stephenterry Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Following on from my post yesterday, re the defence's main challenge is to bring about a sea change in attitude towards authority.They face an uphill battle, IMO. Here is a snippet from the NRC educational structural reform proposal: All the proposed changes do little to tackle existing social and cultural barriers that have long blocked improvements to the education system. Chief among these is the fact that students are taught to follow orders rather than thinking for themselves. Here, the so-called 12 National Values, which promote order, conformity and respect for authority, warrant close scrutiny. If we want the next generation of Thai workers to meet the challenges of the modern world, they must be instilled with the courage to ask questions. Such freedom and curiosity are not only necessary to professional success, but they also foster liberal values that form the basis of an open and democratic society. My point, relating to the trial, is that the RTP have never been questioned/challenged, because they're in a position of authority. If they say the B2 committed the crimes, their opinion will be respected. And it explains post 241 above. Edited August 21, 2015 by stephenterry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Does anyone know whether, under Thai law, the judge can elect to dismiss the case at the end of the prosecution phase before the defense introduces their own evidence? Maybe, that is what the Thai authorities want to happen. Recall that the defense claim to have explosive forensic evidence that they can only produce during the defense phase, and that they are obliged to keep confidential otherwise. It would be better, from the viewpoint of the Thai authorities, if the Burmese kids were freed and the damaging revelations remain secret. It would explain the incompetence surrounding the prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. A black comedy at its finest but Thailand makes its own reality version with real victims and real suffering being imposed on everyone involved by those that are supposed to uphold the justice in Thailand. There is no hope of a fair trial at this stage unless things get turned around by the defense to such an extent that the judges have to take notice. Underhand tactics like this are deplorable and are an ongoing theme being presented by the prosecution and its witnesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkknight666 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 So this is what the prosecution is dedicating time to, The best they got? Why haven't we heard much about the two roti guys testimony? The potato is getting hotter, who's mitts will it end up in? Why haven't hey even touched the running man video so far? May it implicate a certain "VIP"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Don't confuse "the interests of the Thai authorities" with the interests of the Tuwichien family. The former may not be too concerned with whatever result comes to pass but is most certainly interested in cash and political favours from the latter. If too good a job is done now, there will be no further opportunities for more goodies later. Edited August 21, 2015 by Briggsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 So this is what the prosecution is dedicating time to, The best they got? Why haven't we heard much about the two roti guys testimony? The potato is getting hotter, who's mitts will it end up in? Why haven't hey even touched the running man video so far? May it implicate a certain "VIP"? They dodged past all the CCTV evidence earlier in the trial. We are supposed to believe that the running man is one of the Burmese kids. They do not care that this is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonuk Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Despite all the Keystone Kops type comments on here, whatever the outcome of this trial, the Judge's will have to submit a report detailing the basis of their decision. In the West, a criminal trial is mostly held before a jury and the jury is not required to explain the basis of their decision. So if the 2 accused are indeed found guilty of these crimes, there will be, as required by Thai Criminal Procedure, a detailed report as to how the Judge's came to that conclusion which would also serve as the prime basis for any appeal. Thai Criminal Procedure Code Section 182: After the trial is over,a judgement or order shall be given in accordance with the merits of the case. A judgement or order shall be read in open Court either on the day the trial is over or within three days from such date Worth also mentioning that there is no verbatim transcript of the trial proceedings. Further, as in this case, independent observers can be prevented from recording what is said in court. Thus, what appears in the judge's official report may or may not reflect the evidence produced in court. It is up to the judge, and (by law) no one can criticize any conclusion he comes to, or question what the judge claims was the evidence produced in court. The system seems perfectly designed to be influenced from the outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 So this is what the prosecution is dedicating time to, The best they got? Why haven't we heard much about the two roti guys testimony? The potato is getting hotter, who's mitts will it end up in? Why haven't hey even touched the running man video so far? May it implicate a certain "VIP"? They dodged past all the CCTV evidence earlier in the trial. We are supposed to believe that the running man is one of the Burmese kids. They do not care that this is ridiculous. Yep, it's all about throwing as much mud at the wall and hoping some will stick in the judges' minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Just looking at our (UK) criminal Prosecution Service guidance notes on disclosure to the accused. Disclosure procedure12.20. Disclosure means providing the defence with any prosecution material which has not previously been disclosed to the accused, and which satisfies the disclosure test. If there is no such material the prosecutor must inform the defence in writing. Specimen letters are included at Annex C. Disclosure to the defence must take place as soon as reasonably practicable after the duty arises. 12.21. The prosecutor is responsible for ensuring that effective disclosure of material falling to be disclosed under the CPIA 1996 is made to the accused. Disclosure to the accused can be achieved by either copying the item, or where this is not practicable or desirable, by allowing the accused to inspect the item. 12.22. Where the item to be disclosed is an item that has been copied by the disclosure officer to the prosecutor, it will usually be appropriate for the prosecutor to copy the item on to the defence. However, there may be circumstances where this is not appropriate. For example where: the quality of the copy supplied to the prosecutor is inadequate, or it is in a form which requires specialist copying equipment (for example, audio or video tapes, computer disks), or the prosecutor considers that the material is not suitable for copying for other reasons (for example, sexual content). where the material has yet to be edited by the police. 12.23. In these circumstances, the prosecutor should discuss with the disclosure officer how disclosure to the defence can best be achieved. This may be by arranging for the disclosure officer to edit the material, to copy the original item and send it to the defence direct, or by arranging for the defence to inspect the original item. The decision should be endorsed by the prosecutor on the MG6C and on the disclosure record sheet. 12.24. Where a copy of any disclosable item is given to the accused, the disclosure officer should inform the prosecutor, and supply a copy to the prosecutor, if one has not already been provided. It is important that a careful record is kept by the disclosure officer (and by the prosecutor on the disclosure record sheet) of what items are inspected by or copied to the accused. 12.25. For information that is not recorded in writing, the disclosure officer may decide in what form the material should be disclosed. If a transcript is provided, the disclosure officer must ensure that the transcript is certified as a true record, for example by way of a short statement by the transcriber. It is not necessary for the disclosure officer personally to certify the accuracy of the transcript. 12.26. If the material that satisfies the disclosure test is sensitive, and the prosecutor considers that an application to withhold the material should be made, the application to the court should not delay disclosing non-sensitive material. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/disclosure_manual/disclosure_manual_chapter_12/ Edited August 21, 2015 by Basil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Does anyone know whether, under Thai law, the judge can elect to dismiss the case at the end of the prosecution phase before the defense introduces their own evidence? Maybe, that is what the Thai authorities want to happen. Recall that the defense claim to have explosive forensic evidence that they can only produce during the defense phase, and that they are obliged to keep confidential otherwise. It would be better, from the viewpoint of the Thai authorities, if the Burmese kids were freed and the damaging revelations remain secret. It would explain the incompetence surrounding the prosecution. I hope the judge does not declare a mistrial because I want to see/hear what the defense puts forth. Unfortunately, each day this charade carries on, is another day the scapegoats must be shackled and fed the Thai national dish: soggy white starch a.k.a. rice with, if they're lucky, a cockroach on the side for protein. So this is what the prosecution is dedicating time to, The best they got? Why haven't we heard much about the two roti guys testimony? The potato is getting hotter, who's mitts will it end up in? Why haven't they even touched the running man video so far? May it implicate a certain "VIP"? Prosecution doesn't want to discuss the Running Man videos. All but die-hard RTP echoers can see those videos are not the either of the suspects, and instead look very much like the kid who we're not supposed to mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony121 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Why should they give evidence to the prosecution ? Andy Hall says he has received evidence from the UK and has refused to let anyone know what it is ? The only difference is Andy Hall is meant to be a Human rights defender open to transparency and he is doing exactly the same as the prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkknight666 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Did Mon not say in his interview after being released from interrogation that it was him in the running man video? I have the video saved. Anyway, if that's true and on video he should be a star witness for the prosecution, No? What possible reason could Mon have for being behind the police and roti guys in the photo Boomer found? Same as why was he on the beach during an active investigation? It's all a bit too cozy, isn't it? And his presence has been quite selective, no coming to court or giving interviews he's just faded back into the shadows. And like I keep saying, NomSod nor his attorney have offered any more evidence to the public to help assert his innocence... He's also slunk back off into the shadows. He's also quite proud he got an apology from Khaosod. And yes Khaosod, I won't be reading any more of their stories because they've got no bite. Shame that, they were doing a decent job. Edited August 21, 2015 by Darkknight666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonuk Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg It's beyond a joke now...they can't even follow the rules. Ridiculous transparent lies designed to destroy two young men so that corrupt officials can save face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony121 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Why should they give evidence to the prosecution ? Andy Hall says he has received evidence from the UK and has refused to let anyone know what it is ? The only difference is Andy Hall is meant to be a Human rights defender open to transparency and he is doing exactly the same as the prosecution. "Why should they give evidence to the prosecution ?" Because thats the law of the land in Thailand as well as most countries throughout the world. Regards Andy Hall or rather the defense team getting evidence from the UK or any evidence at all for that matter, the defense have no obligation to show/share their evidence with anyone until or if they are ready to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritTim Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Why should they give evidence to the prosecution ? Andy Hall says he has received evidence from the UK and has refused to let anyone know what it is ? The only difference is Andy Hall is meant to be a Human rights defender open to transparency and he is doing exactly the same as the prosecution. The defense received the information from the UK on the strict condition that it be kept confidential. Thankfully, the UK authorities decided that they were not willing to see the Burmese kids convicted and potentially executed for something they did not do. However, the exculpatory evidence is only intended to be presented if absolutely necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkknight666 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well. No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Why should they give evidence to the prosecution ? Andy Hall says he has received evidence from the UK and has refused to let anyone know what it is ? The only difference is Andy Hall is meant to be a Human rights defender open to transparency and he is doing exactly the same as the prosecution. The defense received the information from the UK on the strict condition that it be kept confidential. Thankfully, the UK authorities decided that they were not willing to see the Burmese kids convicted and potentially executed for something they did not do. However, the exculpatory evidence is only intended to be presented if absolutely necessary. "Hall said the defense team would present evidence from British authorities at odds with the findings presented by Thai investigators. He did not characterize the nature of the evidence and said they were under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. British investigators visited Thailand in October to review the case, but no information from that was made public." http://www.chiangraitimes.com/trail-of-murdered-british-tourists-resumes-in-koh-samui.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony121 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well. No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. I don't have to skew anything its a bit late for that, the prosecution is going to be all wrapped up in a week or so, and regarding your first question my answer is yes ! Why has the other mother not shown up to ill ? your son could be on death row in a few months and you are too sick to go see him in court ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Does anyone know whether, under Thai law, the judge can elect to dismiss the case at the end of the prosecution phase before the defense introduces their own evidence? Maybe, that is what the Thai authorities want to happen. Recall that the defense claim to have explosive forensic evidence that they can only produce during the defense phase, and that they are obliged to keep confidential otherwise. It would be better, from the viewpoint of the Thai authorities, if the Burmese kids were freed and the damaging revelations remain secret. It would explain the incompetence surrounding the prosecution. I hope the judge does not declare a mistrial because I want to see/hear what the defense puts forth. Unfortunately, each day this charade carries on, is another day the scapegoats must be shackled and fed the Thai national dish: soggy white starch a.k.a. rice with, if they're lucky, a cockroach on the side for protein. So this is what the prosecution is dedicating time to, The best they got? Why haven't we heard much about the two roti guys testimony? The potato is getting hotter, who's mitts will it end up in? Why haven't they even touched the running man video so far? May it implicate a certain "VIP"? Prosecution doesn't want to discuss the Running Man videos. All but die-hard RTP echoers can see those videos are not the either of the suspects, and instead look very much like the kid who we're not supposed to mention. I doubt the Judge will call a mistrial as they should have done this weeks ago. I assume as this is a trial by judges they will have to take notes and present a report as to why the find the defendants guilty or not and therefore will have to say what evidence the accept and what they do not. As much as I do believe that the B2 have been stitched up, reporting does seem to be one sided at present. The important thing here is the impartiality of the judges, as this is not just the B2 on trial here but also the Thai judicial system on trail in the eyes of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well. No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. I don't have to skew anything its a bit late for that, the prosecution is going to be all wrapped up in a week or so, and regarding your first question my answer is yes ! Why has the other mother not shown up to ill ? your son could be on death row in a few months and you are too sick to go see him in court ? Why don't you head to Koh Samui and ask her yourself if your so concerned about her absence on the first day. She's been there everyday since so you still have time to catch her.................quick off you go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 It may be underhand but It Is a trial to ascertain if they comitted the crime and if they are truely innocent then it will shine through the illusion the prosecution are trying to create. None of us know 100 percent what happened. I am just waiting for the defence to take the reins. Andy has always said to me this is about a fair trial. Not getting 2 criminals off a charge of murder and I think he is sincere about that. They have something up their sleeve to for the prosecution so what goes around comes around in this case. ? tw16.jpg (Copier) Broken? Not allowed? B/S. It's dirty, underhand, and immoral. Desperate and blatant measures to foil any attempt of a fair and just trial. Bar-stewards. Hope the world's media kick up a real storm over this disclosure failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony121 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 "Hall said the defense team would present evidence from British authorities at odds with the findings presented by Thai investigators. tw16.jpg He did not characterize the nature of the evidence and said they were under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. British investigators visited Thailand in October to review the case, but no information from that was made public." http://www.chiangraitimes.com/trail-of-murdered-british-tourists-resumes-in-koh-samui.html under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. So the evidence isn't under the confidentiality agreement just who provided it ? If it is going to be used in court it won't be confidential anymore. and they have all ready claimed it comes from british authorities thus breaking the confidentiality agreement ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 "Hall said the defense team would present evidence from British authorities at odds with the findings presented by Thai investigators. tw16.jpg He did not characterize the nature of the evidence and said they were under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. British investigators visited Thailand in October to review the case, but no information from that was made public." http://www.chiangraitimes.com/trail-of-murdered-british-tourists-resumes-in-koh-samui.html under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. So the evidence isn't under the confidentiality agreement just who provided it ? If it is going to be used in court it won't be confidential anymore. and they have all ready claimed it comes from british authorities thus breaking the confidentiality agreement ? If you say so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonodingle Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 "Hall said the defense team would present evidence from British authorities at odds with the findings presented by Thai investigators. tw16.jpg He did not characterize the nature of the evidence and said they were under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. British investigators visited Thailand in October to review the case, but no information from that was made public." http://www.chiangraitimes.com/trail-of-murdered-british-tourists-resumes-in-koh-samui.html under a strict confidentiality agreement not to disclose who provided it. So the evidence isn't under the confidentiality agreement just who provided it ? If it is going to be used in court it won't be confidential anymore. and they have all ready claimed it comes from british authorities thus breaking the confidentiality agreement ? This news report has misinterpreted Andys words. It will all be revealed In court. The confidentiality agreement was in respect of publishing information outside of the court room. As they did with the first Met Police letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM07 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well. No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. I don't have to skew anything its a bit late for that, the prosecution is going to be all wrapped up in a week or so, and regarding your first question my answer is yes ! Why has the other mother not shown up to ill ? your son could be on death row in a few months and you are too sick to go see him in court ? Uuuuuuiiiiiii...another troll, not at all irritated by the fumbling and stumbling of the prosecution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony121 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well. No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. You complain the media isn't reporting then when there is a link to the media reporting you say its only one source and taken out of context Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Despite all the Keystone Kops type comments on here, whatever the outcome of this trial, the Judge's will have to submit a report detailing the basis of their decision. In the West, a criminal trial is mostly held before a jury and the jury is not required to explain the basis of their decision. So if the 2 accused are indeed found guilty of these crimes, there will be, as required by Thai Criminal Procedure, a detailed report as to how the Judge's came to that conclusion which would also serve as the prime basis for any appeal. Thai Criminal Procedure Code Section 182: After the trial is over,a judgement or order shall be given in accordance with the merits of the case. A judgement or order shall be read in open Court either on the day the trial is over or within three days from such date Worth also mentioning that there is no verbatim transcript of the trial proceedings. Further, as in this case, independent observers can be prevented from recording what is said in court. Thus, what appears in the judge's official report may or may not reflect the evidence produced in court. It is up to the judge, and (by law) no one can criticize any conclusion he comes to, or question what the judge claims was the evidence produced in court. Certainly the decision will not be based on the snippets of biased opinion provided by the defense that have been the basis of the reporting on the proceedings; I think some people are setting themselves up for disappointment by embracing this bias. have you got a 6 year old inside you pulling levers I hope some day you find yourself in a Thai court charged with murder, will you label your defense team as having a biased opinion of your innocence your post reaffirms my opinion you are trolling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsanddogs Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Still waiting to hear from the bulk of the 65 witnesses the prosecution said it had. Going to be a crowded court no doubt habloodyha. So it would appear their statement re 65 witnesses was intended to scare of the defence at the beginning of this fiasco which didn't work. Roll on the 1st September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkknight666 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) looks like Andy might have had a fall out with the the mother of one of the accused I wonder why ? http://www.samuitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-reconvenes-in-koh-samui This was only reported by one source and was most likely taken out of context. Are you insinuating that Andy Hall somehow thinks the B2 are guilty and as such isn't speaking to one of the mother's of the accused? Because that would be pretty ridiculous. It would serve a certain viewpoint quite well.No Tony, we're not buying the half hearted attempts to skew the case, not a single one. And this case won't just fade away because media isn't reporting. Concerned citizens will not be deterred. You complain the media isn't reporting then when there is a link to the media reporting you say its only one source and taken out of context Tony, you clearly don't get it. Not that it matter when you don't care to understand, only to mislead.Andy is still working hard for Justice and hasn't shunned anyone. Your belief that he would publicly disregard the mothers based on his own personal opinion speaks for itself. Are you an Island DJ named Tony by Chance Edited August 21, 2015 by Darkknight666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts