thailandchilli Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Also why is it on the funding page it clearly says that the B2 had been in Thailand for several years, Yet when Charlie Campbell interviewed the B2 for time.com they said 2 years ? If it's 2 years or 3 years why is it relevant ? Because this is what these posters try to do here, create doubt and look for anything they can to damage the B2's credibility. It's always funny, though.. How bad they are at it. I mean, really? You're drawing some kind of conclusion from a discrepancy in how long the B2 have lived in Thailand.... Look, what they did before doesn't much matter, what matters is what they were doing when David and Hannah were taken away. I bet there are all kinds of things in Campbell's article you don't want to talk about, eh WRG? What was your last nic? Ninjagirl? Yes Ninjagirl was her last profile where she admitted she was in her teens and not yet old enough to drink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHITEROCKGIRL Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Also why is it on the funding page it clearly says that the B2 had been in Thailand for several years, Yet when Charlie Campbell interviewed the B2 for time.com they said 2 years ? If it's 2 years or 3 years why is it relevant ? Maybe there was a translation problem? Damn wheres that roti seller when you need him! Read the interview there are plenty mentions of numbers in there http://time.com/3955081/thailand-koh-tao-murder-david-miller-hannah-witheridge-zaw-lin-wai-phyo-burma-myanmar/ I don't think you can blame it on the translator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Follow Andy Hall@Atomicalandy Witness 1 day 12 Koh Tao trial is officer who formally conduct 4 interview with accused Zaw Lin/Wai Phyo that forms their confessions/denial 11:01 PM - 27 Aug 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHITEROCKGIRL Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Why did the defense not give the passport of one of the accused to the court till december ? Who had it all that time ? They are undocumented workers which means no paperwork. The first thing the police do in the western world is a background check to see if you have a criminal record they need some sort of ID for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHITEROCKGIRL Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 As for letting ferries leave the island at 5 in the morning this is more clever than stupid there are plenty more police on the mainland to deal with any potential suspects getting of the ferry than Koh Tao. And there is a good chance that if the murderer was a tourist they would have fled as soon as possible like the bomber in Bangkok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Breaking News Koh Tao murder trial: Defendents did not have representation during interrogations, court hears Thai Police have confirmed the two defendants in the Koh Tao murder trial did not have any legal representation when they were confessing to the killings of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge and fellow British backpacker David Miller. Police Colonel Prathoom Ruangtong, who initially took charge of the investigation, after the bodies of the pair were found on Sairee Beach in Koh Tao, last September, confirmed the two Burmese immigrant workers had not been provided with their own lawyers. Zaw Lin and Wei Phyo, both aged 22, are alleged to have confessed separately to the crimes, but they both maintain they were threatened and tortured to admit their guilt. They both retracted their confessions after they were charged. Trial judges on the neighbouring island of Koh Samui, have been hearing evidence from prosecution witnesses since early July, and it will be the turn of the pro-bono defence lawyers to present their evidence from next week. http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/koh_tao_murder_trial_defendents_did_not_have_representation_during_interrogations_court_hears_1_4211590 Good post, another glaring contradiction is that an RTP witness a few weeks back claimed to have not checked the pier CCTV whereas this other RTP witness yesterday claimed they did check it and it showed nothing. This is outrageous, which one is it? Either one or both of them are lying, also I agree with some later posts about david's phone. Just a verbal claim that it was from a nameless person who can't be contacted to verify. Pathetic Like the nameless person who made the call to police after discovering the bodies.As if that were true for Christ's sake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Follow Andy Hall@Atomicalandy Witness 1 day 12 Koh Tao trial is officer who formally conduct 4 interview with accused Zaw Lin/Wai Phyo that forms their confessions/denial 11:01 PM - 27 Aug 2015 That will be interesting, so he'll be one of the officers who allegedly tortured them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Circus over soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy C Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? Edited August 28, 2015 by Amy C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 If you count the number of posters here who believe that the prosecution has a case that they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, you would be able to do it without having to take your socks off. So, if the case ends up in a not guilty verdict, what will these people rely on as the evidence that would be worthy of appeal. In countries with a "modern" court system, an appeal is granted where an error in law is made, not on the evidence that the prosecution presented / failed to present. I can't wait to hear the excuses..... I hate to be a pessimist, but we shall not know the full evidence ascribed to the prosecution until the judge presents his report at the end of the trial. This report will not be based on a verbatim transcript, but the judge's interpretation. Of course, the prosecution case is weak, but a guilty verdict is quite possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jai Dee Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 A number of posts containing defamation, flames, and off-topic comments have been removed from this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? When he left, he had already been roughed up by the police once. He knew they were looking for scapegoats, and he was one of the leading candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? Possibly because he got word that he was in line for a frame up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? The better question would be: If he was guilty, why would he go to his room immediately after the crime and snooze like a baby? Additionally: if he was guilty, he would want to split (or he would at least act erratically afterwards). He'd have blood on him and his clothes, so he'd be crazed about cleaning everything. The trip on the ferry happened two weeks after the crime, for krysaches. Also, as Stephen has mentioned several times: locals would be literally up in arms - swarming to the Burmeses' dwelling to string the guys up - if they thought he did it. Locals usually know about such things. Heck, locals didn't even call out or throw anything when witnessing the reenactment. Ordinarily, Thais would be livid during a reenactment - particularly for such a heinous crime which impacts so badly on the island's reputation. The islanders know the boys didn't do the crime. Most know who did it, but for obvious reasons (they want to stay alive), they ain't tellin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy C Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? The better question would be: If he was guilty, why would he go to his room immediately after the crime and snooze like a baby? Additionally: if he was guilty, he would want to split (or he would at least act erratically afterwards). He'd have blood on him and his clothes, so he'd be crazed about cleaning everything. The trip on the ferry happened two weeks after the crime, for krysaches. Also, as Stephen has mentioned several times: locals would be literally up in arms - swarming to the Burmeses' dwelling to string the guys up - if they thought he did it. Locals usually know about such things. Heck, locals didn't even call out or throw anything when witnessing the reenactment. Ordinarily, Thais would be livid during a reenactment - particularly for such a heinous crime which impacts so badly on the island's reputation. The islanders know the boys didn't do the crime. Most know who did it, but for obvious reasons (they want to stay alive), they ain't tellin'. Just trying to find some answers, not accusing them or anyone else of the crimes. I did not know the the ferry trip was two weeks later, the timeline i read did not detail that, but was it known why he was leaving, or were he was heading. I guess we wait and see how the trial ends, can get hooked on this story i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ?The better question would be: If he was guilty, why would he go to his room immediately after the crime and snooze like a baby?Additionally: if he was guilty, he would want to split (or he would at least act erratically afterwards). He'd have blood on him and his clothes, so he'd be crazed about cleaning everything. The trip on the ferry happened two weeks after the crime, for krysaches. Also, as Stephen has mentioned several times: locals would be literally up in arms - swarming to the Burmeses' dwelling to string the guys up - if they thought he did it. Locals usually know about such things. Heck, locals didn't even call out or throw anything when witnessing the reenactment. Ordinarily, Thais would be livid during a reenactment - particularly for such a heinous crime which impacts so badly on the island's reputation. The islanders know the boys didn't do the crime. Most know who did it, but for obvious reasons (they want to stay alive), they ain't tellin'. For sure......... I posted weeks back, check bank account transactions.............. I think this is good point that if the locals believed the Burmese did it they probably would have swarmed around the residences of all Burmese in the area. They might not care about the lives of a couple of farang but they do care about their livelihoods that might be impacted by tourist murders. However, we have heard many comments from visitors to KT to the effect that they all know who did but don't dare say, except that it wasn't the 2B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? The better question would be: If he was guilty, why would he go to his room immediately after the crime and snooze like a baby? Additionally: if he was guilty, he would want to split (or he would at least act erratically afterwards). He'd have blood on him and his clothes, so he'd be crazed about cleaning everything. The trip on the ferry happened two weeks after the crime, for krysaches. Also, as Stephen has mentioned several times: locals would be literally up in arms - swarming to the Burmeses' dwelling to string the guys up - if they thought he did it. Locals usually know about such things. Heck, locals didn't even call out or throw anything when witnessing the reenactment. Ordinarily, Thais would be livid during a reenactment - particularly for such a heinous crime which impacts so badly on the island's reputation. The islanders know the boys didn't do the crime. Most know who did it, but for obvious reasons (they want to stay alive), they ain't tellin'. For sure......... I posted weeks back, check bank account transactions.............. Nobody smart enough to have accepted hush money and have been part of the grand scheme to keep a lid on it would be dumb enough to stick any significant kind of money in a bank account at least a domestic one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy C Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. I thought the towel may have just been used to cover her injuries, an act of dignity from someone given the horrific nature of the attack. Edited August 28, 2015 by Amy C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) Has anyone got information that the two accused "confessed in court". This is from the report Justice Green issued the other day 23. With regard to the accused the Report describes the events leading up to their arrest and it records their interviews including their confessions. In particular the Report makes reference to the fact that confessions were made at more than one time. DCI Lyons points out that he cannot comment upon the allegations made later that the confessions were procured by torture “in an open statement” but he does say that the accused repeated their confessions in court before the judge in the presence of their own lawyers. https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/hq_15X0311_final.pdf