Jump to content

Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui


webfact

Recommended Posts

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Are they in court again today?

The media coverage has disappeared almost completely.

The prosecution's final two days on 27-8 this month, followed by the defence in Spetember 1-2, 11 (Ms Porntip), 22-25, Judge wrapping up on 26, verdict end October.

Thanks Stephen. The way they've spaced out this trial seems mad off the wall. I know Thailand is somewhat noted for the excruciatingly slow speed under which the wheels of it's justice system turn, but still.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

That goes up there as being in the top 10 of the most bizarre statements made by Aleg. Completely lost touch with reality.

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she had been shot that would have stood up like a sore thumb during a post-mortem, that the UK authorities also carried out. There is no way that after that the UK police would had briefed the families and if they'd found evidence of a gunshot then the families would come out saying the two men on trial had a hard case to answer for.

This gunshot theory is ridiculous, it comes from online speculation from people that watch too much CSI themed TV shows.

One more, but here one do not fear ridiculous ... rolleyes.gif

It's what happens with people that become trapped in Groupthink, they just don't realize how they look from the outside.

Tell me if anything of this sounds familiar:

"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

Edit to add the second paragraph:

"Loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates its own abilities in decision-making, and significantly underrates the abilities of its opponents (the "outgroup"). Furthermore, groupthink can produce dehumanizing actions against the "outgroup"."

Edited by AleG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

That goes up there as being in the top 10 of the most bizarre statements made by Aleg. Completely lost touch with reality.

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You seem to forget all the other news but of course the other news fails to fit in with your own peculiar world, I'm not going to repeat it all for you look at all the reports, theres plenty of them if you hadn't noticed

Edited by thailandchilli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Thai Penal Code Section 330: In case of defamation, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punished.

Edited by JLCrab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That goes up there as being in the top 10 of the most bizarre statements made by Aleg. Completely lost touch with reality.

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You must be very impressed with the way the Police have handled this case AleG. It really has been a textbook open and shut case. The Police have been thorough in every aspect, not overlooking any key investigation paths, being perfectly consistent with their press releases, and all their officers that stood up to give evidence at the trial were highly knowledgeable about the case and could answer every question pertaining to the details of the DNA evidence and other artifacts found at the scene. It just surprises me they haven't got a straight up guilty verdict already. It's easy to see why you have such unshakeable confidence in them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she had been shot that would have stood up like a sore thumb during a post-mortem, that the UK authorities also carried out. There is no way that after that the UK police would had briefed the families and if they'd found evidence of a gunshot then the families would come out saying the two men on trial had a hard case to answer for.

This gunshot theory is ridiculous, it comes from online speculation from people that watch too much CSI themed TV shows.

One more, but here one do not fear ridiculous ... rolleyes.gif

It's what happens with people that become trapped in Groupthink, they just don't realize how they look from the outside.

Tell me if anything of this sounds familiar:

"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

You associate very often with psychological theories and then attempt to project them onto those you do not agree with, I think your actually projecting your own symptoms. Rather unsuccessfully I may add but carry on trying, its amusing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Thai Penal Code Section 330: In case of defamation, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punished.

That "if" should be in letters ten foot tall methinks, particularly if the side making the defamation lawsuit is economically stronger than the party he is sue-ing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You seem to forget all the other news but of course the other news fails to fit in with your own peculiar world, I'm not going to repeat it all for you look at all the reports, theres plenty of them if you hadn't noticed

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Thai Penal Code Section 330: In case of defamation, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punished.

Yup it does. In much the same way it says that if the prosecution cannot prove the guilt of the B2, then they will be found innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You seem to forget all the other news but of course the other news fails to fit in with your own peculiar world, I'm not going to repeat it all for you look at all the reports, theres plenty of them if you hadn't noticed

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Oh, and I'm sure you won't, not here in Thailand, Paragon of justice and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You seem to forget all the other news but of course the other news fails to fit in with your own peculiar world, I'm not going to repeat it all for you look at all the reports, theres plenty of them if you hadn't noticed

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Here's a couple for you, confessions made under alleged torture admissible in court, video confessions made just a few hours after alleged torture admissible in court, the list goes on but I'll leave that for you to find out, its all available freely in a place called Google

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take 2: Thai Penal Code Section 330: In case of defamation, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punished.

It suggests that one have one's proof lined up before making any potentially libelous statement and not try to assemble such proof in arrears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That goes up there as being in the top 10 of the most bizarre statements made by Aleg. Completely lost touch with reality.

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You must be very impressed with the way the Police have handled this case AleG. It really has been a textbook open and shut case. The Police have been thorough in every aspect, not overlooking any key investigation paths, being perfectly consistent with their press releases, and all their officers that stood up to give evidence at the trial were highly knowledgeable about the case and could answer every question pertaining to the details of the DNA evidence and other artifacts found at the scene. It just surprises me they haven't got a straight up guilty verdict already. It's easy to see why you have such unshakeable confidence in them.

Not that it would make any difference to explain...

No, I'm not very impressed with the police investigation but that doesn't mean that I'm going to jump in the "They are scapegoats" bandwagon, let alone buy into the myriad conspiracy theories being thrown around.

Just because the police doesn't live up to some ideal of professionalism it doesn't mean that the men on trial are innocent, by that argument every single inmate in Thai prisons should be set free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Here's a couple for you, confessions made under alleged torture admissible in court, video confessions made just a few hours after alleged torture admissible in court, the list goes on but I'll leave that for you to find out, its all available freely in a place called Google

By that standard the court should throw out any and all evidence if there are allegations against it.

No sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Here's a couple for you, confessions made under alleged torture admissible in court, video confessions made just a few hours after alleged torture admissible in court, the list goes on but I'll leave that for you to find out, its all available freely in a place called Google

By that standard the court should throw out any and all evidence if there are allegations against it.

No sale.

As I said, you've completely lost touch with reality, the real world is concerned at this trial, you are not, there's nothing else to discuss with you. Perhaps you should set up your own thread along with your friends that way you'll have your own little world all to yourselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That goes up there as being in the top 10 of the most bizarre statements made by Aleg. Completely lost touch with reality.

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You must be very impressed with the way the Police have handled this case AleG. It really has been a textbook open and shut case. The Police have been thorough in every aspect, not overlooking any key investigation paths, being perfectly consistent with their press releases, and all their officers that stood up to give evidence at the trial were highly knowledgeable about the case and could answer every question pertaining to the details of the DNA evidence and other artifacts found at the scene. It just surprises me they haven't got a straight up guilty verdict already. It's easy to see why you have such unshakeable confidence in them.

Not that it would make any difference to explain...

No, I'm not very impressed with the police investigation but that doesn't mean that I'm going to jump in the "They are scapegoats" bandwagon, let alone buy into the myriad conspiracy theories being thrown around.

Just because the police doesn't live up to some ideal of professionalism it doesn't mean that the men on trial are innocent, by that argument every single inmate in Thai prisons should be set free.

Every couple of years they virtually are, under royal amnesty.

Then they get down to re-offending.

So you concede the police work has been weak. It does interest me to know what has instilled your firm belief in the guilt of the accused though. If you disregard the confessions they made and signed under the instruction of illiterate translators, which other pieces of evidence have convinced you. Oh, right, the DNA samples, yawn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then, what has been unfair about the trial so far?

Latest news were that the defense has been allowed to retest the DNA evidence from the autopsy, which they refused. How unfair. rolleyes.gif

You seem to forget all the other news but of course the other news fails to fit in with your own peculiar world, I'm not going to repeat it all for you look at all the reports, theres plenty of them if you hadn't noticed

Of course you can't provide an example, it's better to insinuate and make allegations, typical CYAism.

I have not seen one single report showing any of the court proceedings as being biased or unfair against the defendants, not one, zero, none.

Ask at the end of the trial if/when the court finds them guilty even with no evidence.

Plus there is no court transcript and no note taking allowed. That in itself opens the court to bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignore the guy, he has nothing to offer but an extremely biased opinion. The only problem there is his posts go unquestioned,, I guess it's a good thing nobody is taking him seriously, anyways.

As I cited:

"Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

And of course the positive reinforcement reward of the "Like" by fellow group members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Thai Penal Code Section 330: In case of defamation, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punished.

Probably isn't easy to prove mafia are mafia

Surely isn't safe to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

Actually, what the trial is proving is that the doomsayers that claimed they would not receive a fair trial were completely wrong. Certainly what the trial is not doing is proving any of your fantasies regarding people of whom you don't even know their names right.

Incidentally, talking about trials proving things.

"Khaosod newspaper apologized for two headlines suggesting the Warot Toovichian, the son of a village chief on Koh Tao, was responsible for the savage murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island.

The newspaper also accused Warot, 22, of being the son of local “mafia” in two articles published on 24 and 25 Sept.

“We have verified facts and discovered that the aforementioned news items were inaccurate,” a statement published in today’s newspaper read.

It added the newspaper paid compensation of an undisclosed amount to Warot’s family."

The Kaosod newspaper admitting it called the Headman 'mafia' doesn't mean that Kaosod was wrong in using that word. All it means is it was demeaning to the Headman's family. If I call ISIS a 'terrorist organization' and ISIS sued me for defamation, then they would probably win. But it doesn't negate the fact that ISIS are terrorists.

Anyone familiar with Thailand knows that defamation of character lawsuits are readily used by rich and influential people to try and shut others down. Thaksin was particularly famous for such lawsuits. He tried to sue a young newspaper reporter for writing some some truth about his corrupt activities. The case didn't rest on whether the reporter was right or wrong in her assertion. It only rested on whether Thaksin was defamed by such revelations. Similar to the recent Headman's lawsuit.

Defamation of character lawsuits are also a major reason why Thailand does not have any debates leading up to elections. Candidates are too spooked by being sued. The big losers are the Thai people, and that's a big reason why they keep electing poor quality politicians.

Basically they can not substantiate their claim...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that it would make any difference to explain...

No, I'm not very impressed with the police investigation but that doesn't mean that I'm going to jump in the "They are scapegoats" bandwagon, let alone buy into the myriad conspiracy theories being thrown around.

Just because the police doesn't live up to some ideal of professionalism it doesn't mean that the men on trial are innocent, by that argument every single inmate in Thai prisons should be set free.

Every couple of years they virtually are, under royal amnesty.

Then they get down to re-offending.

So you concede the police work has been weak. It does interest me to know what has instilled your firm belief in the guilt of the accused though. If you disregard the confessions they made and signed under the instruction of illiterate translators, which other pieces of evidence have convinced you. Oh, right, the DNA samples, yawn.

How about first you ponder on why you think that I have a firm belief in the guilt of the accused?

I don't, there's a very real possibility that they are guilty, also that they are innocent; but unlike others I'm not going to simply declare them innocent because that would fit with some preconceived notions or summarily dismiss any evidence of the basis of not liking what it may lead to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AleG, on 24 Aug 2015 - 13:13, said:snapback.png


As I cited:

"Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

And of course the positive reinforcement reward of the "Like" by fellow group members.

Yes I noticed Happy Joe liked one of your posts, yipee for you!!

Edited by thailandchilli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that it would make any difference to explain...

No, I'm not very impressed with the police investigation but that doesn't mean that I'm going to jump in the "They are scapegoats" bandwagon, let alone buy into the myriad conspiracy theories being thrown around.

Just because the police doesn't live up to some ideal of professionalism it doesn't mean that the men on trial are innocent, by that argument every single inmate in Thai prisons should be set free.

Every couple of years they virtually are, under royal amnesty.

Then they get down to re-offending.

So you concede the police work has been weak. It does interest me to know what has instilled your firm belief in the guilt of the accused though. If you disregard the confessions they made and signed under the instruction of illiterate translators, which other pieces of evidence have convinced you. Oh, right, the DNA samples, yawn.

How about first you ponder on why you think that I have a firm belief in the guilt of the accused?

I don't, there's a very real possibility that they are guilty, also that they are innocent; but unlike others I'm not going to simply declare them innocent because that would fit with some preconceived notions or summarily dismiss any evidence of the basis of not liking what it may lead to.

Fair enough, If you are claiming to sit on the fence, then I can't fault you. I just didn't get that vibe from your posts to date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that it would make any difference to explain...

No, I'm not very impressed with the police investigation but that doesn't mean that I'm going to jump in the "They are scapegoats" bandwagon, let alone buy into the myriad conspiracy theories being thrown around.

Just because the police doesn't live up to some ideal of professionalism it doesn't mean that the men on trial are innocent, by that argument every single inmate in Thai prisons should be set free.

Every couple of years they virtually are, under royal amnesty.

Then they get down to re-offending.

So you concede the police work has been weak. It does interest me to know what has instilled your firm belief in the guilt of the accused though. If you disregard the confessions they made and signed under the instruction of illiterate translators, which other pieces of evidence have convinced you. Oh, right, the DNA samples, yawn.

How about first you ponder on why you think that I have a firm belief in the guilt of the accused?

I don't, there's a very real possibility that they are guilty, also that they are innocent; but unlike others I'm not going to simply declare them innocent because that would fit with some preconceived notions or summarily dismiss any evidence of the basis of not liking what it may lead to.

The problem is that even if they are guilty there is no western court that would convict based on what the RTP have presented, every process - procedure - protocol that I can think of has not been followed and these are not western standards - they are very basic international standards - watchin Mon (an initial suspect) trampling all over the crime scene was the start of a massive catalog of errors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTP apologists and Nomsod shielders have been telling us (those of us seeking truth and justice) for nearly a year ...."just wait until the trial starts. Then all will be made clear. The Police are professionals and they know a whole lot more about this crime then any of us do."

Some of them even projected their wrong-headed fantasy to include the families: "How can you second guess the victims' families?! They were briefed by British experts. They know a lot more about the case than we do....."

Well, Nomsod lovers, you're flat out 100% wrong. The trial has been proving what we said all along: The RTP doesn't have a clue, literally. Actually, I thought the RTP would pull a better ruse than they have shown thus far. Are they intentionally bumbling even more than they would ordinarily bumble? The mind reels.

It's a little bit to early for you to say the trial has been proving everything wrong and why are you bringing Nomsods name into this , he is not on trial .

I think we should wait until the trial has finished before we should come up with a conclusion .

You might be right about RTP and the coverup but it will always end up as speculations until we have evidence that will stand up in court.

Now since this is a Thai court and two Burmese guys are on trial , you will not accept any possible "facts" from the police anyway , and we all know the most likely outcome will end up with them being released . If that happens speculations and rumors will carry on for years to come . Maybe even on Thaivisa.

Edited by balo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres only 3 authorities to receive information from I think. Police FCO and the Coroners Office.

If it's anything to do with DNA, the obvious source is from the Coroners Office. The pathologist's report, perhaps?

You're on the right track today Stephen.

All the lawyers statements are coded. He makes a statement with omissions. The omissions are the thing he cannot tell you due to the case being in court.

Like the DNA last week. He got his results and then promptly said you know what we dont need any further testing we can prove our case on what we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...