Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[canuckamuck]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

The judge will, when passing the verdict, provide a summary of the evidence provided and the reasoning for his/their decision.

From now until then you should come to terms with the fact that what actually has gone down in the court will be more substantial and relevant to that outcome that Internet chit-chat. Specially in view that the information that has been fueling that has in large come from people with the explicit job of seeing the defendants walk free regardless of guilt or innocence and a stated goal of having things judged in the "court of public opinion".

Or guilty regardless of the truth.

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall

‏@Atomicaland

Last night Koh Tao prosecution witnesses not completed on schedule. Defense allotted first day of defence witnesses (1st Sep) to prosecution

So defense witnesses in Koh Tao murder trial shall begin late on 1st Sept or perhaps even 2nd Sept meaning small scheduling change in trial.

Edited August 29, 2015 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[berybert]

Yes, to some extent, but i don't have the full picture, maybe tomorrow but my understanding is DNA evidence does link the two accused to the crime, this was a driver behind the defence not wanting a retest, profiles do match.

Not very surprising though, that was the missing evidence from the prosecution case so far.

As for the defense not wanting to retest it, to me it is rather telling. If as they claimed they have evidence that contradicts the results I don't see why they would refuse to have the retest done, either it would come back as a no match and that would put the prosecution case in disarray or it could come back as a match and then the defense could show their evidence proving it as being wrong, either from an error in the investigation or due to actual malice, either way it would again be extremely damaging to the prosecution.

Their refusal to have a retest tells me that whatever they card they may have to play is not enough to counter the DNA evidence of the prosecution, hence the refusal.

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work out the prosecution have the items for nearly a year. Stacked in a trolley somewhere?. They have had every opportunity to add substances to gain a positive result on a re-test.

The defence had the DNA taken in court upto Bangkok last Tuesday on the last flight out of Samui. Friday they had their results. Then announced we do not need anything else. We can prove our case.

As for David's phone my source tells me and their words.... Today

"The phone was apparently returned from UK as UK refused to examine it. Police said yesterday IMEI number said to be David's. No written conf. Phone not presented as evidence in court. Just arrived at court in box. First time phone was in court, 12 days into the trial. Prosecution say it is David's but no conclusive proof yet."

So as I said to YOU Ali G.. No evidence to confirm its Davids phone and you don't have it do you. if the court don't neither do you. Unless your mystic meg with a glass ball..

Actually perhaps you are?

Until such time as someone comes up with a logical explanation on how a phone would banish from one of the victims, an identical phone appeared on the hands of the accused on the same night and subsequently rather than doing the rational thing of keeping or attempting to sell that expensive phone they smashed it up and threw it away, any person whose mental faculties are, shall we say, present, will derive the conclusion that the phone was the same and their actions spell out getting rid of incriminating evidence.

Of note though is that you, like IslandLover, show no inclination whatsoever to actually see the provenance of said phone verified; that is not the stance of someone looking for the truth in a quest for justice, that's the stance of someone that would gladly see relevant evidence being ignored because it would run contrary to a certain outcome.

I guess if someone who knew David said that it was Davids phone then maybe we could believe it. All we have is Chris Ware shaking his head mouthing "no". And proven liars in court telling us it was Davids phone. You have proved yourself to be a liar on more than one occasion when it comes to this case.

Now you accuse people if not wanting verification of the phone when no one has said this.

Saying some geezer told me over the phone it belonged to David doesn't cut it with normal thinking people.

[catsanddogs]

[snip] And what the hell is THAT MAN MON doing in this photograph being the two Burmese scapegoats!

I'm not so sure it is Mon in that photo C&D...I was thinking it could possibly be this fellow.

Edit to add enlarged image -

I can see the resemblance, but they're two different men. The other man has slightly thinner face and wider mouth. Also, his eye shape doesn't match.

Apologies for mistaken identity, if it is. My opinion remains the same re that man. Haul him in.

[stephenterry]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

Their claims of what happened that night have changed more times than I can keep track of, in October they testified in court that they had found the phone. Now out of the blue someone gave it to them? They neglected to mention that little, insignificant detail for almost a year?

Or maybe it's been the longest hangover in history and just now things begin to get in focus, since previously they testified in court that they had been too drunk to remember anything that went on that night.

Their alibi is so flimsy it seems to need constant mending.

Their alibi, presumably, is to be presented in court by the defence. We have yet to hear the explanation of conflicting statements (which could of course be just 'incorrect' reporting). I suggest you wait and see. So far, the elephant in the room is the lack of any substantiated DNA evidence submitted by the prosecution - in fact they haven't presented ANY DNA to the court.

Without that, anything else is hearsay, innuendo, and snippets of information from various sources - some of which maybe factual or not. But here, police assertions carry a lot of weight even if they are not backed up with any evidence to substantiate their testimony.

You don't have to concern yourself, this case is going to the Appeals court, and the B2 will continue to be incarcerated.

[loonodingle]

Yes, to some extent, but i don't have the full picture, maybe tomorrow but my understanding is DNA evidence does link the two accused to the crime, this was a driver behind the defence not wanting a retest, profiles do match.

Not very surprising though, that was the missing evidence from the prosecution case so far.

As for the defense not wanting to retest it, to me it is rather telling. If as they claimed they have evidence that contradicts the results I don't see why they would refuse to have the retest done, either it would come back as a no match and that would put the prosecution case in disarray or it could come back as a match and then the defense could show their evidence proving it as being wrong, either from an error in the investigation or due to actual malice, either way it would again be extremely damaging to the prosecution.

Their refusal to have a retest tells me that whatever they card they may have to play is not enough to counter the DNA evidence of the prosecution, hence the refusal.

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work out the prosecution have the items for nearly a year. Stacked in a trolley somewhere?. They have had every opportunity to add substances to gain a positive result on a re-test.

The defence had the DNA taken in court upto Bangkok last Tuesday on the last flight out of Samui. Friday they had their results. Then announced we do not need anything else. We can prove our case.

As for David's phone my source tells me and their words.... Today

"The phone was apparently returned from UK as UK refused to examine it. Police said yesterday IMEI number said to be David's. No written conf. Phone not presented as evidence in court. Just arrived at court in box. First time phone was in court, 12 days into the trial. Prosecution say it is David's but no conclusive proof yet."

So as I said to YOU Ali G.. No evidence to confirm its Davids phone and you don't have it do you. if the court don't neither do you. Unless your mystic meg with a glass ball..

Actually perhaps you are?

Until such time as someone comes up with a logical explanation on how a phone would banish from one of the victims, an identical phone appeared on the hands of the accused on the same night and subsequently rather than doing the rational thing of keeping or attempting to sell that expensive phone they smashed it up and threw it away, any person whose mental faculties are, shall we say, present, will derive the conclusion that the phone was the same and their actions spell out getting rid of incriminating evidence.

Of note though is that you, like IslandLover, show no inclination whatsoever to actually see the provenance of said phone verified; that is not the stance of someone looking for the truth in a quest for justice, that's the stance of someone that would gladly see relevant evidence being ignored because it would run contrary to a certain outcome.

More BS.... I worked on trying to gain evidence who the phone belonged to. I have a copy of the file.

[stephenterry]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

The judge will, when passing the verdict, provide a summary of the evidence provided and the reasoning for his/their decision.

From now until then you should come to terms with the fact that what actually has gone down in the court will be more substantial and relevant to that outcome that Internet chit-chat. Specially in view that the information that has been fueling that has in large come from people with the explicit job of seeing the defendants walk free regardless of guilt or innocence and a stated goal of having things judged in the "court of public opinion".

That's your opinion. Mine differs. As I said before, this case will go to the Appeals court whatever the verdict.

Edited August 29, 2015 by stephenterry

[metisdead]

Troll posts have been removed. Another post containing an image in violation of forum rules has been removed:

2) You will not use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.

You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

[phuketandsee]

Kind of ironic we all got so worked up about the defense not having access to the prosecution's case before the trial when it now appears they have none.

[Rykbanlor]

Apologies.

[phuketandsee]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

[loonodingle]

Kind of ironic we all got so worked up about the defense not having access to the prosecution's case before the trial when it now appears they have none.

When you have to send a case back to the police 4 times through lack of evidence you know you may end up with a crock of Sh! Te

[smedly]

I said this a month or so ago

The puncture wounds on Davids body were caused by a shark with only one tooth that was able to crawl on land and bite him on the beach, I am 100% sure they should be looking for a toothless shark

keep the feet for dancing

This kind of unhealthy irony is completely displaced.

Not even funny besides. It seems that humor and natural elegance of British people be endangered.

so you found something offensive in my post - go figure

Evidently a cryptic inference is beyond you

[Basil B]

BBC Myanmar correspondent Jonah Fisher said: "The Thai authorities may have thought that by charging two poor Burmese men with murder this case would quickly disappear from public view.

"If that's the case they were wrong."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29639997

How right Jonah Fisher was.

From that same article:

"Thailand's chief of police, General Somyot Poompanmoung, has admitted mistakes were made but said everyone involved in the case had worked to the best of their ability."

So the Judge(s) might ask in reaching a verdict, how can we expect our uniformed police to work better than the best of their ability.

"So the Judge(s) might ask in reaching a verdict, how can we expect our uniformed police to work better than the best of their ability."

The judges should not factor in police ability, I assume Thai law is pretty much similar to that of many countries, the test that the judges must apply will probably be similar to "beyond reasonable doubt", so where the evidence put to the court is discredited it should not be coincided by the judges in their summing up.

Police Ability, is an issue for government...

In this instance ability seems to cover Incompetence, corruption and inability but then in a system that positions and promotions are bought rather than awarded to the best candidate for the job what do you expect.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Basil B

[oldsailor35]

The dirty truth.

Jaktip Chaijinda, deputy head of national police, said a quick resolution of the case would result in a speedy recovery of tourist numbers.

He went on: “Today the case should be finished. We want to clear it up as soon as possible so our tourist industry can bounce back.”

Tourism and Sports Minister Kobkarn Wattanavrangkul said: “I think the tourist confidence will improve.

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/thailand-beach-murders-police-defend-4374673

But will they forget DEATH ISLAND ?

[StealthEnergiser]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

I understand it went from the garden to the tree possibly cleaned up before reaching the tree if you watch the video it certainly looks like there is a lot less blood on it when forensics are swabbing it.

[AleG]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

The judge will, when passing the verdict, provide a summary of the evidence provided and the reasoning for his/their decision.

From now until then you should come to terms with the fact that what actually has gone down in the court will be more substantial and relevant to that outcome that Internet chit-chat. Specially in view that the information that has been fueling that has in large come from people with the explicit job of seeing the defendants walk free regardless of guilt or innocence and a stated goal of having things judged in the "court of public opinion".

That's your opinion. Mine differs. As I said before, this case will go to the Appeals court whatever the verdict.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

The judge is required to prepare the summary and explain the reasoning behind the verdict, that is a fact. That he would be in a better position than you, who I presume have not sat through the entire court hearings, to know what has been divulged and discussed in the court, is also a fact.

The defense working to set their clients free, regardless of guilt or innocence, is also a fact since to do that they don't have to actually prove innocence, they just need to sufficiently discredit the prosecution case.

[smedly]

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work out the prosecution have the items for nearly a year. Stacked in a trolley somewhere?. They have had every opportunity to add substances to gain a positive result on a re-test.

The defence had the DNA taken in court upto Bangkok last Tuesday on the last flight out of Samui. Friday they had their results. Then announced we do not need anything else. We can prove our case.

As for David's phone my source tells me and their words.... Today

"The phone was apparently returned from UK as UK refused to examine it. Police said yesterday IMEI number said to be David's. No written conf. Phone not presented as evidence in court. Just arrived at court in box. First time phone was in court, 12 days into the trial. Prosecution say it is David's but no conclusive proof yet."

So as I said to YOU Ali G.. No evidence to confirm its Davids phone and you don't have it do you. if the court don't neither do you. Unless your mystic meg with a glass ball..

Actually perhaps you are?

Until such time as someone comes up with a logical explanation on how a phone would banish from one of the victims, an identical phone appeared on the hands of the accused on the same night and subsequently rather than doing the rational thing of keeping or attempting to sell that expensive phone they smashed it up and threw it away, any person whose mental faculties are, shall we say, present, will derive the conclusion that the phone was the same and their actions spell out getting rid of incriminating evidence.

Of note though is that you, like IslandLover, show no inclination whatsoever to actually see the provenance of said phone verified; that is not the stance of someone looking for the truth in a quest for justice, that's the stance of someone that would gladly see relevant evidence being ignored because it would run contrary to a certain outcome.

More BS.... I worked on trying to gain evidence who the phone belonged to. I have a copy of the file.

It is a mute point that the phone did or didn't belong to David, lets assume that it did, then there will be up to 4 peoples DNA and finger prints on it, the first is obvious Davids, then if the testimony is true it will also have the DNA of the guy who dumped it and at least one of the accused, I have heard nothing reported by the police that they tested this phone for anything, the police claim they found it smashed up in the bushes - how convenient

[AleG]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

I understand it went from the garden to the tree possibly cleaned up before reaching the tree if you watch the video it certainly looks like there is a lot less blood on it when forensics are swabbing it.

The blood is on the head of the hoe, the video shows a close up of the handle being swabbed; so no it doesn't look like there is less blood on it.

I just thought of pointing that out, in case people don't check the video and take your description of it as being accurate.

[stephenterry]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

The judge will, when passing the verdict, provide a summary of the evidence provided and the reasoning for his/their decision.

From now until then you should come to terms with the fact that what actually has gone down in the court will be more substantial and relevant to that outcome that Internet chit-chat. Specially in view that the information that has been fueling that has in large come from people with the explicit job of seeing the defendants walk free regardless of guilt or innocence and a stated goal of having things judged in the "court of public opinion".

That's your opinion. Mine differs. As I said before, this case will go to the Appeals court whatever the verdict.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

The judge is required to prepare the summary and explain the reasoning behind the verdict, that is a fact. That he would be in a better position than you, who I presume have not sat through the entire court hearings, to know what has been divulged and discussed in the court, is also a fact.

The defense working to set their clients free, regardless of guilt or innocence, is also a fact since to do that they don't have to actually prove innocence, they just need to sufficiently discredit the prosecution case.

If you can't understand that what you have wholly written is in part an opinion, I cannot help you further.

[Mooner]

It's clear that this trial to date has mostly been a damp squib. As Smedly said (in so many words) all the police witnesses have to say is this is what happened without any substantiated evidence to back it up. The critical omission is the asserted DNA 'evidence' that matches the B2 to the victims. It has not been presented in court. All we've had is a procession of senior police officers' hearsay testimony. And, I agree, days have been 'wasted' presenting unlawful scenarios, that may or may not be accepted by the court.

I really see no future for Thai law and order, if this trial is an example of how 'justice' is arrived at. The one thing I'm looking forward to, is a professional case presentation by the defence that shows how it should be done. Not that I expect will make any difference to the outcome. The verdict is immaterial because there will be an appeal.

The judge will, when passing the verdict, provide a summary of the evidence provided and the reasoning for his/their decision.

From now until then you should come to terms with the fact that what actually has gone down in the court will be more substantial and relevant to that outcome that Internet chit-chat. Specially in view that the information that has been fueling that has in large come from people with the explicit job of seeing the defendants walk free regardless of guilt or innocence and a stated goal of having things judged in the "court of public opinion".

