Koh Tao murders: 2 DNA profiles from alleged murder weapon do not match defendants' DNA

[boomerangutang]

No, it (press release by victims' families in December) came more than two months after the autopsy.

The RTP/Thai orchestrated autopsy was bunk. Indeed, it was so badly done, that it has hardly been mentioned by the prosecution.

[Madaussie]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Didn't the families 'difficult case to answer' quote come before the actual autopsy performed in the UK? If so then I'd say they were simply repeating what the RTP had fed the UK observers.

No, it came more than two months after the autopsy.

The British Inquest didn't start until Jan 2015. The family made their 'difficult case to answer' comments beginning of December 2014 so how can they be basing it from information from a British Coroner's report?

January was an adjournment hearing until Oct. There has been NO inquest yet. The family doesn't have the findings until the inquest. So this highlights the fact that AleG doesn't understand UK procedure. Don't take it personally AleG as it isn't meant to belittle you I am just making the point your incorrect in your assumptions.

[apetley]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Didn't the families 'difficult case to answer' quote come before the actual autopsy performed in the UK? If so then I'd say they were simply repeating what the RTP had fed the UK observers.

No, it came more than two months after the autopsy.

As the UK Inquest didn't even open until early 2015 how can quotes from the family in 2014 come from the UK coroner's report?

[Rykbanlor]

Can you provide a credible link from a media report that claims the RTP have admitted 35% of case go to court without any evidence?

RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted so yes I agree with. The only way these 2 will not go to jail or death is if there's a public outcry. Otherwise they are dead meat walking.

I have never seen that written anywhere except by you here. I tried to google this but came up empty handed.

Go look for it its out there.. Cant do all your work for you.

Well young Goldbuggy, I was the person who originally posted a link to the human rights report where that was stated and I would love to post the link for you but firstly the original source i used cannot be accessed and the only other link I have is from the Bangkok post which as you know cannot be linked here, however if you or anyone wants to see The BKK post link, please PM me.

Edit: Not surprisingly it wasn't the RTP who admitted this, it was a "senior justice official".

Edited September 12, 2015 by Rykbanlor

[boomerangutang]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Sarah Yuen's most comprehensive news report from day 15 Koh Tao murder trial, an important useful read http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734 … via @sharethis

Again, it's a farang news outlet which does the reporting. Thai press corps are out to lunch, eating white starch rice and fried crickets.

Thanks Andy, for that link. A couple of excerpts....

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death."

"During the hearing it was disclosed that Norfolk Coroner’s court had carried out its own autopsy on the body of Ms Witheridge, after it was returned to the UK, and there were significant differences noted between that report and the report compiled by the Thai pathologist."

"

[Rykbanlor]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Didn't the families 'difficult case to answer' quote come before the actual autopsy performed in the UK? If so then I'd say they were simply repeating what the RTP had fed the UK observers.

No, it came more than two months after the autopsy.

As the UK Inquest didn't even open until early 2015 how can quotes from the family in 2014 come from the UK coroner's report?

SOmething as trivial as facts and reality won't stop em!

[Cake Monster]

Was this the reason the defendants were denied access to the findings of the Met Police from the UK ? at the trial hearing recently.

This whole tragic affair has been a joke from the very start.

My heart goes out to the grieving families and friends of the victims, who have not only lost their loved ones, but have to endure the daily farce of the trial.

[AleG]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Oh Mr AleG..

I am happy to debate this with you.

" It has conflicting findings" is my words

"significant differences" is the reported words.... however they mean one and the same to me.

Your understanding of the English language is perhaps somewhat limited so I will make allowances however your understanding of English coroners procedure falls far short for you to be able to make these comments.

And let me explain why.

The Coroner works independently of the FCO and the police. They do not report to the familys or seek permission when they make decisions on what evidence they will provide to another jurisdiction.

The Inquest has not even taken place just preliminary hearings to arrange adjournments. The family will be invited to attend the hearing later on in the year.

