smedly Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) IMO as I have said before - finding a phone is not the issue here not so clear about being out at 4am looking for stuff but he says he was so no foul there either, from a map it seems all these bars back out onto the beach, it is not clear that before going swimming they left their clothes and the guitar in AC (2) bar or just the guitar, since one of them worked at the bar it is not beyond belief they put their belongs there while swimming at 2am, no foul there either - now to the phones Police found a phone at the crimesecene as they reported - this was very likely Davids phone IMO Police also found a smashed phone at B2 residence - admitted by the accused in court (we know the story) or maybe the proceeds from the previous nights muggings - police claimed to be Davids phone Modern phones are dodgy things to thieve these days, they have tracking abilities and various other tactics to fool thieves and trace stolen devices via GPS, as an example, if someone steals my phone it cannot be turned of from the lockscreen, it looks like it is off but it is still on and traceable via GPS, the battery cannot be removed, so the safest thing for a thief to do is smash it - no point in stealing it in the first place, if I thieved a handbag and it had a modern phone in there I would get rid of it ASAP So police have 2x phones that we know about The issue as I see it is - which phone belonged to David ? Police say the phone at the residence was Davids confirmed by IMEI ...... how convenient, again (just like the DNA) something else we have to take their word for, do we believe them do we trust them ? if we still believe B2 are scapegoats then it is likely police are manipulating evidence and telling lies to strengthen their case - something that many believe has been going on throughout this investigation/trial so nothing unusual there. If the phone at B2 residence was in fact Davids phone (IMO unlikely) then whos phone was found at the crimesecene and why have police not identified both phones as they are both just as relevent to the crime - just another reason why most people don't trust or believe what they are being told Phones are not difficult to identify, they have serial numbers IMEI numbers sim cards that could all very easily reveal the history of the phones and who was using them, the motherboard of a smashed phone(usually the screen) could easily be inserted into a working chassis and software (Apple would assist with this) used to access the data bypassing any lock codes. Edited October 14, 2015 by smedly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberfarang Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) I,ll throw another possibility into the hat and remember this is not my belief in what happened, only giving another possible theory, because theories is all we have for the time being without turning this into another conspiracy opportunity. If there were more men or even women, a gang, involved in the murders and the Burmese 2 were part of that group, would it make sense that the B2 would not implicate the others involved in fear that disclosing who they were would place them on the scene and of the others implicating them in the murder? Surely it would be better that the B2 deny everything in the hope that the police will not be able to prove anything and eventually the case dropped. I doubt the Burmese men would have the intelligence to think of this by themselves, but they would have been well advised by their defence lawyers. Another Plausible explanation for events. What do you think? Makes sense or not? Edited October 14, 2015 by cyberfarang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) Note: the phone that RTP found at the crime scene. What's the story on that one? If it belonged to one of the real perpetrators, then the general public will never know. I am not sure about the phone being found at the crime scene hannah's friends handed hers in to the police. I noticed smedly mentioned this also . I may have forgot about reading this but does anyone have the link where it was reported Edited October 14, 2015 by StealthEnergiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HUH Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Note: the phone that RTP found at the crime scene. What's the story on that one? If it belonged to one of the real perpetrators, then the general public will never know. I am not sure about the phone being found at the crime scene hannah's friends handed hers in to the police. I noticed smedly mentioned this also . I may have forgot about reading this but does anyone have the link where it was reported Investigating officer Cherdpong Chiewpreecha, failed to confirm whether the mobile phone and SIM card found on the beach belonged to Mr Miller http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3173235/Catalogue-police-blunders-including-failure-investigate-evidence-chase-suspects-revealed-court-judge-doubts-case-conclusive-outcome.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. Follow Andy Hall@Atomicalandy @JQP6 the police and prosecution did not respond to defense multiple requests for forensic testing case notes/chain of custody/photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. why do you keep saying this, maybe you could explain what dna evidence you are referring too there was no DNA evidence presented in court in any shape of form, police made a claim - that is all and in my professional opinion is worth absolutely nothing by any standard that I am aware of, this has been explained to you many many times by myself and others, why do you keep repeating this garbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. Follow Andy Hall@Atomicalandy @JQP6 the police and prosecution did not respond to defense multiple requests for forensic testing case notes/chain of custody/photos. Why don't you ask Mr. Hall why the defense didn't seek a court order to get the documentation released? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. why do you keep saying this, maybe you could explain what dna evidence you are referring toothere was no DNA evidence presented in court in any shape of form, police made a claim - that is all and in my professional opinion is worth absolutely nothing by any standard that I am aware of, this has been explained to you many many times by myself and others, why do you keep repeating this garbage Because he's trying to influence the uninformed. I tend to rely on Andy hall summation of the flaws in the prosecution case as he has been present throughout the trial. Legally the prosecution have no leg to stand on. They have failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. why do you keep saying this, maybe you could explain what dna evidence you are referring too there was no DNA evidence presented in court in any shape of form, police made a claim - that is all and in my professional opinion is worth absolutely nothing by any standard that I am aware of, this has been explained to you many many times by myself and others, why do you keep repeating this garbage "why do you keep saying this" Because that's a fact, what do you think the defense is talking about when saying that they think there are inconsistencies or problems or whatever with the DNA evidence presented by the prosecution? They just play along with a charade? Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away; you can ease yourself into that realization now or be blindsided by it when the verdict is read in December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I,ll throw another possibility into the hat and remember this is not my belief in what happened, only giving another possible theory, because theories is all we have for the time being without turning this into another conspiracy opportunity. If there were more men or even women, a gang, involved in the murders and the Burmese 2 were part of that group, would it make sense that the B2 would not implicate the others involved in fear that disclosing who they were would place them on the scene and of the others implicating them in the murder? Surely it would be better that the B2 deny everything in the hope that the police will not be able to prove anything and eventually the case dropped. I doubt the Burmese men would have the intelligence to think of this by themselves, but they would have been well advised by their defence lawyers. Another Plausible explanation for events. What do you think? Makes sense or not? As a scenario it's possible. As is their non involvement. Without any DNA evidence to link them to the crimes they could be accused of being accessories at best. Bear in mind the DNA evidence is only an assertion by the Rtp it has not been substantiated or validated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenterry Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. Follow 45] Andy Hall@Atomicalandy @JQP6 the police and prosecution did not respond to defense multiple requests for forensic testing case notes/chain of custody/photos. Why don't you ask Mr. Hall why the defense didn't seek a court order to get the documentation released? If the documentation existed there wouldn't be any reason not to provide said evidence. Perhaps you should ponder why it wasn't forthcoming as you seem to believe that the prosecution has the case wrapped up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim principle of English Law Where is the proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. why do you keep saying this, maybe you could explain what dna evidence you are referring too there was no DNA evidence presented in court in any shape of form, police made a claim - that is all and in my professional opinion is worth absolutely nothing by any standard that I am aware of, this has been explained to you many many times by myself and others, why do you keep repeating this garbage "why do you keep saying this" Because that's a fact, what do you think the defense is talking about when saying that they think there are inconsistencies or problems or whatever with the DNA evidence presented by the prosecution? They just play along with a charade? Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away; you can ease yourself into that realization now or be blindsided by it when the verdict is read in December. why did you edit out most of my post !!!!!!!!!!!!! here it is again why do you keep saying this, maybe you could explain what dna evidence you are referring too there was no DNA evidence presented in court in any shape of form, police made a claim - that is all and in my professional opinion is worth absolutely nothing by any standard that I am aware of, this has been explained to you many many times by myself and others, why do you keep repeating this garbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCruncher Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim principle of English Law Where is the proof? I'm sure you must have noticed that Samui isn't in England, so English Law may not apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HUH Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim principle of English Law Where is the proof? I'm sure you must have noticed that Samui isn't in England, so English Law may not apply. Because that particular law is common throughout the world including Thailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) Thank you HUH for your comment Thailand's legal system uses many sources of law There is also a difference between evidence and a claim of evidence. Edited October 14, 2015 by AGareth2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucky11 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) “I was sexually abused by Thai police” - Witheridge accused tells court http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/i_was_sexually_abused_by_thai_police_witheridge_accused_tells_court_1_4266818 Physically abused, mentally abused, sexually abused, verbally abused, threatened with having their bodies chopped up and given to crocodiles, probably racially abused because they are not Thai - I'm assuming they were water boarded and had salt put on pulled out fingernails !! Are there any other ways of abusing someone that they (Human rights) have left out? Edited October 14, 2015 by lucky11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolandRat Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Thank you HUH for your comment Thailand's legal system uses many sources of law There is also a difference between evidence and a claim of evidence. yes, many sources of law, the most common being, "law unto themselves". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy Joe Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. You just perfectly sums up my own conviction. Let us add that the polemicists interventions Andy Hall have taken him unworthy confusion of serene justice. The last element to consider is that David's father believes in the guilt of accuseds. And this faith shows real conviction of British investigators that they are bound by reserve duty. Appointment for the verdict so and let continue the great specialists their carousel of speculations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolandRat Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim principle of English Law Where is the proof? I'm sure you must have noticed that Samui isn't in England, so English Law may not apply. It would seem that no law applies in this case, only that which they feel suits there end game. The whole society is based on "whats in it for me" so why should the law be excluded. Forget "protect & Serve" it more like "pay & display" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolandRat Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. You just perfectly sums up my own conviction. Let us add that the polemicists interventions Andy Hall have taken him unworthy confusion of serene justice. The last element to consider is that David's father believes in the guilt of accuseds. And this faith shows real conviction of British investigators that they are bound by reserve duty. Appointment for the verdict so and let continue the great specialists their carousel of speculations. read it twice still dont understand a damn word....pretentious springs to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Will have to wait to hear the Judges' rulling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuketandsee Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. You just perfectly sums up my own conviction. Let us add that the polemicists interventions Andy Hall have taken him unworthy confusion of serene justice. The last element to consider is that David's father believes in the guilt of accuseds. And this faith shows real conviction of British investigators that they are bound by reserve duty. Appointment for the verdict so and let continue the great specialists their carousel of speculations. Did you use Google Translate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolandRat Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) What game of chess awaits the media, the "saving face" card will be a major player. For all we know, things will be seen to be done, but in reality who knows what deals and "agreements" have been made. Hypothetical scenario: The B2 are found guilty, sentenced, justice is seen to be done, perpetrators found, pat on the back to RTP,(face saved) case closed, several months go by may be a year, attention dies down, B2 released through a back door with a nice "compensation" and nobody is any the wiser. Its all smoke and mirrors, or is that winks,handshakes and envelopes to cover up incompetency and the previous pay off to destroy/hide evidence by those who were in a financial position to pay for it to go away. The actual truth, despite all the hot air and "experts" will never be known...........sadly. but hey TIT Edited October 14, 2015 by RolandRat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Thank you HUH for your comment Thailand's legal system uses many sources of law There is also a difference between evidence and a claim of evidence. none that they seem to follow either Police in the west generally make an attempt at solving crimes, they must follow strict protocols and proceedures that are all designed to be fair for those accused and also to remove any doubts when they get a conviction, they are also highly trained and qualified for the task A defence team will have unrestrcted access to all evidence presented in court and have the opportunity to verify all of it especially physical evidence like dna and murder weapons, if they are unable to do so that evidence would not be allowed, all samples of "original" dna must be kept, there are special proceedures to follow if dna "original" sample might be exhausted due to sample size being very small, in the case of these murders the largest and most plentiful samples (semen) would have been from Hannah if indeed she was actually raped, to say they were exhausted or used up is a blatant lie and IMO impossible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberfarang Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I,ll throw another possibility into the hat and remember this is not my belief in what happened, only giving another possible theory, because theories is all we have for the time being without turning this into another conspiracy opportunity. If there were more men or even women, a gang, involved in the murders and the Burmese 2 were part of that group, would it make sense that the B2 would not implicate the others involved in fear that disclosing who they were would place them on the scene and of the others implicating them in the murder? Surely it would be better that the B2 deny everything in the hope that the police will not be able to prove anything and eventually the case dropped. I doubt the Burmese men would have the intelligence to think of this by themselves, but they would have been well advised by their defence lawyers. Another Plausible explanation for events. What do you think? Makes sense or not? As a scenario it's possible. As is their non involvement. Without any DNA evidence to link them to the crimes they could be accused of being accessories at best. Bear in mind the DNA evidence is only an assertion by the Rtp it has not been substantiated or validated. I will go along with that. After reading your post, I am now 60/40 that the B2 are implicated in this somehow. I wonder, lets say for arguments sake, if the B2 are found guilty, could they be offered a plea deal whereas a lighter sentence if they divulge any others that were involved? If this could be, then I guess the others involved must be very worried at this time or they have all ready made a run for it. Very interesting to see what may be revealed at the final trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWA Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Christmas Eve verdict is absolutely not a coincidence. I will be traveling to KS to give whatever support I can and personally thank Andy and his team for the incredibly brave work they have done. very nice of you but me sorry, I really don't want to put a foot / one cent in surat thani province , specially in Koh tao/phangan/Samui... never of my life ! and it would be the same about all thailand if i haven't a gf and 2 children to take care in issaan.... must also add that i'll never encourage somebody else to go for it.... me sorry again to think thailand will never change.... I feel exactly the same way but I feel strongly enough to make an exception in this case. The more people that show up the more both sides will realize people have not, and will not, forget this. Cheers!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamukloy Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I hope the Miller's get their justice and can have closure on their terrible loss. I think that they are privy to something that we don't know about - maybe something revealed to them by the UK police in their capacity of observing the investigation, of which cannot be given out to the public. Otherwise, why would they want the B2 to go down if they they were not truly convinced of their guilt? I suspect people suffering such horrific grief often want quick closure and sometimes quick justice. I think its very complex and something you can have no real idea of until it happens to you. I think you would hope that justice is being done, but if someone in authority tells you they have the culprit..then you would be feeling so many strong emotions that you would probably accept what they say without thinking to much. They would surely want someone to pay, and being able to think "they have the bxxxxxxs that done this" must give them some small comfort in a terrible situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthEnergiser Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The facts of the case are in the bag already, people can speculate until they go blue on the face but it's not going to change anything. The fact is the prosecution presented DNA evidence that points to their guilt, the fact is the defense didn't seek a court order to get the chain of custody and case notes from the police, the fact is they declined having the DNA retested and the fact is Dr. Pornthips testimony (the only substantial thing the defense has thrown against the prosecution case) doesn't actually invalidate the results of the DNA analysis. The fact is the defendants were near the scene of the crime at that time, that they have no credible alibi, the clothes they were wearing on that night are conveniently missing and they were in possession of one of the victim's phones. You may not like any of those facts but they are what they are. What if there were other people there on that night? What if this?, what if that?... It's been more than a year of "what ifs" that have gone nowhere. Follow Andy Hall@Atomicalandy @JQP6 the police and prosecution did not respond to defense multiple requests for forensic testing case notes/chain of custody/photos. Why don't you ask Mr. Hall why the defense didn't seek a court order to get the documentation released? Andy Hall @JQP6 i was not aware of defense lawyers requesting the court to order disclosure. Burden of proof is with the prosecution, not defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts