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

[TheCruncher]

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.

I would be happy to share a taxi with many on here as there quite clearly honest, upstanding people with a ability to see what's right or wrong... I would however would not be waiting for you. And yes I would be very happy to stand up in court and say that the running man is not in any shape or form one of the B 2. I notice you also say it's nothing to do with you.. Well you ceartainly have a lot to say if that's the case... Maybe you could meet me in said court and put your case forward ! Or maybe again it wouldn't be anything to do with you again....I'm not hiding !! I'm happy to tell you my business interests , address etc in Thailand. Tell you what, we can swop information and maybe meet up for a quiet drink and discuss the merits of this case !

I think you are twisting my words to make your own claims believable, and I suggest you stop that, because you are confusing me with yourself.

Go through all my posts and you will find that I have never made any claim as to if I consider the accused either guilty or innocent, and neither have i made claims if any evidence presented is real or false.

Something that can't be said from yourself.

So now you're here anyway, where is your evidence that the police officer who was removed from the case knows the identity of the running man in the CCTV picture.

Put up or shut up.

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

photo at bottom of article ?

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

Edited October 12, 2015 by TheCruncher

[Nigeone]

Summary of disturbing facts regarding the two Burmese:

1 - They drunk beer and wine. They were reportedly stole their clothes while they were swimming ???

2 - Their DNA was found in the body of the Hannah. This evidence is contested in form but not in substance. The complotiste version is that RTP falsified the results of analysis to incriminate them.

3 - They would have "found" David's phone in the night on the beach when they were probably still under the influence of alcohol. However they don't saw the victims ???

One takes the side of victim's families cannot accept this version.

We understand that the motivation of a vast majority of posters here is the unilateral criticism of investigators and by extension of Thailand in general. It was already coarser at first, it becomes farcical with these last informations.

Just by their own words they halfway to a conviction.

They were near the crime of the scene (opportunity), they were drunk (people do stupid things when drunk), their clothes were stolen (but not the guitar, what a weird thief, anyway a key piece of evidence conveniently lost), they "found" the phone of the victim and tried to destroy it to avoid being incriminated (how would they know it was related to the crime?) and last but not least they never came forward to help in any way with the investigation.

They had a full year to come up with that alibi and it's so flimsy you could knock it over with a feather.

I haven't seen any report on what the prosecution asked them during cross examination, or what their answers were but I can't imagine it going over very well.

Doesn't there many times already circulate a picture in this and other Koh Tao threads, which many posters claim is of someone wearing David's shorts?

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Or someone who's clothes were covered in blood from the horrific attack on Hannah !! That guy with the alleged David's clothes was not one of the B2... Who could it have been then !? Ask the police guy removed from the case..He knew !

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.

I would be happy to share a taxi with many on here as there quite clearly honest, upstanding people with a ability to see what's right or wrong... I would however would not be waiting for you. And yes I would be very happy to stand up in court and say that the running man is not in any shape or form one of the B 2. I notice you also say it's nothing to do with you.. Well you ceartainly have a lot to say if that's the case... Maybe you could meet me in said court and put your case forward ! Or maybe again it wouldn't be anything to do with you again....I'm not hiding !! I'm happy to tell you my business interests , address etc in Thailand. Tell you what, we can swop information and maybe meet up for a quiet drink and discuss the merits of this case !

I think you are twisting my words to make your own claims believable, and I suggest you stop that, because you are confusing me with yourself.

Go through all my posts and you will find that I have never made any claim as to if I consider the accused either guilty or innocent, and neither have i made claims if any evidence presented is real or false.

Something that can't be said from yourself.

So now you're here anyway, where is your evidence that the police officer who was removed from the case knows the identity of the running man in the CCTV picture.

Put up or shut up.

Mmm interesting....Tell you what...where is the evidence that he wasn't removed because he was fingering protected families....it's funny how as soon as he named the prime suspects he was gone...!! And I was actually very polite with me answer to you..clearly not recognised by yourself. Do you dispute my claim then that the running man is not one of the B2.. Touched a nerve there haven't I.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Nigeone

[Gweiloman]

I would be happy to share a taxi with many on here as there quite clearly honest, upstanding people with a ability to see what's right or wrong... I would however would not be waiting for you. And yes I would be very happy to stand up in court and say that the running man is not in any shape or form one of the B 2. I notice you also say it's nothing to do with you.. Well you ceartainly have a lot to say if that's the case... Maybe you could meet me in said court and put your case forward ! Or maybe again it wouldn't be anything to do with you again....I'm not hiding !! I'm happy to tell you my business interests , address etc in Thailand. Tell you what, we can swop information and maybe meet up for a quiet drink and discuss the merits of this case !

I think you are twisting my words to make your own claims believable, and I suggest you stop that, because you are confusing me with yourself.

Go through all my posts and you will find that I have never made any claim as to if I consider the accused either guilty or innocent, and neither have i made claims if any evidence presented is real or false.

Something that can't be said from yourself.

So now you're here anyway, where is your evidence that the police officer who was removed from the case knows the identity of the running man in the CCTV picture.

Put up or shut up.

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

photo at bottom of article ?

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

[Linky]

Awful lot of trolls out at the end of the trial trying to shut things down. Hope the mods dont succumb to the pressure of the trolls.

[TheCruncher]

Put up or shut up.

Mmm interesting....Tell you what...where is the evidence that he wasn't removed because he was fingering protected families....it's funny how as soon as he named the prime suspects he was gone...!! And I was actually very polite with me answer to you..clearly not reckonised by yourself. Do you dispute my claim then that the running man is not one of the B2.. Touched a nerve there haven't I.

I have no claims to make if the running man is one of the B2 or not, neither do I claim it is someone else, there is an ongoing trial in Koh Samui where it on 24 December probably will be announced if they consider it to be one of the B2 or not.

And I trust that a justice system that has a lot more facts than anyone on this forum, will be able to make the right judgement.

[TheCruncher]

I think you are twisting my words to make your own claims believable, and I suggest you stop that, because you are confusing me with yourself.

Go through all my posts and you will find that I have never made any claim as to if I consider the accused either guilty or innocent, and neither have i made claims if any evidence presented is real or false.

Something that can't be said from yourself.

So now you're here anyway, where is your evidence that the police officer who was removed from the case knows the identity of the running man in the CCTV picture.

Put up or shut up.

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

photo at bottom of article ?

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

So if Panya really announced that the man in the picture is Mon, and it wasn't later proven that he was mistaken, Mon must be classified as a suspect in the files.

So why isn't Mon standing trial?

[Nigeone]

Put up or shut up.

Mmm interesting....Tell you what...where is the evidence that he wasn't removed because he was fingering protected families....it's funny how as soon as he named the prime suspects he was gone...!! And I was actually very polite with me answer to you..clearly not reckonised by yourself. Do you dispute my claim then that the running man is not one of the B2.. Touched a nerve there haven't I.

I have no claims to make if the running man is one of the B2 or not, neither do I claim it is someone else, there is an ongoing trial in Koh Samui where it on 24 December probably will be announced if they consider it to be one of the B2 or not.

And I trust that a justice system that has a lot more facts than anyone on this forum, will be able to make the right judgement.

Sadly I also think the justice system and mainly the RTP has more facts than anyone on here too...But that's the problem isn't it, in a nutshell. They do know who's done this crime but have suppressed and covered up from almost Day one. Nothing that has been said in court can discount that !!

Edited October 12, 2015 by Nigeone

[Gweiloman]

Put up or shut up.

Mmm interesting....Tell you what...where is the evidence that he wasn't removed because he was fingering protected families....it's funny how as soon as he named the prime suspects he was gone...!! And I was actually very polite with me answer to you..clearly not reckonised by yourself. Do you dispute my claim then that the running man is not one of the B2.. Touched a nerve there haven't I.

I have no claims to make if the running man is one of the B2 or not, neither do I claim it is someone else, there is an ongoing trial in Koh Samui where it on 24 December probably will be announced if they consider it to be one of the B2 or not.

And I trust that a justice system that has a lot more facts than anyone on this forum, will be able to make the right judgement.

Sorry, but you don't get to wriggle out of your hole so easily.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855163-koh-tao-murders-2-dna-profiles-from-alleged-murder-weapon-do-not-match-defendants-dna/page-86#entry9958179

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Tell me in all honesty that your post above is not trying to implicate one of the B2. As I have mentioned many times before, everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, deceitful lies are shameful. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

[Gweiloman]

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

photo at bottom of article ?

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

So if Panya really announced that the man in the picture is Mon, and it wasn't later proven that he was mistaken, Mon must be classified as a suspect in the files.

So why isn't Mon standing trial?

How long have you lived in Thailand?

[Nigeone]

I think you are twisting my words to make your own claims believable, and I suggest you stop that, because you are confusing me with yourself.

Go through all my posts and you will find that I have never made any claim as to if I consider the accused either guilty or innocent, and neither have i made claims if any evidence presented is real or false.

Something that can't be said from yourself.

So now you're here anyway, where is your evidence that the police officer who was removed from the case knows the identity of the running man in the CCTV picture.

Put up or shut up.

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

photo at bottom of article ?

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

So if Panya really announced that the man in the picture is Mon, and it wasn't later proven that he was mistaken, Mon must be classified as a suspect in the files.

So why isn't Mon standing trial?

Indeed !! Connections and money come to mind !

[Chetzee]

i seems it's been groundhog day again here today ...... and likely to remain that way . You think they did .... i think they didn't . RTP say they did , but failed to make significant info and dna, available to those that say they didn't .

Hey ... we know who really did it . .... no way .. coz he wasn't even on the Island .......

Oh and then there's the daily slanging matches .... and farcical long winded posts .... endlessly copied and quoted ....

seems i did not miss much today

[TheCruncher]

Put up or shut up.

Mmm interesting....Tell you what...where is the evidence that he wasn't removed because he was fingering protected families....it's funny how as soon as he named the prime suspects he was gone...!! And I was actually very polite with me answer to you..clearly not reckonised by yourself. Do you dispute my claim then that the running man is not one of the B2.. Touched a nerve there haven't I.

I have no claims to make if the running man is one of the B2 or not, neither do I claim it is someone else, there is an ongoing trial in Koh Samui where it on 24 December probably will be announced if they consider it to be one of the B2 or not.

And I trust that a justice system that has a lot more facts than anyone on this forum, will be able to make the right judgement.

Sorry, but you don't get to wriggle out of your hole so easily.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855163-koh-tao-murders-2-dna-profiles-from-alleged-murder-weapon-do-not-match-defendants-dna/page-86#entry9958179

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Tell me in all honesty that your post above is not trying to implicate one of the B2. As I have mentioned many times before, everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, deceitful lies are shameful. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Did you notice the word "Maybe" in my statement, and do only Burmese people get clothes stolen?

Don't you think that it would be logical that someone who wears a shorts from someone else does this because he himself doesn't have a short to wear?

Or do you want to insinuate that it clearly is Mon in the picture and that he wore the shorts of a murder victim just for the kick of it?

Edited October 12, 2015 by TheCruncher

[Gweiloman]

i seems it's been groundhog day again here today ...... and likely to remain that way . You think they did .... i think they didn't . RTP say they did , but failed to make significant info and dna, available to those that say they didn't .

Hey ... we know who really did it . .... no way .. coz he wasn't even on the Island .......

Oh and then there's the daily slanging matches .... and farcical long winded posts .... endlessly copied and quoted ....

seems i did not miss much today

Difference being that those that said they didn't backs up their stance with logical arguments, shows up lot of discrepancies and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, are able to point to experts' testimonies and cast reasonable doubt.

Those that think they did.....well, they think they did. Much like when the RTP pulls you over for a traffic violation that you didn't commit.

[TheCruncher]

So Mon is standing trial right?

Or has it been proven that Panya was mistaken?

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

So if Panya really announced that the man in the picture is Mon, and it wasn't later proven that he was mistaken, Mon must be classified as a suspect in the files.

So why isn't Mon standing trial?

How long have you lived in Thailand?

I have lived in Thailand very long time, maybe longer than you I don't know and I don't care either, but I don't believe that the length of stay in any country or length of membership on a Thai oriented forum makes one a homicide investigator .

[Gweiloman]

I have no claims to make if the running man is one of the B2 or not, neither do I claim it is someone else, there is an ongoing trial in Koh Samui where it on 24 December probably will be announced if they consider it to be one of the B2 or not.

And I trust that a justice system that has a lot more facts than anyone on this forum, will be able to make the right judgement.

Sorry, but you don't get to wriggle out of your hole so easily.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/855163-koh-tao-murders-2-dna-profiles-from-alleged-murder-weapon-do-not-match-defendants-dna/page-86#entry9958179

Now who would want to wear the shorts of a murder victim?

Hmm, maybe someone who's clothes were stolen?