There is NO link between the familys statements and the coroner. None what so ever. The family statements are linked to the MPS and the FCO who have not supplied ANY information to the court. In fact last December a report went out on how the thought their was inconsistences in the case and this has been proven many times by other posters.

I find your attitude and some what hopefulness somewhat strange in the way you seem to desire them to be found guilty come what ever. Even if there is evidence?.

The UK coroner hasn't sent her findings to the court just to upset the Thai Pathologist she has done it because she believes in Natural Justice. She has information she knows will help the B2 prove their innocence. Because the UK inquest hasn't taken place it may be the case that she has asked for non disclosure prior to her case hearing in order to protect the family's back in the UK. Whatever it is she has felt the need to inform the court of evidence that will make sure justice is served in this case.

Your Party's nearly over my friend. Justice could well be seen to be served up here.

And remember this the UK coroner doesn't have the B2 DNA profiles either does she. So her revelations are possibly something else so important she has had to disclose it.

My comprehension of the English language is fine; and the point still stands, a difference in the report doesn't mean the results are in conflict.

You are simply basing yourself in assumptions, such as "There is NO link between the familys statements and the coroner. None what so ever." or "She has information she knows will help the B2 prove their innocence.", and uncorroborated statements from the defense lawyer are not proof of anything else than the defense doing their work of casting doubts on the investigation at every possible opportunity.

I don't care how is guilty, Burmese, Thai, or Martian as long as there is positive evidence that proves the case and the "party" is not over until the judge reads out a verdict and the rationale behind it.

[Madaussie]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Didn't the families 'difficult case to answer' quote come before the actual autopsy performed in the UK? If so then I'd say they were simply repeating what the RTP had fed the UK observers.

No, it came more than two months after the autopsy.

As the UK Inquest didn't even open until early 2015 how can quotes from the family in 2014 come from the UK coroner's report?

Jan Opened and adjourned until Oct 2015. He is clutching at straws now. The family aren't privy to the reports yet. The coroner has taken it upon herself to release a report as she has uncovered significant differences between her Forensic autopsy and the Thai Police Autopsy report. Sufficiently different that she has to reveal it to the court in pursuit of natural justice in regard to the defendants.

In other words she doesn't want to see them die as she knows information that will assist their defence.

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Sarah Yuen's most comprehensive news report from day 15 Koh Tao murder trial, an important useful read http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734 … via @sharethis

Again, it's a farang news outlet which does the reporting. Thai press corps are out to lunch, eating white starch rice and fried crickets.

Thanks Andy, for that link. A couple of excerpts....

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death."

"During the hearing it was disclosed that Norfolk Coroner’s court had carried out its own autopsy on the body of Ms Witheridge, after it was returned to the UK, and there were significant differences noted between that report and the report compiled by the Thai pathologist."

"

There were a couple of thai media outlets reported it yesterday thairath & thai pbs most likely because Dr Pornthip was on the stand.

[AleG]

As the UK Inquest didn't even open until early 2015 how can quotes from the family in 2014 come from the UK coroner's report?

SOmething as trivial as facts and reality won't stop em!

If you want to believe the families wouldn't had been informed on the results of the autopsy, specially if they directly contradicted the case, then that's up to you.

[GOLDBUGGY]

Can you provide a credible link from a media report that claims the RTP have admitted 35% of case go to court without any evidence?

RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted so yes I agree with. The only way these 2 will not go to jail or death is if there's a public outcry. Otherwise they are dead meat walking.

I have never seen that written anywhere except by you here. I tried to google this but came up empty handed.

Go look for it its out there.. Cant do all your work for you.

Well young Goldbuggy, I was the person who originally posted a link to the human rights report where that was stated and I would love to post the link for you but firstly the original source i used cannot be accessed and the only other link I have is from the Bangkok post which as you know cannot be linked here, however if you or anyone wants to see The BKK post link, please PM me.