That's your opinion. Mine differs. As I said before, this case will go to the Appeals court whatever the verdict.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

The judge is required to prepare the summary and explain the reasoning behind the verdict, that is a fact. That he would be in a better position than you, who I presume have not sat through the entire court hearings, to know what has been divulged and discussed in the court, is also a fact.

The defense working to set their clients free, regardless of guilt or innocence, is also a fact since to do that they don't have to actually prove innocence, they just need to sufficiently discredit the prosecution case.

What case? Youve been banging on about DNA matches that would nail these guys without doubt for months. Where is it? Police said Hoe was not checked even though we have pics of somebody swabbing it. Where is this conclusive DNA?

All we have is RTP saying "They said they did it" and a few random people saying that the B2 were on the beach drinking and singing.

[AleG]

More BS.... I worked on trying to gain evidence who the phone belonged to. I have a copy of the file.

It is a mute point that the phone did or didn't belong to David, lets assume that it did, then there will be up to 4 peoples DNA and finger prints on it, the first is obvious Davids, then if the testimony is true it will also have the DNA of the guy who dumped it and at least one of the accused, I have heard nothing reported by the police that they tested this phone for anything, the police claim they found it smashed up in the bushes - how convenient

A claim supported by two witnesses, friends of the defendants, that testified in court of receiving the phone from them and discarding it where it was subsequently found. You know, like normal, low income people would do with an expensive phone.

[joebrown]

A little more information from the Myanmar Times: http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html.

This may be significant:

Ko Wai Phyo has said that he was given the mobile phone by someone on Koh Tao, where the pair was killed on September 15, 2014.

It is not clear if this gift occurred on the night of the murders. It also does not explain why the phone ended up smashed. This is the only prosecution evidence that presents difficulties for the defense IMHO, though it definitely is insufficient in and of itself o support a charge of rape and murder.

Maybe the defendants were gifted the phone on the night of the murders. I think if I'd been ordered by my boss to help move/re-arrange the bodies and the crime scene I'd be looking for some form of reward, but only on the understanding that my involvement was going to be kept secret. I'd certainly be looking to dispose of the phone when I realised later that I was being set-up as a scapegoat, wouldn't you?

Edited August 29, 2015 by joebrown

[StealthEnergiser]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

I think one of the reasons that we have had problems with a certain group RTP defenders on this site is that photos were leaked on to the internet very soon after the murders .

These photo's are of the clothes and the hoe in two different positions and some of hannah with possible a spray pattern of blood on rocks similar to gunshot .

If there are people on the island that wanted this stopped or forums shut down they may have possibly hired a group of people good with english to stop this some of these people are very possibly connected to the island and dive industry.

I recall right back at the time of the murders at least one of the rtp defenders saying the hoe had not been moved,

I hope one if these b2 are proven innocent that some of the members on this group are investigated further .

I am not accusing anyone of being involved in a cover up but there is enough information on this site that raises questions.

[JLCrab]

BBC Myanmar correspondent Jonah Fisher said: "The Thai authorities may have thought that by charging two poor Burmese men with murder this case would quickly disappear from public view.

"If that's the case they were wrong."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29639997

How right Jonah Fisher was.

From that same article:

"Thailand's chief of police, General Somyot Poompanmoung, has admitted mistakes were made but said everyone involved in the case had worked to the best of their ability."

So the Judge(s) might ask in reaching a verdict, how can we expect our uniformed police to work better than the best of their ability.

"So the Judge(s) might ask in reaching a verdict, how can we expect our uniformed police to work better than the best of their ability."

The judges should not factor in police ability, I assume Thai law is pretty much similar to that of many countries, the test that the judges must apply will probably be similar to "beyond reasonable doubt", so where the evidence put to the court is discredited it should not be coincided by the judges in their summing up.

Police Ability, is an issue for government...

In this instance ability seems to cover Incompetence, corruption and inability but then in a system that positions and promotions are bought rather than awarded to the best candidate for the job what do you expect.

You are right: The Judge(s) have to determine what is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They don't have to determine guilt beyond what they consider to be an UNreasonable doubt and the Judge(s) in Thailand get to determine what they consider to be reasonable not a jury as in the USA and elsewhere.

[AleG]

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

The judge is required to prepare the summary and explain the reasoning behind the verdict, that is a fact. That he would be in a better position than you, who I presume have not sat through the entire court hearings, to know what has been divulged and discussed in the court, is also a fact.

The defense working to set their clients free, regardless of guilt or innocence, is also a fact since to do that they don't have to actually prove innocence, they just need to sufficiently discredit the prosecution case.

What case? Youve been banging on about DNA matches that would nail these guys without doubt for months. Where is it? Police said Hoe was not checked even though we have pics of somebody swabbing it. Where is this conclusive DNA?

All we have is RTP saying "They said they did it" and a few random people saying that the B2 were on the beach drinking and singing.

So between a snippet of unknown origin and validity and actual photographic evidence you choose to believe the former? A bit of an issue that, isn't it?

Apparently the conclusive DNA results were shown in court yesterday; I, for one, I'm still waiting for the people that not only have campaigned to guarantee a transparent trial, but have also solicited large amounts of money to that end to stick to their sales pitch.

Any time now I guess...

[loonodingle]

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work out the prosecution have the items for nearly a year. Stacked in a trolley somewhere?. They have had every opportunity to add substances to gain a positive result on a re-test.

The defence had the DNA taken in court upto Bangkok last Tuesday on the last flight out of Samui. Friday they had their results. Then announced we do not need anything else. We can prove our case.

As for David's phone my source tells me and their words.... Today

"The phone was apparently returned from UK as UK refused to examine it. Police said yesterday IMEI number said to be David's. No written conf. Phone not presented as evidence in court. Just arrived at court in box. First time phone was in court, 12 days into the trial. Prosecution say it is David's but no conclusive proof yet."

So as I said to YOU Ali G.. No evidence to confirm its Davids phone and you don't have it do you. if the court don't neither do you. Unless your mystic meg with a glass ball..

Actually perhaps you are?

Until such time as someone comes up with a logical explanation on how a phone would banish from one of the victims, an identical phone appeared on the hands of the accused on the same night and subsequently rather than doing the rational thing of keeping or attempting to sell that expensive phone they smashed it up and threw it away, any person whose mental faculties are, shall we say, present, will derive the conclusion that the phone was the same and their actions spell out getting rid of incriminating evidence.

Of note though is that you, like IslandLover, show no inclination whatsoever to actually see the provenance of said phone verified; that is not the stance of someone looking for the truth in a quest for justice, that's the stance of someone that would gladly see relevant evidence being ignored because it would run contrary to a certain outcome.

More BS.... I worked on trying to gain evidence who the phone belonged to. I have a copy of the file.

It is a mute point that the phone did or didn't belong to David, lets assume that it did, then there will be up to 4 peoples DNA and finger prints on it, the first is obvious Davids, then if the testimony is true it will also have the DNA of the guy who dumped it and at least one of the accused, I have heard nothing reported by the police that they tested this phone for anything, the police claim they found it smashed up in the bushes - how convenient

This is direct from my source within the court yesterday and I quote ok...

"The phone was apparently returned from UK as UK refused to examine it. Police said yesterday IMEI number said to be David's. No written conf. Phone not presented as evidence in court. Just arrived at court in box."

Then a later update:

"First time phone was in court, 12 days into the trial. Prosecution say it is David's but no conclusive proof yet."

So the Thai police sent it to England and they returned it without an answer. and they will not answer as it beaches protocol in death sentence cases.

I worked on trying to get the info from the phone company and they kept kicking it back to the police. Despite the importance of finding out.

I for one want to know if they done it. I am not 100% sure if they had NO involvement in the case at all. There is so many theorys ... remember also that their mate worked in the AC bar. They left the guitar in the AC so they have a link to the AC bar. They are obviously known to the AC owners I don't doubt.

What I don't believe is these 2 guys did this on their own. The evidence I have seen and heard so far suggests they didn't.

You must also remember that they don't dispute they where on the beach. If the was closer to the AC and David and Hannah left there following a bust up and started to run whats the first thing you loose.

Your sunglasses hanging on your shirt and the phone bouncing around in your pocket??

Just an idea, What I cant believe is the absolute silence coming from the island.

No witnesses to the altercation in the bar. Nothing.... somebody has something to hide without doubt.....

Anyway <deleted> do I know?? perhaps a few things about evidence and UK witnesses. A little about the autopsy procedure as told to me by the case officer for Hannah without being specific about her case. Just procedure.. The location of Sean McAnna...Not enough to judge 2 men and whether they should die for this crime.

[thailandchilli]

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

The judge is required to prepare the summary and explain the reasoning behind the verdict, that is a fact. That he would be in a better position than you, who I presume have not sat through the entire court hearings, to know what has been divulged and discussed in the court, is also a fact.

The defense working to set their clients free, regardless of guilt or innocence, is also a fact since to do that they don't have to actually prove innocence, they just need to sufficiently discredit the prosecution case.

What case? Youve been banging on about DNA matches that would nail these guys without doubt for months. Where is it? Police said Hoe was not checked even though we have pics of somebody swabbing it. Where is this conclusive DNA?

All we have is RTP saying "They said they did it" and a few random people saying that the B2 were on the beach drinking and singing.

So between a snippet of unknown origin and validity and actual photographic evidence you choose to believe the former? A bit of an issue that, isn't it?

Apparently the conclusive DNA results were shown in court yesterday; I, for one, I'm still waiting for the people that not only have campaigned to guarantee a transparent trial, but have also solicited large amounts of money to that end to stick to their sales pitch.

Any time now I guess...

Apparently the conclusive DNA results were shown in court yesterday................where was that reported?? Missed it completely or is this more evidence of the misinformation you spread

Edited August 29, 2015 by thailandchilli

[AleG]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

I think one of the reasons that we have had problems with a certain group RTP defenders on this site is that photos were leaked on to the internet very soon after the murders .

These photo's are of the clothes and the hoe in two different positions and some of hannah with possible a spray pattern of blood on rocks similar to gunshot .

If there are people on the island that wanted this stopped or forums shut down they may have possibly hired a group of people good with english to stop this some of these people are very possibly connected to the island and dive industry.

I recall right back at the time of the murders at least one of the rtp defenders saying the hoe had not been moved,

I hope one if these b2 are proven innocent that some of the members on this group are investigated further .

I am not accusing anyone of being involved in a cover up but there is enough information on this site that raises questions.

The main reason there is a problem in this threads is that there's a small contingent of people, of which you are one, leveling outrageous, outright paranoid and certainly defamatory accusations against other people; much as you'd like to hide your beheaviour behind "I'm not accusing anyone...".

[thailandchilli]

Thanks to Islandlover for posting the hoe pics (1415)

Is it just me or does there seem to be much more blood on the hoe when it was in the garden than under the tree? Could be just the quality of the photos I guess. Did it go from the tree to the garden or the garden to the tree?

I think one of the reasons that we have had problems with a certain group RTP defenders on this site is that photos were leaked on to the internet very soon after the murders .

These photo's are of the clothes and the hoe in two different positions and some of hannah with possible a spray pattern of blood on rocks similar to gunshot .

If there are people on the island that wanted this stopped or forums shut down they may have possibly hired a group of people good with english to stop this some of these people are very possibly connected to the island and dive industry.

I recall right back at the time of the murders at least one of the rtp defenders saying the hoe had not been moved,

I hope one if these b2 are proven innocent that some of the members on this group are investigated further .

I am not accusing anyone of being involved in a cover up but there is enough information on this site that raises questions.

The admission by the RTP in court that they didn't bring the detailed crime scene photos because of lack of budget adds further weight & suspicion to the points you make so well Stealth

Edited August 29, 2015 by thailandchilli