Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere]

The prosecution case is like when my mother tried to convince me that chubby Santa Claus shimmy down our small fireplace with a big bag full of stuff and a bicycle. I purposely asked for big stuff just to see how creative my mom's story would get. I'm sure the prosecution would have an easier time convincing the judge Santa Claus was the killer.

[smedly]

The phone was dumped there by a friend of the defendants, they gave it to him to throw it away; I suppose giving an expensive phone to someone and saying "dump it in the sea" would sound a little suspicious.

One would describe your version strange I think.

The scenario you suggest is that the 2 murderers decided to ask their friend to dispose of evidence taken from the crime scene of perhaps the most high profile case on Koh Tao. And to not appear suspicious they didnt tell him to dump it in the sea because it would appear suspicious. Really??? Come on do you Really Believe what you have suggested.

This story never ceases to amaze me. The comments and views of some contributors are bizarre to say the least. Totally illogical.

Firstly the chances of the murderer taking items from the victims home is slim in my opinon. In the event of the place is crawling with the RTP, disposal in the area of your home is highly unlikely as well. You would have to have the IQ of a banana to do that.

It's not my version, it's the version of the two defendants and the two witnesses that testified.

As for criminals keeping incriminating evidence in their homes... have you seen the news lately?

I have got to question you on this as you have made a factual statement and not simply given an opinion

Are you saying that the two defendants have given un-retracted statements that this is what happened to the phone and is not part of the early withdrawn and discredited confession ?

Are you also saying that 2x people got up in court and also testified that this was what happened with the phone ? and who were they ?

and just to add, I don't quite understand your last statement, if you are a criminal in the process of criminal activity you will be equipped, if you have just committed a crime (murder) it is not unusual to try and get rid of anything that could connect you to said crime (murder) pretty obvious I would have thought

Edited August 31, 2015 by smedly

[Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere]

Speculation and theories of the numerous murders and rapes on Koh Tao has a history. When has any of these crimes been solved? Can you imagine being a victim of a crime and the guy who victimized you shows up with the police and asks you what happened?

[boomerangutang]

It's not my version, it's the version of the two defendants and the two witnesses that testified.

As for criminals keeping incriminating evidence in their homes... have you seen the news lately?

The defendants also agreed that broken glass was used as murder weapon, though no glass was found at or near the crime scene. When a person is being tortured, they'll say any damn thing. BTW, why have we heard nearly nothing in the prosecutions' presentations about wounds to victims or weapons used? It couldn't be because RTP and prosecution are hiding things could it? or maybe because Thai forensics completely mis-read (intentionally or unwittingly) the items they're supposedly trained to diagnose. It will be interesting when Ms Pontip takes the stand. Even more interesting if any British forensic findings are submitted to the proceedings.

[thailandchilli]

Whats not been made public or at least I've never seen any reports is when this actual phone that allegedly belongs to David was found behind the living quaters of the B2. I see no mention of this find until after they were arrested on the 2nd Oct. So are we being led to believe it lay there for 2 weeks undisturbed and not found by anyone. I'm sure if it had been found before the RTP would have added it to one of the numerous statements. Instead we get the B2 arrested and then suddenly this appears.

[JLCrab]

....everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

Police said publicly that they saw him depicted on the Running Man video. That's why they were searching for him for days (while saying he was their prime suspect), while he was hiding. Also hundreds of thousands of people who have scrutinized that footage assert it's him. There may likely be additional proofs, but it's not easy getting people to speak freely when they're afraid to speak out. Also, Nomsod is not on trial, so (according to authorities) there should be no mention of him. The judges have apparently forbidden any further testing/comparison of his DNA (with that found in/on victim) so all we (the rest of the world) have to go on for DNA comparisons is the word of top brass RTP.

There was mention of a Burmese worker at AC bar who claimed he was with NS in AC bar that fateful night, but the worker split the country 2 days after the crime and can't be contacted. There is Sean, but he was quickly escorted out of the country and told never to return. There was likely CCTV from the beach bars, but all that footage (except David entering the bar around 1:30 am) has been conveniently trashed.

