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

[Darkknight666]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

[Rykbanlor]

2) The Mobile Phone purportedly belonging to David.

Every time I see this brought up I always see that the most important part of this is always missing. Let's go back down memory lane here at start at the beginning.

Police knew from talking to David's friends and family that David Mobile Phone was missing, but they chose not to disclose this to the public. Probably in hopes of catching the murderer with it red handed. That means that David did not tell his friends, including Chris, who last saw him that night around 1 am, that he lost his phone. So there is a very good likelihood he had it on him when he left and ended up at the AC bar at 1:30 am.

So why is it that since the Police knew the Mobile Phone was missing almost on the day of the murders that it was not discovered for 2 weeks later? How did they know where to look even?

It is because after the confessions (forced or otherwise) the accused were asked about David's Mobile Phone. It is then alleged that one of the accused (Win I think) told them he had given this to a friend. When this friend was approached by police he told them he discarded this smashed up phone as he became suspicious of it, but other reports say they did it because it didn't work on the Island. Either way he showed them where he discarded it and thus leading to the discovery of this Mobile Phone.

Once the accused retracted their confession they later claimed they found this Mobile Phone on the Beach. Keep in mind that by then the Prosecution had a witness saying they gave it to him. But how plausible is that? Let's see!

If David did lose his Mobile Phone on the beach it had to have been that night as he never reported missing to his friends. Since David was seen on CCTV at a different bar, when it was closed, and a 7-11 later, and before he went to the AC Bar, he did not take the beach path to get their as there are no CCTV Cameras their, as we all know. So he would have had to have lost his phone somewhere along the beach from the AC Bar to the Rocks, and somewhere close the the 2 accused for them to find it in the dark.

So how is it that both of the accused claimed they did not see them. Even if they were swimming how far out in the ocean and away from the shore can 2 guys who are 5 feet tall go? To not notice someone walk by maybe only yards away, with all there clothes their and a guitar hid in the bush someplace. Or sitting on the log playing the guitar and someone walking by would almost have to trip over them.

If they did find the Mobile Phone on the beach how is it they knew it was David Miller's Mobile Phone when asked by the Police, and was directed to its location, and yet they claim they never saw anyone? Why would you give something so valuable to a friend without compensation and for no known good reason to do so, other than possibly trying to hide you had it? Wouldn't trying to sell it and send money home make more sense, if it was found and not stolen? Why would you destroy a Mobile Phone just because it didn't work for you first time. Why would David walk around with a Mobile Phone that wasn't working their?

Sorry but it is no very plausible to me they found it.

Now the next and final point.

As I said before, it beggars belief that the police would just happen to pick two scapegoats that just happened to had found that phone on that night.

It also seems very, shall we say, odd that the people clamoring for the truth don't seem to be interested in getting to the bottom of that issue.

Yeah and to prove this they said someone from Burma told them all about it but he now seems to have disappeared. But again the nice policeman said it so it must be true.

No one has stood up in court and testified that the phone was found behind the Burmese room or the phone belonged to David. If that is all the proof you need then the sooner you end up in jail for something you didn't do the better.

Actually karma must have something a lot worse in store than you being in jail.

The Migrant Worker has already given a sworn testimony in court way back in October or November in front of a judge and the defense team, who could cross examine him if they so choose. So he doesn't have to be sitting in the court a year later to do that again. His statement is Evidence! His whereabouts now has no relevance to this case anymore. The 2 Accused also admitted they gave this mobile Phone to him. If you want to call them liars I won't argue that point.

As to the phone being planted, as suggested by someone else, that is a ridiculous statement that has zero possibility. The accused admitted they gave this mobile phone to a friend and he showed them where he put it, and gave testimony in court to that extent. There was no need to plant anything except more flowers.

Was the Mobile Phone David Millers? There goes that no proof again. The High Ranking Police Officer did not say he could not confirm this was David's Mobile Phone. This was what the Defense told the media afterwards. Or was it Andy?

What he said he tried to get clarification from the UK (Police I suppose) as to if this was David's Phone or not. They refused to supply him with written documentation because the UK is not allowed to provide such evidence in a Murder Trial which has the Death Penalty. He provide documentation to justify his excuse with written requests and replies.

What he also said is that he talked to them and they verbally verified it was David Miller's Mobile Phone even if they would not give written documentation to that effect. No! That is not solid evidence! But it is still evidence none the less. A sworn statement in court by and Eye Witness, such as the case with this High Ranking Police Officer, is in fact considered evidence until proven otherwise. Like it or not!

No, it is FACT that the mobile phone has not been officially linked to David. The UK has refused to comply. FACT.

SOme warm milk and a tweed blanket over your lap might be best now

[Rykbanlor]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

I thought big ears cop was the one with Mon in the convenience store.

[Jai Dee]

Several posts have been removed because they were either flames, or baiting and troll posts.

[newcomer71]

I am sure that many will not like my post but: what's the point to reply to trolling, baiting attention seekers?

Sure cannot put reason in them because their only target is to get attention, and make other posters nervous, maybe insult them and get suspended.

And also I feel they sure have all the interest top feel important to be the one to make the topic trashed and blocked.

So, let them tell their "ideas" and just write your ideas without replying or implying them. Simple as that.

I see that replying to them, often calls new trolls in the system, so (but that's just my opinion) I'd avoid.

To stay in topic, I am very glad of how the defense is scoring points (many own goals from the prosecution, but star scores from the first witness for the defense), though as seen as the whole system in Thailand is so corrupt and devious I won't feel satisfied till the Court will give their judgement.

Sadly you, and many of us, will not feel satisfied when the court gives it's judgement, even if the B2 are acquitted:

1. How was it ever allowed to get this far? At least we all know the answer to this now.

2. Without Andy Hall and social media the B2 would be toast already.

3. The true perps are free to do it again. And they will be more careful next time.

4. The RTP may have learned how to better cover up their incompetence/complicity.

5. Hannah and David are dead because the perps knew the system here would allow them to get away with it.

The British government really has a responsibility now. Ok, they can't intervene in the Thai "justice" system but they absolutely must warn visitors of the extreme risks that that system subjects them to. Maybe then a sliver of good will come from this.

I agree on everything you wrote. What I meant is: I can be satisfied only when Court will give their final judgement, if will be (like should be) toward the defense.

Defense is winning lots of battle but can't cheer till the "war" will be won.

[fritzzz25]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

It seems to be different people

here is a Facebook https://www.facebook.com/jarkrapan.kaewkhao?fref=ts

Interesting posts on his FB page there.....

[StealthEnergiser]

Pol Colonel Prachum Ruangthong, chief of Koh Pha-Ngan

[jaidam]

Pol Colonel Prachum Ruangthong, chief of Koh Pha-Ngan

police1.jpg

Google image his name. He has a lovely and very expensive brand new car. I am not a believer in coincidence, and I am not prepared to accept that he saved up his salary for a few hundred years to buy this car.

[Rykbanlor]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

It seems to be different people

here is a Facebook https://www.facebook.com/jarkrapan.kaewkhao?fref=ts

Interesting posts on his FB page there.....

Indeed, he was a sergeant on the case, and he's also a DJ in a Tao club?

Hmmmmmmmmm, conflict of interests mai???

[Darkknight666]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

It seems to be different people

here is a Facebook https://www.facebook.com/jarkrapan.kaewkhao?fref=ts

Interesting posts on his FB page there.....

Holy shit... That man is a police officer? Scary.

Anyone read his post about the DNA?

[StealthEnergiser]

I think this is the first officer that testified

KOH SAMUI The Koh Tao Police Officer in charge of the investigation into the brutal killing of two Britons on Koh Tao appeared for the first time in court Wednesday to be questioned by a lawyer for the two Myanmar migrants facing murder charges.

The testimony of Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, an officer at Koh Tao police station who was called as the first witness for the prosecution, capped the first day of the closely watched trial at the Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani province.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-trial-begins-police-questioned-by-lawyers.html

Aren't there very few cops on Tao? Or was this guy from Samui? I ask because I'm curious if this was the "big ears" cop.

It seems to be different people

here is a Facebook https://www.facebook.com/jarkrapan.kaewkhao?fref=ts

Interesting posts on his FB page there.....

Very interesting at first i didn't think it was the same person with the blonde wig dated aug 2014 .

[Rykbanlor]

Furthermore at the end of his post, he kind of makes a plea "To all the friends and people i know on FB, do you i think I am that kind of <deleted> up guy that I would allow a crime like this to be covered up".

Yes, yes we do.

[Darkknight666]

Furthermore at the end of his post, he kind of makes a plea "To all the friends and people i know on FB, do you i think I am that kind of <deleted> up guy that I would allow a crime like this to be covered up".

Yes, yes we do.

It's always the first thing a thief says as well "do you think I would steal from you?" Yes I do.

[jaidam]

Furthermore at the end of his post, he kind of makes a plea "To all the friends and people i know on FB, do you i think I am that kind of <deleted> up guy that I would allow a crime like this to be covered up".

Yes, yes we do.

why would we think that ?

jk2.jpg

I am beginning to understand why the blond hair was so conveniently lost.

[PaPiPuPePo]

My understanding is that the police outposts on KT or KPN aren't normal police stations, that they're somehow "unofficial" and/or not in the normal chain of command. I heard this while on KT but don't recall the details. Anyone have info on this?

[fritzzz25]

According to his shoulder insignia, he is a Lieutenant. I would think that his comments about a trial that is not even complete shows his lack of brains. As we all know, nothing will be done about it......

[GOLDBUGGY]

Further Discussion on Confessions since there in no more room to apply on my link.

I am not a Thai Lawyer or Judge so I can't debate Thai Law with certainty, but I can tell you this as this is what I know for sure.

The Prosecutor has spend days at this Trial having Witnesses on the Stand including a Senior Police Officer who sat in on the Interrogations, and Interpreter (qualified or not) testifying about the 2 Accused Confessions. To the point of even bringing in the Crime Reenactment Photos to show the court. The Defense spent their first day of the Trial with Lin on the Stand Testifying how he was forced into his Confession.

It seems to me that if there Confession was so meaningless, and don't count in the court, why would both sides go through so much trouble talking about it in Court?

The questioned I posed was who normally would have more weight in a Court of Law. An a Accused Rapist and Murdered who has already proved to the Court he has lied when he recanted his Confession (for whatever reason), or a slew of Officials including a High Ranking Police Officer, who all have no proven reason to lie and in doing so would Perjury themselves and open them up to further Prosecution?

You said you are not a lawyer but honestly tell me, do you think the confession should be accepted as relevant given the allegations of torture, the absence of legal representation during the interrogation, the unqualified translator, the confession in thai and not Burmese and the absence of recordings? Just one of these would make it unusable in the majority of courts.

And a real lawyer in this thread quoted the thai law saying the reconstitution of the crime can't be used in court after a confession has been recanted. So the tragically comical reconstitution where the two Burmese had to be told at each step what to do and where to be probably shouldn't even be mentioned.

Well an allegation of torture for a confession is just that. An Allegation! Its not proof!

Consider that if all that was needed when anyone was arrested for a serious crime was to simply say in court he was tortured, and was let free because of that, how many convictions would you have? I personally would have liked if they had CCTV throughout the full confession, but does it change anything? Who is to say they weren't taken to a motel room or safe house first, then shown later making there confession, and like the crime reenactment?

I agree that this Translator was not an Official Translator, but you also have to consider the time and place where the accused were arrested. Lin himself said on the stand he was questioned at or shortly after midnight. So where on an Island of 2,000 People are you going to find an Official Burmese Translator?

They use an unqualified translator who was also worked for the police in the past from time to time, as this is all they had or could find at that time. What is clear is that the accused knew they were signing a confession, as they made no claim to state otherwise and have admitted to that. As far as given permission to give their DNA is a moot point. Had they not agreed a simple trip to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them anyway, and like they would in your country.

The confession is in Thai is because it is Thailand and the language spoken here. In Poland it would be in Polish. In the UK and States it would be in English. In Canada in either English or French, depending on your preference. That is how it works in every other country. You need a translator if you don't speak the local language.

I am not surprised that the 2 accused had to ask what to do next, and then told, when you consider it was their first reenactment. I didn't see 2 policemen reenacting the crime first then say repeat after us. Don't know about someone claiming he is a lawyer and they can't show this reenactment in court. They did show it, so I guess it shows he was wrong. Doesn't it? .

[fritzzz25]

Further Discussion on Confessions since there in no more room to apply on my link.

I am not a Thai Lawyer or Judge so I can't debate Thai Law with certainty, but I can tell you this as this is what I know for sure.

The Prosecutor has spend days at this Trial having Witnesses on the Stand including a Senior Police Officer who sat in on the Interrogations, and Interpreter (qualified or not) testifying about the 2 Accused Confessions. To the point of even bringing in the Crime Reenactment Photos to show the court. The Defense spent their first day of the Trial with Lin on the Stand Testifying how he was forced into his Confession.

It seems to me that if there Confession was so meaningless, and don't count in the court, why would both sides go through so much trouble talking about it in Court?

The questioned I posed was who normally would have more weight in a Court of Law. An a Accused Rapist and Murdered who has already proved to the Court he has lied when he recanted his Confession (for whatever reason), or a slew of Officials including a High Ranking Police Officer, who all have no proven reason to lie and in doing so would Perjury themselves and open them up to further Prosecution?

You said you are not a lawyer but honestly tell me, do you think the confession should be accepted as relevant given the allegations of torture, the absence of legal representation during the interrogation, the unqualified translator, the confession in thai and not Burmese and the absence of recordings? Just one of these would make it unusable in the majority of courts.

And a real lawyer in this thread quoted the thai law saying the reconstitution of the crime can't be used in court after a confession has been recanted. So the tragically comical reconstitution where the two Burmese had to be told at each step what to do and where to be probably shouldn't even be mentioned.

Well an allegation of torture for a confession is just that. An Allegation! Its not proof!

Consider that if all that was needed when anyone was arrested for a serious crime was to simply say in court he was tortured, and was let free because of that, how many convictions would you have? I personally would have liked if they had CCTV throughout the full confession, but does it change anything? Who is to say they weren't taken to a motel room or safe house first, then shown later making there confession, and like the crime reenactment?

I agree that this Translator was not an Official Translator, but you also have to consider the time and place where the accused were arrested. Lin himself said on the stand he was questioned at or shortly after midnight. So where on an Island of 2,000 People are you going to find an Official Burmese Translator?

They use an unqualified translator who was also worked for the police in the past from time to time, as this is all they had or could find at that time. What is clear is that the accused knew they were signing a confession, as they made no claim to state otherwise and have admitted to that. As far as given permission to give their DNA is a moot point. Had they not agreed a simple trip to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them anyway, and like they would in your country.

The confession is in Thai is because it is Thailand and the language spoken here. In Poland it would be in Polish. In the UK and States it would be in English. In Canada in either English or French, depending on your preference. That is how it works in every other country. You need a translator if you don't speak the local language.

I am not surprised that the 2 accused had to ask what to do next, and then told, when you consider it was their first reenactment. I didn't see 2 policemen reenacting the crime first then say repeat after us. Don't know about someone claiming he is a lawyer and they can't show this reenactment in court. They did show it, so I guess it shows he was wrong. Doesn't it? .

You still haven't responded to my comments:

Have you been in the court room to hear all of the evidence presented in the languages spoken in the court room and you completely understand these languages with the fluency that allows you to declare a comment "I know for sure". Please advise those of us who are interested, as I am sure you could answer many questions for us all then.

[Rykbanlor]

Further Discussion on Confessions since there in no more room to apply on my link.

I am not a Thai Lawyer or Judge so I can't debate Thai Law with certainty, but I can tell you this as this is what I know for sure.

The Prosecutor has spend days at this Trial having Witnesses on the Stand including a Senior Police Officer who sat in on the Interrogations, and Interpreter (qualified or not) testifying about the 2 Accused Confessions. To the point of even bringing in the Crime Reenactment Photos to show the court. The Defense spent their first day of the Trial with Lin on the Stand Testifying how he was forced into his Confession.

It seems to me that if there Confession was so meaningless, and don't count in the court, why would both sides go through so much trouble talking about it in Court?

The questioned I posed was who normally would have more weight in a Court of Law. An a Accused Rapist and Murdered who has already proved to the Court he has lied when he recanted his Confession (for whatever reason), or a slew of Officials including a High Ranking Police Officer, who all have no proven reason to lie and in doing so would Perjury themselves and open them up to further Prosecution?

You said you are not a lawyer but honestly tell me, do you think the confession should be accepted as relevant given the allegations of torture, the absence of legal representation during the interrogation, the unqualified translator, the confession in thai and not Burmese and the absence of recordings? Just one of these would make it unusable in the majority of courts.

And a real lawyer in this thread quoted the thai law saying the reconstitution of the crime can't be used in court after a confession has been recanted. So the tragically comical reconstitution where the two Burmese had to be told at each step what to do and where to be probably shouldn't even be mentioned.

Well an allegation of torture for a confession is just that. An Allegation! Its not proof!

Consider that if all that was needed when anyone was arrested for a serious crime was to simply say in court he was tortured, and was let free because of that, how many convictions would you have? I personally would have liked if they had CCTV throughout the full confession, but does it change anything? Who is to say they weren't taken to a motel room or safe house first, then shown later making there confession, and like the crime reenactment?

I agree that this Translator was not an Official Translator, but you also have to consider the time and place where the accused were arrested. Lin himself said on the stand he was questioned at or shortly after midnight. So where on an Island of 2,000 People are you going to find an Official Burmese Translator?

They use an unqualified translator who was also worked for the police in the past from time to time, as this is all they had or could find at that time. What is clear is that the accused knew they were signing a confession, as they made no claim to state otherwise and have admitted to that. As far as given permission to give their DNA is a moot point. Had they not agreed a simple trip to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them anyway, and like they would in your country.

The confession is in Thai is because it is Thailand and the language spoken here. In Poland it would be in Polish. In the UK and States it would be in English. In Canada in either English or French, depending on your preference. That is how it works in every other country. You need a translator if you don't speak the local language.

I am not surprised that the 2 accused had to ask what to do next, and then told, when you consider it was their first reenactment. I didn't see 2 policemen reenacting the crime first then say repeat after us. Don't know about someone claiming he is a lawyer and they can't show this reenactment in court. They did show it, so I guess it shows he was wrong. Doesn't it? .

So they couldn't wait to find a translator in a double murder and rape case that could end in death penalty, they absolutely had to interrogate him at midnight.

Well yes, if that is the case, then its totally fair to blow all their legal rights out the window.

Your comments on the re-enactment are just idiotic.

IF THEY DID THE CRIME< THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE TOLD WHAT TO DO, why should they need to see the copper do it first, becasue if they did it, THEY WOULD KNOW.

[StealthEnergiser]

According to his shoulder insignia, he is a Lieutenant. I would think that his comments about a trial that is not even complete shows his lack of brains. As we all know, nothing will be done about it......

If you google "Koh Tao policeman challenged over killings" he is the same person that said the clothes were piled neatly nearby

[Darkknight666]

When you sign a confession in the rest of the world it must be in a language you can read... Otherwise, anybody with a brain would refuse to sign because they have no clue what's written. Let's talk about the DNA "match" again.... That DNA is the silver bullet for the the cops and prosecutors and still at hasn't been scrutinized in court. All they have to do is show they collected and labeled it properly and then that it's a match with the B2 and job would be done, no?

Only this hasn't happened.. It should've happened when the case was brought to court.

Now, Hannah's phone.. No mention on what was in there. Any photos? Messages about some creep hitting on her aggressively in a bar? No mention at all afaik.... Or does the phone fall in the other pile of evidence because "we have sperm"?

They don't have it, their DNA "match" was never supposed to be questioned.. Now they are boned and can't think fast enough how to twist the results.

[fritzzz25]

Lieutenant "I don't know" made his statement about witness evidence trial that is still presently happening. In many countries, this would be severely frowned upon. I am wondering his comments, which apparently include talk of Hitler (based on the oh so capable translation sites out there - if anyone can translate it properly, it would be great to know what it truly says) would this possible be an example of "expressing opinions that could lead to unrest of instability in the country or "unpeace" as was stated.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855372-pm-anyone-expressing-opinions-that-lead-to-unpeace-in-the-country-will-be-prosecuted/

[thailandchilli]

Lets see if this ever so credible Police forensics department who tested the DNA renew their certificate of competence. Perhaps their having trouble meeting the standards required after their incompetence has been made public for all to see.

[StealthEnergiser]

Koh Tao Policeman that testified

[KunMatt]

Koh Tao Policeman that testified

pol3.jpg

ktp1.jpg

What lovely blonde Asian hair he has. Wait a minute.....

[Darkknight666]

How does a police Leuitinant not know better than to post what's he's posted to his own public Facebook? I can't believe some of crap he says on his page, wow. So TC, the Thai labs certificate is out of date? Some shocker there.

[GOLDBUGGY]

2) The Mobile Phone purportedly belonging to David.

Every time I see this brought up I always see that the most important part of this is always missing. Let's go back down memory lane here at start at the beginning.

Police knew from talking to David's friends and family that David Mobile Phone was missing, but they chose not to disclose this to the public. Probably in hopes of catching the murderer with it red handed. That means that David did not tell his friends, including Chris, who last saw him that night around 1 am, that he lost his phone. So there is a very good likelihood he had it on him when he left and ended up at the AC bar at 1:30 am.

So why is it that since the Police knew the Mobile Phone was missing almost on the day of the murders that it was not discovered for 2 weeks later? How did they know where to look even?

It is because after the confessions (forced or otherwise) the accused were asked about David's Mobile Phone. It is then alleged that one of the accused (Win I think) told them he had given this to a friend. When this friend was approached by police he told them he discarded this smashed up phone as he became suspicious of it, but other reports say they did it because it didn't work on the Island. Either way he showed them where he discarded it and thus leading to the discovery of this Mobile Phone.

Once the accused retracted their confession they later claimed they found this Mobile Phone on the Beach. Keep in mind that by then the Prosecution had a witness saying they gave it to him. But how plausible is that? Let's see!

If David did lose his Mobile Phone on the beach it had to have been that night as he never reported missing to his friends. Since David was seen on CCTV at a different bar, when it was closed, and a 7-11 later, and before he went to the AC Bar, he did not take the beach path to get their as there are no CCTV Cameras their, as we all know. So he would have had to have lost his phone somewhere along the beach from the AC Bar to the Rocks, and somewhere close the the 2 accused for them to find it in the dark.

So how is it that both of the accused claimed they did not see them. Even if they were swimming how far out in the ocean and away from the shore can 2 guys who are 5 feet tall go? To not notice someone walk by maybe only yards away, with all there clothes their and a guitar hid in the bush someplace. Or sitting on the log playing the guitar and someone walking by would almost have to trip over them.

If they did find the Mobile Phone on the beach how is it they knew it was David Miller's Mobile Phone when asked by the Police, and was directed to its location, and yet they claim they never saw anyone? Why would you give something so valuable to a friend without compensation and for no known good reason to do so, other than possibly trying to hide you had it? Wouldn't trying to sell it and send money home make more sense, if it was found and not stolen? Why would you destroy a Mobile Phone just because it didn't work for you first time. Why would David walk around with a Mobile Phone that wasn't working their?

Sorry but it is no very plausible to me they found it.

Now the next and final point.

As I said before, it beggars belief that the police would just happen to pick two scapegoats that just happened to had found that phone on that night.

It also seems very, shall we say, odd that the people clamoring for the truth don't seem to be interested in getting to the bottom of that issue.

Yes that is odd AleG. But do you want to know what I find even odder than that? It is where did all those people go, and the Media, who were screaming for months for a "Fair and Transparent Trial'? Here is what I mean.

On one hand you have a High Ranking Police Officer who made an Official Request to the UK Police (I gather) to help identify the said David Miller's Mobile Phone. Had this phone not belonged to David then this would help the Defense. Had it belonged to David then of course it would have helped the Prosecution. But the reply they got was they were unable to supply official documentation on this as this involved a murder trail which carries the death penalty. Although a Witness testified he had verbal conformation on this subject.

On the other hand and for months we have heard that the Defense has damning evidence from the UK that will discredit the RTP DNA that was recently given to them from a Forensic Expert in the UK, who preformed an autopsy on Hannah. Hum??? Who this said person allegedly passed on these official documents and this information onto the Defense Team only.

But do we know what this evidence is? No!No! No! It is so secret that nobody in the court room knew what it was as they refused to disclose this. Not even the Prosecution so they would have a chance to debate it or the validity of those documents. Instead they passed it under the table for the judges to view alone.

All I know for sure is if the shoe was on the other foot, and it was the Prosecution who did that, and not the Defense, this whole blog would be buzzing with people complaining and calling Prosecution and Police every name under the sun. But now it is so quiet here and nobody even mentions that, except me right now.

Maybe that isn't so odd after all.

[Rykbanlor]

Lieutenant "I don't know" made his statement about witness evidence trial that is still presently happening. In many countries, this would be severely frowned upon. I am wondering his comments, which apparently include talk of Hitler (based on the oh so capable translation sites out there - if anyone can translate it properly, it would be great to know what it truly says) would this possible be an example of "expressing opinions that could lead to unrest of instability in the country or "unpeace" as was stated.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855372-pm-anyone-expressing-opinions-that-lead-to-unpeace-in-the-country-will-be-prosecuted/

He does mention Hitler although I still can't fully understand what he says:

In the time of hitler, these people were referred to as diligent but stupid.

Still trying to work out what he means, i'll keep reading

[Rykbanlor]

Lieutenant "I don't know" made his statement about witness evidence trial that is still presently happening. In many countries, this would be severely frowned upon. I am wondering his comments, which apparently include talk of Hitler (based on the oh so capable translation sites out there - if anyone can translate it properly, it would be great to know what it truly says) would this possible be an example of "expressing opinions that could lead to unrest of instability in the country or "unpeace" as was stated.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855372-pm-anyone-expressing-opinions-that-lead-to-unpeace-in-the-country-will-be-prosecuted/

He does mention Hitler although I still can't fully understand what he says:

In the time of hitler, these people were referred to as diligent but stupid.

Still trying to work out what he means, i'll keep reading

He says:

There are "some groups" i guess this means the defence who have a conflict of interests and want to attack the forensic lab (RTP lab) to benefit themeselves.

This group, in the time of hitler would be classified as diligent but stupid.

In Hitler's time, these people would be rounded up and killed.

[Rykbanlor]

You gotta love those people who think referencing Hitler somehow helps their cause.

It seems to be rife in Thailand these days.