Forensic team to testify in Koh Tao murder trial

[smedly]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

The police originally arrested three men, the third one was let go because there was no evidence to implicate him with the murders. So the idea the they were simply out to get anyone and make them fit into a predetermined scenario is not just not supported by any facts, the facts contradict it.

Same as the theory that there was never any DNA evidence to begin with, a few days after the murders they announced there were two sets of DNA from Asian males, then they used that to test and clear out suspects for the next three weeks.

The idea that they would simply make everything up is absurd, what's the scenario? They just pretend that they have DNA evidence, go around making a fool of themselves by pointing fingers at this suspect and that suspect, backpedaling and then, after over three weeks finally bring the plan to fruition by this time pointing the finger at the men now on trial all that charade for the purpose of... what exactly?

Besides that people should make up their minds already, one year of hearing how the original police team was the real deal until they were pushed aside to frame up some innocent people, and now it was the original team that fabricated all the evidence in the first place? Which one is it?

I will just comment on your first two paragraphs as I have done many times when you have made similar opinionated statements, have you actually shared what the 3rd person said after he was safely out of harms way, please do that, I don't think you will

As for "never any dna" where is it ???????????????????????????????? produce it and I will believe otherwise as I have also said many times - it is like police saying they have a ballistics match for a murder weapon but lost the gun and the bullet - that is absurd.

[Fat Haggis]

Again we hear a prolific poster hold onto the DNA issue, when there is no chain of custody, results produced faster than even experts have stated, why wasn't the person who conducted these tests able to provide documentation and a schedule of events that took place the moment the DNA was handed over to them?

What were the instructions given as to the priority of those samples, also pretty sure that it was claimed that the samples actually went to Singapore as Thailand didn't have the ability to produce fast results.

Who signed for the samples on receipt of them, and who signed for the results after they were complete?

Far too many discrepancies with regards to simple hearsay that DNA was actually submitted, without any signatures and a chain of custody, these examples are the figment of imaginations, discrepancies in both autopsies should have been enough to make someone go " wait a minute, what's going on here" but nope, the results are dismissed immediately out of hand, that's not an opinion, that's an agenda pure and simple.

[stephenterry]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The DNA match found in the body of Hanna Witheridge with the 2 Burmese is not able to be contested……..

….. Because it was "used up", or it never even existed in the first place. And if it did exist, there is no chain of custody of the said evidence. It comes down to the RTP effectively saying, "We're police officers; trust us."

Have we any reason to trust them, when they they are not able to produce the evidence to back up what they state?

Look at it this way. Had the evidence been real and factual, they would have placed it on the defence's table right at the outset of this trial in full view of the court officials, and challenged them to dispute it. The avoidance and continued obstruction of such a process from July to date indicates that the non-existent evidence or, at the very least, a substantiation needs more than a procession of police officers saying they did it.

[evadgib]

Its well documented that arrests had to happen as the world was watching, when the RTP could not or would not find the real perps they then went for the current accused.

That they thought the rest of the world would fall for it shows just how insular this culture is.

[bamukloy]

Yes, Brit Tim, the scenario of 3+ attackers would at least be somewhat believable.

But now the RTP would have us believe that these 2 x 5ft nothing midgets were able to overcame David and Hannah even though BOTH victims had the hoe in their hands ( at some stage)

BUT even then all of that hardly matters, since there was no DNA or otherwise evidence of the accused even touching the handle of the hoe!

Its actually getting more ridiculous as the days go on.

One would think if they still get a guilty verdict after all this, there must be some kind of uproar.

[stephenterry]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

There's none so blind .......etc etc Most posters on here are open to the fact that the B2 could possibly have been involved in some way, even if they are not guilty of rape and murder. But a minority of posters (about 4, I think) are totally convinced that they did commit rape and murder, and refuse to consider any other possibility, so it is pointless having any form of discussion with them - just put them on IGNORE - it makes life less frustrating!

I'm one poster who is open-minded enough to reason the B2 are in no way involved in these crimes. Why? Because there's not a shred of REAL evidence to support their involvement. On the other hand, I am open-minded enough to reason that persons from the headman's family could possibly have been involved in some way. And I think there are a lot of like-minded followers on here.

[bamukloy]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

The police originally arrested three men, the third one was let go because there was no evidence to implicate him with the murders. So the idea the they were simply out to get anyone and make them fit into a predetermined scenario is not just not supported by any facts, the facts contradict it.

Same as the theory that there was never any DNA evidence to begin with, a few days after the murders they announced there were two sets of DNA from Asian males, then they used that to test and clear out suspects for the next three weeks.

The idea that they would simply make everything up is absurd, what's the scenario? They just pretend that they have DNA evidence, go around making a fool of themselves by pointing fingers at this suspect and that suspect, backpedaling and then, after over three weeks finally bring the plan to fruition by this time pointing the finger at the men now on trial all that charade for the purpose of... what exactly?

Besides that people should make up their minds already, one year of hearing how the original police team was the real deal until they were pushed aside to frame up some innocent people, and now it was the original team that fabricated all the evidence in the first place? Which one is it?

It hardly matters which scenario you mention as the RTP have gone on to make even bigger fools of themselves and indeed the whole Thai justice system, in presenting a case that (at best) has more holes than Swiss cheese.

You ask why did they go to all the trouble to do X,Y,Z...

well, yes indeed, why go to all that trouble only to make a complete and utter balz-up of presenting the case to the court?

[ffaarraanngg]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

There's none so blind .......etc etc Most posters on here are open to the fact that the B2 could possibly have been involved in some way, even if they are not guilty of rape and murder. But a minority of posters (about 4, I think) are totally convinced that they did commit rape and murder, and refuse to consider any other possibility, so it is pointless having any form of discussion with them - just put them on IGNORE - it makes life less frustrating!

I have but the problem arises with those who wish to endlessly debate with them, as the fab 4s posts are then quoted.

Edited September 25, 2015 by ffaarraanngg

[partington]

Again we hear a prolific poster hold onto the DNA issue, when there is no chain of custody, results produced faster than even experts have stated, why wasn't the person who conducted these tests able to provide documentation and a schedule of events that took place the moment the DNA was handed over to them?

What were the instructions given as to the priority of those samples, also pretty sure that it was claimed that the samples actually went to Singapore as Thailand didn't have the ability to produce fast results.

Who signed for the samples on receipt of them, and who signed for the results after they were complete?

Far too many discrepancies with regards to simple hearsay that DNA was actually submitted, without any signatures and a chain of custody, these examples are the figment of imaginations, discrepancies in both autopsies should have been enough to make someone go " wait a minute, what's going on here" but nope, the results are dismissed immediately out of hand, that's not an opinion, that's an agenda pure and simple.

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out of an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

Edited September 25, 2015 by partington

[fab99]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

There's none so blind .......etc etc Most posters on here are open to the fact that the B2 could possibly have been involved in some way, even if they are not guilty of rape and murder. But a minority of posters (about 4, I think) are totally convinced that they did commit rape and murder, and refuse to consider any other possibility, so it is pointless having any form of discussion with them - just put them on IGNORE - it makes life less frustrating!

I agree with that, the Ignore function sure helps a lot and makes the thread easier to read and it probably will prevent being banned for reacting emotionally to baits and reduce the chances for this thread to be closed again (though it will probably be closed tomorrow anyway).

I still sometimes can't help but answer, trying to stay factual, but I guess it is even better to ignore, it just reduces the visibility of these posts.

Edited September 25, 2015 by fab99

[sambum]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

"let's see what the judge decides."

Seems like a certain person has lost belief in some of his convictions! Just an observation!

[DM07]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

There's none so blind .......etc etc Most posters on here are open to the fact that the B2 could possibly have been involved in some way, even if they are not guilty of rape and murder. But a minority of posters (about 4, I think) are totally convinced that they did commit rape and murder, and refuse to consider any other possibility, so it is pointless having any form of discussion with them - just put them on IGNORE - it makes life less frustrating!

2 things, I would have to say to this:

1) as much as I don't believe, the B2 are involved (there is just nothing that convinces me otherwise)...even IF they were: the total F-up, that is this case and what the RTP and those instructing them made out of it, makes it totally impossible, to ever find out who really did it!

There will never be anything like real closure for the families of the victims and no one will give two young men back this time they spent in jail and in constant fear for their live.

And I don't even want to think about, what will be happening, if there will be a guilty verdict, because...well...face!

2) I am not very outspoken in this case, because others here do a much better job on that, then I could ever do and I tip my hat to staelth, fat haggis and so many others.

I could even live with someone, who was of the opinion, the B2 are still guilty, because of whatever.

But it freaks me out, if one or the other member here not only misinforms, but just straight lies and makes up his own facts, re herrings and strawmen.

There is a line in the sand, that you should not cross- they cross this line constantly.

I know: ignore, report...you are a better man then I am!

I can not do that!

But thanks for the support, anyways!

[StealthEnergiser]

Again we hear a prolific poster hold onto the DNA issue, when there is no chain of custody, results produced faster than even experts have stated, why wasn't the person who conducted these tests able to provide documentation and a schedule of events that took place the moment the DNA was handed over to them?

What were the instructions given as to the priority of those samples, also pretty sure that it was claimed that the samples actually went to Singapore as Thailand didn't have the ability to produce fast results.

Who signed for the samples on receipt of them, and who signed for the results after they were complete?

Far too many discrepancies with regards to simple hearsay that DNA was actually submitted, without any signatures and a chain of custody, these examples are the figment of imaginations, discrepancies in both autopsies should have been enough to make someone go " wait a minute, what's going on here" but nope, the results are dismissed immediately out of hand, that's not an opinion, that's an agenda pure and simple.

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

Andy Hall added 7 new photos — with MW RN and 5 others.

Yesterday at 6:50am ·

The Koh Tao defense team has been assisted for many months now by renowned international DNA and forensics expert Jane Taupin, a resident in Australian but trained extensively in the UK (http://www.expertsdirect.com.au/expert-profile/?id=4100)

An expert on DNA analysis and particularly clothing and substances, Jane has been a crucial and important part of the Koh Tao murder case defense team and another pro bono here seeking to ensure justice for the accused, deceased, their families, friends and all concerned.

Jane's advice has been spot on, accurate and crucial to the defense team

https://www.facebook.com/andy.hall.3110?fref=nf&pnref=story

[Emster23]

Some of us ask why prosecution persists as their whole case is crumbling. Perhaps this could be why:

"More shall they speak, for now I am bent to know,

By the worst means, the worst. For mine own good,

All causes shall give way. I am in blood

Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more,

Returning were as tedious as go o'er.

Strange things I have in head, that will to hand,

Which must be acted ere they may be scanned."

Macbeth Act 3 Scene 4

[mcm991]

It saddens me because a system as broken and corrupt as this - that allows such a farce to occur .....

is the same system that allows for a guilty verdict based soley on the confession and renactment and nothing else.

If it were not for the first world coverage, I would put money on a guilty verdict.

If that does not depress you ... not much will.

[bamukloy]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

There's none so blind .......etc etc Most posters on here are open to the fact that the B2 could possibly have been involved in some way, even if they are not guilty of rape and murder. But a minority of posters (about 4, I think) are totally convinced that they did commit rape and murder, and refuse to consider any other possibility, so it is pointless having any form of discussion with them - just put them on IGNORE - it makes life less frustrating!

I agree with that, the Ignore function sure helps a lot and makes the thread easier to read and it probably will prevent being banned for reacting emotionally to baits and reduce the chances for this thread to be closed again (though it will probably be closed tomorrow anyway).

I still sometimes can't help but answer, trying to stay factual, but I guess it is even better to ignore, it just reduces the visibility of these posts.

I look on it in a different way altogether. There is not much point having a debate with only one team. They are entitled to their opinion and IMO, these guys are of small value in that they keep presenting nonsense arguments that the prosecution probably would like to make but are not clever enough.

The Thai side, prosecutors and BiB would all be Hi5'ing their shills, but i doubt they would have the noggins to even comprehend what is being debated.

One thing is for sure (in my mind anyway) if this whole shannanigans was a debating contest, and something not so deadly serious, not only would the prosecution by loosing dismally, but the audience and everyone else involved would be pointing at them and laughing hysterically.

[ffaarraanngg]

It saddens me because a system as broken and corrupt as this - that allows such a farce to occur .....

is the same system that allows for a guilty verdict based soley on the confession and renactment and nothing else.

If it were not for the first world coverage, I would put money on a guilty verdict.

If that does not depress you ... not much will.

Despite the utter shambles of a prosecution we have witnessed, which in any other nation on this planet would have never made it to court. Im of the opinion that there is still a very good chance they will be found guilty.

Someone has to be and we all know the actual culprits will never see the inside of a prison cell.

[BritTim]

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out of an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

I think the very fact that lawyers, experts like Jane Taupin and others are willing to assist pro bono in this case shows the very real concern of those able to judge the evidence (or rather lack thereof). It has often struck me that the most highly skilled experts in their fields are often those most willing to offer their expertise free of charge in a good cause. For all that this case has shown much of the worst of human nature, it is wonderful to see that good human beings will put themselves out to prevent injustice to two poor migrant workers.

[ffaarraanngg]

removed

Reported for trolling

[DM07]

removed

...and I am still waiting for the water-proof case the prosecution has!

You know, the one with all the irrefutable evidence, that 100% certain bind the B2 to rape and murder and...oh, you know what: I would settle for evidence, they were within a perimeter of 500 meter around the crime scene!

You know what: don't bother to answer!

[mcm991]

It saddens me because a system as broken and corrupt as this - that allows such a farce to occur .....

is the same system that allows for a guilty verdict based soley on the confession and renactment and nothing else.

If it were not for the first world coverage, I would put money on a guilty verdict.

If that does not depress you ... not much will.

Despite the utter shambles of a prosecution we have witnessed, which in any other nation on this planet would have never made it to court. Im of the opinion that there is still a very good chance they will be found guilty.

Someone has to be and we all know the actual culprits will never see the inside of a prison cell.

My feeling is that after numerous appeals and many years behind bars, the B2 will be set free by a much higher court.

By that time, the case will be cold and the guilty parties will all have received good value for what they paid for.

That would be the best case outcome in a feudal system.

[fab99]

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out of an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

I think the very fact that lawyers, experts like Jane Taupin and others are willing to assist pro bono in this case shows the very real concern of those able to judge the evidence (or rather lack thereof). It has often struck me that the most highly skilled experts in their fields are often those most willing to offer their expertise free of charge in a good cause. For all that this case has shown much of the worst of human nature, it is wonderful to see that good human beings will put themselves out to prevent injustice to two poor migrant workers.

I seriously admire the defense team for working so hard in difficult conditions, doing the best they can with what they have, hat off to them.

I sure hope it is not all for nothing though.

[RWA]

Again we hear a prolific poster hold onto the DNA issue, when there is no chain of custody, results produced faster than even experts have stated, why wasn't the person who conducted these tests able to provide documentation and a schedule of events that took place the moment the DNA was handed over to them?

What were the instructions given as to the priority of those samples, also pretty sure that it was claimed that the samples actually went to Singapore as Thailand didn't have the ability to produce fast results.

Who signed for the samples on receipt of them, and who signed for the results after they were complete?

Far too many discrepancies with regards to simple hearsay that DNA was actually submitted, without any signatures and a chain of custody, these examples are the figment of imaginations, discrepancies in both autopsies should have been enough to make someone go " wait a minute, what's going on here" but nope, the results are dismissed immediately out of hand, that's not an opinion, that's an agenda pure and simple.

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out of an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

out of likes, so again, only a Big Thanks instead!

[DM07]

Another clear attempt at baiting, by wifle waffle and derailing the thread.

I am sorry...couldn't help myself!

Time to join Happy Hour -that might get me back on track!

Have a good weekend, everybody!

DM07 over and out!

[realenglish1]

As I have said before and will continue to say Not guilty Release them Give them Thai citizenship and make them whole again .

[StealthEnergiser]

Court hears of police brutality as Hannah Witheridge’s family returns to Thailand

08:07 25 September 2015

Sarah Yuen in Thailand

representatives of the Burmese Embassy in Thailand have described a culture of police brutality and torture on the Thai island of Koh Tao, where Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge was raped and murdered last year.

Ms Witheridge’s family has returned to Thailand for the last stages of the trial and this morning the court heard of more allegations of police brutality.

Two 22 year-old Burmese men claim they were tortured by police to confess to her killing, and that of David Miller from Jersey, on Sairee Beach.

cont:

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/court_hears_of_police_brutality_as_hannah_witheridge_s_family_returns_to_thailand_1_4247106

[RWA]

It is impossible to tell what the current position about the status of the DNA evidence actually is from newspaper reports of statements by "spokesmen" who do not know anything about what DNA evidence is, or how it is gathered , or how it is interpreted, made to reporters who are even more ignorant, and who are usually translating very badly and inaccurately into English.

I would say objectively at present there is no way of telling what DNA evidence there is, how it has been presented in the case, and what the future status of any presentation is going to be. I do not trust social media accounts, and I do not trust newspapers except in as far as they are directly reporting what has been said in court, not at second hand, but because the reporter has been present in court, and understands the language.

I think I believe at the very minimum that the defence has engaged one of the best known forensic DNA experts in the world, Jane Taupin, and that she has not testified, although she is ready to. I cannot believe that this has been made up, as this person is too well known to be the subject of false rumours.

The explanation given for her lack of testimony by Andy Hall is that the report on which the DNA evidence was based has not been made available, so she cannot give testimony on it. This also seems unlikely to have been made up, as it would be too easy to find out and report that it isn't true. In addition I remember reading that when the police forensic witness was on the stand giving testimony it was reported that she said the police refuse to make the DNA report available, citing a Thai law that prevents private information on individuals being circulated (!). This may well be false reporting however.

Now the verifiable fact that the defence have a world expert on DNA ready to testify and she has not been able to seems to require a LOT of explanation. If the police will not make available the report on which their entire case is based, that tells you something fairly significant. I have always thought that, even if the Thai police have fabricated every other item of evidence out of an arrogant and stupid desire to make their case better, then if this DNA evidence is true, they are probably on a safe and justified conviction.

It now seems to me more and more likely that this DNA evidence either doesn't exist at all, or is so compromised and inadequate that it doesn't even prove identity. What possible reason could there be to hide the only evidence directly linking the accused to the crime?

I think the very fact that lawyers, experts like Jane Taupin and others are willing to assist pro bono in this case shows the very real concern of those able to judge the evidence (or rather lack thereof). It has often struck me that the most highly skilled experts in their fields are often those most willing to offer their expertise free of charge in a good cause. For all that this case has shown much of the worst of human nature, it is wonderful to see that good human beings will put themselves out to prevent injustice to two poor migrant workers.

YES, absolutely CORRECT, thank you!

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

Koh Samui Court has now adjourned Koh Tao murder trial until the final 2 days of hearings for 2 accused to give testimony on 10/11 October

[StealthEnergiser]

Follow

Andy Hall‏@Atomicalandy

As final hearing accused testimony Koh Tao trial schedule 10/11 October, need time 4 closing statements. So judgement likely late Nov or Dec

[thailandchilli]

Over 2 weeks till the next session. Lets try to keep this thread open and learn from our most previous example just a few posts ago, if a troll appears report, the mods are acting quickly