Great. Excuse # 102. And if that is indeed the Kid then how come no one else seems to have seen him anywhere else at any time in question on the island? That'll be # 103 I presume.

Edited August 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[AleG]

Whats not been made public or at least I've never seen any reports is when this actual phone that allegedly belongs to David was found behind the living quaters of the B2. I see no mention of this find until after they were arrested on the 2nd Oct. So are we being led to believe it lay there for 2 weeks undisturbed and not found by anyone. I'm sure if it had been found before the RTP would have added it to one of the numerous statements. Instead we get the B2 arrested and then suddenly this appears.

You missed the previous post?

"One of the suspects said he had left it with a friend and when the friend was questioned he led them to the phone."

It was found after the arrests, if that doesn't make it clear.

[AleG]

....everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

Police said publicly that they saw him depicted on the Running Man video. That's why they were searching for him for days (while saying he was their prime suspect), while he was hiding. Also hundreds of thousands of people who have scrutinized that footage assert it's him. There may likely be additional proofs, but it's not easy getting people to speak freely when they're afraid to speak out. Also, Nomsod is not on trial, so (according to authorities) there should be no mention of him. The judges have apparently forbidden any further testing/comparison of his DNA (with that found in/on victim) so all we (the rest of the world) have to go on for DNA comparisons is the word of top brass RTP.

There was mention of a Burmese worker at AC bar who claimed he was with NS in AC bar that fateful night, but the worker split the country 2 days after the crime and can't be contacted. There is Sean, but he was quickly escorted out of the country and told never to return. There was likely CCTV from the beach bars, but all that footage (except David entering the bar around 1:30 am) has been conveniently trashed.

Great. Excuse # 102. And if that is indeed the Kid then how come no one else seems to have seen him anywhere else at any time in question on the island? That'll be # 103 I presume.

This is all a variant of the Bertrand Russel's Teapot:

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense."

Basically arguing that something is true based on the impossibility of refuting untestable assertions. In the name of seeking the Truth no less...

[JLCrab]

So nobody it seems who has any exculpatory information such as to the whereabouts of the 2 accused or other persons or knows first hand of any money transfers designed to prevent those in the know from talking etc. etc. is willing to come forward.

If that is the case, that sucks more than anything the Thai officialdom has maybe fabricated to date.

[thailandchilli]

Whats not been made public or at least I've never seen any reports is when this actual phone that allegedly belongs to David was found behind the living quaters of the B2. I see no mention of this find until after they were arrested on the 2nd Oct. So are we being led to believe it lay there for 2 weeks undisturbed and not found by anyone. I'm sure if it had been found before the RTP would have added it to one of the numerous statements. Instead we get the B2 arrested and then suddenly this appears.

You missed the previous post?

"One of the suspects said he had left it with a friend and when the friend was questioned he led them to the phone."

It was found after the arrests, if that doesn't make it clear.

No I read your previous post my point was how long was it lying there undisturbed without being found before the RTP collected it. That has not been reported and if you read my post it appears that we are being led to believe it lay there for 2 weeks behind their living quaters found in the bushes, there are photos of this.

[boomerangutang]

....everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

Police said publicly that they saw him depicted on the Running Man video. That's why they were searching for him for days (while saying he was their prime suspect), while he was hiding. Also hundreds of thousands of people who have scrutinized that footage assert it's him. There may likely be additional proofs, but it's not easy getting people to speak freely when they're afraid to speak out. Also, Nomsod is not on trial, so (according to authorities) there should be no mention of him. The judges have apparently forbidden any further testing/comparison of his DNA (with that found in/on victim) so all we (the rest of the world) have to go on for DNA comparisons is the word of top brass RTP.

There was mention of a Burmese worker at AC bar who claimed he was with NS in AC bar that fateful night, but the worker split the country 2 days after the crime and can't be contacted. There is Sean, but he was quickly escorted out of the country and told never to return. There was likely CCTV from the beach bars, but all that footage (except David entering the bar around 1:30 am) has been conveniently trashed.

Great. Excuse # 102. And if that is indeed the Kid then how come no one else seems to have seen him anywhere else at any time in question on the island? That'll be # 103 I presume.

Do you know for sure that no one saw Nomsod on the island that night? For starters, the full weight of the Headman (his people, his connections, his money) wants that whole issue to become a non-issue. So Mon, all his buddies, RTP brass and prosecution are doing all they can to stuff that issue. Secondly, neither you nor I know what the Brits and/or defense has uncovered in that regard. We don't know who has been interviewed outside of Thailand or what they may have said. We've been told a hundred times not to concern ourselves with NS because he's not on trial. I get that. The Headman has already successfully sued a newspaper for alluding to NS being a suspect and he + Mon are probably keeping an eagle eye out for anyone else. In sum, there are many people and forces actively wanting to keep NS from being mentioned. Wanting something not be true doesn't make it not true.

I can't say for sure whether he was on the island or whether he committed the crime. But I would like RTP to do their jobs and investigate it. A big reason they aren't lifting a finger to do that, is avenues of investigation have been intensely stifled since Panya was yanked off the job in late September. There are a host of reasons I and thousands of others continue to believe there's a strong possibility NS was on the island and involved with the crime. It's obvious to any 4 year old that there are concerted impediments to investigating that.

[JLCrab]

I said publicly. Judge Green has said there was nothing exculpatory in the UK - Scotland Yard report. And I figure you've run up the excuse number to at least 110.

[BritTim]

Again, as has been said many times on this forum, we are not privy to all the information. Media coverage is very limited at this stage, predominately via Twitter from what i have observed, and that seems to have slowed lately. We simply do not know the full details or facts, of the investigation. I expect when the trial reaches conclusion, a lot more of the investigative results will be available in the public arena.

When the trial ends, the only review of the evidence presented at the trial that may legally be quoted will be the judge's report. This may or may not reflect what actually happened in court. The lack of a verbatim transcript of the court proceedings, combined with forbidding any other accurate record from being kept, means that the judge could, if so minded, completely distort the presented evidence.

[metisdead]

A few quotes from sources I can't link to but you may look up:

In that case, don't even bother to post the quotes.

[boomerangutang]

I said publicly. Judge Green has said there was nothing exculpatory in the UK - Scotland Yard report. And I figure you've run up the excuse number to at least 110.

Justice Green was looking only at the report which was written in December 2014. That's a 9 month old report which was given to non-investigating Brit experts by a Thai minder - and which was later paraphrased to the victims' families. A lot can happen in 9 months. Plus it's doubtful Justice Green knows all the the defense team in Thailand knows. Green is a bit player in this drama. Also, at least one item in the report that Green summarized was blatantly false. I pointed it out in two earlier posts. Get with the program.

[JLCrab]

Sure a lot can happen in 9 months but it hasn't at least publicly. You love to point out things that you think are true but when somebody like me asks how do you know they are true, you rattle off the excuses like the people who know first hand that it's true are intimidated by the headman's goon squad so how could you expect them to publicly come forward which to me is just confirmation that nobody has come forward and one reason maybe that nobody has come forward is that there isn't anybody out there that has anything with which to come forward.

[BigC]

Sorry about my previous comments

[PaPiPuPePo]

Perhaps then you should stop speculating and spreading unfounded rumours:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/849310-koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui/?p=9788992

I understand, again from verbal dialogue, the Ace Card was from a female witness, which was outside the planned sequence of witnesses. The evidence seems very comprehensive, but reporting of the trial was from the defence, the prosecution respected the courts demands of no external communication, yes, no external reporting by media or social means, that's why many local newspapers dropped there interest.

Quick confirmation my statement is correct, certainly not speculation and well founded.

Source please? Verbal dialogue does not cut it in the real world

Initially via a social media application, then via a verbal discussion using a telephonic device between myself and a friend residing on the Island of Samui, and has taken an interest in this court case and visited the day' s proceedings.

Still no one but you and your "friend on Samui" have made any mention at all of an "Ace card." You say it's because the prosecution isn't reporting outside the court-room and any and all media sources have lost interest. A rather detailed explanation, you give a lot of those, shape the whole reality within a sentence or two, present it as fact when it's all verbiage with no confirmation elsewhere, no evidence at all.

