and honesty and dishonesty. I also care about justice and that it should be seen to be done despite whatever barriers,arguments and outright lies and dishonesty is offered up by authorities,RTP and even surprise surprise, posters on here. It's so sad that human nature is such that individuals and organisations can be manipulated by powers that be that have money and/or influence. Posters on here can read into this as much as they want! Justice will be done I'm sure of that but maybe not always how we think and not maybe in our time frame ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweatalot Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Agreed but its very difficult when people make incorrect statements and they are called on it, then they still come back and attempt to play with words in a dishonest debate to try and hide their inaccuracies then its very difficult to resist. But I am trying " its very difficult when people make incorrect statements and they are called on it, then they still come back " No it is not. Don't answer them directly. Don't let them involve you. Don't answer them, just make an independent post. make the correct statement. there was some mentioning of.... This is wrong. This is the fact.... Do not take them personal - and do not get personal. You have nothing in common with shills and trolls, have you and keep the thread short Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridge’s body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandLover Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) The hoe that was apparently not checked for any form of DNA from either the victims, or the alleged killers ? funny how they can get a DNA sample off a 20 baht note that's been handled by hundreds of people, and yet they didn't bother with the hoe.. Sterling police work indeed.. What about this Prosecution ace, did it ever manifest itself? It appears that the phone is more relevant to some people than the hoe itself, what about the DNA from the glass bottle that was "allegedly" used to kill David? That must have been submitted as evidence too, as this is what the bogus translator also claimed when he was a bona fide credible witness!!!! What about this Prosecution ace, did it ever manifest itself? No it did not. It was yet more misinformation spread by some posters on this forum. Before any of you ask, this has been confirmed to me personally by a source (who speaks fluent Thai) who was in court all day last Friday. Well, there's always today's Prosecution evidence, I suppose Edited September 1, 2015 by IslandLover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridges body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Oh dear, and so it goes on. What evidence that RTP said they had has actually stood up or been produced in court to add strength to there case...Nothing...!! The perfect case! Not. It's actually very very sad that people in this country are putting there faith in such a unprofessional and downright incompetent organisation. There's no way of disguising the fact. They haven't a clue and very sad for innocent people framed for crimes here. They haven't a chance with this set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridge’s body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Jesus thats pretty damning. We have been lead to believe by another RTP investigator that it was lost and now we have this in court! Wow, so there's a possibility that this could be the killers or at least somebody closely involved in the killings and as yet unidentified! But what we do know it did not belong to the B2 or David. The defense have not even started yet and we get this on the last day of the prosecution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandLover Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 The hoe that was apparently not checked for any form of DNA from either the victims, or the alleged killers ? funny how they can get a DNA sample off a 20 baht note that's been handled by hundreds of people, and yet they didn't bother with the hoe.. Sterling police work indeed.. What about this Prosecution ace, did it ever manifest itself? It appears that the phone is more relevant to some people than the hoe itself, what about the DNA from the glass bottle that was "allegedly" used to kill David? That must have been submitted as evidence too, as this is what the bogus translator also claimed when he was a bona fide credible witness!!!! What about this Prosecution ace, did it ever manifest itself? No it did not. It was yet more misinformation spread by some posters on this forum. Before any of you ask, this has been confirmed to me personally by a source (who speaks fluent Thai) who was in court all day last Friday. Well, there's always today's Prosecution evidence, I suppose Well, there's always today's Prosecution evidence, I suppose Oh wait, I spoke too soon - yet another round of "don't knows", obfuscation and downright lies http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridges body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Jesus thats pretty damning. We have been lead to believe by another RTP investigator that it was lost and now we have this in court! Wow, so there's a possibility that this could be the killers or at least somebody closely involved in the killings and as yet unidentified! But what we do know it did not belong to the B2 or David. The defense have not even started yet and we get this on the last day of the prosecution! Incredible isn't it. If not for the terrible tragedy that this case is about this court case shows up so much the RTP. As I've said many times the prosecution has been the best defense the B2 could have had. God knows what the real defense case has to offer. Not long to wait and am intrigued to hear what the forensic expert has to say. I feel that could be a massive addition to this trial. If I was the RTP I would be seriously worried as this is only going one way. God knows what they will do if they have to appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsailor35 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I'm going to just point out that you admit of not knowing what all the 65 witnesses (66 now it seems) testified yet decided that no evidence was presented, just because you don't know something doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Evidence was presented, the phone that some are trying very hard to pretend doesn't matter, DNA evidence, CCTV footage and witness testimony. Of course it's up to the judge to decide if that evidence warrants a guilt conviction but simply declaring that no evidence was presented is just not true. AleG please tell me where you got the information that all 65 witnesses have actually appeared in court, its only that your stating it as fact and I've seen no report on that, as far as I'm aware not even a third of the number have actually taken the witness stand. "As far as I know" is the key phrase there, once again I'm not the one making claims about how many witnesses have or have nottestified, so again, this is false "AleG please tell me where you got the information that all 65 witnesses have actually appeared in court, its only that your stating it as fact" because I stated no such thing. Why are these two allowed to keep on sniping and bickering with each other when everyone else are only interested in the case in point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridge’s body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Jesus thats pretty damning. We have been lead to believe by another RTP investigator that it was lost and now we have this in court! Wow, so there's a possibility that this could be the killers or at least somebody closely involved in the killings and as yet unidentified! But what we do know it did not belong to the B2 or David. The defense have not even started yet and we get this on the last day of the prosecution! Time to do some more DNA checking on that island the truth will come out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcomer71 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridge’s body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed I guess that holes in foot of prosecution and RTP are bigger than the Vredefort Crater by now... I just can't believe it. An unbelievable mix of incompetence, bullying, and misconducts. ...speechless... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eirene Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Oh but one of the Burmese had blond hair remember and then had time to go home and dye it before falling asleep. http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/three-migrant-workers-confess-rape-murder-british-tourists In a DM article dated September 16, 2014 it was stated - 'There was also a blond hair on a mobile telephone police have now located.' [DM articles not allowed] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linky Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Nigeone is absolutely correct. Who cares about who had the phone, who got rid of it, etc etc. that is all a nonsense because..... RTP have produced no evidence at all who the phone belonged to. All they have said in evidence is that someone else told them who it belonged to. That is not evidence, that is hearsay and under rules of evidence must be dismissed. The only way it can be used as evidence, as the RTP have staed the UK police told them, is for the UK representative to stae it as ebidence. Until that happens then the phone issue is completely not relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) World | Thu Jul 9, 2015 3:27pm BST Related: WORLD, UK Thai police say key DNA evidence in murders of Britons has been lost KOH SAMUI | BY PRAPAN CHANKAEW Thai police said on Thursday some key DNA evidence in the trial of two men for the murders of two British tourists had been lost or "finished" and so could not be retested as the defence has demanded. The trial of two Myanmar migrant workers, Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun began on Wednesday. The two men are accused of killing David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23. The high-profile case has raised questions about the competence of the investigation and the treatment of migrant labourers in Thailand. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/09/uk-thailand-britain-murder-idUKKCN0PJ1VI20150709 from that article The defence wants some evidence central to the case re-examined. But Police Lieutenant Colonel Somsak Nurod, who led the original investigation, said some evidence could no longer be re-tested as it had been lost, including a hair sample found in Witheridge’s hand Edited September 1, 2015 by StealthEnergiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changoverandout Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Just who is the antagonist in all of the closed threads? who is the common denominator? and they seem to get away with it too. Since after all these years (BTW congrat's George) I found the 'IGNORE' facility I do not have any problems with 'beer' related posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandLover Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 From the article by Sarah Yuen today: Mr Miller’s family are attending the latest round of court hearings on Koh Samui but Ms Witheridge’s family are not. They are receiving daily written reports instead. I wonder how that works, since no note-taking is allowed in court? It would seem that the Witheridge family are having to rely on the press reports from Sarah Yuen, just like the rest of us. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balo Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Guys, please stop the bickering... We risk the topic to be closed again and is not worth, really. The bickering just let win who wants to derail the thread and have it closed. Sorry to bother Agreed but its very difficult when people make incorrect statements and they are called on it, then they still come back and attempt to play with words in a dishonest debate to try and hide their inaccuracies then its very difficult to resist. But I am trying I agree this was a mistake , but so many things has been reported in the media and it's difficult to separate so called facts from badly written reports by the media , still we can discuss it here and state an opinon without the usual bickering . Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsailor35 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Thai police confirm British cooperation in Koh Tao case British police provided evidence to authorities in Thailand that tied two migrant workers to the murder of British backpackers last year, a court heard yesterday. Royal Thai Police Colonel Kissana Phathanacharoen confirmed to the Koh Samui court that a phone owned by one of the deceased, David Miller, 24, had been found discarded near the lodgings of the defendants. The UK National Crime Agency later identified the SIM card as being Mr Millers, he said. http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html Last place I would ditch a phone is near my lodging. All that deep blue to Chuck it in... The phone was dumped there by a friend of the defendants, they gave it to him to throw it away; I suppose giving an expensive phone to someone and saying "dump it in the sea" would sound a little suspicious. Bullpoo! How do you know that it was dumped there by a "friend" of the defendants? Some friend to dump a piece of incriminating evidence in the garden of the person who had given it to you to dispose of! And in any case, as I have said already, would they not have been more inclined to dispose of it themselves rather than involve a third (or fourth) party? Gotta say one thing for this Aleg guy. He made up his mind ages ago that the 2B were going to be guilty and is doing his best to convince the rest of us, even the independent thinkers. However sadly for him, all his one eyed nonsense is wasted, floating into the ether ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsailor35 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Did this someone see the hoe in its original location before or after the police arrived? When did this someone tell Mon? Did this someone give evidence in court? I am not saying you are wrong, but (to me) a more likely scenario is that Mon arranged the original crime scene and did not like it being altered. Your "more likely scenario" is that he arranged a murder scene practically at the doorsteps of his or his family's business? Really? No, seriously, really? How dense can some people get..... Let me type slowly so some posters won't get confused. The murder happened at that place. The murderer wished that it could have happened somewhere else but sadly, the victims (and nature, as it was starting to get light) wouldn't cooperate. Therefore, the murderer could not relocate the murder scene. There! What would normally have taken me 5 seconds to type took almost 20 seconds. Hope it's clear now. After what i have been reading from friend A . I very much doubt it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial The presence of a single blonde hair, clutched in the hand of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge after her death on the island of Koh Tao in Thailand, has proved that senior police officers gave contradictory evidence at her murder trial. The hair, which still had the root attached when it was found on Ms Witheridges body by the Royal Thai Police pathologist during her autopsy, was sent for testing. The strand test revealed it had not come from either 23 year-old Ms Witheridge, or Jersey tourist David Miller, 24, who was murdered alongside her. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Jesus thats pretty damning. We have been lead to believe by another RTP investigator that it was lost and now we have this in court! Wow, so there's a possibility that this could be the killers or at least somebody closely involved in the killings and as yet unidentified! But what we do know it did not belong to the B2 or David. The defense have not even started yet and we get this on the last day of the prosecution! Incredible isn't it. If not for the terrible tragedy that this case is about this court case shows up so much the RTP. As I've said many times the prosecution has been the best defense the B2 could have had. God knows what the real defense case has to offer. Not long to wait and am intrigued to hear what the forensic expert has to say. I feel that could be a massive addition to this trial. If I was the RTP I would be seriously worried as this is only going one way. God knows what they will do if they have to appeal. The article already quoted the forensic expert regarding the hair: "The police pathologist who carried out the autopsy said in July that the investigation had set the evidence aside because of the inconclusive test result." The "contradictory evidence" is how many times the Lt. Col Nurod met with the pathologist, calling that "evidence" is inaccurate, it's contradictory testimony not evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I know you don't realize how absurd your "scenarios" are. You are arguing that someone connected with the murder went out of his way to bring back the murder weapon to the crime scene. We are way under the Dunning-Kruger effect threshold now. As you say, someone connected to the murder bringing back the murder weapon to the crime scene would be absurd. However, let is change the scenario a little: You are arguing that someone connected with the murder went out of his way to bring back the alleged murder weapon to the crime scene. Let us suppose the hoe was not the main murder weapon, but someone wished to make it appear that way. Then, bringing it back into the murder scene is not so absurd any more, is it? As it happens, one of the first factors that created doubt in my mind about the police investigation was the clear impossibility of the hoe being the cause of most of the injuries, especially David's. I do believe the hoe was used to smash Hannahs head in. The other wounds were caused by something else (according to the Rohingha translators a wine bottle of which no trace has been found). Hannah's blood was found on the hoe, but none of David's. The hoe was not checked for the fingerprints or DNA of those who handled it (both would be expected to exist). Absurd or not, I believe it quite possible that the crime scene was manipulated, and local police sabotaged the investigation to protect the real perpetrators. Note that I say possible. I am not saying that it is in any way proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigeone Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 So why did they produce the evidence in court as it has no bearing on the prosecutions case. In fact if anything it undermines it as the hair was supposed to be another nail against the B2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 So why did they produce the evidence in court as it has no bearing on the prosecutions case. In fact if anything it undermines it as the hair was supposed to be another nail against the B2. While this is not totally clear, I think most of the information about the hair revealed during the trial has been elicited during cross examination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts