Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[JLCrab]

So if Crabby was a Burmese illegal worker he would step forward.......Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah......gawd.....

If I was a Thai or a Burmese I would get an agent to write a deal with Rupert Murdoch or the Daily Mail for the exclusive rights to my story and give the information needed to spring the 2 unjustly accused. But your hypothetical scenario assumes there IS a such a person with that information and I am just as likely to believe that the reason no one has come forward is because there is not.

[Darkknight666]

I find it quite curious why Sean McAnna/Dilupo etc. refuses to even give an opinion of what he thinks happened, or what he heard that week he was on the Island after the murders. If his story is true and he really knows nothing why not at least speculate what he thinks might have occurred? He's essentially trying to run and hide from the events on Sept 14 2014 on KT, but why?

I'd also like to know why he thinks he was threatened that night. Would people with vested interests in the Island threaten a random tourist before anyone actually knows what happened to save the image of the island? A lot of things just don't add up if we assume the B2 are guilty.

[AleG]

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.

The defense has claimed some months ago that they have one or more witnesses that can prove the innocence of the defendants, so I don't see why some people are so worried about anything.

[KunMatt]

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.

Still clinging to this one sole thing I see.

Until the B2 confess to this during the actual trial it's an inconsequential non-fact.

So do you have anything else except for this phone which may or may not have belonged to one of the victims, and may or may not have been taken by the B2, and may or may not have been found behind their residence?

If not then there is a good reason why you have to keep bringing up such a small thing when all of the greater more solid evidence which would usually be available to convict someone of murder and rape is missing from the case.

[balo]

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...?

Maybe not , but I'm quite surprised than no one has spoken up after they left the island , you know , tourists, expats, immigration workers who are safe back in their home lands.

Edited August 31, 2015 by balo

[fireplay]

Ok finally breaking my silence after a long time following this. I have read every thread, every post, and feel a bit humbled to be actually entering this arena. My simple thought is...if this is david millers phone, why hasn't photos data numbers contacts etc been extracted and displayed prominantly on a big screen in the court. Please don't reply if you genuinely think smashing a phone to bits actually eliminates said data. Ok back to my observer status...carry on mates!

[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...?

Maybe not , but I'm quite surprised than no one has spoken up after they left the island , you know , tourists, expats, immigration workers who are safe back in their home lands.

The problem there, Balo, is even if the people who went home who had information gave it to police, it's at their (RTP) discretion what to make public or not make public. I've read that people have given their statements already via multiple channels yet we've heard nothing of it likely only will from the defense... Which I am not thrilled about, that's the way it is in the Thai legal system.

Being that the crime occurred late at night on a somewhat secluded beach there could be no eye witnesses to the crime I agree, but there should be at least a few willing to give their testimony that they were in the bar that night or with David or Hannah at some point in the evening. I've seen nothing from the trial that indicates any witnesses from AC and Choppers have testified to who was in the bar that night. The prosecuting attorneys can't find anyone who was in those bars on that night? Seems odd to me.

[JLCrab]

Yes -- The British tabloids are notoriously timid in tracking down friends of a murder victim or UK persons who might have been at the scene of the crime when it occurred and are now at home in the UK.

[StealthEnergiser]

Ok finally breaking my silence after a long time following this. I have read every thread, every post, and feel a bit humbled to be actually entering this arena. My simple thought is...if this is david millers phone, why hasn't photos data numbers contacts etc been extracted and displayed prominantly on a big screen in the court. Please don't reply if you genuinely think smashing a phone to bits actually eliminates said data. Ok back to my observer status...carry on mates!

Exactly the reason may well be that the smashed up phone belonged to another person involved in the crime and it was intentionally smashed so the person could not be identified I mentioned this a long way back in another thread.

Maybe it belonged to someone and they had left the island and gave orders to smash it up and ditch it we can think of many different scenarios .

Also the video of the running man when it was enhanced looked like the person may have been carrying a phone could someone have mixed up phones we don't know.

But this smashed up phone should have been forensically examined I hope the defence call for it.

Edited August 31, 2015 by StealthEnergiser

[Darkknight666]

Yes -- The British tabloids are notoriously timid in tracking down friends of a murder victim or UK persons who might have been at the scene of the crime when it occurred and are now at home in the UK.

Maybe read where he actually is? Not in the UK and will not give any further statement. He's also a convicted sex offender. Not worth seeing what he knows especially since he was escorted off the island by the police and press. Seems relevant to me.

[AleG]

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.

Still clinging to this one sole thing I see.

Until the B2 confess to this during the actual trial it's an inconsequential non-fact.

So do you have anything else except for this phone which may or may not have belonged to one of the victims, and may or may not have been taken by the B2, and may or may not have been found behind their residence?

If not then there is a good reason why you have to keep bringing up such a small thing when all of the greater more solid evidence which would usually be available to convict someone of murder and rape is missing from the case.

David Miller's phone ending up in the hands of the suspects is not inconsequential.

The reason this keeps popping up is because of people that insist on dismissing something that to any reasonable person would constitute very relevant evidence as being a small, inconsequential thing.

That you don't see that doesn't put you in a good position to be the judge of what evidence should be considered more solid or not.

[JLCrab]

Yes -- The British tabloids are notoriously timid in tracking down friends of a murder victim or UK persons who might have been at the scene of the crime when it occurred and are now at home in the UK.

Maybe read where he actually is? Not in the UK and will not give any further statement. He's also a convicted sex offender. Not worth seeing what he knows especially since he was escorted off the island by the police and press. Seems relevant to me.

Huh?

[AleG]

Ok finally breaking my silence after a long time following this. I have read every thread, every post, and feel a bit humbled to be actually entering this arena. My simple thought is...if this is david millers phone, why hasn't photos data numbers contacts etc been extracted and displayed prominantly on a big screen in the court. Please don't reply if you genuinely think smashing a phone to bits actually eliminates said data. Ok back to my observer status...carry on mates!

Exactly the reason may well be that the smashed up phone belonged to another person involved in the crime and it was intentionally smashed so the person could not be identified I mentioned this a long way back in another thread.

Maybe it belonged to someone and they had left the island and gave orders to smash it up and ditch it we can think of many different scenarios .

Also the video of the running when it was enhanced looked like the person may have been carrying a phone could someone have mixed up phones we don't know.

But this smashed up phone should have been forensically examined I hope the defence call for it.

Yes, you can create all sort of scenarios, specially if you ignore the testimonies from witnesses and the actual defendants.

[fireplay]

Ok finally breaking my silence after a long time following this. I have read every thread, every post, and feel a bit humbled to be actually entering this arena. My simple thought is...if this is david millers phone, why hasn't photos data numbers contacts etc been extracted and displayed prominantly on a big screen in the court. Please don't reply if you genuinely think smashing a phone to bits actually eliminates said data. Ok back to my observer status...carry on mates!

Exactly the reason may well be that the smashed up phone belonged to another person involved in the crime and it was intentionally smashed so the person could not be identified I mentioned this a long way back in another thread.

Maybe it belonged to someone and they had left the island and gave orders to smash it up and ditch it we can think of many different scenarios .

Also the video of the running when it was enhanced looked like the person may have been carrying a phone could someone have mixed up phones we don't know.

But this smashed up phone should have been forensically examined I hope the defence call for it.

Yes, you can create all sort of scenarios, specially if you ignore the testimonies from witnesses and the actual defendants.

Ha aleg and ignore the data on the phone chai pa...

[AleG]

I haven't speculated. I have only said there is no such publicly available information. If someone says that that have exculpatory information but we are not going to tell you what it is, then that is not publicly available information.

Not to mention what that would say about the character of the person making such a claim.

[AleG]

Yes, you can create all sort of scenarios, specially if you ignore the testimonies from witnesses and the actual defendants.

Ha aleg and ignore the data on the phone chai pa...

Unlike you, I don't presume to know what data, if any, remained on the phone because I don't know in which condition it was when found.

[thailandchilli]

Yes, you can create all sort of scenarios, specially if you ignore the testimonies from witnesses and the actual defendants.

Ha aleg and ignore the data on the phone chai pa...

I'd like to know if there was any data on the phone that was found at the actual crime scene, the one the RTP investigator in court said he could not confirm who it belonged to, I'd also like confirmation of who it belonged to, or rather I'm sure the defense and the judge does.

As for the iPhone found in the bushes some time and maybe at least 2 weeks after, well I'm suspicious of that, leaving a phone in a clear plastic bag in the bushes and it was not found until the witnesses told the RTP where it was. mmmmm

[Darkknight666]

Yes -- The British tabloids are notoriously timid in tracking down friends of a murder victim or UK persons who might have been at the scene of the crime when it occurred and are now at home in the UK.

Maybe read where he actually is? Not in the UK and will not give any further statement. He's also a convicted sex offender. Not worth seeing what he knows especially since he was escorted off the island by the police and press. Seems relevant to me.

Huh?

My mistake there JLC, thought you were talking about Sean.

[JLCrab]

Why Huh?? Simple -- those are friends of the victim Ms. Witheridge who have most likely returned to the UK and would be easy to

find for any dogged UK newspaper reporter whose editor has said: Find'em or don't come back.

I don't know that any of the late Ms.Witheridge's friends who may have been with her in Koh Taio were convicted sex offenders.

EDIT -- Overlap. OK

Edited August 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[berybert]

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.

Still clinging to this one sole thing I see.

Until the B2 confess to this during the actual trial it's an inconsequential non-fact.

So do you have anything else except for this phone which may or may not have belonged to one of the victims, and may or may not have been taken by the B2, and may or may not have been found behind their residence?

If not then there is a good reason why you have to keep bringing up such a small thing when all of the greater more solid evidence which would usually be available to convict someone of murder and rape is missing from the case.

David Miller's phone ending up in the hands of the suspects is not inconsequential.

The reason this keeps popping up is because of people that insist on dismissing something that to any reasonable person would constitute very relevant evidence as being a small, inconsequential thing.

That you don't see that doesn't put you in a good position to be the judge of what evidence should be considered more solid or not.

There is no proof the phone belonged to David. A policeman saying "yeah I have confirmation from a phone call" doesn't cut it with right minded people in a double murder case.

When will you understand we do not accept someone saying something as gospel. We want proof.

Edited August 31, 2015 by berybert

[StealthEnergiser]

Not sure if anybody has noticed this but the forensics person is taking something from the tree it also looks like something has hit the tree as fresh bark is visible , maybe its where the fighting started.

[berybert]

Why Huh?? Simple -- those are friends of the victim Ms. Witheridge who have most likely returned to the UK and would be easy to

find for any dogged UK newspaper reporter whose editor has said: Find'em or don't come back.

I don't know that any of the late Ms.Witheridge's friends who may have been with her in Koh Taio were convicted sex offenders.

EDIT -- Overlap. OK

You have mentions this numerous times.

They had been on the island I think 2 nights ? Probably been in a number of different bars. Might have seen Nomsod once or twice in that time if he was on the island.

Nomsod has no stand out qualities, just looks like an average Thia youngster.

Why would any of David or Hannah's friends notice him above anyone else.

You have a love of posting pictures of island parties showing packed bars full of people. How many of those people could you recognize ?

I guess Nomsod does have one stand out feature even if one poster on here would have you believe most Thais his age have a gimp arm.

Edited August 31, 2015 by berybert

[JLCrab]

The question to the friends might be: On the night of September 14-15 did you see any male with the late Ms. Witheridge giving her attention unwanted or otherwise or cause her to endure any aggravation especially as regards sexual advances?

But thanks guys -- I've dealt with about a 10 man tag-team today and now I'm just going to sign off.

Edited August 31, 2015 by JLCrab

[StealthEnergiser]

The thread is now re-opened on a test basis. Please note the following guidance:

1) Absolutely no bickering allowed. We have on this forum a number of people with opinions set in stone, both for and against the guilt of the accused (despite the fact that the trial has not even finished). Most of these members, on both "sides" of the issue, will not change their minds based on information or views provided by others. Do not attempt to "persuade" them, as experience has shown this leads nowhere.

Any violation of this will lead to the immediate suspension of all parties involved. We are not going to attempt to wade through multiple posts to who "started" it or who was more at fault than who. Everyone who bickers will be penalized.

2) Post in a manner respectful of the fact that this is not an armchair "whodunnit" for anyone's private entertainment but rather a terrible tragic event affecting flesh and blood people. Treating it as a game or puzzle is highly insensitive and disrespectful of the deceased, their families, and the accused and their families.

Thank you for opening this back up and it is also worth mentioning that it is better to use ignore button if you feel a member is trying derail the topic.

Edited August 31, 2015 by StealthEnergiser

[Darkknight666]

The British Embassy Police Liason is certainly aware that UK authorities do not provide any assistance in death penalty cases, Embassy staff are held accountable and that would definitely be a major cock up on that employees record. It's why RTP don't have any email corespondents or documents to support their claim that the IMEI was David's. I fear much like the majority of the evidence, Police believed a simple official statement from an officer would suffice.

[Aj Mick]

That video is so poor it could have been multiple people, fact. People need to move on from this train of thought, it's become so repetitive, same question, same answers over and over again, sure you can agree on this.

I keep harping on about those Running Man video clips because they're very likely key to establishing whodunit in this case. The RM videos were key factor for the initial RTP team when they announced they found the murderer(s) and arrests were imminent, just days after the crime.

All that changed in a Bkk minute, and we (those of us seeking truth and justice) have some good ideas why. Just because it's annoying or inconvenient (for some) to have those videos in the public record, does not mean we should forget they exist. The Headman's people, RTP and prosecution would like them to have never existed, but that's tough tamales. The cat's out of the bag, and they tell just as scintillating a story now, as they did 11 months ago when first revealed.

If you're a resident of New Orleans, you probably dearly wish Katrina had never come through 10 years ago - but she did, and no amount of wishing will change that.

Boomerangutang,Boomerangutang.. we all know this, the Police announced who they suspected, they were wrong, the case moved on, that's the way it is. It may change over the curse of the trial. Yes, you me and everyone have good idea's, but it means nothing, zero, zilch... Mistakes happen in crime investigations, especially early on, we have seen examples of it recently were the Police are keen to put out names or information and it's incorrect. We all critisice they speak to soon, but in the course of the Koh Tao case people cling to the initial accusations, you can't have it both ways.

Not many mistakes being made in this investigation…… Just shameless chicanery to keep the heat off certain early suspects.

[berybert]

The question to the friends might be: On the night of September 14-15 did you see any male with the late Ms. Witheridge giving her attention unwanted or otherwise or cause her to endure any aggravation especially as regards sexual advances?

But thanks guys -- I've dealt with about a 10 man tag-team today and now I'm just going to sign off.

Yes what a sensible question to ask. I expect her friends might have replied, "She was young she was good looking and she was blond"

From that reply you can make your own assumptions.

You have done well to deal with a 10 man tag team, and even better today no mention of who was buying jelly donuts and who was buying cream ones.

Enjoy your rest.

[AleG]

The thread is now re-opened on a test basis. Please note the following guidance:

1) Absolutely no bickering allowed. We have on this forum a number of people with opinions set in stone, both for and against the guilt of the accused (despite the fact that the trial has not even finished). Most of these members, on both "sides" of the issue, will not change their minds based on information or views provided by others. Do not attempt to "persuade" them, as experience has shown this leads nowhere.

Any violation of this will lead to the immediate suspension of all parties involved. We are not going to attempt to wade through multiple posts to who "started" it or who was more at fault than who. Everyone who bickers will be penalized.

2) Post in a manner respectful of the fact that this is not an armchair "whodunnit" for anyone's private entertainment but rather a terrible tragic event affecting flesh and blood people. Treating it as a game or puzzle is highly insensitive and disrespectful of the deceased, their families, and the accused and their families.

Thank you for opening this back up and it is also worth mentioning that it is better to use ignore button if you feel a member is trying derail the topic.

Using the names of the victims in a username by someone who evidently created an account with the purpose of promoting the work of the defense is an egregious example of something "highly insensitive and disrespectful of the deceased".

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Tomorrow day 13 Koh Tao murder trial. Final prosecution witness is Somsak Norud, main police investigator, Koh Phangan police station.

[StealthEnergiser]