Koh Tao murder trial reconvenes in Koh Samui

[smedly]

You very conveniently cut the quote, here it is again with the very relevant part you left out: "In any case the allegations of torture are neither here or there in respect of whether they are innocent or not."

If they were tortured that is a case to answer for by the police, but the current case is about the murders of David Miller and Hannah Witheridge and if they did it or not doesn't depend on whether they were tortured or not.

In my opinion, their various confessions make more sense than their account of events after the retraction; so I'm waiting to hear how they clarify them.

A guilty or non guilty verdict is the "hear or there" part when this is still unverified.

You fantastically fail to grasp the basics of what is considered a fair and transparent trial and in your own admission this is not important to you.

***************the confessions are no longer in evidence**************** so can we stop even discussing it please

Everywhere, in all countries confessions obtained by the police are regularly challenged after the intervention of the lawyers. The pattern is always the same: threat and police brutality.

The problem is who lies: Investigators as think the majority of posters here or the accuseds. No evidence proved one of either version for now.

Recall that DNA connection presented by the prosecution was not formally challenged. The proof of guilt is therefore based mainly on these two items.

Upon resumption of the trial the defense is likely to challenge the validity of DNA tests taken from the victims. This only evidence imho will tip the balance:

- If it is not possible to challenge 2B will be declared guilty and liars about all their allegations.

- If they are proven false or unverifiable the prosecution will have lost all credibility and all admit that his record is not believable. So benefit of the doubt will go for 2 B.

This decision would cause a huge scandal leading to a long series of resignations more or less imposed.

My opinion is that Dr. Pornhip will persist to cast doubt without daring to decide clearly. Assumptions and allegations could therefore continue for long time...

I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense, I am not going to explain it to you but I will give you a clue - the right to council which applies in Thailand, the rest is obvious

[thailandchilli]

I think that Hannah was killed before the peak of high tide, based on the photos of her foot sunk in the sand after the tide had immersed it. So if correct that would put a time of before 02.19 for the death, however that does not correspond to the running man so its all very confusing. Why would the doctor in court say a time of 5.30am as the time of death but yet it seems clear it was earlier than this?

testimony by Hannah friends said her and David left between 3 and 4. Can't agree with 2 a.m. I rely on the running man at just before 5 as indicating he'd witnessed a horrible situation.

mmm yes my brains not in gear yet forgot about that report from the friends.

[happy Joe]

Yes but in those countries where any similar allegations of police brutality or torture are alleged then they are investigated before the trial, not when the trial is in process. No trial can proceed in a fair manner when this has not been investigated first. The RTP are at fault for this as they refused to even attend the numerous meetings called by the Human rights to discuss these allegations before the trial many months ago.

Well you see Thailandchili, on this point are we fully agree.

Go now to 11 September for a concrete follow.

[Rykbanlor]

As per the running man - excuse me if i wish to air an opinion that is purely speculation but:

Phone call - "Hey, guess who we have down on the beach right now."

Running man - "No shit, be there in 5"

[smedly]

The blond hair could easily have been her own hair and I would find that more likely than any other explanation

[BritTim]

im glad you have mentioned the blond hairs as there was a post last night about this which quickly disappeared unless i have missed it, the post read not in the exact words but that a blonde hair would exonerate the b2…fair enough it would, but it would also exonerate NS, M, anyone of asian decent..even mc anna ( although he doenst deserve any air time form my point of view) so whats the deal with this? was it evidence or another rumour that did the rounds?

There is no doubt a hair existed, but was lost or discarded. Here is a recent report from the trial where the hair was discussed:

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[BritTim]

The blond hair could easily have been her own hair and I would find that more likely than any other explanation

Yes, except the forensic examination said that possibility had been eliminated. While I am suspicious about much of the prosecution testimony, I cannot imagine why they would lie about that, or get rid of the hair if this were true.

[frank83628]

I think that Hannah was killed before the peak of high tide, based on the photos of her foot sunk in the sand after the tide had immersed it. So if correct that would put a time of before 02.19 for the death, however that does not correspond to the running man so its all very confusing. Why would the doctor in court say a time of 5.30am as the time of death but yet it seems clear it was earlier than this?

possibly because that person was a doctor with the possibility of being experienced in these things and was at the scene….

[thailandchilli]

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

im glad you have mentioned the blond hairs as there was a post last night about this which quickly disappeared unless i have missed it, the post read not in the exact words but that a blonde hair would exonerate the b2…fair enough it would, but it would also exonerate NS, M, anyone of asian decent..even mc anna ( although he doenst deserve any air time form my point of view) so whats the deal with this? was it evidence or another rumour that did the rounds?

Frank, just to be clear with you on the Nomsod issue. I'm sick of reading about him to be honest, I think there's far more useful things to talk about regards the trial and ensuring it is fair. Without it being fair there is no justice for the victims or B2. I'm not going to bore you with what I think about Nomsod being involved or why, suffice to say I'm fluid on this and its a 50/50 possibility but I really do not think about him at all in any of my posts.

The important point you raise is the blonde hair that we know for a fact was found in Hannah's hand and it appears she must have pulled it out of the head of the attacker as the root is intact. This in itself completely discredits the current prosecution case. Yes I feel there is a strong possibility that a female may also be involved in this somehow, there are also other reports of other blond hairs being found at the crime scene and blond hairs being found on a phone that was in Millers luggage when Chris Ware was stopped at the airport in Bangkok. By the way thats 3 phones in the mix we have now. The one with blond hairs, the one found at the crime scene and the one found planted behind the B2 shack.

Did the B2 have something to do with this? Possibly but for sure they were not alone, could they be completely innocent or completely guilty, I don't think we will ever know because of the farcical investigation. Are they scapegoats? 100% yes

[smedly]

The tide does not move like a light switch, it gradually comes in with swell and waves and gradually goes out over the space of several hours and apart from that a foot could easily sink into wet sand were water has been retained for a period especially around rocks were puddles form

[thailandchilli]

I think that Hannah was killed before the peak of high tide, based on the photos of her foot sunk in the sand after the tide had immersed it. So if correct that would put a time of before 02.19 for the death, however that does not correspond to the running man so its all very confusing. Why would the doctor in court say a time of 5.30am as the time of death but yet it seems clear it was earlier than this?

possibly because that person was a doctor with the possibility of being experienced in these things and was at the scene….

I admire your faith in the local KT doctor

[Richard Hall]

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

Fair trial rights

The aim of the right is to ensure the proper administration of justice. As a minimum the right to fair trial includes the following fair trial rights in civil and criminal proceedings:^[1]

• the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal
• the right to a public hearing
• the right to be heard within a reasonable time
• the right to counsel
• the right to interpretation^[1]

States may limit the right to a fair trial or derogate from the fair trial rights only under circumstances specified in the human rights instruments.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_a_fair_trial

[thailandchilli]

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

Fair trial rights

The aim of the right is to ensure the proper administration of justice. As a minimum the right to fair trial includes the following fair trial rights in civil and criminal proceedings:^[1]

• the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal
• the right to a public hearing
• the right to be heard within a reasonable time
• the right to counsel
• the right to interpretation^[1]

States may limit the right to a fair trial or derogate from the fair trial rights only under circumstances specified in the human rights instruments.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_a_fair_trial

brilliant....grateful for your editable wiki article. This more comprehensive document will explain a fair trial a little clearer for you. https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/fair_trial.pdf

[Darkknight666]

A guilty verdict by whatever means possible is the order of the day for the prosecution, a guilty verdict is the only decision a handful of posters are praying for, the defense is but an inconvenient sideshow for them. Its neither here nor there.

On the other hand a not guilty verdict seems to be what heaps of posters are praying for because the accused are not influential and wealthy Thais, isn't it?

It the accused are found to be not guilty this means the search for the real culprits must start all over again and may be it so.

I for myself do not care what nationality or backgrounds the defendants have as long as the REAL cuprits are taken to responsibility. Isn't that what justice should be all about and it is not me to decide because I am no judge.

Yes, as already indicated justice has its flaws because all is based on laws and decisions made by human beings.

Therefore, the question what is just can never be clearly answered because the answer depends on cultural aspects and individual considerations. Is the death penalty just? One question, thousand differing answers.

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

im glad you have mentioned the blond hairs as there was a post last night about this which quickly disappeared unless i have missed it, the post read not in the exact words but that a blonde hair would exonerate the b2fair enough it would, but it would also exonerate NS, M, anyone of asian decent..even mc anna ( although he doenst deserve any air time form my point of view) so whats the deal with this? was it evidence or another rumour that did the rounds?

I could be way off, My thoughts are that the killers had plenty of time to stage the bodies before police were notified... And Mon was notified before the police, So that hair most likely was planted same as the condom.... When they were staging the scene, if anyone noticed the hair and it was one of the suspects they surely would have removed it IMO. I read that the condom had DNA on the outside but nothing inside, to me that says they used it to indicate consensual sex in the beach which would go along with the RTP's theory of the B2 not being able to hold themselves back when finding David and Hannah on the beach. I believe if the hair was genuinely from the assailants the police would have sent it to a major crime lab for verification, it's too significant a piece of evidence to just sweep aside. From reports that hair still had some roots intact meaning a possible DNA profile could be extracted.

I'm curious whether RTP checked under Hannah's nails for flesh, or were there restraint marks.... A violent rape like this usually leaves DNA in multiple places killers can't/won't get rid of. I really don't like being graphic about the evidence but these are things that stand out to me.

Edited: typo

[thailandchilli]

The blond hair could easily have been her own hair and I would find that more likely than any other explanation

But the Police Pathologist said it was not Hannah's or Davids

[Rykbanlor]

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

Fair trial rights

The aim of the right is to ensure the proper administration of justice. As a minimum the right to fair trial includes the following fair trial rights in civil and criminal proceedings:^[1]

• the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal
• the right to a public hearing
• the right to be heard within a reasonable time
• the right to counsel
• the right to interpretation^[1]

States may limit the right to a fair trial or derogate from the fair trial rights only under circumstances specified in the human rights instruments.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_a_fair_trial

brilliant....grateful for your editable wiki article. This more comprehensive document will explain a fair trial a little clearer for you. https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/fair_trial.pdf

I posted a link a few days back regarding the judiciary here, which had quoted a senior justice official as admitting that 30% of cases maybe more go to trial without any conclusive evidence whatsoever.

Another Human rights report blasted the system here too, as being highly susceptible to manipulation by both corrupt police, law officials and mafia type figures, and also pointed out that the sluggish pace at which the trials process happens here is an important factor in the vulnerability of the system.

[AleG]

Maybe he should spend more time trying to explain if it possible to have the DNA mixed up ?

Is it Possible that the DNA on Hannah could belong to other people and not the b2 ?

I think it prudent to wait until September 11 before trying to reach conclusions on that. However, I have been mulling over the conflicting testimony provided by the prosecution over what was available for retesting.

Most important is reconciling "used up" versus Kewalee Chanpan's testimony that, while the samples were no longer available, the DNA was. I am no expert on DNA, so I welcome corrections to my analysis. What I believe the prosecution is claiming is that, while nothing remained of the original source samples from the cigarettes (presumably saliva), "on" Hannah's body (perhaps, also saliva?) and semen, that DNA fragments produced using an amplification process were available. My belief is that there would be no way to tell from these DNA fragments whether the original sample was, say, from saliva on a cigarette or semen. If this is true, and the RTP were to have full control over providing the DNA fragments to the Thai Forensic Institute, then the defense would have been totally crazy to do retesting under such conditions.

My reading also suggests that, in a high profile crime such as this one, it was highly irregular for DNA processing to take place anywhere else in Thailand than the Thailand Forensic Institute, and the fact that it was is a huge red flag in and of itself.

The DNA samples were sent to the Forensic Institute, that is the reason why that witness, the chief of police at Phang Nga when asked to produce the samples said they were gone. Of course it took about five seconds for people to spin that into "All DNA samples gone"

[BritTim]

I could be way off, My thoughts are that the killers had plenty of time to stage the bodies before police were notified... And Mon was notified before the police, So that hair most likely was planted same as the condom.... When they were staging the scene, if anyone noticed the hair and it was one of the suspects they surely would have removed it IMO. I read that the condom had DNA on the outside but nothing inside, to me that says they used it to indicate consensual sex in the beach which would go along with the RTP's theory of the B2 not being able to hold themselves back when finding David and Hannah on the beach. I believe if the hair was genuinely from the assailants the police would have sent it to a major crime lab for verification, it's too significant a piece of evidence to just sweep aside. From reports that hair still had some roots intact meaning a possible DNA profile could be extracted.

I'm cuties whether RTP checked under Hannah's nails for flesh, or were there restraint marks.... A violent rape like this usually leaves DNA in multiple places killers can't/won't get rid of. I really don't like being graphic about the evidence but these are things that stand out to me.

My assumption is that, in the pre-dawn darkness, the hair was missed. It is interesting, though, that it was not disposed of during the initial crime scene investigation. It may be that someone on the scene wanted the real villains caught. He could be the same one trying to assist with early crime scene photos.

[BritTim]

The DNA samples were sent to the Forensic Institute, that is the reason why that witness, the chief of police at Phang Nga when asked to produce the samples said they were gone. Of course it took about five seconds for people to spin that into "All DNA samples gone"

Source please, and an explanation of why the court had to decide whether they could be sent there again so Khun Pornthip, the head of the Thailand Forensic Institute, could examine them.

[StealthEnergiser]

Maybe he should spend more time trying to explain if it possible to have the DNA mixed up ?

Is it Possible that the DNA on Hannah could belong to other people and not the b2 ?

I think it prudent to wait until September 11 before trying to reach conclusions on that. However, I have been mulling over the conflicting testimony provided by the prosecution over what was available for retesting.

Most important is reconciling "used up" versus Kewalee Chanpan's testimony that, while the samples were no longer available, the DNA was. I am no expert on DNA, so I welcome corrections to my analysis. What I believe the prosecution is claiming is that, while nothing remained of the original source samples from the cigarettes (presumably saliva), "on" Hannah's body (perhaps, also saliva?) and semen, that DNA fragments produced using an amplification process were available. My belief is that there would be no way to tell from these DNA fragments whether the original sample was, say, from saliva on a cigarette or semen. If this is true, and the RTP were to have full control over providing the DNA fragments to the Thai Forensic Institute, then the defense would have been totally crazy to do retesting under such conditions.

My reading also suggests that, in a high profile crime such as this one, it was highly irregular for DNA processing to take place anywhere else in Thailand than the Thailand Forensic Institute, and the fact that it was is a huge red flag in and of itself.

The DNA samples were sent to the Forensic Institute, that is the reason why that witness, the chief of police at Phang Nga when asked to produce the samples said they were gone. Of course it took about five seconds for people to spin that into "All DNA samples gone"

That doesn't answer this question ?

Maybe he should spend more time trying to explain if it possible to have the DNA mixed up ?

Is it Possible that the DNA on Hannah could belong to other people and not the b2 ?

[Aj Mick]

Here we go. More off topic derailment of the thread, lets not start talking about the differing views on the death penalty eh, or the question of justice being in the mind of the beholder.

Please note most posters here want a fair trial, if that leads to a guilty or not guilty verdict then we will accept that, a fair trial however is not currently in process. The only decision to be made now that could be deemed to be fair is call a mistrial on technicalities or whatever, such as the failure to investigate the torture beforehand and the lack of investigations into many other aspects of the case and evidence that has not been properly investigated such as blonde hairs!!

Fair trial rights

The aim of the right is to ensure the proper administration of justice. As a minimum the right to fair trial includes the following fair trial rights in civil and criminal proceedings:^[1]

• the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal
• the right to a public hearing
• the right to be heard within a reasonable time
• the right to counsel
• the right to interpretation^[1]

States may limit the right to a fair trial or derogate from the fair trial rights only under circumstances specified in the human rights instruments.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_a_fair_trial

1 - We have to assume that the case is being heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal; the overworked judiciary are one of the more respected institutions in Thailand…… But there are more than a few cases that there has been doubt, with good reason.

2 - The hearing is nominally in public, though the powers be are doing their bit to limit "public" to the courtroom.

It is not as though there was no interest in the case, yet news coverage has dwindled to nothing locally.

Restrictions on taking notes, and difficulty in getting people prepared to act as interpreters, do little to facilitate reporting the case internationally.

3 - Heard after many months of being in custody, wearing shackles, and just a day or two a week in court over a couple of months….. reasonable time? Your call.

4 - We know there was no counsel during the initial questioning, after the boys were taken into custody. They have been fortunate to have access to pro bono counsel as the case has progressed. That has come about because so many folks had their doubts about the case and want to see justice done. Had it not hit the headlines, they almost certainly have would not been fortunate to get counsel genuinely interested in their case.

5 - For the initial interrogation the interpreter had only limited knowledge of the boys' own language and Thai. No doubt they have the benefit of competent interpreters for the actual trial, thanks to the defence team.

Call the trial fair, if you like, but there have been phases leading up to the trial that have been anything but fair.

[thailandchilli]

Maybe he should spend more time trying to explain if it possible to have the DNA mixed up ?

Is it Possible that the DNA on Hannah could belong to other people and not the b2 ?

I think it prudent to wait until September 11 before trying to reach conclusions on that. However, I have been mulling over the conflicting testimony provided by the prosecution over what was available for retesting.

Most important is reconciling "used up" versus Kewalee Chanpan's testimony that, while the samples were no longer available, the DNA was. I am no expert on DNA, so I welcome corrections to my analysis. What I believe the prosecution is claiming is that, while nothing remained of the original source samples from the cigarettes (presumably saliva), "on" Hannah's body (perhaps, also saliva?) and semen, that DNA fragments produced using an amplification process were available. My belief is that there would be no way to tell from these DNA fragments whether the original sample was, say, from saliva on a cigarette or semen. If this is true, and the RTP were to have full control over providing the DNA fragments to the Thai Forensic Institute, then the defense would have been totally crazy to do retesting under such conditions.

My reading also suggests that, in a high profile crime such as this one, it was highly irregular for DNA processing to take place anywhere else in Thailand than the Thailand Forensic Institute, and the fact that it was is a huge red flag in and of itself.

The DNA samples were sent to the Forensic Institute, that is the reason why that witness, the chief of police at Phang Nga when asked to produce the samples said they were gone. Of course it took about five seconds for people to spin that into "All DNA samples gone"

Really, thats not what I've read in the reports. Can you verify where it states that testing of the DNA samples from the victims at the time of the murders was processed at the Forensic Institute?

[metisdead]

Just like all the other Koh Tao topics, when the court enters a recess, round and round and round again speculation enters the topic.

As it seems the court is in recess until Sept. 11:

Where has the post gone that was here a minute ago (think it was from Stealth) re Andy Hall's court update?

it may be deleted by mistake as no advice was received from mods here it is again

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Day 14 Koh Tao murder trial just ended. Accused Zaw Lin's testimony ongoing as session ended for the day. Trial now recommences 11th Sept.

This topic is now in recess and will reconvene when the trial resumes.

Closed

[metisdead]

Thread is now reopened with this update:

DNA on weapon does not match men accused of killing British tourists in Thailand

Forensic expert says DNA found on bloodied garden hoe does not belong to two men standing trial for deaths of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller

British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller were murdered on the island of Koh Tao. Photograph: Handout/PA

Oliver Holmes in Bangkok

DNA samples taken from a garden hoe believed to have been used in the murder of British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller in Thailand last year does not belong to the two men who are standing trial, a top Thai forensic expert has told the court.

The revelation is the latest in a string of inconsistencies in the police investigationinto the brutal killings. During a three-month trial, police have been accused of improperly collecting evidence at the crime scene, intimidation and abuse of witnesses.

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Today during defense lawyers Koh Samui prison visit Zaw Lin wore 'I need freedom' t-shirt and Wai Phyo doves of peace

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Day 15 Koh Tao murder trial underway, defence forensics expert witness Dr Pornthip just taken the stand to tesify. Expected to last all day.

[jcsmith]

If the above is true, then people need to be held accountable for this. I'd love to see the DNA compared to some other DNA which has been said to not match so those theories can be laid to rest or confirmed, as well.

[StealthEnergiser]

Lack of Evidence, Local Media Coverage Adds to Mystery of Koh Tao Murder

Last week, a partially blind Burmese beach cleaner told the court he spotted the garden hoe at the scene before police arrived, and returned the tool to its normal spot nearby. Upon police's request, he later retrieved the hoe, which he said he was unaware was covered in blood.

“The garden hoe yielded no DNA traces and no fingerprints, according to police,” said the defendants’ lawyer, Nakhon Chompuchat. “But we think there should be something left.”

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1436774626&typecate=06&section=

[StealthEnergiser]

link to above article

DNA on weapon does not match men accused of killing British tourists in Thailand

Forensic expert says DNA found on bloodied garden hoe does not belong to two men standing trial for deaths of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/11/dna-weapon-not-match-men-accused-killing-british-tourists-thailand

[Darkknight666]

Lack of Evidence, Local Media Coverage Adds to Mystery of Koh Tao Murder

Last week, a partially blind Burmese beach cleaner told the court he spotted the garden hoe at the scene before police arrived, and returned the tool to its normal spot nearby. Upon police's request, he later retrieved the hoe, which he said he was unaware was covered in blood.

The garden hoe yielded no DNA traces and no fingerprints, according to police, said the defendants lawyer, Nakhon Chompuchat. But we think there should be something left.

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1436774626&typecate=06&section=

As usual, police say there's "no evidence" and the defense proves them wrong. Wonder if the police will try to match the profile from the hoe to any of the thousands of people DNA they collected.

[berybert]

Police blunders? Hardly blunders are they, down right lies to protect the real killers would be a more honest description.