When you suddenly start posting non-stop about this case after joining up, and aside from such an intense interest make categorical statements like "I expect the RTP will have done due diligence" it's hard not to conclude you are NOT just a disinterested observer.

95% of the people on these KT murder threads have a strong position on the case and the other 5% are liars.

[sweatalot]

# PaPiPuPePo

I agree with your post. But I wouldn't say 5% are liars, most of them probably, some may be just naive and uninformed.

I answer to you this way because I think it is not necessary to replicate another poster to whom you answered

Edited August 31, 2015 by sweatalot

[jdinasia]

So nobody it seems who has any exculpatory information such as to the whereabouts of the 2 accused or other persons or knows first hand of any money transfers designed to prevent those in the know from talking etc. etc. is willing to come forward.

If that is the case, that sucks more than anything the Thai officialdom has maybe fabricated to date.

The issue, of course, being that no such evidence likely exists.

[jdinasia]

I said publicly. Judge Green has said there was nothing exculpatory in the UK - Scotland Yard report. And I figure you've run up the excuse number to at least 110.

With it being a capital case, would evidence or testimony gathered by the UK police have been turned over to the RTP?

We know that nothing exculpatory was in it. That's all we know.

[BritTim]

This link has details on the testimony presented in court on the mobile phone alleged to have been David Miller's:

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/owner_of_mobile_phone_linking_burmese_migrant_workers_to_hannah_witheridge_murder_never_established_1_4213643

[thailandchilli]

So tomorrow in court its the last day of the prosecutions evidence with their final witness, a high ranking RTP officer from Koh Phangan. Yes the island of sin where they hold the drug fueled moon parties under the noses of the RTP stationed there! Going to be interesting to hear what he has to say..........not

[joebrown]

So nobody it seems who has any exculpatory information such as to the whereabouts of the 2 accused or other persons or knows first hand of any money transfers designed to prevent those in the know from talking etc. etc. is willing to come forward.

If that is the case, that sucks more than anything the Thai officialdom has maybe fabricated to date.

The issue, of course, being that no such evidence likely exists.

Of course, you are only able to say this now, before a word has been spoken by the defence on behalf of the accused. I remember earlier in the investigation process you stating "the prosecution case is flawed, but let's see what happens in court". Please up-date us now on whether and why you think the prosecution case is any way less flawed or 'more perfect', than before the trial started.

[jimmybkk]

Great -- another Boogie Man argument. Everybody knows who did it but no one will say who or can prove it; follow the money (what money?); everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

From All The President's Men on the Watergate Break-in investigation:

Howard Simons: Then can we use their names?

Carl Bernstein: No.

Ben Bradlee (The Boss): Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?

As a movie buff Mr Crab maybe you can help me remember the name of an old western movie I once saw. In the movie a quiet town full of God-fearing folk gets taken over and terrorized by a ruthless and violent gang of bandits who rape the women, pillage the town's supplies and intimidate the townsfolk into submission and silence. A local Marshall or Sheriff gets wind that something is amiss in this town and so goes to investigate. He meets with the chief bandit who tells him there's nothing going on and everything in the town is just hunky dory. To prove his point he calls a town meeting and invites the townsfolk to come forth and tell the Sheriff/Marshall of any grievances they may have. With sheepish expressions the townsfolk remain silent and the chief bandit proudly states: "See? I told you there's nothing going on here..." as the rest of the bandits nod their heads and murmur their agreement, and so the Sheriff/Marshall has no choice but to continue on his way.

In that movie the only people suggesting that the silence of the townsfolk confirmed no wrongdoing was taking place were the bad guys. Does it ring any bells...?

Regarding the Koh Tao case, how do you know that "no one has publicly said that they saw him;"? I would agree that I have not seen any published accounts of people seeing him, but that could be because the media refused to publish such accounts. If I see an event take place and contact my local media to report what I have seen, have i publicly said what I saw? Or in your opinion is it only to be considered "public" when the media decide to air/publish the story?

The police were responsible for conducting interviews with locals, examining CCTV etc. and from their investigations they concluded that the person you are referring to was their prime suspect and 9 days after the murders took place they even went so far as naming him.. It is a bit of a stretch of the imagination to believe they were so convinced of his involvement without any of the people they interviewed saying they had seen him, and none of the CCTV footage they examined showing him to be on the island at that time. And then, when they did "go public" and actually named their prime suspect, what happened...? Well, the newspaper that reported the story ended up getting sued... for reporting a story that was released by the police... hmmm.... go figure...

And you are genuinely surprised that no individual has come forth to publicly say that they saw him....?

I know that the individual in question is not on trial and has been exonerated based on DNA tests, and that's fine - it is what it is, but please, let's not be using an absence of publicly stated sightings as evidence of anything other than fear/caution when it has already been shown that going public gets you in a whole heap of sh1t, even when you're a national newspaper and what you're publicizing is a statement released by the police.

[berybert]

The phone was dumped there by a friend of the defendants, they gave it to him to throw it away; I suppose giving an expensive phone to someone and saying "dump it in the sea" would sound a little suspicious.

One would describe your version strange I think.

The scenario you suggest is that the 2 murderers decided to ask their friend to dispose of evidence taken from the crime scene of perhaps the most high profile case on Koh Tao. And to not appear suspicious they didnt tell him to dump it in the sea because it would appear suspicious. Really??? Come on do you Really Believe what you have suggested.

This story never ceases to amaze me. The comments and views of some contributors are bizarre to say the least. Totally illogical.

Firstly the chances of the murderer taking items from the victims home is slim in my opinon. In the event of the place is crawling with the RTP, disposal in the area of your home is highly unlikely as well. You would have to have the IQ of a banana to do that.

It's not my version, it's the version of the two defendants and the two witnesses that testified.

As for criminals keeping incriminating evidence in their homes... have you seen the news lately?

Well I missed that, when did the defendants take the stand ?

Or do you mean its the version the RTP claim the defendants told them, I do wish people would stop distorting the truth.

[JLCrab]

Great -- another Boogie Man argument. Everybody knows who did it but no one will say who or can prove it; follow the money (what money?); everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

From All The President's Men on the Watergate Break-in investigation:

Howard Simons: Then can we use their names?

Carl Bernstein: No.

Ben Bradlee (The Boss): Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?

< snip >

Regarding the Koh Tao case, how do you know that "no one has publicly said that they saw him;"? I would agree that I have not seen any published accounts of people seeing him, but that could be because the media refused to publish such accounts. If I see an event take place and contact my local media to report what I have seen, have i publicly said what I saw? Or in your opinion is it only to be considered "public" when the media decide to air/publish the story?

< snip 2>

And you are genuinely surprised that no individual has come forth to publicly say that they saw him....?

< snip 3 >

No I do not recall the movie you describe. If the newspaper is worried about divulging the identity of a person with knowledge of a case, then they don't reveal the source. And yes it is public knowledge when I can read about it on Reuters, etc. I don't believe that anyone could come forward with any compelling substantiated information on a case like this and a newspaper would not print it or put it on its website quoting 'a source'.

Am I surprised that no one has come forward with any hard core information related to the crime? Yes. Since on here so many persons are said to have such information I am surprised that no even one will offer evidence to clear the 2 accused. I also believe it is possible to whatever extent that no one has come forward because there is no person with such compelling information.

Edited August 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[JLCrab]

Great -- another Boogie Man argument. Everybody knows who did it but no one will say who or can prove it; follow the money (what money?); everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

From All The President's Men on the Watergate Break-in investigation:

Howard Simons: Then can we use their names?

Carl Bernstein: No.

Ben Bradlee (The Boss): Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?

< snip >

Regarding the Koh Tao case, how do you know that "no one has publicly said that they saw him;"? I would agree that I have not seen any published accounts of people seeing him, but that could be because the media refused to publish such accounts. If I see an event take place and contact my local media to report what I have seen, have i publicly said what I saw? Or in your opinion is it only to be considered "public" when the media decide to air/publish the story?

