Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[Lite Beer]

Thai police used roti vendors as translators
By Michael Sainsbury

KOH SAMUI: -- Thai police used two Muslim Rohingya translators with a very poor grasp of the Thai language to interrogate two Rakhine men accused of murdering British backpackers, it was revealed in court yesterday.

One of the translators, Ko Ye, admitted to the Samui Central Court yesterday that he could not read or write Thai and barely understood the Rakhine dialect.

Under questioning from the defence, he said that he signed a statement confirming what happened in the interrogation even though he didn’t know what it said in Thai, and he wasn’t asked to sign it until a month afterward.

The two translators, both street roti sellers, were brought in by police after Ko Zaw Lin and Ko Wai Phyo, both 22, were detained on October 2, 2014. Ko Ye is from Surat Thani, while the other translator, Ko Kamar, is from Koh Tao.

The Myanmar migrant workers could face the death penalty if convicted of murdering David Miller, 24, and murdering and raping Hannah Witheridge, 23, in the early hours of September 15, 2014.

The trial is now in the third of its six weeks.

The defence maintains that the Rakhine natives are being scapegoated following a botched investigation that was rushed to clear Thailand’s marred image as a tourist paradise.

“The second roti seller has been on the stand today and it’s become very clear that he does not have much of grasp of Thai at all so we don’t understand how he could have translated for police,” Andy Hall, a British migrant rights advocate who is helping the defence team, told The Myanmar Times.

“As well there have been many police procedural issues exposed this week, including many inconsistencies in the timing of events around the arrest of the accused.”

Police witnesses have contradicted each other about the times of various events, including the arrest of the men, the taking of DNA samples and the times of their initial confessions, observers at the court said.

On August 19, Bangkok solicitor Pittaya Yaipetch claimed he was present during the confessions but did not make a report of the event, despite apparently being an observer for the Thai Lawyers Association.

“The suspect told the investigating police officer that he was with the co-accused on the beach at about 3am when the victims walked past them. He said they went to a place further along the beach and started kissing,” said Mr Yaipetch.

“Zaw Lin said he hit Mr Miller with a garden hoe while he was lying on top of Ms Witheridge but the victim jumped to his feet and tried to fight [Zaw Lin] off. That was when he hit him again and he fell down.”

Those confessions were allegedly obtained using the translation services of the roti sellers, but the confessions were later retracted.

Ko Zaw Lin and Ko Wai Phyo have accused both the police and the roti sellers of beating, stripping and blindfolding them.

The two Muslim men both denied using violence on the accused.

Mr Hall said that the accused remained upbeat during yesterday’s trial.

The mothers of the two men were present in court yesterday to witness the trial. The trial continues today.

Source: http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16101-thai-police-used-roti-vendors-as-translators.html

--MyanmarTimes 2015-08-21

[rockingrobin]

Thai police used roti vendors as translators

By Michael Sainsbury

KOH SAMUI: -- Thai police used two Muslim Rohingya translators with a very poor grasp of the Thai language to interrogate two Rakhine men accused of murdering British backpackers, it was revealed in court yesterday.

One of the translators, Ko Ye, admitted to the Samui Central Court yesterday that he could not read or write Thai and barely understood the Rakhine dialect.

Under questioning from the defence, he said that he signed a statement confirming what happened in the interrogation even though he didn’t know what it said in Thai, and he wasn’t asked to sign it until a month afterward.

The two translators, both street roti sellers, were brought in by police after Ko Zaw Lin and Ko Wai Phyo, both 22, were detained on October 2, 2014. Ko Ye is from Surat Thani, while the other translator, Ko Kamar, is from Koh Tao.

The Myanmar migrant workers could face the death penalty if convicted of murdering David Miller, 24, and murdering and raping Hannah Witheridge, 23, in the early hours of September 15, 2014.

The trial is now in the third of its six weeks.

The defence maintains that the Rakhine natives are being scapegoated following a botched investigation that was rushed to clear Thailand’s marred image as a tourist paradise.

“The second roti seller has been on the stand today and it’s become very clear that he does not have much of grasp of Thai at all so we don’t understand how he could have translated for police,” Andy Hall, a British migrant rights advocate who is helping the defence team, told The Myanmar Times.

“As well there have been many police procedural issues exposed this week, including many inconsistencies in the timing of events around the arrest of the accused.”

Police witnesses have contradicted each other about the times of various events, including the arrest of the men, the taking of DNA samples and the times of their initial confessions, observers at the court said.

On August 19, Bangkok solicitor Pittaya Yaipetch claimed he was present during the confessions but did not make a report of the event, despite apparently being an observer for the Thai Lawyers Association.

“The suspect told the investigating police officer that he was with the co-accused on the beach at about 3am when the victims walked past them. He said they went to a place further along the beach and started kissing,” said Mr Yaipetch.

“Zaw Lin said he hit Mr Miller with a garden hoe while he was lying on top of Ms Witheridge but the victim jumped to his feet and tried to fight [Zaw Lin] off. That was when he hit him again and he fell down.”

Those confessions were allegedly obtained using the translation services of the roti sellers, but the confessions were later retracted.

Ko Zaw Lin and Ko Wai Phyo have accused both the police and the roti sellers of beating, stripping and blindfolding them.

The two Muslim men both denied using violence on the accused.

Mr Hall said that the accused remained upbeat during yesterday’s trial.

The mothers of the two men were present in court yesterday to witness the trial. The trial continues today.

Source: http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16101-thai-police-used-roti-vendors-as-translators.html

--MyanmarTimes 2015-08-21

A procession of police witnesses have confirmed that both the suspects did not have any legal representation when they were being questioned.

Two impartial legal observers did sit in on their interviews but only after they had already confessed.

http://news.sky.com/story/1539151/koh-tao-murder-suspect-had-injuries-on-body

Therefore which confession did Pittaya Yaipetch witness

[IslandLover]

Yes he can speak Thai of course.....

Wrong Balo. He can't speak Thai well at all. That was proven yesterday when he didn't understand questions addressed to him in Thai, and when he couldn't make himself clear in Thai, when trying to respond. You can fool some Thais some of the time, but you can't fool any of them into thinking you speak Thai - when you don't.

Thai officials picking the roti seller to serve as interpreter is a microcosm of the whole screwed up mess orchestrated by Thai officialdom. Actually, to Balo's defense, the roti-seller probably speaks Thai better than....

....Thai forensic experts can determine a murder weapon, or

....Thai detectives can secure a crime scene, or

....Thai detectives can find clues and follow them, or

....Thai top brass can concoct a believable crime scenario for scapegoats.

Ok , but maybe you can enlighten me ?

What is his native language ? He was asked to be a translator and didnt understand a word? Does he speak and write in Burmese but not in the same dialect as the suspects ?

Did the local police had any alternatives at the island , to find someone that spoke both Thai and Burmese? Maybe the pancake seller was their only hope to try to communicate with the suspects? What do you think ?

What is his native language ? Bengali?

Does he speak and write in Burmese but not in the same dialect as the suspects ? Apparently, however his ability to write (and read) in any language is debatable.

[Basil B]

Tony or who ever you are. You could be a Jane or a Joe but anyway I fail to see why you wish to assassinate Andy Hall's character.

As far as I can see he has only done good for the MWRN.. For the Rights of Migrant workers in many cases. He has helped to raise funds so as Hannah and David's family can get a better and just result in the effort to find the killers of their children. He has sought support for some fair justice along with Chris Harkins and his petition. The defence lawyers and their support staff. Heidi Anna and her help as well as the ladies who have taken the B2 Mothers under their wing.

If the B2 are guilty so be it and a fair trial will prove without doubt if they are guilty.

Trying generate some animosity towards a selfless man only goes to lower your place in the human race doesn't?

Comments Welcome Below:

Reading in the Daily mail today it seems the two Burmese have suddenly changed their story and are now saying that they thought the woman was being raped and beat off the man to help.

​It sort of now makes a mockery of all those claiming to be a stitch up

Link here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3205844/Twist-British-backpacker-murder-trial-Two-accused-men-claim-thought-student-Hannah-Witheridge-raped-went-help-beach-Thailand.html

The Daily Mail article is wrong, this was reported first yesterday by Sky News:

Mr Kringkrai was released last December but, before that, he also acted as a translator during police interviews at the prison.

He said he heard both suspects confess to the rape and killing of Ms Witheridge, 23, and the murder of 24-year-old Mr Miller, when he was translating.

He said that they had told police they heard Ms Witheridge crying and saying repeatedly: "I'm sorry. I'm sorry".

They said they went over to see what was going on and saw Mr Miller on top of her.

Mr Kringkrai said Lin admitted picking up a garden hoe and hitting Mr Miller with it to get him off Ms Witheridge. Then Wei Phyo decided to rape her, Mr Kringkrai also said. http://news.sky.com/story/1539151/koh-tao-murder-suspect-had-injuries-on-body

My apologies Andy did tweet this,just the part about the bruising on the chest though, he left out the confession part ! more Balanced reporting from the great Human rights defender.

For those more intelligent of us we know Andy is on the side of the B2, his job is to defend them, and he is doing a great job of discrediting the the prosecution ...publicly.

If it were not for Andy the B2 would probably have already been fond guilty ...and buried.

[Tony121]

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/defence_team_reverse_demands_to_retest_dna_found_on_body_of_hannah_witheridge_1_4204183

[khunPer]

Another mystery to do with this case has never been explained. That is what is the legal status in Thailand of the two Rohingya pancake sellers who double up as police translators. Being Rohingyas they presumably don't have Burmese nationality and may in fact be stateless. Even if they have genuine Burmese or Bangladeshi passports, they cannot possibly have work permits and NON-B visas to work as pancake sellers and translators. Retail jobs are banned for foreigners and work permits are not supposed to be issued unless the foreign worker is employed by a properly registered business that is also registered for VAT, has paid-up capital of 2 million baht and employs at least 4 Thais for every foreigner. On the Thai TV interview, it looked like one of the pancake sellers was self employed running a one man stall which is certainly impossible for foreigners. Since they are illiterate in both Thai and Burmese they couldn't possibly get work permits as Thai-Burmese translators, since they would have to show their qualifications for the job.

If they have Thai ID cards, these are likely to be fake or illegally issued by corrupt district office officials (the going rate for Burmese to buy illegally issued Thai ID cards is allegedly 200,000 baht, usually in the name of a deceased Thai person). There is no way a stateless person born outside Thailand can legally become a naturalised Thai citizen. Even if they had Burmese or Bangladeshi nationality, they would need to be earning 80,000 baht a month with notarised tax receipts and be working for a proper company. Even so, foreigners leaving in Surat Province, where Samui is located, have reported that local officials refused to process naturalisation applications which meant the only way for them to do it was to get a house registration in Bangkok.

The chances that the two pancake sellers are legally residing and working in Thailand seems less than a snowball's chance in hell. That's probably why police are happy to employ them, knowing that they are beholden to police to be allowed to continue their happy illegal existences in the Kingdom.

The rules you refer to, Dogmatix, are the well known for farang-foreigners who wants to open a business or apply for Work Permit, but to my knowledge there are different rules for migrant workers from neighboring countries, i.e. Cambodia, Lao and Myanmar (perhaps also Malaysia…?). That’s why you can have migrant building construction workers in numbers being paid Thai minimum salary, waiters in restaurants (Myanmar people speaks fairly good English) etc.

For example, having a Work Permit for a Lao citizen do not require any number of Thai employees, the Work Permit last for 2 years including health insurance and it costs around 10,000 baht (including fee for agent doing application and all paperwork).

[IslandLover]

So the B2 went to save Hannah from rape, but after successfully defeating the "rapist" decide to rape and kill Hannah themselves? Wow, Ok.

The insinuation now is that it was David who was "raping" her. It goes from the sublime to the ridiculous and I feel really sorry for David's loyal girlfriend having to read about this.

[IslandLover]

Another mystery to do with this case has never been explained. That is what is the legal status in Thailand of the two Rohingya pancake sellers who double up as police translators. Being Rohingyas they presumably don't have Burmese nationality and may in fact be stateless. Even if they have genuine Burmese or Bangladeshi passports, they cannot possibly have work permits and NON-B visas to work as pancake sellers and translators. Retail jobs are banned for foreigners and work permits are not supposed to be issued unless the foreign worker is employed by a properly registered business that is also registered for VAT, has paid-up capital of 2 million baht and employs at least 4 Thais for every foreigner. On the Thai TV interview, it looked like one of the pancake sellers was self employed running a one man stall which is certainly impossible for foreigners. Since they are illiterate in both Thai and Burmese they couldn't possibly get work permits as Thai-Burmese translators, since they would have to show their qualifications for the job.

If they have Thai ID cards, these are likely to be fake or illegally issued by corrupt district office officials (the going rate for Burmese to buy illegally issued Thai ID cards is allegedly 200,000 baht, usually in the name of a deceased Thai person). There is no way a stateless person born outside Thailand can legally become a naturalised Thai citizen. Even if they had Burmese or Bangladeshi nationality, they would need to be earning 80,000 baht a month with notarised tax receipts and be working for a proper company. Even so, foreigners leaving in Surat Province, where Samui is located, have reported that local officials refused to process naturalisation applications which meant the only way for them to do it was to get a house registration in Bangkok.

The chances that the two pancake sellers are legally residing and working in Thailand seems less than a snowball's chance in hell. That's probably why police are happy to employ them, knowing that they are beholden to police to be allowed to continue their happy illegal existences in the Kingdom.

I'm out of "likes" for today again but what you have said is what many of us have been thinking for a long time. The surprise, for me at least, is that there are in fact two of these Rohingya "translators", not just the one who has been regularly pictured in the media and who has given interviews to the press. On the one hand the Thais treat the Rohingyas like sub-human dirt - but will gladly use them when it is to their advantage. Sick.

[IslandLover]

Certainly the decision will not be based on the snippets of biased opinion provided by the defense that have been the basis of the reporting on the proceedings; I think some people are setting themselves up for disappointment by embracing this bias.

I've become inured to disappointments, because there have been so many in this case. Here are a few:

>>> RTP didn't secure the crime scene

>>> RTP didn't look for clues

>>> CCTV footage on island either destroyed, not looked at or refused to be handed over. 2/3 of cameras purportedly broken.

>>> RTP's first investigative team said they knew who the criminals were and arrests were imminent. No arrests ensued.

>>> Brit team of experts were told they could show up. Then, a day later, just before they arrived, they were told they can do zero investigative work.

>>> Brit coroner told she would release findings on Jan. 6. Just before Jan.6, she says, nope, but maybe will release some finding in October.

>>> In late April, the court said defense could re-examine DNA evidence right away. Days later, the court said they would make a decision on the first day of the trial. First day came and went. Second day came and went, still no decision. Third day, a decision was made to make a decision. Now, weeks later, we still don't know if any DNA has been re-tested.

>>> Even if/when DNA is reexamined, the court is putting restrictions on what can be re-tested. Rule #1, nothing can be looked at which relates to any of the Headman's staff, buddies or family members.

Disappointments? Naw, everything is peaches and cream. The PM hit the nail on the head when he said, "this is a perfect investigation."

Best post of the day

[Tony121]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

[BritTim]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

[partington]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

This is the first piece of news that I have read that, if true, suggests maybe the Burmese have a case to answer after all.

[Dogmatix]

Another mystery to do with this case has never been explained. That is what is the legal status in Thailand of the two Rohingya pancake sellers who double up as police translators. Being Rohingyas they presumably don't have Burmese nationality and may in fact be stateless. Even if they have genuine Burmese or Bangladeshi passports, they cannot possibly have work permits and NON-B visas to work as pancake sellers and translators. Retail jobs are banned for foreigners and work permits are not supposed to be issued unless the foreign worker is employed by a properly registered business that is also registered for VAT, has paid-up capital of 2 million baht and employs at least 4 Thais for every foreigner. On the Thai TV interview, it looked like one of the pancake sellers was self employed running a one man stall which is certainly impossible for foreigners. Since they are illiterate in both Thai and Burmese they couldn't possibly get work permits as Thai-Burmese translators, since they would have to show their qualifications for the job.

If they have Thai ID cards, these are likely to be fake or illegally issued by corrupt district office officials (the going rate for Burmese to buy illegally issued Thai ID cards is allegedly 200,000 baht, usually in the name of a deceased Thai person). There is no way a stateless person born outside Thailand can legally become a naturalised Thai citizen. Even if they had Burmese or Bangladeshi nationality, they would need to be earning 80,000 baht a month with notarised tax receipts and be working for a proper company. Even so, foreigners leaving in Surat Province, where Samui is located, have reported that local officials refused to process naturalisation applications which meant the only way for them to do it was to get a house registration in Bangkok.

The chances that the two pancake sellers are legally residing and working in Thailand seems less than a snowball's chance in hell. That's probably why police are happy to employ them, knowing that they are beholden to police to be allowed to continue their happy illegal existences in the Kingdom.

The rules you refer to, Dogmatix, are the well known for farang-foreigners who wants to open a business or apply for Work Permit, but to my knowledge there are different rules for migrant workers from neighboring countries, i.e. Cambodia, Lao and Myanmar (perhaps also Malaysia…?). That’s why you can have migrant building construction workers in numbers being paid Thai minimum salary, waiters in restaurants (Myanmar people speaks fairly good English) etc.

For example, having a Work Permit for a Lao citizen do not require any number of Thai employees, the Work Permit last for 2 years including health insurance and it costs around 10,000 baht (including fee for agent doing application and all paperwork).

There are executive decrees published annually renewing regulations allowing workers from the 3 countries based on MOUs with each country. I am not sure if they specifically give exemption to all the regulations that apply to farangs and others but that seems implicit. However they are clearly not allowed to run their own businesses or operate roadside stalls and don't they are allowed to work in retail businesses or as waiters, although many do. They must also have passports which most Rohingya don't because they have no nationality. The who did the TV interview said he had been in Thailand 18 years. I don't think they can stay for that long continuously as the system is designed to prevent them settling in Thailand.

If they do have work permits as labourers from neighbouring countries, then it's illegal for them to do a professional job like a translator. You cant have it both ways. There's no way they could be 100% legal as foreigners or stateless people and no way they could legally have obtained Thai citizenship.

Edited August 21, 2015 by Dogmatix

[loonodingle]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

This is the first piece of news that I have read that, if true, suggests maybe the Burmese have a case to answer after all.

On the Contary. They dont need the hoe tested. All they need is the 2 profiles from the B2 which they will get. They have enough other evidence to win the case. Job done in the bag.

[silverado]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

This is the first piece of news that I have read that, if true, suggests maybe the Burmese have a case to answer after all.

On the Contary. They dont need the hoe tested. All they need is the 2 profiles from the B2 which they will get. They have enough other evidence to win the case. Job done in the bag.

''The suspects' lawyers said they no longer required re-testing of the DNA found on the victims' bodies, despite demanding it for months....''

''They said "it would serve no useful purpose"

maybe 'something' coming soon from UK will be more usefull ?

Edited August 21, 2015 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[simonuk]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

I would not want the testing done under the conditions imposed either. Totally pointless if you don't trust the authorities which clearly no one associated or familiar with the case does.

Very wise move by the defence although quite why they didn't see it coming I don't know.

The prosecution would never allow independant transparent testing as that may demonstrate that it was a fit up.

[loonodingle]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

I would not want the testing done under the conditions imposed either. Totally pointless if you don't trust the authorities which clearly no one associated or familiar with the case does.

Very wise move by the defence although quite why they didn't see it coming I don't know.

The prosecution would never allow independant transparent testing as that may demonstrate that it was a fit up.

This is only the DNA on the Hoe etc. NOT the DNA from the B2 which is still being processed as they can verify the chain and ist being done by Pornthips lab. She is due to give evidence for the defence.

They have enough other evidence to disprove the case. They are playing a smart game here.

[jimmybkk]

Despite all the Keystone Kops type comments on here, whatever the outcome of this trial, the Judge's will have to submit a report detailing the basis of their decision. In the West, a criminal trial is mostly held before a jury and the jury is not required to explain the basis of their decision. So if the 2 accused are indeed found guilty of these crimes, there will be, as required by Thai Criminal Procedure, a detailed report as to how the Judge's came to that conclusion which would also serve as the prime basis for any appeal.

Thai Criminal Procedure Code Section 182: After the trial is over,a judgement or order shall be given in accordance with the merits of the case. A judgement or order shall be read in open Court either on the day the trial is over or within three days from such date

Worth also mentioning that there is no verbatim transcript of the trial proceedings. Further, as in this case, independent observers can be prevented from recording what is said in court. Thus, what appears in the judge's official report may or may not reflect the evidence produced in court. It is up to the judge, and (by law) no one can criticize any conclusion he comes to, or question what the judge claims was the evidence produced in court.

Certainly the decision will not be based on the snippets of biased opinion provided by the defense that have been the basis of the reporting on the proceedings; I think some people are setting themselves up for disappointment by embracing this bias.

I have to agree with AleG on this one, at least regarding people being disappointed. The smoking gun in all of this is the DNA evidence that the RTP are claiming was found on/in the victim, and I think that it has already been decided that this evidence is strong enough on it's own to secure a conviction. Unless this evidence can be definitively shown to be inaccurate or inadmissible then these lads are doomed, and the collection and analysis of this evidence was notably kept in-house by the RTP. Even if the defense produce a UK coroner's report stating the cause of death as being a gunshot wound... So what? Or if the UK coroner found evidence of someone else's DNA on/in the victim... So what? Sure, it may raise a few gasps in the courtroom but is it admissible evidence? Probably not, and it's then just a case of the Thai coroner's assessment versus the UK coroner's assessment, and given that the Thai coroner had access to the bodies before they were embalmed, and given that the murders took place in Thailand I don't think the judge(s) would be putting his/their neck(s) on the line by choosing to go with the findings of the Thai coroner.

The only thing I can think of that would nullify that smoking gun DNA evidence would be irrefutable proof that the DNA kit used to retrieve the samples found in/on the body of the victim was past it's expiry date, or something very similar.

I also think that people will disappointed because they have underestimated the RTP. The way I see it is that the RTP are actually very good at what they do, but we struggle to see it because what they do is not what us foreigners hope/expect they will do. The cops who gave their testimony about DNA samples being used up... and no budget being available for saving any of the crime scene photos... and failing to check CCTV footage at the pier... etc. etc. I noticed that after this kind of testimony was reported there was a hint of optimism in the air, with some posters thinking the prosecution's case was falling over without even being contested. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the cops who gave their testimony in court were not just winging it and saying whatever came into their heads at the time, and despite what some may think this was definitely not a Keystone Kops scenario. This was what you may call a Columbo scenario and the RTP played it very well indeed.

For those not familiar with Columbo, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo

How does Columbo relate to this case? Well. whilst most of us were sniggering at the incompetence and ineptitude of the RTP that was on display in the courtroom for all to see, what was actually happening was that all additional evidence was being removed from the picture with no-one raising any complaints whatsoever...

And why would they do that? Well, in case by some miracle this trial does not result in a guilty verdict, or in case in a few years time there is a new government in place which perhaps has an axe to grind with certain people who are seen as being close friends with the current leadership and decides to re-open this case with a view to pressing charges against a certain person's son... What are the chances of anyone taking this case to trial again when the only surviving evidence that could perhaps be re-examined is the DNA that was found on/in the victim? And if that was not enough to secure a conviction this time round, what are the chances that it will be enough in the future...?

I would guess that someone with influence decided that he wanted no loose ends in this case that could perhaps come back and haunt either him or the ones he loves at some point in the future, and what's worrying is that 2 Burmese lads, who probably know a lot about what really happened that night, who are rotting in a Thai jail could definitely be considered loose ends.

[catsanddogs]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-thailand-blast-police-idUSKCN0QQ0ZM20150821

As deputy police chief, Chakthip has been the public face of other tourism-related cases in which concerns have been raised about the professionalism of the Thai police.

They include the murder of two British backpackers on the island of Koh Tao in September 2014. Two migrant workers from Myanmar are now on trial amid allegations that police failed to properly seal off the crime scene - a criticism also leveled after Monday's shrine blast - and bungled DNA evidence.

Edited August 21, 2015 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[loonodingle]

What if the institute for forensic sciences has already done the profile of the B2. And it doesnt match the profile in the file submitted by the prosecution.

Edited August 21, 2015 by loonodingle

[loonodingle]

Also remember the defence set them up to get the B2 profile tested. They had people from forensic sciences in the court waiting to ambush the prosecution. That was planned. They didnt just happened to be passing. Chain of custody is approved. This was planned and they have what they need now. Thai Columbo... at work.. hats of to them all.

Edited August 21, 2015 by loonodingle

[catsanddogs]

Despite all the Keystone Kops type comments on here, whatever the outcome of this trial, the Judge's will have to submit a report detailing the basis of their decision. In the West, a criminal trial is mostly held before a jury and the jury is not required to explain the basis of their decision. So if the 2 accused are indeed found guilty of these crimes, there will be, as required by Thai Criminal Procedure, a detailed report as to how the Judge's came to that conclusion which would also serve as the prime basis for any appeal.

Thai Criminal Procedure Code Section 182: After the trial is over,a judgement or order shall be given in accordance with the merits of the case. A judgement or order shall be read in open Court either on the day the trial is over or within three days from such date

Worth also mentioning that there is no verbatim transcript of the trial proceedings. Further, as in this case, independent observers can be prevented from recording what is said in court. Thus, what appears in the judge's official report may or may not reflect the evidence produced in court. It is up to the judge, and (by law) no one can criticize any conclusion he comes to, or question what the judge claims was the evidence produced in court.

Certainly the decision will not be based on the snippets of biased opinion provided by the defense that have been the basis of the reporting on the proceedings; I think some people are setting themselves up for disappointment by embracing this bias.

I have to agree with AleG on this one, at least regarding people being disappointed. The smoking gun in all of this is the DNA evidence that the RTP are claiming was found on/in the victim, and I think that it has already been decided that this evidence is strong enough on it's own to secure a conviction. Unless this evidence can be definitively shown to be inaccurate or inadmissible then these lads are doomed, and the collection and analysis of this evidence was notably kept in-house by the RTP. Even if the defense produce a UK coroner's report stating the cause of death as being a gunshot wound... So what? Or if the UK coroner found evidence of someone else's DNA on/in the victim... So what? Sure, it may raise a few gasps in the courtroom but is it admissible evidence? Probably not, and it's then just a case of the Thai coroner's assessment versus the UK coroner's assessment, and given that the Thai coroner had access to the bodies before they were embalmed, and given that the murders took place in Thailand I don't think the judge(s) would be putting his/their neck(s) on the line by choosing to go with the findings of the Thai coroner.

The only thing I can think of that would nullify that smoking gun DNA evidence would be irrefutable proof that the DNA kit used to retrieve the samples found in/on the body of the victim was past it's expiry date, or something very similar.

I also think that people will disappointed because they have underestimated the RTP. The way I see it is that the RTP are actually very good at what they do, but we struggle to see it because what they do is not what us foreigners hope/expect they will do. The cops who gave their testimony about DNA samples being used up... and no budget being available for saving any of the crime scene photos... and failing to check CCTV footage at the pier... etc. etc. I noticed that after this kind of testimony was reported there was a hint of optimism in the air, with some posters thinking the prosecution's case was falling over without even being contested. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the cops who gave their testimony in court were not just winging it and saying whatever came into their heads at the time, and despite what some may think this was definitely not a Keystone Kops scenario. This was what you may call a Columbo scenario and the RTP played it very well indeed.

For those not familiar with Columbo, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo

How does Columbo relate to this case? Well. whilst most of us were sniggering at the incompetence and ineptitude of the RTP that was on display in the courtroom for all to see, what was actually happening was that all additional evidence was being removed from the picture with no-one raising any complaints whatsoever...

And why would they do that? Well, in case by some miracle this trial does not result in a guilty verdict, or in case in a few years time there is a new government in place which perhaps has an axe to grind with certain people who are seen as being close friends with the current leadership and decides to re-open this case with a view to pressing charges against a certain person's son... What are the chances of anyone taking this case to trial again when the only surviving evidence that could perhaps be re-examined is the DNA that was found on/in the victim? And if that was not enough to secure a conviction this time round, what are the chances that it will be enough in the future...?

I would guess that someone with influence decided that he wanted no loose ends in this case that could perhaps come back and haunt either him or the ones he loves at some point in the future, and what's worrying is that 2 Burmese lads, who probably know a lot about what really happened that night, who are rotting in a Thai jail could definitely be considered loose ends.

The smoking gun in all of this is the DNA evidence that the RTP are claiming was found on/in the victim, and I think that it has already been decided that this evidence is strong enough on it's own to secure a conviction.

By Who?

Even if the defense produce a UK coroner's report stating the cause of death as being a gunshot wound... So what? Or if the UK coroner found evidence of someone else's DNA on/in the victim... So what?

So What!? Give me strength.

[smedly]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

this completely confuses me

the defense have requested to independently retest the dna but are now saying that there is no point - either

- prosecution/police are interfering (will be testimony for defense)

- or they have been told that the dna evidence from the victims is tainted spoiled or inaccurate (will be testimony for defense)

- or that the tests came back as a match

the great thing about forensics is that they can tell exactly where a sample came from

if we do not now hear testimony from the national forensics lab in Bangkok to say that tests were not possible or that the samples were untestable or that they couldn't perform their duties without interference - then this case takes a swing towards guilty

I suspect we will hear more about this if a certain forensic person is still called as a witness - if so her testimony will be a shocker, if she isn't called by the defense then that raises some serious questions for me

[balo]

I am very surprised , the defense team should know from the start that another DNA test would be performed in Thailand , in a Thai DNA lab. And they have asked for a retest, not only one time but repeatedly.

Suddenly they change their minds. Why ?

[loonodingle]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

this completely confuses me

the defense have requested to independently retest the dna but are now saying that there is no point - either

- prosecution/police are interfering (will be testimony for defense)

- or they have been told that the dna evidence from the victims is tainted spoiled or inaccurate (will be testimony for defense)

- or that the tests came back as a match

the great thing about forensics is that they can tell exactly where a sample came from

if we do not now hear testimony from the national forensics lab in Bangkok to say that tests were not possible or that the samples were untestable or that they couldn't perform their duties without interference - then this case takes a swing towards guilty

I suspect we will hear more about this if a certain forensic person is still called as a witness - if so her testimony will be a shocker, if she isn't called by the defense then that raises some serious questions for me

Its split into 2.

DNA from the B2 is STILL being tested. Results passed straight to defence.

its the Hoe etc they dont need it now. The profiles have been submitted already in case files. They dont need to argue it.

[loonodingle]

I bet that DNA sample left Koh Samui that night and has been processed already. They are happy with profiles received as it doesnt match the case profile submitted. ...

just my two pennys worth...

[smedly]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

I would not want the testing done under the conditions imposed either. Totally pointless if you don't trust the authorities which clearly no one associated or familiar with the case does.

Very wise move by the defence although quite why they didn't see it coming I don't know.

The prosecution would never allow independant transparent testing as that may demonstrate that it was a fit up.

actually I would have given a cautious trust to Porntip Rojanasunan, like I said above if she still appears in court then she will have something shocking to say about this case, if the prosecution call her as a witness then all bets are off

[smedly]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

I would not want the testing done under the conditions imposed either. Totally pointless if you don't trust the authorities which clearly no one associated or familiar with the case does.

Very wise move by the defence although quite why they didn't see it coming I don't know.

The prosecution would never allow independant transparent testing as that may demonstrate that it was a fit up.

This is only the DNA on the Hoe etc. NOT the DNA from the B2 which is still being processed as they can verify the chain and ist being done by Pornthips lab. She is due to give evidence for the defence.

They have enough other evidence to disprove the case. They are playing a smart game here.

don't know what happened to my post here as it was blank when I looked so I will try again

ah ok, so my posts above are somewhat useless since I assumed something different - I should know better but hey late in the morning for me after a night out lol ​

Edited August 21, 2015 by smedly

[smedly]

Despite all the Keystone Kops type comments on here, whatever the outcome of this trial, the Judge's will have to submit a report detailing the basis of their decision. In the West, a criminal trial is mostly held before a jury and the jury is not required to explain the basis of their decision. So if the 2 accused are indeed found guilty of these crimes, there will be, as required by Thai Criminal Procedure, a detailed report as to how the Judge's came to that conclusion which would also serve as the prime basis for any appeal.

Thai Criminal Procedure Code Section 182: After the trial is over,a judgement or order shall be given in accordance with the merits of the case. A judgement or order shall be read in open Court either on the day the trial is over or within three days from such date

Worth also mentioning that there is no verbatim transcript of the trial proceedings. Further, as in this case, independent observers can be prevented from recording what is said in court. Thus, what appears in the judge's official report may or may not reflect the evidence produced in court. It is up to the judge, and (by law) no one can criticize any conclusion he comes to, or question what the judge claims was the evidence produced in court.

Certainly the decision will not be based on the snippets of biased opinion provided by the defense that have been the basis of the reporting on the proceedings; I think some people are setting themselves up for disappointment by embracing this bias.

I have to agree with AleG on this one, at least regarding people being disappointed. The smoking gun in all of this is the DNA evidence that the RTP are claiming was found on/in the victim, and I think that it has already been decided that this evidence is strong enough on it's own to secure a conviction. Unless this evidence can be definitively shown to be inaccurate or inadmissible then these lads are doomed, and the collection and analysis of this evidence was notably kept in-house by the RTP. Even if the defense produce a UK coroner's report stating the cause of death as being a gunshot wound... So what? Or if the UK coroner found evidence of someone else's DNA on/in the victim... So what? Sure, it may raise a few gasps in the courtroom but is it admissible evidence? Probably not, and it's then just a case of the Thai coroner's assessment versus the UK coroner's assessment, and given that the Thai coroner had access to the bodies before they were embalmed, and given that the murders took place in Thailand I don't think the judge(s) would be putting his/their neck(s) on the line by choosing to go with the findings of the Thai coroner.

The only thing I can think of that would nullify that smoking gun DNA evidence would be irrefutable proof that the DNA kit used to retrieve the samples found in/on the body of the victim was past it's expiry date, or something very similar.

I also think that people will disappointed because they have underestimated the RTP. The way I see it is that the RTP are actually very good at what they do, but we struggle to see it because what they do is not what us foreigners hope/expect they will do. The cops who gave their testimony about DNA samples being used up... and no budget being available for saving any of the crime scene photos... and failing to check CCTV footage at the pier... etc. etc. I noticed that after this kind of testimony was reported there was a hint of optimism in the air, with some posters thinking the prosecution's case was falling over without even being contested. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the cops who gave their testimony in court were not just winging it and saying whatever came into their heads at the time, and despite what some may think this was definitely not a Keystone Kops scenario. This was what you may call a Columbo scenario and the RTP played it very well indeed.

For those not familiar with Columbo, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo

How does Columbo relate to this case? Well. whilst most of us were sniggering at the incompetence and ineptitude of the RTP that was on display in the courtroom for all to see, what was actually happening was that all additional evidence was being removed from the picture with no-one raising any complaints whatsoever...

And why would they do that? Well, in case by some miracle this trial does not result in a guilty verdict, or in case in a few years time there is a new government in place which perhaps has an axe to grind with certain people who are seen as being close friends with the current leadership and decides to re-open this case with a view to pressing charges against a certain person's son... What are the chances of anyone taking this case to trial again when the only surviving evidence that could perhaps be re-examined is the DNA that was found on/in the victim? And if that was not enough to secure a conviction this time round, what are the chances that it will be enough in the future...?

I would guess that someone with influence decided that he wanted no loose ends in this case that could perhaps come back and haunt either him or the ones he loves at some point in the future, and what's worrying is that 2 Burmese lads, who probably know a lot about what really happened that night, who are rotting in a Thai jail could definitely be considered loose ends.

dna does not expire, it doesn't need to be kept in a fridge either

[partington]

Defense no longer want DNA tested, (another news source)

http://news.sky.com/story/1539622/mother-sobs-over-backpacker-murder-re-enactment

The defense always wanted transparent, independent DNA testing. In the end, it appears they could not achieve this, and having the RTP control another round of testing did not seem a good idea.

this completely confuses me

the defense have requested to independently retest the dna but are now saying that there is no point - either

- prosecution/police are interfering (will be testimony for defense)

- or they have been told that the dna evidence from the victims is tainted spoiled or inaccurate (will be testimony for defense)

- or that the tests came back as a match

the great thing about forensics is that they can tell exactly where a sample came from

if we do not now hear testimony from the national forensics lab in Bangkok to say that tests were not possible or that the samples were untestable or that they couldn't perform their duties without interference - then this case takes a swing towards guilty

I suspect we will hear more about this if a certain forensic person is still called as a witness - if so her testimony will be a shocker, if she isn't called by the defense then that raises some serious questions for me

Its split into 2.

DNA from the B2 is STILL being tested. Results passed straight to defence.

its the Hoe etc they dont need it now. The profiles have been submitted already in case files. They dont need to argue it.

The DNA evidence being discussed is the rape kit DNA taken from inside the victim's body, and which was said to match the suspects. If real DNA evidence exists that cannot be contested or discredited, showing that the two Burmese left DNA inside the victim's body then the two will be, and probably should be, found guilty.

It is this evidence which has to be shown to be wrong for the case to be thrown out. Furthermore it is usual in western courts for prosecution to argue that if retesting of DNA samples is offered to the defence and not taken up, then the defence cannot justifiably contest what the prosecution say that the DNA evidence shows. One of the main reasons for believing that the defence were convinced of the innocence of their clients was their insistence on having the rape kit samples retested, and now this has gone. This is a reversal that is very hard to understand: there is almost no good reason not to retest unless you are afraid the result won't help your case.

As others have pointed out, expecting that evidence apparently gathered by personnel in the UK weeks after the bodies left Thai custody (if this really exists) will be admissible or accepted in the Thai court is probably unwise. No country's courts would be likely to accept that after remains have been completely forensically examined, released to the families and have been out of the legal jurisdiction of the country for weeks, that new evidence apparently gathered by workers in another country would be admissable, since no verification at all that the bodies weren't contaminated or tampered with is possible.

So the idea that evidence gathered like this will somehow trump the Thai forensic evidence is very unrealistic indeed.