The Judge then says: "I should add for the sake of completeness that the Claimants did not accept the accuracy of all of these statements." Re the above almost everybody on the island knows who did it, maybe just one person said they know who did it and then everybody else on the island says they know who did it because they don't want to be the only one on the island who will say that they don't know who did it. Thainess, huh? Edited August 28, 2015 by JLCrab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Time is running out for Tony's 'Star Witness' to appear. Any news on this anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. I thought the towel may have just been used to cover her injuries, an act of dignity from someone given the horrific nature of the attack. Yes, but there is no evidence of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Time is running out for Tony's 'Star Witness' to appear. Any news on this anyone? No news from court which means either nothing significant is happening or a lot is happening. And Tony's star witness is a defence one, IMO. At least, I hope so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. I thought the towel may have just been used to cover her injuries, an act of dignity from someone given the horrific nature of the attack. Yes, but there is no evidence of this. None that's been presented -presumably that's why the defence questionned it. BTW - you are responding to a minor of 15 years (if her profile is true) and that's dangerous territory on this thread.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. I thought the towel may have just been used to cover her injuries, an act of dignity from someone given the horrific nature of the attack. I think that is the most likely explanation. If so, it should never have been permitted, as it contaminated the crime scene and inhibited a proper forensic investigation. At Dogm says, the towel does at least need proper explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It's certainly possible the green towel was introduced to the crime scene after the perps had fled but it is also possible that it was used by the murderers to cover the victim's face, so they could rape her posthumously without having to look at their handiwork. Given that there is no evidence that the towel was introduced later and the crime scene was deliberately left unsealed by police, a complete forensic examination of the towel should be essential. I thought the towel may have just been used to cover her injuries, an act of dignity from someone given the horrific nature of the attack. Yes, but there is no evidence of this. None that's been presented -presumably that's why the defence questionned it. BTW - you are responding to a minor of 15 years (if her profile is true) and that's dangerous territory on this thread.. Ageed, people here should really not respond to this poster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy C Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Been following these topics for a few weeks now so have got a fairly good understanding of the case. One thing that sticks in my mind, why was one of the defendants trying to leave the island, i believe he got as far as Surat Thani before the police stopped him. Quite possible he had a valid reason, any idea's or was it a different person ? Possibly because he got word that he was in line for a frame up. Highly unlikely, but who know's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm991 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Deja vu all over again regarding the Bangkok bombs ....... http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/chief-investigator-says-erawan-shrine-bombing-was-not-the-work-of-thai-perpetrators Head of the Erawan deadly bomb explosion investigation expressed confidence that the bombing was not the work of Thai perpetrators while the possibility of involvement by foreign-based group is not ruled out. He said he was certain no Thai would be so cruel to carry out the deadly attack on their fellow countrymen. I know it is off topic ... but where have you heard that before ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambum Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 The phone being confirmed as belonging to David Miller is very damning evidence; the people complaining how that was established are showing their hand over whether they want the truth to come out and justice be served versus simply wanting the case to collapse. To recap, they two men on trial have already admitted the just happened to find the phone on the night of the murders. To me it beggars belief that these men would be a pair of scapegoats that by sheer coincidence turned out to had found that phone on that night. Not to mention that instead of keeping an expensive phone they smashed and tried to dispose of it. Have either of the B2 taken the stand yet? If not, when did they testify to stealing/finding a phone? Yes they have, many months ago they testified during a pre-trial hearing that they found the phone in question on the night of the murder, also two witnesses testified that the accused had given them that phone to dispose of it. So they found the(expensive?) phone and asked two other people to dispose of it for them? Come on! IF they had committed the murders and stolen the phone, the motive for stealing it would be for monetary gain, surely? So why on earth would they ask someone else to get rid of it for them? If the 2 witnesses had said the B2 had tried to sell it to them - that would have been more believable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Deja vu all over again regarding the Bangkok bombs ....... http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/chief-investigator-says-erawan-shrine-bombing-was-not-the-work-of-thai-perpetrators Head of the Erawan deadly bomb explosion investigation expressed confidence that the bombing was not the work of Thai perpetrators while the possibility of involvement by foreign-based group is not ruled out. He said he was certain no Thai would be so cruel to carry out the deadly attack on their fellow countrymen. I know it is off topic ... but where have you heard that before ? Why is it, when Thai police chiefs make announcements, it's like they're addressing a roomful of kindergardners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts