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

[Basil B]

https://twitter.com/Atomicalandy/status/653118890629730304

One in the eye for justice? I hope not...

[HUH]

Another troll post. Why don't you troll elsewhere. Nothing you say is factual

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

So this is what, in general terms, is meant by a "partial profile".

The situation is even more uncertain here because they are talking about Y-chromosome profiling. This is often done when the DNA is in very low amounts, or is contaminated with huge amounts of victim DNA (as is often the case in sexual assaults), and you can't do a 'proper' 30-marker identification profile.

Because only men have the Y-chromosome, testing for a Y-chromosome profile eliminates all female DNA without having to do complicated chemical separations on the sample that can destroy much of it if the quality or amount is low.

BUT Y-chromosome typing is NOT good enough for identification purposes, because the Y-chromosome, unlike the markers used in the 13 marker profling above, does not change enough over time to be useful. All male relatives: fathers, brother, sons, paternal uncles, will have identical Y-chromosome markers, Also in some populations, especially where there is not much migration, it is possible for the same Y-chromosome profile to be present in as many as 1 in a 1000 unrelated people. So even a complete Y-chromosome profile is not good enough to prove identity.

Its main use is to exclude suspects. If a marker is present with, say, value 20 in a suspect, but the crime scene DNA has the value 11 at this place, this proves beyond argument that the DNA is not the suspect's.

A Y-chromosome match of 25%, which is being discussed here, means that only one quarter of the markers were the same. This means nothing at all about identification, as the witness said. No markers were readable that excluded the suspect, and a match of one quarter of the markers with the suspect gives no indication at all about whether it is his DNA, because this same match could have been obtained from any random man off the street. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/857515-forensic-team-to-testify-in-koh-tao-murder-trial/page-13#entry9887220

[Aj Mick]

Another troll post. Why don't you troll elsewhere. Nothing you say is factual

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

A partial match does provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of the suspect are not the same person. It also means that such a result can be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA…..

For the simple reason that unless the markers match with 99.99999% accuracy it is not the same person. All a partial match means is that some of the markers used are the same, just as some of the numbers on anyone's passport, ID card or whatever will be a partial match for many others.

Now, could you please verify your bona fide and sincerity by answering a few questions:

From KunMatt

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?

And here are another couple from me:

1. Why your interest in this case?

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

[ttthailand]

If found guilty maybe we should all wear black the next day as people do after someone has died.

But they surely will let these boys go if the DNA info provided by the British show problems.

[oldsailor35]

Big article on ''Sky News'' this evening and also the ''Daily Mirror''..

both men said, they were tortured and forced to confess..

Glad its getting European coverage,

If they are innocent, i hope them well and safe journey back home..

Poor Guys..

Well lets just hope that those two large media outlets will warn the outside world just how dangerous it is here on Koh Samui and in Thailand generally regarding the police and the judicial section. Foreigners stand little chance especially with the RTP unless they have lots of money to pay bribes. The outside world have to know this.

Edited October 11, 2015 by oldsailor35

[Linky]

Trolls dont answer questions

[AleG]

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

So this is what, in general terms, is meant by a "partial profile".

The situation is even more uncertain here because they are talking about Y-chromosome profiling. This is often done when the DNA is in very low amounts, or is contaminated with huge amounts of victim DNA (as is often the case in sexual assaults), and you can't do a 'proper' 30-marker identification profile.

Because only men have the Y-chromosome, testing for a Y-chromosome profile eliminates all female DNA without having to do complicated chemical separations on the sample that can destroy much of it if the quality or amount is low.

BUT Y-chromosome typing is NOT good enough for identification purposes, because the Y-chromosome, unlike the markers used in the 13 marker profling above, does not change enough over time to be useful. All male relatives: fathers, brother, sons, paternal uncles, will have identical Y-chromosome markers, Also in some populations, especially where there is not much migration, it is possible for the same Y-chromosome profile to be present in as many as 1 in a 1000 unrelated people. So even a complete Y-chromosome profile is not good enough to prove identity.

Its main use is to exclude suspects. If a marker is present with, say, value 20 in a suspect, but the crime scene DNA has the value 11 at this place, this proves beyond argument that the DNA is not the suspect's.