Tell me in all honesty that your post above is not trying to implicate one of the B2. As I have mentioned many times before, everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, deceitful lies are shameful. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Did you notice the word "Maybe" in my statement, and do only Burmese people get clothes stolen?

Don't you think that it would be logical that someone who wears a shorts from someone else does this because he himself doesn't have a short to wear?

Or do you want to insinuate that it clearly is Mon in the picture and that he wore the shorts of a murder victim just for the kick of it?

On the night in question, the B2 had their clothes stolen. But you knew that of course. Keep wriggling.

[Gweiloman]

No, Mon is not standing trial.

And no, it has not been proven that Panya was mistaken.

So if Panya really announced that the man in the picture is Mon, and it wasn't later proven that he was mistaken, Mon must be classified as a suspect in the files.

So why isn't Mon standing trial?

How long have you lived in Thailand?

I have lived in Thailand very long time, maybe longer than you I don't know and I don't care either, but I don't believe that the length of stay in any country or length of membership on a Thai oriented forum makes one a homicide investigator .

Quite right. The length of stay in a country does not make one a homicide investigator. But unless you are living in the middle of Nakhon Nowhere, you will undoubtedly know how things work in Thailand.

[Gweiloman]

How long have you lived in Thailand?

I have lived in Thailand very long time, maybe longer than you I don't know and I don't care either, but I don't believe that the length of stay in any country or length of membership on a Thai oriented forum makes one a homicide investigator .

Quite right. The length of stay in a country does not make one a homicide investigator. But unless you are living in the middle of Nakhon Nowhere, you will undoubtedly know how things work in Thailand.

No I don't know how "Things" work in a high profile murder case in Thailand, since I have never been involved in any. Have you?

Can we just keep to the topic at hand? We don't want the thread closed now, do we?

[Scott]

Keep the discussion civil and keep personal remarks out of the thread.

One post has been removed and one poster has been suspended.

Suspensions will be handed out liberally and they will be lengthy.

[fritzzz25]

I guess the chap who went to great lengths to find an iPhone IMEI photo didn't read about the way the evidence would have to be collected using forensic software on the computer to clone an exact image of the hard drive. Also proving that chain of custody of said hard drive would be importance.

"when you are grasping at straws, don't be choosy about the color"

[webfact]

Koh Tao trial verdict set for December 24
Reuters

Defence team still expect victory; suspects claim sexual assault in jail

KOH SAMUI: -- THE verdict in the trial of two Myanmar migrant workers accused of killing two British tourists will be announced at the end of the year, a defence lawyer said yesterday following a trial that has been mired in controversy.

Britons Hannah Witheridge, 23, and David Miller, 24, were found bludgeoned to death on the southern island of Koh Tao last year. Post-mortem examination also showed that Witheridge had been raped.

The killings raised questions about the safety of tourists in Thailand, the competence of its police force and its treatment of migrant workers. Lawyers for the accused, Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun, both 22, have made police incompetence and mishandling of evidence central to their defence.

"The verdict will be on December 24," chief defence lawyer Nakhon Chompuchat said.

"There is a chance we can |still win," he said, adding that inconsistencies in the police investigation, including not sealing off the crime scene properly, could work in favour of the defence.

During the trial, which began in July, defence lawyers complained of a patchy police investigation marred by disputed forensics. The trial ended this weekend with the men alleging they were tortured and sexually assaulted to make false confessions.

Rights groups have become involved in the trial and claim the men are being used as scapegoats because of their status as foreign migrant workers.

'Inquiry needed into |allegations'

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha agreed last year to allow Britain's Metropolitan Police to conduct an inquiry in an attempt to reassure the victims' families that the judicial process was being carried out in a fair and transparent way.

The Met refused to hand over a report they had compiled on the police investigation and the two accused men lost a high court challenge in August that sought access to the report.

Andy Hall, a Thailand-based activist for the rights of migrant workers who is helping with the defence, said there needs to be an urgent investigation into the sexual assault allegations.

The defence and prosecu-|tion have until October 26 to deliver their written closing statements.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Koh-Tao-trial-verdict-set-for-December-24-30270731.html


-- The Nation 2015-10-13

[diehard60]

It has been a shame from the word go.

[smedly]

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=

You have mixed up two testimonies here.

The Burmese beach cleaner found the bodies and told O, an employee of Mon, about it.

He called Mon who came down to the beach.

0 then walked back to the resort and saw his hoe against a tree some way from the murder scene - at least 50 metres - maybe more like 75 - 100, he said.

He said he recognised it as his hoe and wondered why it was against the tree so he picked it up, didn't see the blood on it in the dawn light, and took it back to his small vegetable plot at the top of the beach. he then decided to do some painting as he didn't think he could be useful with the bodies.

He then said Mon and a policeman came to him and asked him where his hoe was.

He said it was in his vegetable patch as he had found it by the tree.

O says the police gave him a ruber glove - in court he demonstrated putting it on - and told him to put the hoe back by the tree.

When the hoe was found in the vegetable plot the police took pictures and the picture showed it wasn;t just placed in the plot but the end of it - the bloodied end - had been hidden among garbage bags.

He said he always kept his hoe among his garbage bags.

This is a transcript from the court procedure.

One thing I am not sure about here , at what time did O return the hoe from the vegatable plot to the tree where he originally found it

Presumably after the bodies were discovered and half the island had already trampled all over the crime scene

and mon and his cop friend had already decided it was the murder weapon before anyone else arrived at the crime scene and before any investigation actually started, to be honest I am kicking myself for not noticing this very obvious slip up before - where is the Hoe ? we left it right there and now it's gone, quick have a look around and see if you can find it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[smedly]

It was his phone as the British end confirmed that it was, categorically David's phone - now I want to know how he (Wei) ended up with his phone (before asking his friend to smash it up and dispose of it for him seemingly in panic fashion) when he claimed he never entered what became the crime scene and knew nothing of the murders until the following morning.

Considering that he said he went to bed at 2.00 AM or was it 4.00 AM and he was with friends, just how did he get hold of this phone? I think that I have the answer!!

He is telling 'porkies' and doing it not very well.

Andy Hall

Today, Wai Phyo testified in court he found an iPhone on the beach around 4am in the morning on 15th Sep 2014. Wai Phyo's friend testified on Oct 14 2014 previously in a pre-trial hearing that he has smashed this phone up and dumped it behind his house after Wai Phyo found it and gave it to him as was worried whose it was and that it may be related for the murders. That's all that has come to light today. Wai Phyo testified today he didn't know whether the phone the prosecution and police have in their possession and which allegedly matches the IMEI of David Miller's phone (as confirmed only by the deceased's parents, although the prosecution claim the UK government confirmed this phone as David's phone but the UK government deny they ever confirmed such information to the Thai Government) is the phone he found in the early morning of 15th Sep 2014 whilst out alone looking for his guitar and clothes. Wai Phyo denied that he took the mobile phone from the same place where the bodies of the deceased were found. Hope that clears up what was discussed today in court.

https://www.facebook.com/andy.hall.3110

No it doesn't actually!!

Figure, they all left the beach totally inebriated (because they hardly drank alcohol) at 2.00 AM and he found the phone on the beach at 4.00 AM.

Why did he return to the beach 2 hours after leaving it in a drunken state? Oh!! and he just happened to find David's phone in the process!!

Lies, lies, lies, I want to know what he has to hide?

he did not find Davids phone............he found A PHONE, police say it was Davids phone, there has been much confusion over phones, I have no doubt police actually did have Davids phone and since like everything else in this case we can trust them with impunity, the question remains - was the phone found smashed and dumped actually Davids phone, considering everything else that has gone on I have my doubts, the police have yet to confirm how many f'ing phones they actually have connected to this case - it was definitely more than one........someone correct me

[StealthEnergiser]

Thailand deaths of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller: Verdict expected on Christmas Eve

• A Thai judge in the trial of two migrant workers accused of killing two British tourists will announce the verdict on Christmas Eve, according to reports.

  Hannah Witheridge, 23, from Hemsby, Norfolk, and David Miller, 24, from Jersey, were found dead on the island of Koh Tao in September last year.

  Two Burmese migrants Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo deny involvement in the murders.
• http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-34505656

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@riverview810 @JQP6 indeed. Well it seemed to me the prosecution/police didn't comply with many defense requests for information.

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@riverview810 @JQP6 @SNetibutr police forensic experts were cross examined by defense lawyers/DNA experts were called by defense & testified

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 @SNetibutr there are likely 1000 pages of typed witness testimony for Koh Tao case and more than 100 evidence documents of 1000s pages

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 @SNetibutr each witnesses testimony is typed based on judge's dictates notes, both defense/prosecution must agree on that summary

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 @SNetibutr during testimony, judge dictates their summary, audible. If either sides disagrees or wants judge to add more, can request

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 @SNetibutr many times defense lawyers requested judges to specifically note something a witness said or corrected the judge's summary

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 @SNetibutr true verbatim notes may be better bt existing system of judge's summary/dictation can be challenged by lawyers on accuracy

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 both in my #naturalfruit trial and certainly in Koh Tao trial, a lot of evidence requested by defense was not produced. Concerning.

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

@JQP6 understand from Thai lawyers can demand documents produced/request judge's to order disclosure but lawyers rarely go to those lengths

[smedly]

Exactly!! WP said as much himself with the following quote:

The next day we heard about the murders and we were worried it might belong to someone involved

Heard about the murders .

Your insinuation thus is that Wei Phyo knew about the murders. Share with us the evidence, otherwise, it's just an opinion, to which you're entitled.

What, so all of yours (and others) comical conspiracy theories are all facts are they?

Prove to me that they were tortured and threatened first. Some of the scenarios thought up by you super sleuths out there are so laughable that I'm surprised that I haven't fallen off the couch yet or got a stitch!!

You can try and ridicule me as much as you like - you won't get to me and I won't stop giving my views.

I feel sorry for you 'bigoted' lot - keep the barbs coming, I won't relent!!

it is not about proving they were tortured, it is the fact that they had no legal council while being "interviewed" exactly why the police should make sure the accused are represented so there is no doubt - pretty basic stuff and if you don't get it "I really do understand why"

[smedly]

why did Mon and his cop friend (first on the scene) go looking for the Hoe, why did they even consider looking for it, how did they know that something that wasn't there on the beach was connected to the murders. Did they look at the two victims and hear a mysterious voice from the sea "it was a Hoe go find it and put it there"

this has been something so obvious that we all missed it

[BritTim]

What it definitely proofs is that the accused were in the possession of the phone of the murder victim.

It doesn't proof they murdered them, but it surely puts them in very hot water.

If the phone was smashed it most probably would not work anymore, and they would not be able to upload a "fake" IMEI number to it. Anyway the RTP didn't know David's IMEI number until a few days ago, so they wouldn't know which number to install in the phone.

I don't know about an Iphone, but all phones I have owned had the IMEI number under the battery, so no need to have a functional phone to discover the IMEI.

What it definitely proofs is that the accused were in the possession of the phone of the murder victim.

First, I think Wai Phyo most likely was in possession of David's phone. However, this is not categorically proven. It could have been a different phone, and the RTP use the IMEI from an (unbroken) phone they knew belonged to David.

Assuming Wai Phyo was in possession of David's phone, it is valid circumstantial evidence, but its strength is debatable. Suppose, as has been claimed anonymously, an attack was initiated just after David and Hannah left AC Bar. David likely would need to drop his phone to defend himself. (This, I believe, is also close to where the hoe would normally have been: a good defensive weapon of opportunity.) David and Hannah beat a fighting retreat towards their guest house, and are finally overwhelmed before they can reach there.

Under that scenario, finding the phone close to where there clothes and guitar had been, but some distance from the victims' bodies is a perfectly reasonable possibility. If you do not believe in coincidences, the phone evidence is pretty damning. However, life is full of coincidences. Wai's statement could well be true.

One question: did the testimony state that only Wai Phyo or both Burmese went out searching for clothes and the guitar. If Wai Phyo was the running man, where was Zaw Lin?

[IslandLover]

catsanddogs, on 12 Oct 2015 - 11:08, said:catsanddogs, on 12 Oct 2015 - 11:08, said:

Anyone know how far the B2's lodgings were from the crime scene? Just thinking maybe WP was woken up by noises of a disturbance and went to see what was going on at 4am and he witnessed something that he dare not speak of.

I read somewhere that their lodgings were in or near the AC2 resort. The AC2 resort is opposite the Maya Beach Club and near where they allegedly went for a swim. The left their guitar at the AC2 resort's beach bar where Maung Maung worked. You will see the distances on the attached map. The log where they were sitting drinking, smoking and playing guitar is right outside the In Touch beach restaurant, which is about 60 metres from where the bodies were found.

Edited October 13, 2015 by IslandLover