Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[lucaswallachia]

So is this pic not right, with the clothes as they were at the crime scene on the right and the left and center pics of them piled neatly on the rock? Were the clothes supposed to be even more scattered than they are in the right pic?

[BritTim]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

[thailandchilli]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

[lucaswallachia]

So The senior investigating officer insisted there was no evidence to suggest she was followed from the bar. This might actually be true.

But what about the possibility the person she had an altercation with, together with some buddies, left the bar earlier?

what about the possibility this gang headed to the ocean view, weaponizing themself with let´s say a garden hoe and a hammer from the ocean view yard?

What about the possibilty of them knowing the best spot for an ambush between AC-BAR and ocean view, waiting their some 30 meters away, smoke a cigarette while waiting and charge on Hannah and David, who were simply returning to their accomomodation?

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I had a quote of one of Hannah's friends, i think it was Emma, saying David was 'smitten' with Hannah, so i do think they were most likely doing that.

[catsanddogs]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

Disagree. Not safe to assume they went there to have sex at all!

All these photos beg the question of who took the photos of the clothes when they were scattered on the beach and posted them on FB and WHY? Someone who knew there was going to be a cover up maybe?

[thailandchilli]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

Disagree. Not safe to assume they went there to have sex at all!

All these photos beg the question of who took the photos of the clothes when they were scattered on the beach and posted them on FB and WHY? Someone who knew there was going to be a cover up maybe?

Agree, the clothes were scattered all around, not the scene of intimacy at all. Regards the other comment that it was possibly a matter of disrespect for being intimate near King Rama Rock, well this would then count out the Burmese as they have no affinity to this.

[catsanddogs]

Who took this photograph? Was it posted on Facebook? And when? Anyone know? Trousers/shorts look inside out like they could have been taken off in a hurry. That's how they look when you pull trousers off a sleeping kid from the waist down before you turn them in the right way. They could have been pulled off David at some point after his death or during a struggle. The fact that these photos exist means that someone was there to take them before the police tidied them up and folded them into a pile (to look like Hannah and David were having sex?). There must be some way of finding out who took the photos.

[Slip]

It seems to me that there is a new shill on the block. The comment to the effect that we can all trust in an enormous and unsubstantiated assumption that the unfortunate couple were having sex is outrageous in my eyes, and has zero evidence to support it. Troll on.

[frank83628]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

why are they not likely?….without sounding callus..who described their characters? pretty sure lots of backpackers do a lot more than they ever tell their parents about,..i know one of my ex girlfriends parents would never believe somethings their angelic daughter got up to!

with regards to the clothes...there were a lot of rumours and gossip flying around in the first days after the murders, the press had no real info and would run with anything as long as they had something write, I'm not defending the police by any means but unless you saw it on a televised report i would take what you read with a pinch of salt as the majority of stories/news reports that came out in the beginning were based on 3rd or 4th hand information and possibly incorrect or lost in translation or somethings omitted…..

[Dr Phil]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

Almost naked (still wearing one sock) with his clothes strewn around according to initial photos. This is, indeed, a great question. One possibility is that the perpetrators removed his clothes and washed them in the sea to remove their blood. At the trial, I believe the prosecution showed only later photos with the clothing neatly placed together, so this question may not be answered at the trial. As no forensic examination of the alleged murder weapon was done, it is fair to assume that the clothing was not carefully examined either.

The released CCTV and photos from the crime scene circulating in the web indicate a mismatch (Hannah´s sandals and Davids trouser). Since the guest house was close and I assume they had their keys with them, it might also be possible the culprits took fresh clothes from there and planted it at the crimescene (underwear, sandals, Davids trouser).

I think if the clothes were washed in the sea they should be wet in the crime scene fotos, which they don´t look for me...

I have my problems with Davids shirt though, i could imagine him having two similar trousers, but twice the same shirt? But than, he came from the beach bar, it was warm... he maybe had just taken it off for his walk home. (as we have seen from the running man video others we´re also moving around topless this night)...

David was sharing the same room with his friend, so i dont think anbody could of entered his room with his friend noticing.

As far as i can remember he was sharing an appartment with his friend, but are you sure there was only one sleeping room? I don´t now the accomodation, can anyone clarify this point?