A Y-chromosome match of 25%, which is being discussed here, means that only one quarter of the markers were the same. This means nothing at all about identification, as the witness said. No markers were readable that excluded the suspect, and a match of one quarter of the markers with the suspect gives no indication at all about whether it is his DNA, because this same match could have been obtained from any random man off the street. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/857515-forensic-team-to-testify-in-koh-tao-murder-trial/page-13#entry9887220

The results can't determine things one way or the other, therefore claiming that the results prove the men are innocent is simply not true.

This is the sort of thing I have problems with:

“The defence witnesses have already proved in court that the total lack of DNA evidence means the two Myanmar nationals are innocent,” said U Htoo Chit, a member of the special investigation team, which is comprised of Thai lawyers and Myanmar human rights activists.

...

The investigation team quoted testimony given by Porntip Rojanasunan, the forensics expert who found that the DNA of two Myanmar defendants does not match the DNA found on the murder weapon of the two British backpackers."

[sambum]

smedly, on 10 Oct 2015 - 23:50, said:smedly, on 10 Oct 2015 - 23:50, said:

Darkknight666, on 10 Oct 2015 - 13:18, said:Darkknight666, on 10 Oct 2015 - 13:18, said:

New Judges, eh? Maybe that's a good sign! I know, I know.... Foolish thinking.

we have already experienced people being removed from this case, I don't think this is either right or proper and speaks very loud to me, can you imagine 2/3 of a jury being replaced near the end of a trial, if I was defence council I would be calling a halt to the proceedings on the grounds of extreme .......................................extreme something because this is just more B.....S, does Thailand actually have laws - do they actually have a judicial process ? they should be ashamed of themselves - Prayuth Chan (O) Cha - something else that needs your urgent attention

According to a poster on Andy Hall's facebook, Heidi Anna, who has been in court every day during the Koh Tao hearings, there has been several changes of judges:

26 December 2014 - 3 judges

30 April 2015 - 1 judge from 26 December hearing, plus 2 new ones

8 July 2015 - "2nd chair" judge from 30 April hearing becomes lead judge, plus 2 new ones

8 July until 25 September 2015 - Same three judges

10 October 2015 - Same lead judge from 8 July hearing, plus 2 new ones in 2nd and 3rd chair.

I don't think this can be explained by an "annual reshuffle". Where is the continuity?

Furthermore, Heidi Anna also says that the 2 accused were not given anything to eat during the long hours they spent in court yesterday. The hearing started in the morning (9:00am I believe) with Zaw Lin's testimony and didn't finish until 10:30pm. Wai Phyo only started to give his testimony at 8:00pm and the trial was halted at 10:30pm due to the late hour. He will resume his testimony this morning. That's an awful long time to go without food.

Probably due to "budget restraints" or "all used up"!

[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=

Ha ha-this was such an obvious fit up-the poor little Burmese guys are in prison for over a year-this causes the country to have an even worse reputation!

Note the hoe was moved before the police arrived. However, with the help of Mon they were able to determine that the hoe was not where it should have been on the crime scene, and arranged to move it back. Still unexplained how Mon and the police knew where the hoe was supposed to be left.

Funnily enough, we know from the reenactment that the Burmese kids did not know where to leave the hoe and needed to be told.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

Investigators Tuesday interrogated Montriwat Toovichien, a 45-year-old bartender at AC Bar on Koh Tao who identified as the man seen in closed-circuit video footage in the hours before the Sept 15 bludgeoning deaths of Britons David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-suspect-arrested-another-on-the-run.html

[stephenterry]

Another troll post. Why don't you troll elsewhere. Nothing you say is factual

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

As I said before. Another troll post. Nothing you say is factual. Why don't you in polite language, go and bury yourself in Koh Tao diving school.

[HUH]

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

So this is what, in general terms, is meant by a "partial profile".

The situation is even more uncertain here because they are talking about Y-chromosome profiling. This is often done when the DNA is in very low amounts, or is contaminated with huge amounts of victim DNA (as is often the case in sexual assaults), and you can't do a 'proper' 30-marker identification profile.

Because only men have the Y-chromosome, testing for a Y-chromosome profile eliminates all female DNA without having to do complicated chemical separations on the sample that can destroy much of it if the quality or amount is low.

BUT Y-chromosome typing is NOT good enough for identification purposes, because the Y-chromosome, unlike the markers used in the 13 marker profling above, does not change enough over time to be useful. All male relatives: fathers, brother, sons, paternal uncles, will have identical Y-chromosome markers, Also in some populations, especially where there is not much migration, it is possible for the same Y-chromosome profile to be present in as many as 1 in a 1000 unrelated people. So even a complete Y-chromosome profile is not good enough to prove identity.

Its main use is to exclude suspects. If a marker is present with, say, value 20 in a suspect, but the crime scene DNA has the value 11 at this place, this proves beyond argument that the DNA is not the suspect's.

A Y-chromosome match of 25%, which is being discussed here, means that only one quarter of the markers were the same. This means nothing at all about identification, as the witness said. No markers were readable that excluded the suspect, and a match of one quarter of the markers with the suspect gives no indication at all about whether it is his DNA, because this same match could have been obtained from any random man off the street. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/857515-forensic-team-to-testify-in-koh-tao-murder-trial/page-13#entry9887220

The results can't determine things one way or the other, therefore claiming that the results prove the men are innocent is simply not true.

This is the sort of thing I have problems with:

“The defence witnesses have already proved in court that the total lack of DNA evidence means the two Myanmar nationals are innocent,” said U Htoo Chit, a member of the special investigation team, which is comprised of Thai lawyers and Myanmar human rights activists.

...

The investigation team quoted testimony given by Porntip Rojanasunan, the forensics expert who found that the DNA of two Myanmar defendants does not match the DNA found on the murder weapon of the two British backpackers."

No the results prove that any man off the street could get the same results so citing this constantly is clutching at straws

[AGareth2]

AleG

your DNA would be a partial match

So?

Do you want to be included?

[catsanddogs]

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=

Ha ha-this was such an obvious fit up-the poor little Burmese guys are in prison for over a year-this causes the country to have an even worse reputation!

Note the hoe was moved before the police arrived. However, with the help of Mon they were able to determine that the hoe was not where it should have been on the crime scene, and arranged to move it back. Still unexplained how Mon and the police knew where the hoe was supposed to be left.

Funnily enough, we know from the reenactment that the Burmese kids did not know where to leave the hoe and needed to be told.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

Investigators Tuesday interrogated Montriwat Toovichien, a 45-year-old bartender at AC Bar on Koh Tao who identified as the man seen in closed-circuit video footage in the hours before the Sept 15 bludgeoning deaths of Britons David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23.

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/koh-tao-murder-suspect-arrested-another-on-the-run.html

Mon needs to have his dna taken again. British have dna of the victims. Then we would see some light.

[stephenterry]

smedly, on 10 Oct 2015 - 23:50, said:smedly, on 10 Oct 2015 - 23:50, said:

Darkknight666, on 10 Oct 2015 - 13:18, said:Darkknight666, on 10 Oct 2015 - 13:18, said:

New Judges, eh? Maybe that's a good sign! I know, I know.... Foolish thinking.

we have already experienced people being removed from this case, I don't think this is either right or proper and speaks very loud to me, can you imagine 2/3 of a jury being replaced near the end of a trial, if I was defence council I would be calling a halt to the proceedings on the grounds of extreme .......................................extreme something because this is just more B.....S, does Thailand actually have laws - do they actually have a judicial process ? they should be ashamed of themselves - Prayuth Chan (O) Cha - something else that needs your urgent attention

According to a poster on Andy Hall's facebook, Heidi Anna, who has been in court every day during the Koh Tao hearings, there has been several changes of judges:

26 December 2014 - 3 judges

30 April 2015 - 1 judge from 26 December hearing, plus 2 new ones

8 July 2015 - "2nd chair" judge from 30 April hearing becomes lead judge, plus 2 new ones

8 July until 25 September 2015 - Same three judges

10 October 2015 - Same lead judge from 8 July hearing, plus 2 new ones in 2nd and 3rd chair.

I don't think this can be explained by an "annual reshuffle". Where is the continuity?

Furthermore, Heidi Anna also says that the 2 accused were not given anything to eat during the long hours they spent in court yesterday. The hearing started in the morning (9:00am I believe) with Zaw Lin's testimony and didn't finish until 10:30pm. Wai Phyo only started to give his testimony at 8:00pm and the trial was halted at 10:30pm due to the late hour. He will resume his testimony this morning. That's an awful long time to go without food.

Probably due to "budget restraints" or "all used up"!

I wonder that there is no humanity shown to these accused. If I was at the trial I would expletive expletive at the total lack of regard of these two guys. Expletive, expletive.

[StealthEnergiser]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

[StealthEnergiser]

https://twitter.com/Atomicalandy/status/653155052907958272

[stephenterry]

Another troll post. Why don't you troll elsewhere. Nothing you say is factual

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

As I said before. Another troll post. Nothing you say is factual. Why don't you in polite language, go and bury yourself in Koh Tao diving school.

Aaaaaaaaah, you know too....................

Yes I know AleG has business interests on Koh Tao and I hope everyone on here realises that.

[berybert]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

Burning tyres around the neck. A few posters on here would regard this as OK.

I guess living with and around murderers must rub off.

[stephenterry]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

Burning tyres around the neck. A few posters on here would regard this as OK.

I guess living with and around murderers must rub off.

ask AleG. He's one of them

[catsanddogs]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

From that article -

Wei Phyo admitted during his testimony to finding a phone on the beach on the night the two British holidaymakers were killed. He said he took it home but couldn't unlock it.

He told the court: "The next day we heard about the murders and we were worried it might be related to someone involved in the murders. My friend smashed up the phone and threw it into the undergrowth behind our hut."

[gandalf12]

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/brit-killings-accused-says-police-abused-me

[fab99]

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

So this is what, in general terms, is meant by a "partial profile".

The situation is even more uncertain here because they are talking about Y-chromosome profiling. This is often done when the DNA is in very low amounts, or is contaminated with huge amounts of victim DNA (as is often the case in sexual assaults), and you can't do a 'proper' 30-marker identification profile.

Because only men have the Y-chromosome, testing for a Y-chromosome profile eliminates all female DNA without having to do complicated chemical separations on the sample that can destroy much of it if the quality or amount is low.

BUT Y-chromosome typing is NOT good enough for identification purposes, because the Y-chromosome, unlike the markers used in the 13 marker profling above, does not change enough over time to be useful. All male relatives: fathers, brother, sons, paternal uncles, will have identical Y-chromosome markers, Also in some populations, especially where there is not much migration, it is possible for the same Y-chromosome profile to be present in as many as 1 in a 1000 unrelated people. So even a complete Y-chromosome profile is not good enough to prove identity.

Its main use is to exclude suspects. If a marker is present with, say, value 20 in a suspect, but the crime scene DNA has the value 11 at this place, this proves beyond argument that the DNA is not the suspect's.

A Y-chromosome match of 25%, which is being discussed here, means that only one quarter of the markers were the same. This means nothing at all about identification, as the witness said. No markers were readable that excluded the suspect, and a match of one quarter of the markers with the suspect gives no indication at all about whether it is his DNA, because this same match could have been obtained from any random man off the street. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/857515-forensic-team-to-testify-in-koh-tao-murder-trial/page-13#entry9887220

The results can't determine things one way or the other, therefore claiming that the results prove the men are innocent is simply not true.

This is the sort of thing I have problems with:

“The defence witnesses have already proved in court that the total lack of DNA evidence means the two Myanmar nationals are innocent,” said U Htoo Chit, a member of the special investigation team, which is comprised of Thai lawyers and Myanmar human rights activists.

...

The investigation team quoted testimony given by Porntip Rojanasunan, the forensics expert who found that the DNA of two Myanmar defendants does not match the DNA found on the murder weapon of the two British backpackers."

But AleG you can't deny that the presence of both victims DNA on the handle of the hoe contradicts the RTP scenario as played in the re enactment and the "confession".

The victims were not attacked by surprise by the B2 while lying defenseless on the beach.

When you add the absence of David's blood on the hoe (which makes it very doubtful that just this weapon was used, and when you look at the wounds, you can't reasonably believe they came from a hoe...), it is more than doubtful that the B2 had the strength to kill tthe two victims without the element of surprise, I strongly believe they were not involved and more than just 2 persons beasts were.

But you always tend to focus on small things and try to twist the truth (a partial match means absolutely nothing, it could be the B2 as well as your DNA or mine).

You can't reasonably say the evidence is 100% rock solid.

In order to convict suspects of a capital case, the evidence SHOULD be rock solid with no trace of doubt, so tell me now : Do you have any doubt about the B2 being guilty ?

If you have doubt, then you should agree they shouldn't be found guily.

If you don't have any doubt, then what can I say...

Edited October 11, 2015 by fab99

[stephenterry]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

From that article -

Wei Phyo admitted during his testimony to finding a phone on the beach on the night the two British holidaymakers were killed. He said he took it home but couldn't unlock it.

He told the court: "The next day we heard about the murders and we were worried it might be related to someone involved in the murders. My friend smashed up the phone and threw it into the undergrowth behind our hut."

While I consider that the B2 are innocent, this testimony doesn't ring true, IMO. I am very uncomfortable with this statement. In other words, I don't buy it. What do you guys think?

[sambum]

Another troll post. Why don't you troll elsewhere. Nothing you say is factual

Nothing factual?

"Mr Waiyawuth said a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile but that did not mean he could be included as a suspect.

DNA experts agree that DNA profiling demands a 99.9999% accurate match."

I didn't find the article that cited the cross examination questions by the prosecution, although I had quoted it in a previous post of mine:

"The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”"

A partial match doesn't provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of suspect are the same person, it also means that such a result can't be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA.

A partial match does provide positive proof that the DNA recovered and that of the suspect are not the same person. It also means that such a result can be used to support the claim that it proves the suspect is not the source of the DNA…..

For the simple reason that unless the markers match with 99.99999% accuracy it is not the same person. All a partial match means is that some of the markers used are the same, just as some of the numbers on anyone's passport, ID card or whatever will be a partial match for many others.

Now, could you please verify your bona fide and sincerity by answering a few questions:

From KunMatt

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?

And here are another couple from me:

1. Why your interest in this case?

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

And one from me for yourself and KunMatt:- Do you think that you will get your (honest?) answers?

[AleG]

Yes I know AleG has business interests on Koh Tao and I hope everyone on here realises that.

Congratulations, you just proved what I was saying a couple pages ago; what you think you know is nothing but Internet rumors, or rather lies, which you willfully gobble up and use as a basis to pass judgement on me.

[catsanddogs]

Brit Murders: Accused Says Police Abused Me

Defendant Wei Phyo claims police threatened to chop off his arms and legs, throw his body into the sea to feed the fish.

One of the men accused of murdering two British tourists on the Thai island of Koh Tao last year has accused Thai police of sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/thai-beach-murder-accused-police-abused-me

From that article -

Wei Phyo admitted during his testimony to finding a phone on the beach on the night the two British holidaymakers were killed. He said he took it home but couldn't unlock it.

He told the court: "The next day we heard about the murders and we were worried it might be related to someone involved in the murders. My friend smashed up the phone and threw it into the undergrowth behind our hut."

I find this worrying. Says he admitted to finding a phone on the beach on the 'night' of the murders - am assuming this should read on the 'morning' of the murders. the B2 said they went to bed between 1am and 2am (i think). It has been reported that the murders took place sometime around 4.30am - of course this could be quite wrong. But my concern is did Wei Phyo find the phone after the murders and if so then surely he would have seen something relating to the crime also, or did he find the phone before the murders on the beach? And we still don't know if the damn phone actually belonged to David Miller. How difficult can it be for heavens sake to find out whose phone it was? Somethings not right.

[sambum]

Big article on ''Sky News'' this evening and also the ''Daily Mirror''..

both men said, they were tortured and forced to confess..

Glad its getting European coverage,

If they are innocent, i hope them well and safe journey back home..

Poor Guys..

Well lets just hope that those two large media outlets will warn the outside world just how dangerous it is here on Koh Samui and in Thailand generally regarding the police and the judicial section. Foreigners stand little chance especially with the RTP unless they have lots of money to pay bribes. The outside world have to know this.

Not being pedantic but "Koh SAMUI"?

[sambum]

Trolls dont answer questions

Shouldn't be fed either

[stephenterry]

Yes I know AleG has business interests on Koh Tao and I hope everyone on here realises that.

Congratulations, you just proved what I was saying a couple pages ago; what you think you know is nothing but Internet rumors, or rather lies, which you willfully gobble up and use as a basis to pass judgement on me.

Do you want me to post the trip advisors review? Just go and troll elsewhere.

[StealthEnergiser]

Regarding the phone in this clip at 2.55 you will see the police showing the broken phone to Chris Ware and it looks like he replies no.

I never realised until a few days ago when i found this clip that it was the broken phone they were showning him.

Some other posters may have known this already but I thought they showed him a good phone before.