< snip 2>

And you are genuinely surprised that no individual has come forth to publicly say that they saw him....?

< snip 3 >

No I do not recall the movie you describe. If the newspaper is worried about divulging the identity of a person with knowledge of a case, then they don't reveal the source. And yes it is public knowledge when I can read about it on Reuters, etc. I don't believe that anyone could come forward with any compelling substantiated information on a case like this and a newspaper would not print it or put it on its website quoting 'a source'.

Am I surprised that no one has come forward with any hard core information related to the crime? Yes. Since on here so many persons are said to have such information I am surprised that no even one will offer evidence to clear the 2 accused. I also believe it is possible to whatever extent that no one has come forward because there is no person with such compelling information.

If YOU lived on the Island would YOU come forward with info...?

If I lived on the island and believed in Truth & Justice I would make some arrangement to provide any genuinely compelling information I had that would spring the 2 falsely accused or else I just don't care about Truth & Justice.

[Darkknight666]

Great -- another Boogie Man argument. Everybody knows who did it but no one will say who or can prove it; follow the money (what money?); everyone knows the kid was there and then made his 4 hour escape to Bangkok but no one has publicly said that they saw him; etc. All we get are the 101 reasons why these things cannot happen.

From All The President's Men on the Watergate Break-in investigation:

Howard Simons: Then can we use their names?

Carl Bernstein: No.

Ben Bradlee (The Boss): Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?

< snip >

Regarding the Koh Tao case, how do you know that "no one has publicly said that they saw him;"? I would agree that I have not seen any published accounts of people seeing him, but that could be because the media refused to publish such accounts. If I see an event take place and contact my local media to report what I have seen, have i publicly said what I saw? Or in your opinion is it only to be considered "public" when the media decide to air/publish the story?

< snip 2>

And you are genuinely surprised that no individual has come forth to publicly say that they saw him....?

< snip 3 >

No I do not recall the movie you describe. If the newspaper is worried about divulging the identity of a person with knowledge of a case, then they don't reveal the source. And yes it is public knowledge when I can read about it on Reuters, etc. I don't believe that anyone could come forward with any compelling substantiated information on a case like this and a newspaper would not print it or put it on its website quoting 'a source'.

Am I surprised that no one has come forward with any hard core information related to the crime? Yes. Since on here so many persons are said to have such information I am surprised that no even one will offer evidence to clear the 2 accused. I also believe it is possible to whatever extent that no one has come forward because there is no person with such compelling information.

If YOU lived on the Island would YOU come forward with info...?

If I lived on the island and believed in Truth & Justice I would make some arrangement to provide any genuinely compelling information I had that would spring the 2 falsely accused or else I just don't care about Truth & Justice.

Would a Farang be witness if they were a resident of Koh Tao? Depends on the person and their legal status/employment. Personally, if I were a witness my first concern would be getting off the small island where almost anything can be bought and paid for no matter what. Once off the island I would give anonymous interviews to the press and in the presence of officials from my embassy I would give sworn statements to the police. Mind you, I have a proper visa and income and nothing to hide from authorities.

Would a Thai? Highly unlikely a Thai would risk their neck to help two Burmese migrants (B2 attorneys being an anomaly) in any way. It would almost certainly have to be a very ballsy Hi-So Thai to provide against in this case or a foreigner. I'd like to hear more from Sonti.

I realize, JLC you're playing Devils advocate here, nice change from the full on schills who've populated the thread.

Edit: Apologies for the mangled post, using mobile.

Edited August 31, 2015 by Darkknight666

[AleG]

It's not my version, it's the version of the two defendants and the two witnesses that testified.

As for criminals keeping incriminating evidence in their homes... have you seen the news lately?

Well I missed that, when did the defendants take the stand ?

Or do you mean its the version the RTP claim the defendants told them, I do wish people would stop distorting the truth.

The two defendants testified in the presence of their lawyers that they simply "found" the phone on the night of the murders, witnesses testified in court on October 14th of last year that they were given that phone by the defendants.

If you want to call them liars so be it.