[frank83628]

It seems to me that there is a new shill on the block. The comment to the effect that we can all trust in an enormous and unsubstantiated assumption that the unfortunate couple were having sex is outrageous in my eyes, and has zero evidence to support it. Troll on.

yeah right ..as opposed to someone claiming the whole scene was staged by the culprits or another claim the clothes were taken from their rooms or the numerous others claims…pretty logical assumption if you want to think logically.

[Slip]

speculation and assumption are not the same thing.

EDIT- there is more at stake here than me receiving a ban. I will not be baited by trolls.

Edited September 4, 2015 by Slip

[thailandchilli]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

why are they not likely?….without sounding callus..who described their characters? pretty sure lots of backpackers do a lot more than they ever tell their parents about,..i know one of my ex girlfriends parents would never believe somethings their angelic daughter got up to!

with regards to the clothes...there were a lot of rumours and gossip flying around in the first days after the murders, the press had no real info and would run with anything as long as they had something write, I'm not defending the police by any means but unless you saw it on a televised report i would take what you read with a pinch of salt as the majority of stories/news reports that came out in the beginning were based on 3rd or 4th hand information and possibly incorrect or lost in translation or somethings omitted…..

If these are rumours regarding the clothes then its rumour being circulated by the RTP and its not from old reports either its from the prosecutions session a couple of weeks ago:

Pol Lt Jakkrapan

"A used condom, grey pants with a belt, a pair of canvas shoes, and a pair of pink sandals were piled neatly nearby."

This is clearly a false statement made by him, why?

My opinion is that it fits in with the lovemaking senario as opposed to the reality where they were scattered all over the place

Edited September 4, 2015 by thailandchilli

[boomerangutang]

If you do a search "Koh Tao policeman challenged over killings " they speak about how the clothes were found piled neatly nearby.

cl1.jpg

I assume the picture on the right is how they were found first. Theres David's shorts and Hannahs panties in the foreground and David's tshirt in the middle and his show, though i wonder what the white thing is to the upper right.

The clothes (particularly David's) sure look laundered to me. David may have been fighting without a shirt, but he would surely have had pants on (he came down to the beach looking for Hannah), and his pants don't show any blood at all. If the crime wrapped up at 5 am, then there was still a few hours before police arrived to cordone off the scene. Is there a drying machine (the type found at a laundromat) anywhere nearby or as part of AC Resort's services? Washing could be done in 10 minutes, and drying in a machine might take 20. Were the clothes damp when found? If so, was it salt water or fresh water? I sure wish RTP had the sense to thoroughly check laundering facilities near the crime scene, particularly facilities Mon would use. It's yet another of the hundreds of things RTP screwed up about.

And what about the fast-boat driver who spent the night in a cave in the woods, the night after the crime, - and cops found him they said he was too drugged to speak coherently. In wondrous RTP fashion, they let him alone from that moment on. If this case were trying to find the real culprits, he could be an important witness. But because the trial is not trying to find the real criminals, the boat driver becomes a non-entity. ....and any video of boats leaving the island on Monday morning become so unimportant as to not even warrant looking at CCTV footage.

i think it fairly safe to assume they (Hannah and David) went there to have sex,......

'Safe to assume....' for Nomsod or Mon or RTP or the prosecution and all the entities trying to frame up the B2, ....but not 'safe to assume' for anyone who looks at the case objectively.

[Slip]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

Sadly, none of these speculations can be dismissed out of hand. Based on what is known of Hannah and David's characters, none are very likely. Also, how does it explain the clothing being initially strewn around, and why did the local police try to pretend otherwise?

why are they not likely?….without sounding callus..who described their characters? pretty sure lots of backpackers do a lot more than they ever tell their parents about,..i know one of my ex girlfriends parents would never believe somethings their angelic daughter got up to!

with regards to the clothes...there were a lot of rumours and gossip flying around in the first days after the murders, the press had no real info and would run with anything as long as they had something write, I'm not defending the police by any means but unless you saw it on a televised report i would take what you read with a pinch of salt as the majority of stories/news reports that came out in the beginning were based on 3rd or 4th hand information and possibly incorrect or lost in translation or somethings omitted…..

Most of the rumours/ gossip (if that is how you want to term it) flying around in the early days came directly from the boys in brown. (Including the shocking and disgusting photos of the crime scene that were posted on social media).

[frank83628]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never have sex on a beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

Edited September 4, 2015 by frank83628

[Slip]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never want to have sex on a beach on the beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

Your logic is warped- in your original quote you said "it is fairly safe to assume", in this quote you say "are you saying that young kids...would never want to have sex on a beach/ you can't say it (is) impossible". The two are not the same, so unfortunately for you, your argument has zero merit.

[AmyJane]

I notice the pink flip flops, which i guess Hannah wore, but on the night she was wearing white flat shoes, off course she could have changed which suggests she went back to her room. Or maybe i need to go to spec savers, apologies if i am wrong.

Video at 31 seconds

[boomerangutang]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

In initial reports by the 1st RTP team (remember them? They were the guys trying to solve the crime), they speculated that David's shorts were pulled off his body after he was killed. It would make sense. Whomever David fought with (even if he was blindsided) would have very likely left blood (or saliva or hair) on David's clothes. Shit like that doesn't happen antiseptically. The perps would have the sense to want to either dispose of David's soiled clothes or launder them. Looking at the clothes on display, it looks like D's clothes were laundered, maybe using bleach with soap. Probably same for Hannah's clothes.

The perps were likely experienced at rapes and maybe also at murders, so they knew something about the problems of leaving traces at crime scenes. I'm surprised they didn't dispose of the hoe, but maybe in the darkness they didn't see it, or because they were so focused (and adrenaline infused) on dealing with bloody clothes, that they couldn't cover all the bases. Could there have been a shark tooth ring unwittingly left on the beach? It wouldn't have been what Mon was in such a hurry (to put in his pocket?) could it? - when he's shown quickly scurrying around inside the cordoned crime scene Monday morning.

Edited September 4, 2015 by boomerangutang

[thailandchilli]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never have sex on a beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

Absolutely not, but you saw my post about the false statement in court by the RTP saying they were in a neat pile right? Why would they say that when those clothes were not in a neat pile when found? Because thats the story the RTP want to have us believe. Now in reality could it be true?

As stated before every indication is that no its not true based on the true condition of the clothes, the fact that it was the first time they had ever met, in all pics of them that night they were never together and infact David went home with Chris leaving Hannah alone with her friends. Obviously there are reports they were seen together later in the AC bar but that does not indicate any intimacy. The estimated time of death as stated by the Police pathologist was 5.30am. The estimated time of leaving the AC bar was between 2 and 3am. That leaves a minimum gap of 2.5 hours and up to 3.5 hours that is unaccounted for, where I believe something much more sinister happened.

In addition we have the blonde hair that Hannah was found clutching, this clearly does not fit in the the prosecution case at all as its proof there is at least another person unaccounted for in this crime

[boomerangutang]

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never have sex on a beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

Frank, you start by making a statement about a specific activity (David and Hannah having sex). You get resistance, then you come back with a silly generalization. No one except you is bringing up the topic of whether "young kids after a night out would ever have sex on a beach" Try not to zig zag all over the place, and you might get taken a little bit seriously.

[frank83628]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

In initial reports by the 1st RTP team (remember them? They were the guys trying to solve the crime), they speculated that David's shorts were pulled off his body after he was killed. It would make sense. Whomever David fought with (even if he was blindsided) would have very likely left blood (or saliva or hair) on David's clothes. Shit like that doesn't happen antiseptically. The perps would have the sense to want to either dispose of David's soiled clothes or launder them. Looking at the clothes on display, it looks like D's clothes were laundered, maybe using bleach with soap. Probably same for Hannah's clothes.

The perps were likely experienced at rapes and maybe also at murders, so they knew something about the problems of leaving traces at crime scenes. I'm surprised they didn't dispose of the hoe, but maybe in the darkness they didn't see it, or because they were so focused (and adrenaline infused) on dealing with bloody clothes, that they could cover all the bases. Could there have been a shark tooth ring left on the beach? It wouldn't have been what Mon was in such a hurry to put in his pocket, could it? - when he's shown quickly scurrying around inside the cordoned crime scene Monday morning.

but they left the condom they raped her with?