Edit: Not surprisingly it wasn't the RTP who admitted this, it was a "senior justice official".

Human Rights Report?

I am sorry but you said "RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted".

RTP is the Royal Thai Police and not Human Rights.

So which one is it?

[boomerangutang]

I made mention of the bloody sand shown in the crime scene photos - and wondered out loud why those weren't considered significant for testing by forensics. As far as I can tell, only I and Ms Pontip have drawn attention to the bloody sand. Obviously, none of the Headman's people shielders wanted that blood tested, similarly to them not wanting CCTV scrutinized or bloody clothing tested/looked for, and 650 other potential clues which might point to the real killers. Here are some other items Headman's people shielders and RTP don't want looked at closely:

>>> phone records

>>> laundry facilities near crime scene

>>> flight manifests and video

>>> many hours of CCTV video, other than the few minutes which have already been released

>>> Mon's cop friend, and Mon's other buddies who wear weaponized rings, pose with rifles, pose with miniature hoes while grinning, etc.

>>> what happened in the beach party bars prior to the crime

>>> Mon's dwelling, Nomsod's dwelling, rooms/places where their buddies crash.

....the list goes on and on....

[Rykbanlor]

Can you provide a credible link from a media report that claims the RTP have admitted 35% of case go to court without any evidence?

RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted so yes I agree with. The only way these 2 will not go to jail or death is if there's a public outcry. Otherwise they are dead meat walking.

I have never seen that written anywhere except by you here. I tried to google this but came up empty handed.

Go look for it its out there.. Cant do all your work for you.

Well young Goldbuggy, I was the person who originally posted a link to the human rights report where that was stated and I would love to post the link for you but firstly the original source i used cannot be accessed and the only other link I have is from the Bangkok post which as you know cannot be linked here, however if you or anyone wants to see The BKK post link, please PM me.

Edit: Not surprisingly it wasn't the RTP who admitted this, it was a "senior justice official".

Human Rights Report?

I am sorry but you said "RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted".

RTP is the Royal Thai Police and not Human Rights.

So which one is it?

Well, it was another poster who said RTP, not me, he must have got his wires crossed. However, it doesn't really matter if it was police or a justice official, either way it's on record. You want the link?

[Madaussie]

Differences in the reports and conflicting findings are not the same thing, the families of the victims would certainly be aware of the results of the coroner inquest and if it had uncover something like a gunshot or a anything that conclusively disproves the case against the two Burmese they wouldn't have said things like the two defendants having a difficult case to answer for.

The defense has made it very clear that they want the case to be judged in the "Court of public opinion", and never been shy about parading whatever findings they could use to undermine the prosecution case, so I wouldn't put my hopes up for any earth shattering revelations on that report.

Oh Mr AleG..

I am happy to debate this with you.

" It has conflicting findings" is my words

"significant differences" is the reported words.... however they mean one and the same to me.

Your understanding of the English language is perhaps somewhat limited so I will make allowances however your understanding of English coroners procedure falls far short for you to be able to make these comments.

And let me explain why.

The Coroner works independently of the FCO and the police. They do not report to the familys or seek permission when they make decisions on what evidence they will provide to another jurisdiction.

The Inquest has not even taken place just preliminary hearings to arrange adjournments. The family will be invited to attend the hearing later on in the year.

There is NO link between the familys statements and the coroner. None what so ever. The family statements are linked to the MPS and the FCO who have not supplied ANY information to the court. In fact last December a report went out on how the thought their was inconsistences in the case and this has been proven many times by other posters.

I find your attitude and some what hopefulness somewhat strange in the way you seem to desire them to be found guilty come what ever. Even if there is evidence?.

The UK coroner hasn't sent her findings to the court just to upset the Thai Pathologist she has done it because she believes in Natural Justice. She has information she knows will help the B2 prove their innocence. Because the UK inquest hasn't taken place it may be the case that she has asked for non disclosure prior to her case hearing in order to protect the family's back in the UK. Whatever it is she has felt the need to inform the court of evidence that will make sure justice is served in this case.

Your Party's nearly over my friend. Justice could well be seen to be served up here.

And remember this the UK coroner doesn't have the B2 DNA profiles either does she. So her revelations are possibly something else so important she has had to disclose it.

My comprehension of the English language is fine; and the point still stands, a difference in the report doesn't mean the results are in conflict.

You are simply basing yourself in assumptions, such as "There is NO link between the familys statements and the coroner. None what so ever." or "She has information she knows will help the B2 prove their innocence.", and uncorroborated statements from the defense lawyer are not proof of anything else than the defense doing their work of casting doubts on the investigation at every possible opportunity.

I don't care how is guilty, Burmese, Thai, or Martian as long as there is positive evidence that proves the case and the "party" is not over until the judge reads out a verdict and the rationale behind it.

I base my assumptions on the report of the court daily record. Along with reputable news feeds. The same as you do. Your not in the court are you. Are your friends in court?

Mine are ;-)

Try to look up the words on Google and definition. It will give you a better understanding and did you mean " I don't care who is guilty? or how is guilty as that's not the correct way to make a sentence.

As far as the Martians and any part they played..... well my days of taking hallucinogenic potions are years behind me you should try the same.

[Madaussie]

As the UK Inquest didn't even open until early 2015 how can quotes from the family in 2014 come from the UK coroner's report?

SOmething as trivial as facts and reality won't stop em!

If you want to believe the families wouldn't had been informed on the results of the autopsy, specially if they directly contradicted the case, then that's up to you.

The purpose of an inquest is to inform the family how their loved ones died.

On what basis do you believe they have already had the inquest as it shows as scheduled in October. Can you explain that? I am at a loss to understand why you think that?

[StealthEnergiser]

07:36 11 September 2015

DNA found on murder weapon does not match with two men on trial for killing Hannah Witheridge

DNA found on a garden hoe, alleged to have been used to bludgeon Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge to death on the paradise island of Koh Tao in Thailand last year, does not match that of the two men on trial for her rape and murder.

Thai police are now being urged to expand the rape and murder enquiry mid-trial as no DNA from the two accused men was found on the alleged murder weapon used to kill Ms Witherdige and fellow British tourist David Miller.

The head of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) said the DNA of two males was found on the handle of a garden hoe but it doesn’t match that of the two Burmese defendants or the victims.

The shock announcement surprised even the defence lawyers, led by Nakhon Chomphuchat, who had been told by the Thai police there was no DNA found on the garden hoe.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

[StealthEnergiser]

07:36 11 September 2015

DNA found on murder weapon does not match with two men on trial for killing Hannah Witheridge

DNA found on a garden hoe, alleged to have been used to bludgeon Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge to death on the paradise island of Koh Tao in Thailand last year, does not match that of the two men on trial for her rape and murder.

Thai police are now being urged to expand the rape and murder enquiry mid-trial as no DNA from the two accused men was found on the alleged murder weapon used to kill Ms Witherdige and fellow British tourist David Miller.

The head of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) said the DNA of two males was found on the handle of a garden hoe but it doesn’t match that of the two Burmese defendants or the victims.

The shock announcement surprised even the defence lawyers, led by Nakhon Chomphuchat, who had been told by the Thai police there was no DNA found on the garden hoe.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

also from that report

Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.

“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges.

[Madaussie]

Well young Goldbuggy, I was the person who originally posted a link to the human rights report where that was stated and I would love to post the link for you but firstly the original source i used cannot be accessed and the only other link I have is from the Bangkok post which as you know cannot be linked here, however if you or anyone wants to see The BKK post link, please PM me.

Edit: Not surprisingly it wasn't the RTP who admitted this, it was a "senior justice official".

Human Rights Report?

I am sorry but you said "RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted".

RTP is the Royal Thai Police and not Human Rights.

So which one is it?

Well, it was another poster who said RTP, not me, he must have got his wires crossed. However, it doesn't really matter if it was police or a justice official, either way it's on record. You want the link?

My Apologises GoldBuggy.

I shouldn't mix the RTP and Justice up in the same sentence should I...

It was the Justice Official. What would the RTP know anyway hey.. heaven forbid..

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Important defense witnesses on days 16 to 19 of Koh Tao murder trial will continue to give crucial testimony (22-25 Sept at Koh Samui Court)

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

The defense team still to call domestic/international forensic experts as well accused's testimony, exploration of torture issues etc.

Edited September 12, 2015 by StealthEnergiser

[Madaussie]

07:36 11 September 2015

DNA found on murder weapon does not match with two men on trial for killing Hannah Witheridge

DNA found on a garden hoe, alleged to have been used to bludgeon Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge to death on the paradise island of Koh Tao in Thailand last year, does not match that of the two men on trial for her rape and murder.

Thai police are now being urged to expand the rape and murder enquiry mid-trial as no DNA from the two accused men was found on the alleged murder weapon used to kill Ms Witherdige and fellow British tourist David Miller.

The head of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) said the DNA of two males was found on the handle of a garden hoe but it doesn’t match that of the two Burmese defendants or the victims.

The shock announcement surprised even the defence lawyers, led by Nakhon Chomphuchat, who had been told by the Thai police there was no DNA found on the garden hoe.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

also from that report

Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.

“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges.

Crikey they have edited dates onto documents???????

Wonder if they done that to a video in BKK

[Rykbanlor]

07:36 11 September 2015

DNA found on murder weapon does not match with two men on trial for killing Hannah Witheridge

DNA found on a garden hoe, alleged to have been used to bludgeon Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge to death on the paradise island of Koh Tao in Thailand last year, does not match that of the two men on trial for her rape and murder.

Thai police are now being urged to expand the rape and murder enquiry mid-trial as no DNA from the two accused men was found on the alleged murder weapon used to kill Ms Witherdige and fellow British tourist David Miller.

The head of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) said the DNA of two males was found on the handle of a garden hoe but it doesn’t match that of the two Burmese defendants or the victims.

The shock announcement surprised even the defence lawyers, led by Nakhon Chomphuchat, who had been told by the Thai police there was no DNA found on the garden hoe.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

also from that report

Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.

“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges.

Crikey they have edited dates onto documents???????

Wonder if they done that to a video in BKK

More and more revelations. Although I daresay we will be enlightened in a few minutes - Pornthip was maybe paid to lie as a little media marketing by those evil conniving defence lawyers

[boomerangutang]

From today's Nation newspaper article: "Other DNA evidence, found on Witheridge's body, was too damaged to be re-examined, a police witness had said earlier in the trial."

Why am I not surprised. The DNA evidence was being held by Thai authorities. Everything Thai authorities have said and done has pointed to cover-up and shielding those people who should be prime suspects. So news of the most important DNA samples being "too damaged to be re-examined" is par for the course.

[thailandchilli]

There are now "significant" enough reasons to call a complete halt to the trial and carry out the basic but very serious investigations that should have been carried out before. This should be done before the trial resumes again.

Torture

DNA Evidence report tampering

New DNA evidence to be compared to other possible suspects

For those defenders who like to play with words, I do not chose the word "significant" lightly, in a context such as this it implies that unless these concerns are fully investigated then it would be deemed as negligent. Hardly a premise for a fair verdict on this case.

This is not media hype, this is not media marketing, this is a reality that some fail to recognize and are happy to convict without the above taking place first.

Edited September 12, 2015 by thailandchilli

[duckmandon]

Is it just me, or is this somewhat confusing?

The DNA on the hoe would most likely be the victims,no?

The article seems to insinuate there is unknown DNA on it,

yet it doesnt go as far as to say the DNA doesnt belong to the victims either.

It also doesnt state that the DNA was sourced from blood or otherwise

Logic would have it, if the DNA wasnt blood based, it could be DNA from the gardener or anyone that used the hoe for gardening or whatever innocent purpose.

But surely they would already have taken the DNA of the gardener to exclude from the evidence pool?

It wouldn't be unknown DNA if the victims DNA was on it. Which it should be unless its a planted peice of evidence. The forensic department would have both the victims DNA.

[Aj Mick]

I dont remember the DNA on the hoe ever even being discussed. I thought the DNA was from the condom? IF Porntip could dispute that evidence then that would be something. This just seems like media hype.

DNA matches from the hoe were never part of the prosecution case against the Burmese, the principal evidence is DNA evidence recovered from inside the body of the rape victim.

Contrary to the claims of the defense lawyer, finding DNA on the hoe from two men who are not the defendants does not prove their innocence.

I find it amusing and very telling the questions that you choose to ignore. And yet you have the time and energy to post the same point over and over and over.

So;

1. Do you now accept that the B2 were tortured into confessing?

2. Do you still believe the RTP's case against the B2 is solid and that the B2 are guilty?

C'mon AleG. Don't hold out on us; answer the questions.

And here are another couple:

1. Why your interest in this case?

2. What is your connection to Koh Tao, and those involved in the case?

As for me;

I have been to Koh Tao 3 times, the last time being about 12 years ago. I stayed at AC resort the first time, and my first night or two the second time.

I reckon the Burmese lads were tortured.

I think the RTP case against them is far from solid, and they are not guilty of the murder and rape.

They probably are guilty of some immigration / work permit irregularities, as are those who employed them, but are not on trial for the same.

In my opinion, this case is really a red herring, a sideshow, to take the heat off the guilty parties.

Edited September 12, 2015 by Aj Mick

[bongoz]

I am pretty dam old but didn't trials take place before the wizardry of DNA? Do we walk around dripping this stuff?

Well if you are that dam old you probably do...

[Lite Beer]

RT@Atomicalandy: The defense team still to call domestic/international forensic experts as well accused's testimony, exploration of torture issues etc.

[GOLDBUGGY]

Well young Goldbuggy, I was the person who originally posted a link to the human rights report where that was stated and I would love to post the link for you but firstly the original source i used cannot be accessed and the only other link I have is from the Bangkok post which as you know cannot be linked here, however if you or anyone wants to see The BKK post link, please PM me.

Edit: Not surprisingly it wasn't the RTP who admitted this, it was a "senior justice official".

Human Rights Report?

I am sorry but you said "RTP have admitted 35% of cases go to court without any evidence and get convicted".

RTP is the Royal Thai Police and not Human Rights.

So which one is it?

Well, it was another poster who said RTP, not me, he must have got his wires crossed. However, it doesn't really matter if it was police or a justice official, either way it's on record. You want the link?

My Apologises GoldBuggy.

I shouldn't mix the RTP and Justice up in the same sentence should I...

It was the Justice Official. What would the RTP know anyway hey.. heaven forbid..

Thank you both. This is all I wanted cleared up. That it was a human rights report and not the RTP who said this. Okay.

[Rykbanlor]

Well, it was another poster who said RTP, not me, he must have got his wires crossed. However, it doesn't really matter if it was police or a justice official, either way it's on record. You want the link?

My Apologises GoldBuggy.

I shouldn't mix the RTP and Justice up in the same sentence should I...

It was the Justice Official. What would the RTP know anyway hey.. heaven forbid..

Thank you both. This is all I wanted cleared up. That it was a human rights report and not the RTP who said this. Okay.

You're welcome. It was, in my opinion, an interesting read, and to quote more accurately:

In Thailand, forced confessions are the preferred route to convictions and the AHRC described as "conservative" a senior justice ministry official's admission last year that 30 per cent of cases went to court with no evidence.

I would interpret this as being somewhat more than 30% in reality.