Forensic team to testify in Koh Tao murder trial

[BritTim]

More memories by you that are unsubstantiated. I'm particularly interested in this little gem " including eye witnesses" Please go ahead and prove me wrong with a link that states they had these eye witnesses who were going to attend the trial. Other than those who were to afraid to attend.

"U Aung Myo Thant said one of the eyewitnesses saw the men who accompanied the British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller from the hotel shortly before the murder. Another witness said he had seen the rape by the light of his motorbike."

I'm sure you are quite satisfied in believing the reason these supposed witnesses don't seem to have materialized is because they were scared of by some vague but nefarious group, from appearing in court... or recording their testimony outside of court, or anything at all that would point to their actual existence.

That is a quite excellent link. Your prediction of why I think the witnesses are not testifying (hinted at in your linked article, and supported by other reports) is also spot on. Besides physical danger, their ability to continue living and working in Thailand would vanish were they to testify. The defense has statements, but they would (rightly) just be treated as hearsay unless the witnesses were willing to attend court.

[JLCrab]

Information held by a public authority

for the purposes of the Freedom of

Information Act

8. The example emphasises that it is the circumstances of each case that will determine whether information is held for the purposes of FOIA.

See also 7.

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1148/information_held_by_a_public_authority_for_purposes_of_foia.pdf

The Inquest is Open to the public Crabby. My interest is whether they will disclose the inconsistency's found or not. I would guess they have to but rather than discuss it on here its better to ask. Its a free country in the UK and they have to respond even if its to say no sorry we will nit disclose important information. However I think they will and have to. If we get the response at least all the armchair deteks will have it from the horses mouth. I for one don't know the answer.

From your email letter: If you don't publish the full facts at the inquest is it possible under the FOI act to get a copy of the findings.

[thailandchilli]

So apparently from the witness list, the Defense will be presenting no witnesses -- UK, Thai, or otherwise -- who were at the scene or vicinity of the crimes on the night in question and who who were in the company of the victims who can testify as to the doings of Ms. Witheridge or Mr. Miller in the hours previous to the crimes.

Which is odd because I distinctly remember them claiming that they had witnesses that could prove the two defendants innocence, including eye witnesses.

More memories by you that are unsubstantiated. I'm particularly interested in this little gem " including eye witnesses" Please go ahead and prove me wrong with a link that states they had these eye witnesses who were going to attend the trial. Other than those who were to afraid to attend.

"U Aung Myo Thant said one of the eyewitnesses saw the men who accompanied the British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller from the hotel shortly before the murder. Another witness said he had seen the rape by the light of his motorbike."

I'm sure you are quite satisfied in believing the reason these supposed witnesses don't seem to have materialized is because they were scared of by some vague but nefarious group, from appearing in court... or recording their testimony outside of court, or anything at all that would point to their actual existence.

Read my post, I'm fully aware of those witnesses and yes they were to scared to return to Thailand. Next time try responding to what I asked for.

Yes I'm also satisfied with the explanation given by the defense I have far more trust in their honesty than I do your RTP which you base your complete trust in to provide evidence that is honest and reliable

[AleG]

Of course I acknowledge the possibility that the tests were not done according to whatever standards one may want to establish; but as I have said repeatedly there's no mishandling of the evidence or errors in the analysis that would yield not one but two matching DNA profiles. The only way that would be possible would be by deliberate malfeasance so that is what the defense needs to do to, IMO, dismiss the evidence.

I'm not going to feel satisfied with what amounts to "Well it could had been wrong, so there".

As for that evidence only proving they had sex with Witheridge, no, it also proves that they lied when they claimed they had nothing to do with anything, and if they lied about that what else did they lie about?

If they did when did that happen and why didn't they tell anyone at any time about it?

Mind you they have also already admitted of having a phone identical to the one that was taken from Miller since the night of the murders, so they just happened to have consensual sex with one of the victims and just happened to "find" the phone of the other?

I was waiting to hear an explanation to the extremely suspicious beheaviour and circumstances of the two defendants but so far I haven't seen anything in that regard, some people have been accused of being involved in the murders on much less grounds than these two.

i agree with some of the points you make, for sure they need to answer to a case against them and we should not accept "it could be wrong so there". But it seems to me the defense are trying to discredit the DNA test and you criticise them for it, you cannot have it both ways, they should have the opportunity.

Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?

So as many questions need answering about the B2 behaviour there are at least as many questions raised about the prosecutions case.

I did not say it was likely that they had sex with her and then innocently walked away but it still has to be proved that they killed her. You cannot just say, well we believe they had sex with her so they must be the murderers, again evidence is needed not speculation.

So, if the defense discredit the DNA evidence and find it to be false or unreliable then there is no evidence against the b2, at least not as far as I can see.

Question - If the RTP believed they had a good case building against them why did they only run finger print checks on the hoe and not run DNA tests at the time? Surely this was a must right? Unless of course they knew there would be no DNA match. Doesn't that make you think that either something is wrong or the RTP acted with gross incompetence?

We all want the same (at least I think so), the guilty to be punished, but I dont want to see 2 people who are innocent being locked up whilst the guilty get away with it. You have to look at both sides of the argument and there are some very suspicious claims coming from the prosecution.

Lastly, is it really so unbelievable to you that something is suspicious, here in Thailand? There was so much pressure to arrest someone quickly that perhaps arrests were made in hast. Of course I do not know that but I could not put my hand on my heart and say it is impossible, could you?

Remember innocent until "proven" guilty.

Yes, innocent until proven guilty, I just happen to think that also applies to the people that carried out the investigation, who are being accused of being part of a conspiracy to not only frame two innocent men, but also of protecting the supposedly real murders.

As for your question regarding fingerprints and DNA testing of the hoe, they were reported as stating that they had found only DNA from Witheridge on the hoe, there's photographic prove that they swabbed it for the purpose of DNA analysis, so the notion that the police never checked it for DNA is simply not true.

About the two men simply being scapegoats picked up in a hurry, I have already mentioned that there many aspects of their story that don't match with it. First of they have admitted of being near the scene of the crime, secondly they have admitted of finding a phone identical to David Miller's on that night, they have also came up with a story of their clothes having been stolen on the same night (which I believe it is mean to explain why they can't produce them for forensic analysis), so on and so forth. There's more than enough there to cast this men under suspicion, that they would had been coincidentally picked as scapegoats is a stretch.

"Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?"

I didn't mention because all I know is what Andy Hall has said about it, did they request it before the hearing or it is something that came up during questioning? What is the documentation about, is it relevant?

This is once again the kind of vague information that IMO is thrown around to imply a lot and say little.

[thailandchilli]

Thanks for your predictable reply.

Maybe I should have limited my post to ask for a Yes/No answer, to avoid the inevitable deflective, non-commital response. So, 'Balo', I ask you now whether you agree in principle (putting aside all the other issues) that the Thai police investigation should be re-opened if the B2 are found not guilty. Please answer Yes or No this time. Thanks. The same Yes/No question and answer also goes to AG, Goldbuggy and friends.

Of course it wll be reopened , I thought that was clear , YES, but if RTP decide to reopen the case there will be not a lot of RTP believers on this forum.

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

I think the families would disagree and would want a new investigation at all costs

[GAZZPA]

Whatever the outcome of the verdict the investigation from armchair detectives will continue for months to come. If B2 are indeed innocent there will be a demand for a proper investigation by RTP. But since nobody want to believe a word of what RTP comes up with , there will only be more speculations and theories about what happened that night. Unless someone hires a private foreign investigator but I think its too late for that.

However if new evidence should come to the light, like CCTV footage from AC bar or maybe some of the people that fled the island, like McAnna breaks his silence.

Thanks for your predictable reply.

Maybe I should have limited my post to ask for a Yes/No answer, to avoid the inevitable deflective, non-commital response. So, 'Balo', I ask you now whether you agree in principle (putting aside all the other issues) that the Thai police investigation should be re-opened if the B2 are found not guilty. Please answer Yes or No this time. Thanks. The same Yes/No question and answer also goes to AG, Goldbuggy and friends.

Of course it wll be reopened , I thought that was clear , YES, but if RTP decide to reopen the case there will be not a lot of RTP believers on this forum.

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

This not about pleasing one crowd or another, its about justice for the victims and their families.

There are serious issues with the case put forward by the prosecution that do not, in my opinion prove that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There are claims of purgery which seem well founded by a police officer, missing paperwork and what seem to be obstacles put in the way of the defence (why only 6 days to present defence in comparison the the prosecutions 12 days?)

What I want to see is either the prosecution answer the questions and put to bed all of the doubts, therefore proving the B2 guilt OR the defence squashing the prosecutions case because it is simply unproven and untrue.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the problems with the prosecutions case. The fact is Neither you or I know for sure, but I will try and keep an open mind and see what happens whilst you blindly ignore the huge elephants in the room.

[AleG]

More memories by you that are unsubstantiated. I'm particularly interested in this little gem " including eye witnesses" Please go ahead and prove me wrong with a link that states they had these eye witnesses who were going to attend the trial. Other than those who were to afraid to attend.

"U Aung Myo Thant said one of the eyewitnesses saw the men who accompanied the British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller from the hotel shortly before the murder. Another witness said he had seen the rape by the light of his motorbike."

I'm sure you are quite satisfied in believing the reason these supposed witnesses don't seem to have materialized is because they were scared of by some vague but nefarious group, from appearing in court... or recording their testimony outside of court, or anything at all that would point to their actual existence.

That is a quite excellent link. Your prediction of why I think the witnesses are not testifying (hinted at in your linked article, and supported by other reports) is also spot on. Besides physical danger, their ability to continue living and working in Thailand would vanish were they to testify. The defense has statements, but they would (rightly) just be treated as hearsay unless the witnesses were willing to attend court.

Right, two persons murdered, two more facing a death penalty and the reason a migrant worker won't speak up is because of job security... and that after the defense team, or rather the MWRN year long donations campaign to, among other things, cover that sort of situations.

I, for one, am quite tired of the convenient excuses and boogie man arguments of why it's just not possible to produce any positive bit of evidence to support the innocence of the two men on trial.

[mcm991]

Of course I acknowledge the possibility that the tests were not done according to whatever standards one may want to establish; but as I have said repeatedly there's no mishandling of the evidence or errors in the analysis that would yield not one but two matching DNA profiles. The only way that would be possible would be by deliberate malfeasance so that is what the defense needs to do to, IMO, dismiss the evidence.

I'm not going to feel satisfied with what amounts to "Well it could had been wrong, so there".

As for that evidence only proving they had sex with Witheridge, no, it also proves that they lied when they claimed they had nothing to do with anything, and if they lied about that what else did they lie about?

If they did when did that happen and why didn't they tell anyone at any time about it?

Mind you they have also already admitted of having a phone identical to the one that was taken from Miller since the night of the murders, so they just happened to have consensual sex with one of the victims and just happened to "find" the phone of the other?

I was waiting to hear an explanation to the extremely suspicious beheaviour and circumstances of the two defendants but so far I haven't seen anything in that regard, some people have been accused of being involved in the murders on much less grounds than these two.

i agree with some of the points you make, for sure they need to answer to a case against them and we should not accept "it could be wrong so there". But it seems to me the defense are trying to discredit the DNA test and you criticise them for it, you cannot have it both ways, they should have the opportunity.

Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?

So as many questions need answering about the B2 behaviour there are at least as many questions raised about the prosecutions case.

I did not say it was likely that they had sex with her and then innocently walked away but it still has to be proved that they killed her. You cannot just say, well we believe they had sex with her so they must be the murderers, again evidence is needed not speculation.

So, if the defense discredit the DNA evidence and find it to be false or unreliable then there is no evidence against the b2, at least not as far as I can see.

Question - If the RTP believed they had a good case building against them why did they only run finger print checks on the hoe and not run DNA tests at the time? Surely this was a must right? Unless of course they knew there would be no DNA match. Doesn't that make you think that either something is wrong or the RTP acted with gross incompetence?

We all want the same (at least I think so), the guilty to be punished, but I dont want to see 2 people who are innocent being locked up whilst the guilty get away with it. You have to look at both sides of the argument and there are some very suspicious claims coming from the prosecution.

Lastly, is it really so unbelievable to you that something is suspicious, here in Thailand? There was so much pressure to arrest someone quickly that perhaps arrests were made in hast. Of course I do not know that but I could not put my hand on my heart and say it is impossible, could you?

Remember innocent until "proven" guilty.

"Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?"

I didn't mention because all I know is what Andy Hall has said about it, did they request it before the hearing or it is something that came up during questioning? What is the documentation about, is it relevant?

This is once again the kind of vague information that IMO is thrown around to imply a lot and say little.

What vagueness?

The prosecution said the DNA in the victim was a match with the accused.

They have been asked to substantiate their claim but once again the 'dog ate it'. Just like 'the dog ate the original sample', so it can't be retested and just like 'the dog ate everything else that they made up.'

You have become so tiresome, AleG. I wonder who you are really covering for........ and why .......

[BritTim]

Of course I acknowledge the possibility that the tests were not done according to whatever standards one may want to establish; but as I have said repeatedly there's no mishandling of the evidence or errors in the analysis that would yield not one but two matching DNA profiles. The only way that would be possible would be by deliberate malfeasance so that is what the defense needs to do to, IMO, dismiss the evidence.

I'm not going to feel satisfied with what amounts to "Well it could had been wrong, so there".

As for that evidence only proving they had sex with Witheridge, no, it also proves that they lied when they claimed they had nothing to do with anything, and if they lied about that what else did they lie about?

If they did when did that happen and why didn't they tell anyone at any time about it?

Mind you they have also already admitted of having a phone identical to the one that was taken from Miller since the night of the murders, so they just happened to have consensual sex with one of the victims and just happened to "find" the phone of the other?

I was waiting to hear an explanation to the extremely suspicious beheaviour and circumstances of the two defendants but so far I haven't seen anything in that regard, some people have been accused of being involved in the murders on much less grounds than these two.

i agree with some of the points you make, for sure they need to answer to a case against them and we should not accept "it could be wrong so there". But it seems to me the defense are trying to discredit the DNA test and you criticise them for it, you cannot have it both ways, they should have the opportunity.

Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?

So as many questions need answering about the B2 behaviour there are at least as many questions raised about the prosecutions case.

I did not say it was likely that they had sex with her and then innocently walked away but it still has to be proved that they killed her. You cannot just say, well we believe they had sex with her so they must be the murderers, again evidence is needed not speculation.

So, if the defense discredit the DNA evidence and find it to be false or unreliable then there is no evidence against the b2, at least not as far as I can see.

Question - If the RTP believed they had a good case building against them why did they only run finger print checks on the hoe and not run DNA tests at the time? Surely this was a must right? Unless of course they knew there would be no DNA match. Doesn't that make you think that either something is wrong or the RTP acted with gross incompetence?

We all want the same (at least I think so), the guilty to be punished, but I dont want to see 2 people who are innocent being locked up whilst the guilty get away with it. You have to look at both sides of the argument and there are some very suspicious claims coming from the prosecution.

Lastly, is it really so unbelievable to you that something is suspicious, here in Thailand? There was so much pressure to arrest someone quickly that perhaps arrests were made in hast. Of course I do not know that but I could not put my hand on my heart and say it is impossible, could you?

Remember innocent until "proven" guilty.

Yes, innocent until proven guilty, I just happen to think that also applies to the people that carried out the investigation, who are being accused of being part of a conspiracy to not only frame two innocent men, but also of protecting the supposedly real murders.

As for your question regarding fingerprints and DNA testing of the hoe, they were reported as stating that they had found only DNA from Witheridge on the hoe, there's photographic prove that they swabbed it for the purpose of DNA analysis, so the notion that the police never checked it for DNA is simply not true.

About the two men simply being scapegoats picked up in a hurry, I have already mentioned that there many aspects of their story that don't match with it. First of they have admitted of being near the scene of the crime, secondly they have admitted of finding a phone identical to David Miller's on that night, they have also came up with a story of their clothes having been stolen on the same night (which I believe it is mean to explain why they can't produce them for forensic analysis), so on and so forth. There's more than enough there to cast this men under suspicion, that they would had been coincidentally picked as scapegoats is a stretch.

"Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?"

I didn't mention because all I know is what Andy Hall has said about it, did they request it before the hearing or it is something that came up during questioning? What is the documentation about, is it relevant?

This is once again the kind of vague information that IMO is thrown around to imply a lot and say little.

they were reported as stating that they had found only DNA from Witheridge on the hoe

No, they testified that both Hannah's and David's DNA was found on the hoe.

there's photographic prove that they swabbed it for the purpose of DNA analysis, so the notion that the police never checked it for DNA is simply not true.

Correct, one of a number of examples of police perjury at the trial.

did they request it before the hearing

They have been unsuccessfully requesting it for months.

About the two men simply being scapegoats picked up in a hurry, I have already mentioned that there many aspects of their story that don't match with it.

Quite so. Very valid point, and one the defense will need to address during the remainder of the trial. The defendants' testimony on this will be interesting.

[Muirton]

the scene is looking different

No, it's exactly the same as before; the prosecution never claimed DNA from the defendants was found on the hoe. The only thing that has come from the independent testing of it is that it was, indeed, the murder weapon; so nothing new.

Meanwhile the actual DNA evidence the prosecution is basing their case on is being contested only indirectly by trying to discredit the process that yielded the results, instead of the actual results themselves; which I don't think carries much weight because it's not possible to by mistake or accident arrive at two DNA profiles matching the defendants.

The only thing that would produce a match is a deliberate faking of the results after the two defendants were arrested, and until they can provide any sort of evidence for such thing, IMO, the DNA evidence still stands.

It's a very interesting point you make and on the surface it sounds correct. But not linking the murder weapon to the accused is a serious blow for the persecution for sure. Even if they can prove without doubt that the men had sex with Hannah that does not mean that they killed her, I know how that sounds but it has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Also, although I know nothing about the UK pathologist report as it is not allowed to be made public I do know from the press releases that in the UK that they have sent a report back to Thailand as they have "serious concerns" over the pathologist report from Thailand. It is inferred that the information will help the defence, again no now knows what that is but it does create doubt.

It is possible that the DNA tests were not conducted correctly for the samples allegedly found. If this proves to be the case what evidence is left that these b2 actually committed the crime? I assume you at least acknowledge this as a possibility.

All we can hope for is the outcome is the right one and that whoever is truly responsible is brought to justice, if it turns out to be the B2 then so be it but I have to say from the limited information we all have there are some very serious doubts and the prosecution will have a tough time proving their guilt.

Of course I acknowledge the possibility that the tests were not done according to whatever standards one may want to establish; but as I have said repeatedly there's no mishandling of the evidence or errors in the analysis that would yield not one but two matching DNA profiles. The only way that would be possible would be by deliberate malfeasance so that is what the defense needs to do to, IMO, dismiss the evidence.

I'm not going to feel satisfied with what amounts to "Well it could had been wrong, so there".

As for that evidence only proving they had sex with Witheridge, no, it also proves that they lied when they claimed they had nothing to do with anything, and if they lied about that what else did they lie about?

If they did when did that happen and why didn't they tell anyone at any time about it?

Mind you they have also already admitted of having a phone identical to the one that was taken from Miller since the night of the murders, so they just happened to have consensual sex with one of the victims and just happened to "find" the phone of the other?

I was waiting to hear an explanation to the extremely suspicious beheaviour and circumstances of the two defendants but so far I haven't seen anything in that regard, some people have been accused of being involved in the murders on much less grounds than these two.

"the extremely suspicious beheaviour [sic erat scriptum] and circumstances of the two defendants" Sez who besides you?

[AleG]

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

This not about pleasing one crowd or another, its about justice for the victims and their families.

There are serious issues with the case put forward by the prosecution that do not, in my opinion prove that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There are claims of purgery which seem well founded by a police officer, missing paperwork and what seem to be obstacles put in the way of the defence (why only 6 days to present defence in comparison the the prosecutions 12 days?)

What I want to see is either the prosecution answer the questions and put to bed all of the doubts, therefore proving the B2 guilt OR the defence squashing the prosecutions case because it is simply unproven and untrue.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the problems with the prosecutions case. The fact is Neither you or I know for sure, but I will try and keep an open mind and see what happens whilst you blindly ignore the huge elephants in the room.

I'm well aware of the problems with the prosecution, also that the coverage of the proceedings have been overwhelmingly biased in favour of the defense.

It's just those problems are only peripheral to my main reasons to believe there is a case against the two defendants.

The prime DNA evidence has gone uncontested in regards to the actual validity of the results and as far as I have seen the suspicious actions and circumstances of the defendants on the day of the murders and afterwards have also not been cleared up.

[loonodingle]

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

This not about pleasing one crowd or another, its about justice for the victims and their families.

There are serious issues with the case put forward by the prosecution that do not, in my opinion prove that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There are claims of purgery which seem well founded by a police officer, missing paperwork and what seem to be obstacles put in the way of the defence (why only 6 days to present defence in comparison the the prosecutions 12 days?)

What I want to see is either the prosecution answer the questions and put to bed all of the doubts, therefore proving the B2 guilt OR the defence squashing the prosecutions case because it is simply unproven and untrue.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the problems with the prosecutions case. The fact is Neither you or I know for sure, but I will try and keep an open mind and see what happens whilst you blindly ignore the huge elephants in the room.

I'm well aware of the problems with the prosecution, also that the coverage of the proceedings have been overwhelmingly biased in favour of the defense.

It's just those problems are only peripheral to my main reasons to believe there is a case against the two defendants.

The prime DNA evidence has gone uncontested in regards to the actual validity of the results and as far as I have seen the suspicious actions and circumstances of the defendants on the day of the murders and afterwards have also not been cleared up.

Very hard to contest something when its used up or lost wouldn't you say.. Very convenient I must say.

[Nigeone]

Whatever the outcome of the verdict the investigation from armchair detectives will continue for months to come. If B2 are indeed innocent there will be a demand for a proper investigation by RTP. But since nobody want to believe a word of what RTP comes up with , there will only be more speculations and theories about what happened that night. Unless someone hires a private foreign investigator but I think its too late for that.

However if new evidence should come to the light, like CCTV footage from AC bar or maybe some of the people that fled the island, like McAnna breaks his silence.

Thanks for your predictable reply.

Maybe I should have limited my post to ask for a Yes/No answer, to avoid the inevitable deflective, non-commital response. So, 'Balo', I ask you now whether you agree in principle (putting aside all the other issues) that the Thai police investigation should be re-opened if the B2 are found not guilty. Please answer Yes or No this time. Thanks. The same Yes/No question and answer also goes to AG, Goldbuggy and friends.

Of course it wll be reopened , I thought that was clear , YES, but if RTP decide to reopen the case there will be not a lot of RTP believers on this forum.

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

OMG once again I'm left speechless. Let me see, you state that the defense has not produced any evidence to support a case against anyone else. Mmmm lets see..who's job is that !! And for the crowning glory you state the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled... A good choice of words I feel... Assembled...gathered together but not maybe relevant. I will say this once and once only. The police up to now have assembled and produced NO evidence whatsoever to implicate the B2. What's been produced by them..Nothing, what's been said they have, LOTS.. What's been produced in court to back up there case. NOTHING.. They say the B2 did it....How do they know because they haven't produced anything,I repeat anything in court to back this statement up. As for the the Forensic findings by the UK coroner I feel there hands might be tired and maybe have overstepped the mark with handing over the findings to the Thai judge but if they don't come out now which is likely they sure as hell are going to come out later at the inquiry. Then is suggested there's significant differences Human Rights and even families of the deceased are going to asking so many questions. This issue is not going away!! The truth will come out one day I really believe that as someone will talk for money and as I've said before the UK sunday papers are a likely instigator. Keep fighting all on here that feel injustice is being done. David and Hannah I'm sure would want that !

[BritTim]

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

This not about pleasing one crowd or another, its about justice for the victims and their families.

There are serious issues with the case put forward by the prosecution that do not, in my opinion prove that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There are claims of purgery which seem well founded by a police officer, missing paperwork and what seem to be obstacles put in the way of the defence (why only 6 days to present defence in comparison the the prosecutions 12 days?)

What I want to see is either the prosecution answer the questions and put to bed all of the doubts, therefore proving the B2 guilt OR the defence squashing the prosecutions case because it is simply unproven and untrue.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the problems with the prosecutions case. The fact is Neither you or I know for sure, but I will try and keep an open mind and see what happens whilst you blindly ignore the huge elephants in the room.

I'm well aware of the problems with the prosecution, also that the coverage of the proceedings have been overwhelmingly biased in favour of the defense.

It's just those problems are only peripheral to my main reasons to believe there is a case against the two defendants.

The prime DNA evidence has gone uncontested in regards to the actual validity of the results and as far as I have seen the suspicious actions and circumstances of the defendants on the day of the murders and afterwards have also not been cleared up.

One version of the "actions and circumstances" goes like this:

• There is CCTV evidence that (on their day off) they were smoking and drinking beer a few hours before the murders. DNA evidence confirms they were guilty of smoking. There is even further CCTV evidence that they purchased cigarettes.
• There is further CCTV evidence that they also rode a motorcycle several hours before the murders. They were not wearing helmets and ought to be fined for this offence.
• No CCTV coverage has been produced that puts them anywhere near the crime scene at or after the time David and Hannah were reported to have left AC Bar.
• At the time the RTP estimate the murders took place, or a few minutes later, they were observed sleeping soundly in their room.
• It is unclear to me what the Burmese kids said under torture versus what they said freely later.

Personally, I would want a little more evidence before convicting them of a capital crime.

[mcm991]

A new investigation under that scenario will probably a dead end, there will be no DNA evidence (hypothetically having already been discredited), it will be a very empty slate that, as you mention, would only please the alternative theory crowd because they'll have an empty canvass on which to draw their own ideas.

It's been a year since the murders, the alternative crowd has produced exactly zero evidence to support a case against anyone else and that is not bound to change, regardless of the outcome of the case; the only real evidence available is the one that the police has assembled. By taking the knee jerk and prejudiced stance of completely discrediting the RTP work the end result will be, as I mentioned before, that the baby is going to go out with the bath water.

This not about pleasing one crowd or another, its about justice for the victims and their families.

There are serious issues with the case put forward by the prosecution that do not, in my opinion prove that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There are claims of purgery which seem well founded by a police officer, missing paperwork and what seem to be obstacles put in the way of the defence (why only 6 days to present defence in comparison the the prosecutions 12 days?)

What I want to see is either the prosecution answer the questions and put to bed all of the doubts, therefore proving the B2 guilt OR the defence squashing the prosecutions case because it is simply unproven and untrue.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the problems with the prosecutions case. The fact is Neither you or I know for sure, but I will try and keep an open mind and see what happens whilst you blindly ignore the huge elephants in the room.

I'm well aware of the problems with the prosecution, also that the coverage of the proceedings have been overwhelmingly biased in favour of the defense.

It's just those problems are only peripheral to my main reasons to believe there is a case against the two defendants.

The prime DNA evidence has gone uncontested in regards to the actual validity of the results and as far as I have seen the suspicious actions and circumstances of the defendants on the day of the murders and afterwards have also not been cleared up.

Oh please AleG ......

The DNA evidence that you are so fond of has remained uncontested because the prosecution has provided nothing to contest. How can you contest something when the sum total of the evidence is a guy who points his finger at the accused and said 'he done it'?

And now apparently, the dog has eaten yet another piece of critical evidence that the defence have been after TO CONTEST this DNA claim.

Stop arguing like a toddler. It is so demeaning to you.

If the DNA is a match ... why has the prosecution refused to hand over their documents that show this? Are you having some trouble with this concept?

[StealthEnergiser]

Defense Points to Flaws in Probe of Koh Tao Murders

KOH SAMUI — Lawyers defending two Myanmar migrant workers on trial for the Koh Tao murders of two British backpackers sought on Wednesday to expose holes in a police investigation they maintain was botched and intended to frame the suspects.

The conduct of Thailand's police and treatment of its huge Myanmar labor force has been central to the trial of the young men accused of killing Hannah Witheridge and David Miller a year ago on the southern island.

Post-mortem examinations showed the victims suffered severe head wounds and Witheridge was raped, but lawyers and activists said the two Myanmar accused, Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun, have been made scapegoats for the killings.

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1443004814

[Rykbanlor]

I have abstained for the last few days, and just skimmed through the last few pages, but it winds me up so I'm remaining a watcher.

Kudos to all the posters who are still at it.

I couldn't bring myself to read all the circulars, but would anyone be able to tell me when the final court dates are?

Regards.

[minikev]

I think it's obvious that it is a different one and is broken across the blade.

What appears obvious for the majority of reasonable minded people such as a seriously flawed investigation and trial is not obvious for those who for whatever reason seem hell bent on backing the official RTP "story". Its worth noting however that such a minority of people who believe this story all seem to have connections to K.T.

Those two pics are the same hoe

Hard to see how you can come to that conclusion as one has a corner missing and the other one doesn't. The patternation of the dried cement or mud on the one on the beach and the one in the small fenced garden are exactly the same, the one in the video has different patternation and doesn't have a corner missing.

Perhaps it's irrelevant and may have been used by the film crew as an example but however you look there are two different hoes.

[BritTim]

I have abstained for the last few days, and just skimmed through the last few pages, but it winds me up so I'm remaining a watcher.

Kudos to all the posters who are still at it.

I couldn't bring myself to read all the circulars, but would anyone be able to tell me when the final court dates are?

Regards.

The original schedule has the court testimony running through until Friday. After that, there is no fixed schedule. The judges gather any further evidence they feel like, and in due course deliver a verdict. If they want to declare the Burmese kids guilty, the additional evidence collection could take a while.

I think it unlikely the defense will finish by Friday, and hope they will be allotted time at a later date to finish their witness testimony. Considering one of the supposed defense days was taken up with completing the prosecution case, it would be extremely unfair if they were not allowed more time.

[GOLDBUGGY]

I care about the 2 True Victims in this case which is Hannah and David. Therefore I do not want to see 2 Accused Rapists and Murderers walk free until it is proven beyond a "Reasonable Doubt" they are in fact Innocent. Do you see where they have done that as I don't.

Someone who may have forgotten to put the correct date on a DNA Document does not convince me the 2 Accused are innocent. Nor is the UK Justice System who fail to provide written declaration that this Mobile Phone belongs to David, as by law they are not allowed to, even if they give a verbal confirmation. Even that this case wasn't handled perfectly with apparent blunders. But none so far that proves the DNA Match with Hannah is false, and why after a year the Defense is still trying to prove that today.

You on the other hand think the victims here are the 2 Accused. You base your judgement on a case that wasn't handled perfectly, which has only been reported about by the Defense Team since last November as the Prosecution has said very little. On 2 Baby Faced Accused Rapists and Murderers who simply said they didn't do it and were tortured into a confession, with no proof so far any of that is true, and when anyone accused with a crime like this would lie through their teeth to save their own skins.

The Defense has a chance this week to prove their case, so let's let them do their job.

This typify's the bias being shown by some posters in favour of a conviction. It is for the prosecution to provide evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants are guilty not for them to prove their innocence. So far they have clearly not done so or indeed provided any evidence other than to say "We know they did it" They have unfortunately lost or destroyed what evidence there was and given laughable reasons for doing so. In any western court the case would never have even reached the trial stage but I guess we will be subjected to the charade a while longer. It seems that for some here the mere accusation by the police is proof of guilt which demonstrates a ridiculously high level of trust in the RTP

There are things about this case you seem to be forgetting. For example full confessions of both the accused after their DNA from a Cigarette Butt matched that of what was found inside of Hannah. Then when their DNA was taken separately and it to matched with Hannah. How odd and strange it is for me to think that 2 accused are questioned in 2 separate locations yet there stories match identically. Agreeing on what Win did on that night in question and also what Lin did.

Then when asked what happened to David Miller's Mobile Phone one of the accused said he found it in David Miller's pants pocket and gave it to a friend to hold. When this friend was questioned, sure enough he had it. He said he became suspicious of it so he destroyed it and threw it behind his living quarters, and where it was found by Police. A Mobile Phone that was surely worth something at least.

Then by their own admission you have the 2 accused on the beach very near the crime scene at or near the time of the murders. Both without alibi's except each other. Both admitting to drinking alcohol their at intoxicating levels. So what the Prosecution starts out with is 2 full Confessions, DNA evidence matching the accused to Hannah, a Mobile Phone that the accused confessed in taking form David Miller's Pants Pocket and giving to a friend, both having the opportunity to commit this crime as both admitted to being on the beach at or near the time of the rape and murder, both without alibis except from each other, and a motive, after the discovery of Hannah being raped before she was murdered.

All is quiet for near a week even after a visit from the Legal Counsel and members of the Myanmar Embassy but this Media attention has brought out some high profile Defense Team willing to work pro-bono. Then suddenly everything changes. This confessions become forced confession under torture, when nobody has come forward and admitted any such occurrence. The Translator was not competent and yet the 2 accused fully understood they signed a confession. That they did not understand that they signed permission to collect DNA Sample from them when a simple visit to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them to anyway, even if they had to be tied to a chair.

Then this Mobile Phone they first admitted getting from David Miller's Pant Pocket changes to, It becomes a Mobile Phone they found on the beach that night, in the dark, when they admitted they didn't see anyone else their. The witness changed his testimony to. He no longer destroyed it and got rid of it because he became suspicious of it, he now destroyed it and got rid of it because it didn't work. Who would destroy and expensive Mobile Phone given to him by a friend to hold, and without their permission I will never know.

Even the clothes and shoe(s) found at the crime scene that didn't belong to Hannah or David and that the accused said they were never their. They knew that this would be surely be tested for DNA, but that didn't matter as they already had an explanation for that to. They went swimming and although they did not see anyone, their clothes and shoes were stolen. So if the DNA turned out to be theirs well, the murderers must have planted them their to accuse them. For two guys with very little to next to none formal education, they sure got their ducks in a row in a hurry.

How many more times are people going to continue making this false statement that everything is lost. Just a couple of weeks ago almost everyone here was claiming that Hannah's clothes was lost. Then Dr. Pornthip questions why her clothes weren't DNA Tested. The clothes everyone said was missing. She also question why the blood in the sand wasn't tested either. Little did she know at this time that a few weeks earlier the Defense Lawyer was happy they could get this sandy blood for retesting. How can you retest something that was never tested before? How would you know any of this if there was no documentation on this DNA, which everyone keeps saying it doesn't exist?

Then you have the hoe. Dr. Pornthip's Lab finding DNA on this hoe, which was known to have been moved from the crime scene, and in which anyone could have touched it afterwards, saying they found DNA on it. Then alleged by the Media Dr. Pornthip telling the Police they need to get to the bottom of who these people are. Since when does the Forensic Expert tell the Police in any country how to handle an investigation?

But no need to do that as the Defense quickly found out or knew who's DNA it was anyway. The Forensic Lab guy, working for Dr. Pornthip claims it belongs to Hannah and David. Go Figure? Just another one of those strange coincidences. How they got Hannah's DNA and also Davids remains a mystery which the media doesn't seem to want to find out.

Which brings me to my last point in all this DNA from the Prosecution that many claim was tainted, destroyed, corrupt, lost, not documented, and so on. I don't think anyone here knows for sure what is left. We do know from the Prosecution Forensic Team said that all DNA was Replicated. Now this will draw many to explain this in over 1,000 Words why this is no damned good, but I only have One Logical question concerning this.

If Replicated DNA is no damned good then why do Forensic Labs Replicate it in the first place? Surely, if it can't be used again as many claim, they would not bother with this. But then from people who think that the entire Police Force from the Lowest Man on the street to the Highest General, and the entire Forensic Lab, would all lie and put to innocent men to their death for no good reason, what would you expect.

I hope you read that last link here from this case in which the Media say (by-the-way) even with David and Hannah's DNA on the hoe, surely David couldn't have done this otherwise he would be a suspect. Right! Then people here have the nerve to call me Defender of the RTP and that you stand up here for justice for Hannah and David.

Yeah! I am sure you all think you do. .

[GAZZPA]

More memories by you that are unsubstantiated. I'm particularly interested in this little gem " including eye witnesses" Please go ahead and prove me wrong with a link that states they had these eye witnesses who were going to attend the trial. Other than those who were to afraid to attend.

"U Aung Myo Thant said one of the eyewitnesses saw the men who accompanied the British tourists Hannah Witheridge and David Miller from the hotel shortly before the murder. Another witness said he had seen the rape by the light of his motorbike."

I'm sure you are quite satisfied in believing the reason these supposed witnesses don't seem to have materialized is because they were scared of by some vague but nefarious group, from appearing in court... or recording their testimony outside of court, or anything at all that would point to their actual existence.

That is a quite excellent link. Your prediction of why I think the witnesses are not testifying (hinted at in your linked article, and supported by other reports) is also spot on. Besides physical danger, their ability to continue living and working in Thailand would vanish were they to testify. The defense has statements, but they would (rightly) just be treated as hearsay unless the witnesses were willing to attend court.

Right, two persons murdered, two more facing a death penalty and the reason a migrant worker won't speak up is because of job security... and that after the defense team, or rather the MWRN year long donations campaign to, among other things, cover that sort of situations.

I, for one, am quite tired of the convenient excuses and boogie man arguments of why it's just not possible to produce any positive bit of evidence to support the innocence of the two men on trial.

They do not need to prove innocence, the prosecution needs to prove guilt. People do not go through life ensuring alibis in case they wrongly accused of something.

[GAZZPA]

I care about the 2 True Victims in this case which is Hannah and David. Therefore I do not want to see 2 Accused Rapists and Murderers walk free until it is proven beyond a "Reasonable Doubt" they are in fact Innocent. Do you see where they have done that as I don't.

Someone who may have forgotten to put the correct date on a DNA Document does not convince me the 2 Accused are innocent. Nor is the UK Justice System who fail to provide written declaration that this Mobile Phone belongs to David, as by law they are not allowed to, even if they give a verbal confirmation. Even that this case wasn't handled perfectly with apparent blunders. But none so far that proves the DNA Match with Hannah is false, and why after a year the Defense is still trying to prove that today.

You on the other hand think the victims here are the 2 Accused. You base your judgement on a case that wasn't handled perfectly, which has only been reported about by the Defense Team since last November as the Prosecution has said very little. On 2 Baby Faced Accused Rapists and Murderers who simply said they didn't do it and were tortured into a confession, with no proof so far any of that is true, and when anyone accused with a crime like this would lie through their teeth to save their own skins.

The Defense has a chance this week to prove their case, so let's let them do their job.

This typify's the bias being shown by some posters in favour of a conviction. It is for the prosecution to provide evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants are guilty not for them to prove their innocence. So far they have clearly not done so or indeed provided any evidence other than to say "We know they did it" They have unfortunately lost or destroyed what evidence there was and given laughable reasons for doing so. In any western court the case would never have even reached the trial stage but I guess we will be subjected to the charade a while longer. It seems that for some here the mere accusation by the police is proof of guilt which demonstrates a ridiculously high level of trust in the RTP

There are things about this case you seem to be forgetting. For example full confessions of both the accused after their DNA from a Cigarette Butt matched that of what was found inside of Hannah. Then when their DNA was taken separately and it to matched with Hannah. How odd and strange it is for me to think that 2 accused are questioned in 2 separate locations yet there stories match identically. Agreeing on what Win did on that night in question and also what Lin did.

Then when asked what happened to David Miller's Mobile Phone one of the accused said he found it in David Miller's pants pocket and gave it to a friend to hold. When this friend was questioned, sure enough he had it. He said he became suspicious of it so he destroyed it and threw it behind his living quarters, and where it was found by Police. A Mobile Phone that was surely worth something at least.

Then by their own admission you have the 2 accused on the beach very near the crime scene at or near the time of the murders. Both without alibi's except each other. Both admitting to drinking alcohol their at intoxicating levels. So what the Prosecution starts out with is 2 full Confessions, DNA evidence matching the accused to Hannah, a Mobile Phone that the accused confessed in taking form David Miller's Pants Pocket and giving to a friend, both having the opportunity to commit this crime as both admitted to being on the beach at or near the time of the rape and murder, both without alibis except from each other, and a motive, after the discovery of Hannah being raped before she was murdered.

All is quiet for near a week even after a visit from the Legal Counsel and members of the Myanmar Embassy but this Media attention has brought out some high profile Defense Team willing to work pro-bono. Then suddenly everything changes. This confessions become forced confession under torture, when nobody has come forward and admitted any such occurrence. The Translator was not competent and yet the 2 accused fully understood they signed a confession. That they did not understand that they signed permission to collect DNA Sample from them when a simple visit to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them to anyway, even if they had to be tied to a chair.

Then this Mobile Phone they first admitted getting from David Miller's Pant Pocket changes to, It becomes a Mobile Phone they found on the beach that night, in the dark, when they admitted they didn't see anyone else their. The witness changed his testimony to. He no longer destroyed it and got rid of it because he became suspicious of it, he now destroyed it and got rid of it because it didn't work. Who would destroy and expensive Mobile Phone given to him by a friend to hold, and without their permission I will never know.

Even the clothes and shoe(s) found at the crime scene that didn't belong to Hannah or David and that the accused said they were never their. They knew that this would be surely be tested for DNA, but that didn't matter as they already had an explanation for that to. They went swimming and although they did not see anyone, their clothes and shoes were stolen. So if the DNA turned out to be theirs well, the murderers must have planted them their to accuse them. For two guys with very little to next to none formal education, they sure got their ducks in a row in a hurry.

How many more times are people going to continue making this false statement that everything is lost. Just a couple of weeks ago almost everyone here was claiming that Hannah's clothes was lost. Then Dr. Pornthip questions why her clothes weren't DNA Tested. The clothes everyone said was missing. She also question why the blood in the sand wasn't tested either. Little did she know at this time that a few weeks earlier the Defense Lawyer was happy they could get this sandy blood for retesting. How can you retest something that was never tested before? How would you know any of this if there was no documentation on this DNA, which everyone keeps saying it doesn't exist?

Then you have the hoe. Dr. Pornthip's Lab finding DNA on this hoe, which was known to have been moved from the crime scene, and in which anyone could have touched it afterwards, saying they found DNA on it. Then alleged by the Media Dr. Pornthip telling the Police they need to get to the bottom of who these people are. Since when does the Forensic Expert tell the Police in any country how to handle an investigation?

But no need to do that as the Defense quickly found out or knew who's DNA it was anyway. The Forensic Lab guy, working for Dr. Pornthip claims it belongs to Hannah and David. Go Figure? Just another one of those strange coincidences. How they got Hannah's DNA and also Davids remains a mystery which the media doesn't seem to want to find out.

Which brings me to my last point in all this DNA from the Prosecution that many claim was tainted, destroyed, corrupt, lost, not documented, and so on. I don't think anyone here knows for sure what is left. We do know from the Prosecution Forensic Team said that all DNA was Replicated. Now this will draw many to explain this in over 1,000 Words why this is no damned good, but I only have One Logical question concerning this.

If Replicated DNA is no damned good then why do Forensic Labs Replicate it in the first place? Surely, if it can't be used again as many claim, they would not bother with this. But then from people who think that the entire Police Force from the Lowest Man on the street to the Highest General, and the entire Forensic Lab, would all lie and put to innocent men to their death for no good reason, what would you expect.

I hope you read that last link here from this case in which the Media say (by-the-way) even with David and Hannah's DNA on the hoe, surely David couldn't have done this otherwise he would be a suspect. Right! Then people here have the nerve to call me Defender of the RTP and that you stand up here for justice for Hannah and David.

Yeah! I am sure you all think you do. .

Nice speech. However,,

Almost everything you have written can be explained by extracting confessions out of the B2 and trying to make the story fit the facts that are known.

The problem is that people are questioning that the confession is believed (by many) to have been "extracted" from the B2 by the RTP. Therefore it is not relevant at all because if it was true they would have most certainly been told what to say making all of it nonsense.

There are holes and problems with the prosecutions case after the confession that certain people tend to ignore. Have an open mind, step back and watch what happens over the next few days.

I do not know the answers but I do suspect something maybe amiss,,

[BritTim]

There are things about this case you seem to be forgetting. For example full confessions of both the accused after their DNA from a Cigarette Butt matched that of what was found inside of Hannah. Then when their DNA was taken separately and it to matched with Hannah. How odd and strange it is for me to think that 2 accused are questioned in 2 separate locations yet there stories match identically. Agreeing on what Win did on that night in question and also what Lin did.

Then when asked what happened to David Miller's Mobile Phone one of the accused said he found it in David Miller's pants pocket and gave it to a friend to hold. When this friend was questioned, sure enough he had it. He said he became suspicious of it so he destroyed it and threw it behind his living quarters, and where it was found by Police. A Mobile Phone that was surely worth something at least.

Then by their own admission you have the 2 accused on the beach very near the crime scene at or near the time of the murders. Both without alibi's except each other. Both admitting to drinking alcohol their at intoxicating levels. So what the Prosecution starts out with is 2 full Confessions, DNA evidence matching the accused to Hannah, a Mobile Phone that the accused confessed in taking form David Miller's Pants Pocket and giving to a friend, both having the opportunity to commit this crime as both admitted to being on the beach at or near the time of the rape and murder, both without alibis except from each other, and a motive, after the discovery of Hannah being raped before she was murdered.

All is quiet for near a week even after a visit from the Legal Counsel and members of the Myanmar Embassy but this Media attention has brought out some high profile Defense Team willing to work pro-bono. Then suddenly everything changes. This confessions become forced confession under torture, when nobody has come forward and admitted any such occurrence. The Translator was not competent and yet the 2 accused fully understood they signed a confession. That they did not understand that they signed permission to collect DNA Sample from them when a simple visit to the Justice of the Peace would have forced them to anyway, even if they had to be tied to a chair.

Then this Mobile Phone they first admitted getting from David Miller's Pant Pocket changes to, It becomes a Mobile Phone they found on the beach that night, in the dark, when they admitted they didn't see anyone else their. The witness changed his testimony to. He no longer destroyed it and got rid of it because he became suspicious of it, he now destroyed it and got rid of it because it didn't work. Who would destroy and expensive Mobile Phone given to him by a friend to hold, and without their permission I will never know.

Even the clothes and shoe(s) found at the crime scene that didn't belong to Hannah or David and that the accused said they were never their. They knew that this would be surely be tested for DNA, but that didn't matter as they already had an explanation for that to. They went swimming and although they did not see anyone, their clothes and shoes were stolen. So if the DNA turned out to be theirs well, the murderers must have planted them their to accuse them. For two guys with very little to next to none formal education, they sure got their ducks in a row in a hurry.

How many more times are people going to continue making this false statement that everything is lost. Just a couple of weeks ago almost everyone here was claiming that Hannah's clothes was lost. Then Dr. Pornthip questions why her clothes weren't DNA Tested. The clothes everyone said was missing. She also question why the blood in the sand wasn't tested either. Little did she know at this time that a few weeks earlier the Defense Lawyer was happy they could get this sandy blood for retesting. How can you retest something that was never tested before? How would you know any of this if there was no documentation on this DNA, which everyone keeps saying it doesn't exist?

Then you have the hoe. Dr. Pornthip's Lab finding DNA on this hoe, which was known to have been moved from the crime scene, and in which anyone could have touched it afterwards, saying they found DNA on it. Then alleged by the Media Dr. Pornthip telling the Police they need to get to the bottom of who these people are. Since when does the Forensic Expert tell the Police in any country how to handle an investigation?

But no need to do that as the Defense quickly found out or knew who's DNA it was anyway. The Forensic Lab guy, working for Dr. Pornthip claims it belongs to Hannah and David. Go Figure? Just another one of those strange coincidences. How they got Hannah's DNA and also Davids remains a mystery which the media doesn't seem to want to find out.

Which brings me to my last point in all this DNA from the Prosecution that many claim was tainted, destroyed, corrupt, lost, not documented, and so on. I don't think anyone here knows for sure what is left. We do know from the Prosecution Forensic Team said that all DNA was Replicated. Now this will draw many to explain this in over 1,000 Words why this is no damned good, but I only have One Logical question concerning this.

If Replicated DNA is no damned good then why do Forensic Labs Replicate it in the first place? Surely, if it can't be used again as many claim, they would not bother with this. But then from people who think that the entire Police Force from the Lowest Man on the street to the Highest General, and the entire Forensic Lab, would all lie and put to innocent men to their death for no good reason, what would you expect.

I hope you read that last link here from this case in which the Media say (by-the-way) even with David and Hannah's DNA on the hoe, surely David couldn't have done this otherwise he would be a suspect. Right! Then people here have the nerve to call me Defender of the RTP and that you stand up here for justice for Hannah and David.

Yeah! I am sure you all think you do. .

I am sure there is a lot about this case that we are all forgetting. The lack of a trial transcript and inability to record or take notes does not make things easy.

If Replicated DNA is no damned good then why do Forensic Labs Replicate it in the first place?

The replicated DNA is extremely good. The development of PCR is a key reason why DNA analysis has become so useful. (You can read up on it at http://nij.gov/topics/forensics/evidence/dna/basics/Pages/analyzing.aspx). It must, however, be used reasonably promptly (it degrades much faster than the original samples) and cannot be traced back to the original samples. The chain of custody documentation is absolutely critical in determining where the replicated DNA came from.

[canuckamuck]

I am waiting for the explanation of how David was killed with a hoe without getting any of his blood on it.

[loonodingle]

I am waiting for the explanation of how David was killed with a hoe without getting any of his blood on it.

Damn good point

[GAZZPA]

Of course I acknowledge the possibility that the tests were not done according to whatever standards one may want to establish; but as I have said repeatedly there's no mishandling of the evidence or errors in the analysis that would yield not one but two matching DNA profiles. The only way that would be possible would be by deliberate malfeasance so that is what the defense needs to do to, IMO, dismiss the evidence.

I'm not going to feel satisfied with what amounts to "Well it could had been wrong, so there".

As for that evidence only proving they had sex with Witheridge, no, it also proves that they lied when they claimed they had nothing to do with anything, and if they lied about that what else did they lie about?

If they did when did that happen and why didn't they tell anyone at any time about it?

Mind you they have also already admitted of having a phone identical to the one that was taken from Miller since the night of the murders, so they just happened to have consensual sex with one of the victims and just happened to "find" the phone of the other?

I was waiting to hear an explanation to the extremely suspicious beheaviour and circumstances of the two defendants but so far I haven't seen anything in that regard, some people have been accused of being involved in the murders on much less grounds than these two.

i agree with some of the points you make, for sure they need to answer to a case against them and we should not accept "it could be wrong so there". But it seems to me the defense are trying to discredit the DNA test and you criticise them for it, you cannot have it both ways, they should have the opportunity.

Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?

So as many questions need answering about the B2 behaviour there are at least as many questions raised about the prosecutions case.

I did not say it was likely that they had sex with her and then innocently walked away but it still has to be proved that they killed her. You cannot just say, well we believe they had sex with her so they must be the murderers, again evidence is needed not speculation.

So, if the defense discredit the DNA evidence and find it to be false or unreliable then there is no evidence against the b2, at least not as far as I can see.

Question - If the RTP believed they had a good case building against them why did they only run finger print checks on the hoe and not run DNA tests at the time? Surely this was a must right? Unless of course they knew there would be no DNA match. Doesn't that make you think that either something is wrong or the RTP acted with gross incompetence?

We all want the same (at least I think so), the guilty to be punished, but I dont want to see 2 people who are innocent being locked up whilst the guilty get away with it. You have to look at both sides of the argument and there are some very suspicious claims coming from the prosecution.

Lastly, is it really so unbelievable to you that something is suspicious, here in Thailand? There was so much pressure to arrest someone quickly that perhaps arrests were made in hast. Of course I do not know that but I could not put my hand on my heart and say it is impossible, could you?

Remember innocent until "proven" guilty.

Yes, innocent until proven guilty, I just happen to think that also applies to the people that carried out the investigation, who are being accused of being part of a conspiracy to not only frame two innocent men, but also of protecting the supposedly real murders.

As for your question regarding fingerprints and DNA testing of the hoe, they were reported as stating that they had found only DNA from Witheridge on the hoe, there's photographic prove that they swabbed it for the purpose of DNA analysis, so the notion that the police never checked it for DNA is simply not true.

About the two men simply being scapegoats picked up in a hurry, I have already mentioned that there many aspects of their story that don't match with it. First of they have admitted of being near the scene of the crime, secondly they have admitted of finding a phone identical to David Miller's on that night, they have also came up with a story of their clothes having been stolen on the same night (which I believe it is mean to explain why they can't produce them for forensic analysis), so on and so forth. There's more than enough there to cast this men under suspicion, that they would had been coincidentally picked as scapegoats is a stretch.

"Also, you do not mention the recent news about the Australian Doctor unable to testify as she needs to see the DNA documentation but as yet she has not seen it, is that not suspicious to you? Why is it not available to the defence immediately?"

I didn't mention because all I know is what Andy Hall has said about it, did they request it before the hearing or it is something that came up during questioning? What is the documentation about, is it relevant?

This is once again the kind of vague information that IMO is thrown around to imply a lot and say little.

I read somewhere very recently that a policeman stated that they did not DNA test the hoe at all, only tested for fingerprints.. To be honest it was somewhere in the huge pile of posts and I cannot be bothered to trawl them all. So according to an official statement they did not test the HOE for DNA.

It is documentation about the DNA testing, the defence have called in an outside expert to assist. It is irrelevant at what point it was requested, all documentation should be available for the defence in order for them to build a defence and now it is being chased,, why?

I dont really understand why you are so close minded about all this. I am not stating, and I have never stated that the B2 are most definitely innocent but I do think that what i have read in the press causes some serious doubts... Why do you not see what the vast majority of people see?

Do you not want the RTP to step up and provide the prosecution with real damning evidence? All they seem to have right now is an alleged forced confession and from what I can see nothing but circumstantial evidence at best. The points about the clothes and mobile can all be attributed to forced confession,, of course the police would not find their clothes if they were innocent because there would be no blood and DNA evidence, and of course they may have disposed of them if guilty as well, so this proves nothing either way.

We all want the right men caught and for justice to prevail.

Anyway, I am getting bored of bouncing this topic back and forth, i am sorry you cannot see the elephants.

[GOLDBUGGY]

I don't care what it is unless it is some Trade Secret or a Military Secret which could harm Thailand. It should be made public in a public trial, if it can be used in any way. I don't care if these documents came from the Pope himself. If it was the Prosecution that did this everyone here would be jumping up and down and screaming how unfair this is. .

Ok so you don't care, not a lot you do care about apart from a guilty verdict is there.

I care about the 2 True Victims in this case which is Hannah and David. Therefore I do not want to see 2 Accused Rapists and Murderers walk free until it is proven beyond a "Reasonable Doubt" they are in fact Innocent. Do you see where they have done that as I don't.

Someone who may have forgotten to put the correct date on a DNA Document does not convince me the 2 Accused are innocent. Nor is the UK Justice System who fail to provide written declaration that this Mobile Phone belongs to David, as by law they are not allowed to, even if they give a verbal confirmation. Even that this case wasn't handled perfectly with apparent blunders. But none so far that proves the DNA Match with Hannah is false, and why after a year the Defense is still trying to prove that today.

You on the other hand think the victims here are the 2 Accused. You base your judgement on a case that wasn't handled perfectly, which has only been reported about by the Defense Team since last November as the Prosecution has said very little. On 2 Baby Faced Accused Rapists and Murderers who simply said they didn't do it and were tortured into a confession, with no proof so far any of that is true, and when anyone accused with a crime like this would lie through their teeth to save their own skins.

The Defense has a chance this week to prove their case, so let's let them do their job.

So you DON'T believe in the old saying "Innocent until PROVEN Guilty" then? not a single shred of evidence presented so far by the prosecution would convict these two... that is the whole point, a point you constantly argue against!!!

Well, not really. I still think that OJ was guilty. But then I am not the court. What is the most important is what the court thinks and not me. That they have not been influenced by the media and social networks. I hope they believe innocent until proven guilty, which they are sworn to do.

But the Prosecution has made there case already, and whether you believe it is strong or not, they point to the accused guilt. So now it is the Defense Team that has to dispute this, which I believe they are doing now. They have to create reasonable doubt. If you believe reasonable doubt has been created already, then good on you. But I don't. .

[catsanddogs]

I am waiting for the explanation of how David was killed with a hoe without getting any of his blood on it.

Was washed off, or instructed to be washed off by those who are guilty.

Or the hoe was not used to kill David.

[GOLDBUGGY]

smedly

Reasonable Doubt is not Irrefutable Evidence, which you fail to grasp. It is the questioning by a reasonable person as to if the facts presented if worthy of a conviction or not.

You constantly keep saying the Defense does not have to prove there case but behind your back they are trying to do this every day. Doesn't this suggest something to you?

[smedly]

smedly

Reasonable Doubt is not Irrefutable Evidence, which you fail to grasp. It is the questioning by a reasonable person as to if the facts presented if worthy of a conviction or not.

You constantly keep saying the Defense does not have to prove there case but behind your back they are trying to do this every day. Doesn't this suggest something to you?

it suggests to me that you have absolutly no clue what you are talking about and there is plenty of evidence to prove that