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

[TheCruncher]

Nothing to do with me, but I suggest you report to the court with your evidence before it's too late, because you clearly insinuate that you know who it is in that CCTV screenshot.

Try the opposite, most know who it isn't and it isn't either of the B2

Since you alll know who it is, so I assume you must have evidence, I suggest you get to the court before it's too late.

Maybe you can share a taxi with Nigeone, who also seem to have sufficient evidence.

You seem a bit confused. Neither Nigeone nor Fat Haggis has said they know who it is. Nigeone said that Khun Panya knew (or maybe suspected). Fat Haggis said that it's not either of the B2.

Yes maybe I'm a bit confused, so Nigeone claims that Khun Panya knows who is the running man. Did Khun Panya ever announced that?

Where is Nigeones evidence that Khun Panya know the name?

[jimmybkk]

The hoe has a wooden handle. Apparently wood is a remarkably good substrate for retaining DNA from contact or "Touch DNA". (Ref: http://www.forensicmag.com/sites/forensicmag.com/files/legacy/u763/art6_0612_table1lg.gif)

It seems to be accepted that several blows were struck by the person wielding the hoe. The act of striking anything with the hoe would result in friction between the wooden handle and the skin on the hands of the assailant.

Adrenaline flowing through the assailant's body would likely increase the strength with which the assailant would be gripping the wooden handle, and would also likely increase the force used in delivering the blows.

Thailand is a tropical country and the warm temperature, combined with the physical exertion of wielding the hoe, combined with the rush of adrenaline would likely result in perspiration on the assailant's hands and other parts of their body.

So to me the above (wooden handle + friction with skin + multiple blows + firm grip + perspiring assailant) would suggest that the murderer's DNA would surely be found somewhere on the handle of the hoe, unless of course the murderer wielding the hoe was wearing gloves and managed to avoid any bodily fluids landing on the hoe, and assuming that the hoe was indeed the murder weapon, which I have doubts about.

The crime scene appears to have been staged and Hannah's body appears to have been posed. The testimony from the owner of the hoe about finding it, moving it and then being told by Mon to put it back where he found it whilst wearing rubber gloves would fit with the staging scenario and suggests that those involved with either the murders or else the staging of the crime scene wanted the hoe to be found and for it to appear to be the murder weapon. I have only read that Hannah's blood was found on the business end of the hoe - no mention of bone fragments etc. Hannah's blood on the blade and the DNA of both victims on the handle could easily have been arranged post-mortem.

Anyone who has see any crime shows, murder documentaries etc. knows that getting rid of the murder weapon is #1 on the list of "Things to do to avoid getting caught for the murder you just committed" and in this case there was an ocean a few metres away from the action. Leaving the hoe out in the open to be found suggests to me that the murderer(s) knew that nothing incriminating to them would be found on the hoe, and also suggests that they wanted a red herring to throw investigators off the scent of looking for/finding the actual murder weapon.

[Gweiloman]

Try the opposite, most know who it isn't and it isn't either of the B2

Since you alll know who it is, so I assume you must have evidence, I suggest you get to the court before it's too late.

Maybe you can share a taxi with Nigeone, who also seem to have sufficient evidence.

You seem a bit confused. Neither Nigeone nor Fat Haggis has said they know who it is. Nigeone said that Khun Panya knew (or maybe suspected). Fat Haggis said that it's not either of the B2.

Yes maybe I'm a bit confused, so Nigeone claims that Khun Panya knows who is the running man. Did Khun Panya ever announced that?

Where is Nigeones evidence that Khun Panya know the name?

If you feel the need to ask this, then it's obvious that you have not been following this case since inception. You claim that GIYF. Go ask it.

[Gweiloman]

The hoe has a wooden handle. Apparently wood is a remarkably good substrate for retaining DNA from contact or "Touch DNA". (Ref: http://www.forensicmag.com/sites/forensicmag.com/files/legacy/u763/art6_0612_table1lg.gif)

It seems to be accepted that several blows were struck by the person wielding the hoe. The act of striking anything with the hoe would result in friction between the wooden handle and the skin on the hands of the assailant.

Adrenaline flowing through the assailant's body would likely increase the strength with which the assailant would be gripping the wooden handle, and would also likely increase the force used in delivering the blows.

Thailand is a tropical country and the warm temperature, combined with the physical exertion of wielding the hoe, combined with the rush of adrenaline would likely result in perspiration on the assailant's hands and other parts of their body.

So to me the above (wooden handle + friction with skin + multiple blows + firm grip + perspiring assailant) would suggest that the murderer's DNA would surely be found somewhere on the handle of the hoe, unless of course the murderer wielding the hoe was wearing gloves and managed to avoid any bodily fluids landing on the hoe, and assuming that the hoe was indeed the murder weapon, which I have doubts about.

The crime scene appears to have been staged and Hannah's body appears to have been posed. The testimony from the owner of the hoe about finding it, moving it and then being told by Mon to put it back where he found it whilst wearing rubber gloves would fit with the staging scenario and suggests that those involved with either the murders or else the staging of the crime scene wanted the hoe to be found and for it to appear to be the murder weapon. I have only read that Hannah's blood was found on the business end of the hoe - no mention of bone fragments etc. Hannah's blood on the blade and the DNA of both victims on the handle could easily have been arranged post-mortem.

Anyone who has see any crime shows, murder documentaries etc. knows that getting rid of the murder weapon is #1 on the list of "Things to do to avoid getting caught for the murder you just committed" and in this case there was an ocean a few metres away from the action. Leaving the hoe out in the open to be found suggests to me that the murderer(s) knew that nothing incriminating to them would be found on the hoe, and also suggests that they wanted a red herring to throw investigators off the scent of looking for/finding the actual murder weapon.

Excellent post!!

[HUH]

During the hearing at a court in Koh Saumi yesterday a defence witness said a report from British forensics specialist Stephen Cole, which compared the gait of the defendant and the man pictured on the footage, has ‘categorically proven’ it is not Wai Phyo. Andy Hall, foreign affairs advisor for the Migrant Workers Rights Network, who are working closely with defence lawyers, presented the evidence during his testimony to the court. http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2015/09/24/thai-murders-accused-not-man-in-cctv-clip/

The evidence from the expert was in the form of report and video which Andy gave to the court.

His credentials would clearly be written on the report and so it would be up to the judge to make a decision on the credibility not an internet wannabe self proclaimed "gait expert"

[catsanddogs]

The hoe has a wooden handle. Apparently wood is a remarkably good substrate for retaining DNA from contact or "Touch DNA". (Ref: http://www.forensicmag.com/sites/forensicmag.com/files/legacy/u763/art6_0612_table1lg.gif)

It seems to be accepted that several blows were struck by the person wielding the hoe. The act of striking anything with the hoe would result in friction between the wooden handle and the skin on the hands of the assailant.

Adrenaline flowing through the assailant's body would likely increase the strength with which the assailant would be gripping the wooden handle, and would also likely increase the force used in delivering the blows.

Thailand is a tropical country and the warm temperature, combined with the physical exertion of wielding the hoe, combined with the rush of adrenaline would likely result in perspiration on the assailant's hands and other parts of their body.

So to me the above (wooden handle + friction with skin + multiple blows + firm grip + perspiring assailant) would suggest that the murderer's DNA would surely be found somewhere on the handle of the hoe, unless of course the murderer wielding the hoe was wearing gloves and managed to avoid any bodily fluids landing on the hoe, and assuming that the hoe was indeed the murder weapon, which I have doubts about.

The crime scene appears to have been staged and Hannah's body appears to have been posed. The testimony from the owner of the hoe about finding it, moving it and then being told by Mon to put it back where he found it whilst wearing rubber gloves would fit with the staging scenario and suggests that those involved with either the murders or else the staging of the crime scene wanted the hoe to be found and for it to appear to be the murder weapon. I have only read that Hannah's blood was found on the business end of the hoe - no mention of bone fragments etc. Hannah's blood on the blade and the DNA of both victims on the handle could easily have been arranged post-mortem.

Anyone who has see any crime shows, murder documentaries etc. knows that getting rid of the murder weapon is #1 on the list of "Things to do to avoid getting caught for the murder you just committed" and in this case there was an ocean a few metres away from the action. Leaving the hoe out in the open to be found suggests to me that the murderer(s) knew that nothing incriminating to them would be found on the hoe, and also suggests that they wanted a red herring to throw investigators off the scent of looking for/finding the actual murder weapon.

Great post JB. Mon wanted the hoe put back where it was before O moved it. Just struck me also how convenient is was that Mon managed to get his footprints all over the crime scene when he was pacing and pointing for the police. He didn't need to worry about going through the ridiculous foot measuring test because he was on the scene post crime so would have been able to cover his tracks should he have left footprints pre/during the crime.

[cookee68]

I'm very very very surprised that not a single person hasn't picked up on the fact that not one of the accused had any defensive wounds on them, if Hannah and David were using the hoe to protect themselves.

And, Dave had wounds NOT from the hoe........Looked them, 100% sure.....Also sure the UK knows what caused those wounds..

In order to subdue David there had to be either multiple assailants or a gun. With big ears cop up Mon's bum 24/7 a gun wouldn't be surprising to me. David's wounds were most certainly cause by a blade and I didn't see any indication at all he was hit with the hoe even once. How did the B2 manage to overpower two people larger than themselves and do so without getting a scratch on them.... And, rather than gtf'outta town after the murders they stuck around. To me all that has changed is the part of Wei's story where he went back out and found the phone, that's not a good thing to hear after claiming he was asleep from 2am on.

The worst part of all of this is,, nobody cares about th killers walk freely aside from the victims family's... Thai officials couldn't give less of a toss so long as their face and tourism is saved.

Horrifying.

I believe the B2 were involved somehow, but not the killers, but i do believe the B2 know who it is but are scared for their lives or their families lives, They are in Thailand, and i think the guilty ones could have them silenced if needed to be, but as of now they dont, and thea the B2 are trying to ride out the storm, on the evidence that they have against them, and hoping that they will pull through on that, but that is only my theory, and there are thousands of them

[boomerangutang]

Why don't you prove to me that the RTP have lied and falsified evidence as so many of you are claiming - just where is the proof? Be very careful, the RTP have more clout than 'miss pretty hair' - the last bit of my previous post was sarcasm BTW.

You sounds like you wouldn't take any proofs, regardless of how plausible they are. But here goes, I'll take the bait:

>>> RTP chief detective said RTP lost the hair. A few hours later his boss, Somyot, declared 'nothing has been lost.'