[thailandchilli]

^^^^^best ignore its getting tedious

[stephenterry]

All the above isn't an issue. Facts are that the b2 are scapegoats If anyone on here can provide evidence to disprove that I would like to see it.

[boomerangutang]

Well the question remains, why was David naked? There is no blood on his clothes so he must of been naked before he was killed.

In initial reports by the 1st RTP team (remember them? They were the guys trying to solve the crime), they speculated that David's shorts were pulled off his body after he was killed. It would make sense. Whomever David fought with (even if he was blindsided) would have very likely left blood (or saliva or hair) on David's clothes. Shit like that doesn't happen antiseptically. The perps would have the sense to want to either dispose of David's soiled clothes or launder them. Looking at the clothes on display, it looks like D's clothes were laundered, maybe using bleach with soap. Probably same for Hannah's clothes.

The perps were likely experienced at rapes and maybe also at murders, so they knew something about the problems of leaving traces at crime scenes. I'm surprised they didn't dispose of the hoe, but maybe in the darkness they didn't see it, or because they were so focused (and adrenaline infused) on dealing with bloody clothes, that they could cover all the bases. Could there have been a shark tooth ring left on the beach? It wouldn't have been what Mon was in such a hurry to put in his pocket, could it? - when he's shown quickly scurrying around inside the cordoned crime scene Monday morning.

but they left the condom they raped her with?

Hello! The condom was unused. It means absolutely zilch to the case. It's a party beach. People go down there, particularly around the rocks, to boom boom boy boy. I would say you're grasping at straws (trying to give some credence to the RTP frame up), but you don't even get straws - maybe a few spider webs.

[StealthEnergiser]

All the above isn't an issue. Facts are that the b2 are scapegoats If anyone on here can provide evidence to disprove that I would like to see it.

I Agree

[stephenterry]

I've read B/S after B/S on here and it's crystal clear that the b2 are scapegoats

[AleG]

I guess the actual trial got boring, time for the same old speculations that have been flogged more than a rented mule and gone nowhere for the past 11 months to be dumped on the thread.

[BritTim]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never have sex on a beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

Absolutely not, but you saw my post about the false statement in court by the RTP saying they were in a neat pile right? Why would they say that when those clothes were not in a neat pile when found? Because thats the story the RTP want to have us believe. Now in reality could it be true?

As stated before every indication is that no its not true based on the true condition of the clothes, the fact that it was the first time they had ever met, in all pics of them that night they were never together and infact David went home with Chris leaving Hannah alone with her friends. Obviously there are reports they were seen together later in the AC bar but that does not indicate any intimacy. The estimated time of death as stated by the Police pathologist was 5.30am. The estimated time of leaving the AC bar was between 2 and 3am. That leaves a minimum gap of 2.5 hours and up to 3.5 hours that is unaccounted for, where I believe something much more sinister happened.

In addition we have the blonde hair that Hannah was found clutching, this clearly does not fit in the the prosecution case at all as its proof there is at least another person unaccounted for in this crime

Just on a point of information, we really do not know the time of death. The police pathologist stated the time of death could not be determined because the bodies were frozen. The doctor called to the scene presumably did not know how to use a rectal thermometer, or was not asked to estimate time of death. My own suspicion is that it probably occurred prior to the initial running man CCTV (always assuming the date/time on that can be trusted).

[catsanddogs]

i think it fairly safe to assume they went there to have sex, hence being naked or even skinny dipping but i would assume the former... whether they were followed and attacked out of jealousy, or discovered and attacked out of lust, or spurned some unwanted advances is unknown…my first thought on seeing the scene was that it might have been out of disrespect, it was the king rama rock after all.

I think the defense and many people here disagree with your fairly safe assumption. Its very convenient because it does fit in with the RTP scenario however we are seeing time and time again how this is being called seriously into question.

i understand the things are called into question, but are you saying that young kids after a night out would never have sex on a beach? i dont know if they liked each other in that way but surely you can't say it impossible? and no disrespect meant

I think that's a fair enough statement. But saying it's a possibility is a far cry from saying it's safe to assume. The latter is too close to RTP speak for comfort for most on here.