>>> RTP and Somyot claimed they typed Nomsod's DNA and found it didn't match DNA found in Hannah. During early days of the trial, a top RTP detective said he doubted NS's DNA was every typed, and didn't know if NS's sample still existed. Yes, the same DNA typing which RTP said they won't share with Brit experts.

>>> RTP said they didn't look at any CCTV of the boats leaving after the crime, deeming it too unimportant to even look at.

>>> RTP said there was no DNA on the hoe handle.

>>> RTP said only Hannah's blood was on the biz end of the hoe, yet they claim the hoe was used to kill David.

there are many more proofs of RTP lying and falsifying evidence, and also hundreds of indications of RTP either;

>>>> not thinking to look at things which could be significant,

>>>> looking, but not liking what they found, because it implicated the people they must shield from scrutiny,

>>>> looking but mis-reading what they saw (David's wounds, for example),

>>>> intentionally skewing data in order to nail the scapegoats,

>>>> intentionally skewing or trashing data in order to protect people connected to Mon.

[AleG]

Did he/she now?

What was the name and when was the testimony given in court?

Because as far as I know it was Andy Hall testifying that the analysis they contracted a company that does not list gait analysis as part of their services said something that anyone with any experience in the subject matter would take with a mountain of salt.

Ah! Welcome back!

I asked you a question earlier

Now that the trial is over, do you still feel that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 are guilty? I consider myself fairly well educated and of reasonable intelligence but...

- neither prints nor DNA of accused found on alleged murder weapon

- no witnesses to the crime

- claimed DNA match on victim's body but unable to substantiate beyond reasonable doubt

- serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc)

Undeniable facts are:

- B2 in the vicinity of the crime scene before said crime; unproven that they were present during the crime

- one of the suspects found a phone, presumably belonging to one of the victims - doesn't really prove anything beyond reasonable doubt

There's a whole lot more but I'll spare other readers what has been discussed over and over. Can you enlighten us as to why you are so convinced of the B2's guilt? If you want to be taken seriously and wish to engage in constructive debate, the least you can do is to respond, without deviation or deflection.

Would you care to answer now?

- neither prints nor DNA of accused found on alleged murder weapon

Good thing the prosecution didn't base their case on that then.

Now riddle me this, why no DNA from the owner of the hoe neither?

The answer is because touch DNA is sketchy at best.

- no witnesses to the crime

So? The prosecution case is not based on witnesses for the crime itself. (besides the confessions)

- claimed DNA match on victim's body but unable to substantiate beyond reasonable doubt

According to the defense, and they would say that, wouldn't they? It's the only thing they have, imply that the DNA results are wrong; they passed on the offer to do a retest though, after asking for months for it, too risky to have the results verified I suppose.

- serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc)

Again according to the defense and online speculation (that they have encouraged since the beginning)

This is the defense case in a nutshell: the evidence could be wrong. No positive proof that would clear their clients, no witnesses, no physical evidence, nothing, zip, zero.

I'm not the judge to decide on their guilt, he has all the relevant information, not me or you do; but the DNA linking them to the crime has not been disproved by the defense, as I said they just tried to imply it may be wrong; that and repeating ad nauseam the allegations of torture, that's the best they could muster and all things considered, in my opinion, the defense case is threadbare.

Now, any comments on using the services of a company that doesn't list gait analysis to "prove" something by gait analysis? (a method not accepted in the UK courts, which may be the reason the company doesn't list it) Can you give me any examples of other gait analysis done by that same company? Any used on any trial in the UK? Anywhere else in the world?

[glenmohr]

There are 5 brotherhoods ( mafia ) on Koh Tao and they run the show. The term confrater would be suitable for their secret societies.

Most of us posting here believe the tragedy was triggered in an incident with some local confraters, none of whom are lawyers nor Burmese.

I endorse what Gweiloman has advised and keep it in English so that when we talk about lawyers we call them lawyers and then everyone is on the same page.

[boomerangutang]

Just struck me also how convenient is was that Mon managed to get his footprints all over the crime scene when he was pacing and pointing for the police. He didn't need to worry about going through the ridiculous foot measuring test because he was on the scene post crime so would have been able to cover his tracks should he have left footprints pre/during the crime.

Plus, if RTP and Thai officialdom ever do the right thing, and put Mon and his weaponized-ring wearing buddies on trial, DNA matches with victims won't be a problem for Mon: his lawyer can simply say, "your honor, my client was at the crime scene just after the crime, so he could have contaminated the scene with his DNA."

[AleG]

During the hearing at a court in Koh Saumi yesterday a defence witness said a report from British forensics specialist Stephen Cole, which compared the gait of the defendant and the man pictured on the footage, has ‘categorically proven’ it is not Wai Phyo. Andy Hall, foreign affairs advisor for the Migrant Workers Rights Network, who are working closely with defence lawyers, presented the evidence during his testimony to the court. http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2015/09/24/thai-murders-accused-not-man-in-cctv-clip/

The evidence from the expert was in the form of report and video which Andy gave to the court.

His credentials would clearly be written on the report and so it would be up to the judge to make a decision on the credibility not an internet wannabe self proclaimed "gait expert"

So it was Andy Hall saying what the expert said, an expert from a company that, again, doesn't list gait analysis as part of their services:

Services

We offer a fully comprehensive service and ensure by working in partnership with clients that we supply realistic long-term solutions that are tailored to your personal needs. We guarantee that our work is completed within the price quoted, there are no hidden extras. We will only undertake further development or additional processes with full consultation and agreement.

• Audio enhancement
• Transcription services
• CCTV
• Clothing comparisons
• Cold Case Reconstruction -
• Corporate Presentation
• Court room A/V setup
• Digital assett review database
• Document database
• Document & Exhibit Scanning
• EPE Preparation
• Facial Comparisons/Mapping
• E-Fit V
• Geomatics
• High Value Fraud
• Imaging services
• Interactive Mapping
• Photography/Video
• Telecoms / ANPR Mapping
• Vehicle comparisons
• Virtual Scene Panoramas
• 3D Computer Generated Body Injury Animations
• 3D Computer Generated Scenes

"Stephen Cole gait analysis" gives no search results except in relation to the Koh Tao testimony by Andy Hall.

Then there's this:

(UK) Forensic Image Comparison and Interpretation Evidence: Guidance for Prosecutors and Investigators

3.4. Subjective Analysis Due to the absence of a suitable database of facial features and no universally accepted methodology as to how two facial images should be compared, the analysis aspect of facial image comparison (and many other image interpretation tasks such as vehicle identification and gait comparison) is considered a subjective process. Therefore the opinion given by the expert will be based upon their competency, training and study of the specialist subject, rather than objective measurements. (more)

https://www.gov.uk/g...ue_1_160115.pdf

I think Mr. Hall may had been overstating the significance of the "gait analysis" he presented in court.

[Gweiloman]

Did he/she now?

What was the name and when was the testimony given in court?

Because as far as I know it was Andy Hall testifying that the analysis they contracted a company that does not list gait analysis as part of their services said something that anyone with any experience in the subject matter would take with a mountain of salt.

Ah! Welcome back!

I asked you a question earlier

Now that the trial is over, do you still feel that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 are guilty? I consider myself fairly well educated and of reasonable intelligence but...

- neither prints nor DNA of accused found on alleged murder weapon

- no witnesses to the crime

- claimed DNA match on victim's body but unable to substantiate beyond reasonable doubt

- serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc)

Undeniable facts are:

- B2 in the vicinity of the crime scene before said crime; unproven that they were present during the crime

- one of the suspects found a phone, presumably belonging to one of the victims - doesn't really prove anything beyond reasonable doubt

There's a whole lot more but I'll spare other readers what has been discussed over and over. Can you enlighten us as to why you are so convinced of the B2's guilt? If you want to be taken seriously and wish to engage in constructive debate, the least you can do is to respond, without deviation or deflection.

Would you care to answer now?

- neither prints nor DNA of accused found on alleged murder weapon

Good thing the prosecution didn't base their case on that then.

Now riddle me this, why no DNA from the owner of the hoe neither?

The answer is because touch DNA is sketchy at best.

- no witnesses to the crime

So? The prosecution case is not based on witnesses for the crime itself. (besides the confessions)

- claimed DNA match on victim's body but unable to substantiate beyond reasonable doubt

According to the defense, and they would say that, wouldn't they? It's the only thing they have, imply that the DNA results are wrong; they passed on the offer to do a retest though, after asking for months for it, too risky to have the results verified I suppose.

- serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc)

Again according to the defense and online speculation (that they have encouraged since the beginning)

This is the defense case in a nutshell: the evidence could be wrong. No positive proof that would clear their clients, no witnesses, no physical evidence, nothing, zip, zero.

I'm not the judge to decide on their guilt, he has all the relevant information, not me or you do; but the DNA linking them to the crime has not been disproved by the defense, as I said they just tried to imply it may be wrong; that and repeating ad nauseam the allegations of torture, that's the best they could muster and all things considered, in my opinion, the defense case is threadbare.

Now, any comments on using the services of a company that doesn't list gait analysis to "prove" something by gait analysis? (a method not accepted in the UK courts, which may be the reason the company doesn't list it) Can you give me any examples of other gait analysis done by that same company? Any used on any trial in the UK? Anywhere else in the world?

I think you might have misunderstood my post. My question was, do you still feel that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 are guilty. At this stage, I'm not interested in what the defence has done.

Try not hiding behind the judges'eventual verdict. What is your opinion? Where is the beyond reasonable doubt that would satisfy most reasonable people?

[Linky]

May i take this time to mplore everyone to just ignore trolls and baiters. Their only reason is to close this thread and stifle discussion.

We stay to facts, simple facts. Do not rise to the bait. Otherwise it will be closed.

[rockingrobin]

Lucky11 requested

"Why don't you prove to me that the RTP have lied and falsified evidence as so many of you are claiming - just where is the proof? Be very careful, the RTP have more clout than 'miss pretty hair' - the last bit of my previous post was sarcasm BTW."

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

Under oath Lieutenant Colonel Somsak Nurod stated he had spoken to the pathologist on the 2nd and 3rd Oct but after that had no further contact with him. The defense then produced a statement from the pathologist stating that Lieutenant Colonel Somsak Nurod had made two separate trips to meet him in late Oct and another on 18th Nov. The pathologist’s statement confirmed they talked about the hair found in Hannah’a hand. When challenged about this Lieutenant Colonel Somsak Nurod then admitted he had had further discussions with the pathologist but would not reveal what was said between them.

[RWA]

If Wei was at the scene and observed the murder , wouldnt it work in his favor to tell the court who he saw that night on the beach ?

If he is innocent and set free he will go back to Burma anyway so he shouldnt worry about his life will be in danger if he talks.

Balo, this Wei guy doesn't seem to be the "brightest cookie" but rather opposite, kinda simple minded, naive boy (I, for once can imagine him wandering around the crime scene and really seeing nothing "special" when stumbled upon iPhone and wander back home, right to the bed ... it wouldn't also surprise me that he then didn't even care much about this phone and would be happy to give it to the friend) ... but ONE THING this guy KNOWS for sure:

he (both of them in fact) did and is going to cause a load of troubles to the RTP officers who took him into the private resort room (safe house) for a torture (otherwise for WHAT really?!!!) and for the "confession" afterwards (without record, qualified translator, attorney and legal procedure) but, believe now, this is the smaller of his concern, as the major one is that he has mightily pi....ed off the Rohingya civilian (and perhaps illegal rotti-seller) translator from the same state of Burma. This one knows where Wei's mother lives and indeed has got a Muslim friends living near by and only a "call-away" ... the RTP might not be a real threat here, but these Rohingya guys are! ... Here would never be safe here, nor back home in Burma

[boomerangutang]

According to the defense, and they would say that, wouldn't they? It's the only thing they have, imply that the DNA results are wrong; they passed on the offer to do a retest though, after asking for months for it, too risky to have the results verified I suppose.

Not necessarily risky to have DNA re-tested, but the re-testing would be under the auspices of the RTP and at the least, the DNA and the newer results would have been handled (given to, retrieved, transported by) the RTP. The same RTP who have shown repeatedly they can't be trusted with DNA. The same RTP who have shown how eager and quick they can be at skewing (or making up) DNA results to fit their agenda. The same RTP who have shown they lose things, and make announcements about DNA when they haven't even done the lab work.

I wouldn't want a hungry cougar babysitting little chicks any more than I'd want RTP typing and handling crucial DNA in a murder case.

[RWA]

The only evidence the prosecution have linking the defendants to the rape charge is the police statements asserting that they found the defendants' DNA inside the rape victim. There is no evidence whatsoever that links the defendants to the murders. The prosecution's case must be that whoever committed the rape must have committed the murders as well - not necessarily the case but the best argument they can come with, since they were unable or unwilling to provide any forensic evidence specifically relating to the mirders and failed to even submit a murder weapon in David's case or explain how his wounds were caused.

So the most crucial evidence relies only on police say so. They refused to allow independent testing of this evidence, giving unconvincing excuses, and then refused to even provide documentation relating to chain of custody and the DNA match, apparently out of terror that an Australian expert was in Samui ready to testify on their documentation which they presumably didn't think likely to withstand scrutiny by a foreign professional. Hannah's clothes and other vital pieces of forensic evidence were deliberately withheld by police who also refused to allow the defense access to crime scene photographs giving an excuse that was obviously a lie. It also seems that evidence from Norwich coroner casts serious doubt on the police that Hannah was raped which would remove the central plank from the police and prosecution case completely.

Despite all of these setbacks the prosecution remains under considerable pressure to win its trumped up case in the 'national interests'. To show their bosses they are still making their KPIs, they pull one more stunt using help from their buddies in the British police and FCO. The latter cannot be seen to be helping directly again as they are in enough trouble for aiding and abetting a notoriously corrupt foreign police force in a death penalty case. But with covert help from British police and the FCO It proves easy enough to manipulate the distraught family of one of the victims again and the Thai Embassy in London is used for cover. It sounds spectacular in the sensationalist headlines but actually all they have is another piece of circumstantial evidence that we'll have been falsified anyway. It is obvious from the deeply suspicious timing that the prosecution had no intention of allowing any independent analysis of this evidence or allow the defence to comment on it.

Excellent. accurate summary! Thank u

[skinnymat]

If Wei was at the scene and observed the murder , wouldnt it work in his favor to tell the court who he saw that night on the beach ?

If he is innocent and set free he will go back to Burma anyway so he shouldnt worry about his life will be in danger if he talks.

This is exactly what I said. Why are they not saying their side of the story? Just saying he found it on the beach at 4am doesn't make sense to me.

errr finding something on the beach doesn't have to make sense, unless it's a mermaid !!

Agreed but to just say he went out at 4am and found a phone on the beach rather than elaborate and say exactly what he saw and explain it in more detail. They really don't seem to be shouting loud enough that they didn't do this and the more I read it the more i'm doubting the alibi.

[glenmohr]

Making comments about a trial that is still in motion, without being there, to see view hear all the evidence is also paramount to rumour mongering, why not wait until the triall is over, and I am sure any irregularities will be examined by the defence,and prosecution for that matter, and or petition for a re trial, trying to second guess what is what when you are not part of either team (prosecution or defence), A very sad reflection on expats

Because it is not a trial in the conventional sense, it is a scapegoating which is very different to a trial.

I could add that the Thai practice of scapegoating has tragic consequences for the victim's families if the victims are expats.

Hold the B2 in jail for 20 years and they will protest their innocence on a daily basis, many human rights minded folk will continue to support them.

No closure for the victim's UK families , ever.

For Thai victims money would be paid and that would often satisfy the grief.

[phuketandsee]

Apologies for mentioning the phone again but how do we know that the phone identified by the Millers is the one the accused found on the beach? Just because the RTP said so?

I must say I have joined those who think the B2 either know more or are involved although clearly not the murderers. I also agree with those who have said having them testify was a major blunder by the defense. My knowledge of these things is almost entirely from watching Law & Order and my recollection is the accused never testifies unless absolutely necessary and the defense is certain what they are going to say.

As has been said, I now believe the phone and WP's presence on the beach at 4 am after saying they were asleep will be seized upon by the judges to justify the preordained verdict.

Christmas Eve announcement - disgusting and Thainess at its purest.

Edited October 12, 2015 by phuketandsee

[boomerangutang]

I think you might have misunderstood my post. My question was, do you still feel that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the B2 are guilty. At this stage, I'm not interested in what the defence has done.

Try not hiding behind the judges'eventual verdict. What is your opinion? Where is the beyond reasonable doubt that would satisfy most reasonable people?

Gweiloman, u don't have to ask AleG questions. We already know which side of the fence he's parked at. He won't switch to reason, no matter what transpires.

[rockingrobin]

During the hearing at a court in Koh Saumi yesterday a defence witness said a report from British forensics specialist Stephen Cole, which compared the gait of the defendant and the man pictured on the footage, has ‘categorically proven’ it is not Wai Phyo. Andy Hall, foreign affairs advisor for the Migrant Workers Rights Network, who are working closely with defence lawyers, presented the evidence during his testimony to the court. http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2015/09/24/thai-murders-accused-not-man-in-cctv-clip/

The evidence from the expert was in the form of report and video which Andy gave to the court.

His credentials would clearly be written on the report and so it would be up to the judge to make a decision on the credibility not an internet wannabe self proclaimed "gait expert"

So it was Andy Hall saying what the expert said, an expert from a company that, again, doesn't list gait analysis as part of their services:

Services

We offer a fully comprehensive service and ensure by working in partnership with clients that we supply realistic long-term solutions that are tailored to your personal needs. We guarantee that our work is completed within the price quoted, there are no hidden extras. We will only undertake further development or additional processes with full consultation and agreement.

• Audio enhancement
• Transcription services
• CCTV
• Clothing comparisons
• Cold Case Reconstruction -
• Corporate Presentation
• Court room A/V setup
• Digital assett review database
• Document database
• Document & Exhibit Scanning
• EPE Preparation
• Facial Comparisons/Mapping
• E-Fit V
• Geomatics
• High Value Fraud
• Imaging services
• Interactive Mapping
• Photography/Video
• Telecoms / ANPR Mapping
• Vehicle comparisons
• Virtual Scene Panoramas
• 3D Computer Generated Body Injury Animations
• 3D Computer Generated Scenes

"Stephen Cole gait analysis" gives no search results except in relation to the Koh Tao testimony by Andy Hall.

Then there's this:

(UK) Forensic Image Comparison and Interpretation Evidence: Guidance for Prosecutors and Investigators

3.4. Subjective Analysis Due to the absence of a suitable database of facial features and no universally accepted methodology as to how two facial images should be compared, the analysis aspect of facial image comparison (and many other image interpretation tasks such as vehicle identification and gait comparison) is considered a subjective process. Therefore the opinion given by the expert will be based upon their competency, training and study of the specialist subject, rather than objective measurements. (more)

https://www.gov.uk/g...ue_1_160115.pdf

I think Mr. Hall may had been overstating the significance of the "gait analysis" he presented in court.

Appears to be well respected in their field

Acume Forensics are the UK's leading producer of Courtroom presentations and ancillary services, 3D Reconstruction, CCTV capture and review, Audio and Video improvement, Forensic Geomatics and Forensic Imaging.

To date we have produced over 300 courtroom presentations for category A murder enquiries with a 100% conviction rate and a sentencing tariff which has surpassed 1250 years.

Drove the early adoption of Digital Imaging in the Police environment.Including involvement in compiling V1 of ACPO digital imaging guidelines.

Set up and managed the first digital scanning and photography of treated crime scene marks in a UK Police force.

Produced the first fully electronic courtroom presentation in the UK (R v Huntley)

Continue to lead in the courtroom presentation market. Including our own in house software solutions for evidence treatment from disclosure to presentation.

Currently producing and suppling solutions to forty two of the forty three UK Police forces, Crown Prosecution Service, Ministry of Defence, HMRC, FSA, SOCA and HSE.

Recommended by the National Crime Agency Helpdesk, One of only five companies on the CPS framework for EPE (Courtroom Presentation) supply.

Specialties: Courtroom presentation, Audio, Video, 3D, Crime scene reconstruction, Visual Comparisons, Digital imaging provenance.

[fitzcaraldo]

9

[TheCruncher]

Apologies for mentioning the phone again but how do we know that the phone identified by the Millers is the one the accused found on the beach? Just because the RTP said so?

I must say I have joined those who think the B2 either know more or are involved although clearly not the murderers. I also agree with those who have said having them testify was a major blunder by the defense. My knowledge of these things is almost entirely from watching Law & Order and my recollection is the accused never testifies unless absolutely necessary and the defense is certain what they are going to say.

As has been said, I now believe the phone and WP's presence on the beach at 4 am after saying they were asleep will be seized upon by the judges to justify the preordained verdict.

Christmas Eve announcement - disgusting and Thainess at its purest.

Thailand doesn't celebrate Christmas so there is no Christmas eve in Thailand.

[AleG]

According to the defense, and they would say that, wouldn't they? It's the only thing they have, imply that the DNA results are wrong; they passed on the offer to do a retest though, after asking for months for it, too risky to have the results verified I suppose.

Not necessarily risky to have DNA re-tested, but the re-testing would be under the auspices of the RTP and at the least, the DNA and the newer results would have been handled (given to, retrieved, transported by) the RTP. The same RTP who have shown repeatedly they can't be trusted with DNA. The same RTP who have shown how eager and quick they can be at skewing (or making up) DNA results to fit their agenda. The same RTP who have shown they lose things, and make announcements about DNA when they haven't even done the lab work.

I wouldn't want a hungry cougar babysitting little chicks any more than I'd want RTP typing and handling crucial DNA in a murder case.

The same RTP that provided the hoe and other items to be retested and the defense didn't raise any objections about those.

[HUH]

- neither prints nor DNA of accused found on alleged murder weapon

Good thing the prosecution didn't base their case on that then.

Now riddle me this, why no DNA from the owner of the hoe neither?

The answer is because touch DNA is sketchy at best.

- no witnesses to the crime

So? The prosecution case is not based on witnesses for the crime itself. (besides the confessions)

- claimed DNA match on victim's body but unable to substantiate beyond reasonable doubt

According to the defense, and they would say that, wouldn't they? It's the only thing they have, imply that the DNA results are wrong; they passed on the offer to do a retest though, after asking for months for it, too risky to have the results verified I suppose.

- serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc)

Again according to the defense and online speculation (that they have encouraged since the beginning)

This is the defense case in a nutshell: the evidence could be wrong. No positive proof that would clear their clients, no witnesses, no physical evidence, nothing, zip, zero.

I'm not the judge to decide on their guilt, he has all the relevant information, not me or you do; but the DNA linking them to the crime has not been disproved by the defense, as I said they just tried to imply it may be wrong; that and repeating ad nauseam the allegations of torture, that's the best they could muster and all things considered, in my opinion, the defense case is threadbare.

Now, any comments on using the services of a company that doesn't list gait analysis to "prove" something by gait analysis? (a method not accepted in the UK courts, which may be the reason the company doesn't list it) Can you give me any examples of other gait analysis done by that same company? Any used on any trial in the UK? Anywhere else in the world?

A few points for you to consider in those replies,

Gait Analysis not accepted in the UK courts: Unless there's been a new law passed recently then as far as I can make out it certainly is allowed in UK courts. A murderer who said he was unfairly convicted because of the way he walks failed in an Appeal Court bid to clear his name. Elroy Otway was jailed in 2009 for the murder of Mark Daniels, 25, who was shot dead in Wythenshawe in August 2006. My testimony was instrumental in bringing Otway to justice. At London’s Appeal Court, Otway’s legal team argued that I ‘could not be considered an expert’ and that podiatry is ‘not sufficiently recognized or advanced’ as a forensic science to justify its use in court. http://www.expertwitnessjournal.co.uk/forensics/591-what-is-forensic-gait-analysis

Touch DNA is sketchy at best: Can you give me an expert opinion and citation that states it is sketchy at best? Are you saying that the identification of Hannah's and Davids DNA on the hoe handle is sketchy? You see logically if they are able to obtain enough to make a full test then it is permissible in court. So do courts take into account this sketchy evidence?

Again according to the defense and online speculation [serious doubts raised on RTP's version of events (rape, attack from behind etc) ] It was the UK coroner not online speculation regards the rape.

DNA result are wrong they passed on an offer to retest. Lets face it, if you have been asking for the chain of custody documents numerous times and they were never given, then whats the point of doing a DNA test when its not verifiable samples?

Allegations of torture thats the best they can muster: Thats pretty damning from most peoples perspective and deserves to be fully investigated and until that is done the evidence of the confessions should not be admissible, do you not agree? Internationa experts that are not connected to the defense do such as the International Commission of Jurists

EDIT

You yourself mentioned you were a gait expert, instead of questioning credible forensic companies would you care to list your own credentials?

Edited October 12, 2015 by HUH

[boomerangutang]

I admire the scapegoats' sophistication. At age 22, I'd be making noises like a caged peacock. I'd be like Bobby Seal at the Chicago 8 trial (before he was dismissed for being out of order, and it became 'The Chicago 7').

Just for a bit of comic interlude: When that trial started, the appointed judge was an old wrinkled man named Hoffman who probably hadn't smiled in 40 years. When the wild-eyed hippie Abbie Hoffman was first brought in to the court, Judge Hoffman solemnly told the court, "we share the same last name, but that's not my son." Right away, Abbie shouted, "Dad, how can you disown me like that !"

[AleG]

So it was Andy Hall saying what the expert said, an expert from a company that, again, doesn't list gait analysis as part of their services:

Services

We offer a fully comprehensive service and ensure by working in partnership with clients that we supply realistic long-term solutions that are tailored to your personal needs. We guarantee that our work is completed within the price quoted, there are no hidden extras. We will only undertake further development or additional processes with full consultation and agreement.

• Audio enhancement
• Transcription services
• CCTV
• Clothing comparisons
• Cold Case Reconstruction -
• Corporate Presentation
• Court room A/V setup
• Digital assett review database
• Document database
• Document & Exhibit Scanning
• EPE Preparation
• Facial Comparisons/Mapping
• E-Fit V
• Geomatics
• High Value Fraud
• Imaging services
• Interactive Mapping
• Photography/Video
• Telecoms / ANPR Mapping
• Vehicle comparisons
• Virtual Scene Panoramas
• 3D Computer Generated Body Injury Animations
• 3D Computer Generated Scenes

"Stephen Cole gait analysis" gives no search results except in relation to the Koh Tao testimony by Andy Hall.

Then there's this:

(UK) Forensic Image Comparison and Interpretation Evidence: Guidance for Prosecutors and Investigators

3.4. Subjective Analysis Due to the absence of a suitable database of facial features and no universally accepted methodology as to how two facial images should be compared, the analysis aspect of facial image comparison (and many other image interpretation tasks such as vehicle identification and gait comparison) is considered a subjective process. Therefore the opinion given by the expert will be based upon their competency, training and study of the specialist subject, rather than objective measurements. (more)

https://www.gov.uk/g...ue_1_160115.pdf

I think Mr. Hall may had been overstating the significance of the "gait analysis" he presented in court.

Appears to be well respected in their field

Acume Forensics are the UK's leading producer of Courtroom presentations and ancillary services, 3D Reconstruction, CCTV capture and review, Audio and Video improvement, Forensic Geomatics and Forensic Imaging.

To date we have produced over 300 courtroom presentations for category A murder enquiries with a 100% conviction rate and a sentencing tariff which has surpassed 1250 years.

Drove the early adoption of Digital Imaging in the Police environment.Including involvement in compiling V1 of ACPO digital imaging guidelines.

Set up and managed the first digital scanning and photography of treated crime scene marks in a UK Police force.

Produced the first fully electronic courtroom presentation in the UK (R v Huntley)

Continue to lead in the courtroom presentation market. Including our own in house software solutions for evidence treatment from disclosure to presentation.

Currently producing and suppling solutions to forty two of the forty three UK Police forces, Crown Prosecution Service, Ministry of Defence, HMRC, FSA, SOCA and HSE.

Recommended by the National Crime Agency Helpdesk, One of only five companies on the CPS framework for EPE (Courtroom Presentation) supply.

Specialties: Courtroom presentation, Audio, Video, 3D, Crime scene reconstruction, Visual Comparisons, Digital imaging provenance.

Still... nothing about gait analysis.

[RWA]

British Family Intervenes In Thai Murders Trial

LONDON: -- David Miller's family take receipt of a package from the Thai Embassy in London which they claim contains vital evidence.

The family of British murder victim David Miller, who died on the Thai island of Koh Tao a year ago, have intervened in the trial to try and prove their son's phone was in the possession of one of the accused.

In a dramatic twist in the final two hours of testimony, the prosecution took receipt of a package from the Thai Embassy in London, which they said confirmed the unique IMEI number of a phone found near the lodgings of one of the accused Burmese migrant workers.

Wei Phyo, 22, has not denied finding a phone on the beach on the night of the murders.

He said he picked it out of the sand some distance from the murder scene and took it home but he could not open it as it was locked with a passcode.

"The next day we heard about the murders and we were worried it might belong to someone involved," he told the court.

"My friend smashed up the phone and threw it into the undergrowth behind our hut."

The confirmation of ownership of the broken phone adds to the considerable circumstantial evidence stacked against Wei Phyo and his friend Zaw Lin, also 22.

Full story: http://news.sky.com/story/1567511/british-family-intervenes-in-thai-murders-trial

-- sky NEWS 2015-10-12

If the Millers are so concerned for the court to find out the truth, why do they hand in circumstancial evidence and did not:

1) Enforce that the RTP or Scotland Yard collects, views and confiscates ALL (back then) available CCTV tapes including the ones from the jetty and the AC Bar?

2) Enforce that (if not Thai authorties, then at least) Scotland Yard took in Christopher Ware AND Sean McAnna, as well as all returning "friends" of Hannah and David for interrogation?

Just to name two things any logical thinking person would have done after seeing the whole case derail during the first days of the so-called "investigation"... Now they send a box that has to do something with David's telephone that was found in the jungle? Are they really that naive to still believe the B2 are guilty? F me, folks, but this is totally beyond me. Are these people blind? Yes, it was shocking they stated to be happy with the Thai led "investigation", but now they send over circumstancial evidence to prove the patsies had found David's phone? Monty Python is lame slapstick compared to this!!!!

Photo shows someone that I, if I were David's or Hannah's father, would have invited to my garage for some man to man talks... Look at his right hand.

Chris Ware was cleared.

based on the fact that his DNA didn't match that what has been found (rape) on/in Hannah

(RTP announced that this "rape DNA" is belong to the Asian man)

but then, the Norfolk coroner findings are there's no signs of any rape, bites, etc., ...

soooo, how was Chris cleared, really? Based on WHAT?