Forensic team to testify in Koh Tao murder trial

[GOLDBUGGY]

The focus is on that because the defense wants to cast doubt on the rape, because the UK autopsy didn't reveal rape related lesions. The Thai report doesn't mention lesions, only mentions evidence of rape and specifies semen traces, which are of course evidence of rape.

I agree AleG that the Defense Team are trying to cast doubt on this rape, even when Andy admitted to this sexual assault, but it is how they are doing this which I find disturbing.

From some Autopsy Report, which none of us have been allowed to see or hear about, gone over by some person, who has been working for the Defense Team for long time (possibly on the Pay Role), who claims some Forensic Expert, who's name has never been revealed in a court of law that I know of, but most certainly has not taken the stand to testify as to there qualifications and findings, alleged to be saying that rape in this case can't be determined.

What kind of a Forensic Expert are you if you can't even determine if someone had been raped or not? I would think this is one of the first things they would learn and what they would teach you in Forensics Training. If there is a good reason for this and why, like you can't determine why a raped did or did not occur because perhaps the body was chemically cleaned or the DNA decomposed, or whatever, then lets hear that to. Why do you keep people guessing and misleading the truth unless you are hiding something?

I know one of my first questions to this alleged person would be why can't you determine if a rape did or didn't occur? But Hey! They can't do that can they? I mean the Prosecutor doesn't have that witness on the Stand, or ever did, to cross-exam do they? They may not even know who wrote this autopsy and what there qualifications are? All they have is some guy working for the Defense Team who claims he studied this report handed to the Defense Team only. So if they ask him all he has to say is "I Don't Know Why". So I would class his evidence he presented in court so far as Hearsay Evidence at best. I won't say at worst.

But then they even tried to cover this point up as well. Someone posted awhile back that a well known Media Reporter claimed that Hearsay Evidence is admissible in a Thai Court. I don't want to post his name as I am not sure he did actually say this. But what I am sure of is that a poster claimed he did. But if he did post that this would not make him a liar. He would just be misleading the truth, which in my opinion is what the Media has done from day one, excluding perhaps BP, which lately I haven't seen them reporting. It also seems that all the Media Reports is almost exact word for word to. Like someone is handing out a written statement for them to copy. Go Figure?

But what was failed to be mentioned here is that Hearsay Evidence is admissible in a Thai Court, but only under special circumstances. As in a case where a witness has given sworn testimony in court to the Prosecution or Defense, but dies before the Court Hearing, Or in the case of Muang Muang, Mao Mao, or what ever his name is now, is from out of country. He gave he testimony in Court a long time ago, where he could be cross-examined by the Defense, as he was from out of country. Hearsay Evidence is also at the discretion of the judge if it can be admitted or not.

Which brings up another interesting point about Muang Muang, and his testimony in court. Under the protection of his own embassy he says nothing about the 2 accused being tortured and showing him their wounds. Even back home in Myanmar he doesn't mention this in his Newspaper Interview except he admitted to be treated roughly. But all of a sudden some person from Amnesty International, or similar group, swears he said this to them a year ago.

I for one would sure like to ask him why he did not come forward with this earlier and under the protection of his own embassy. But then we will never know as he is not their now is he? He is not on the Stand now, is he? So the Prosecution can't cross-exam this either. He just suddenly disappears where nobody claims they know where he is at. So you just end up with someone who says he says this or that to them, or he saw this or that to them. But then Muang Muang is obviously good friend of the accused anyway. Even out drinking and partying together in the night in question. But regardless if he would make a good witness for the Prosecution or not, you still just end up with just more Hearsay Evidence.

You know AleG another thing I always found strange in the case about Muang Muang, and in which I never mentioned before, actually comes from Lin's own testimony in court. He said he was awakened in his sleep around midnight by police. Then moved to a private hotel room which I believe he said the Ocean View Hotel. At which point he said he was stripped naked in a cold room and the Interrogation started, which I would guess within and hour so around 1 am. Somewhere in this alleged torture he is given a mobile phone and allowed to talk to Win. Win said to him he can't take anymore of this and by 4 am Lin and Win both Confessed. Now the odd part.

Muang Muang was also brought in the same night as Lin and was also considered a suspect. There was originally 3 of them. He had what appears to be a flimsy alibi, from his girlfriend no less, which obviously the police didn't believe either, as he was held for another 2 days. Which I gather was the time taken for his DNA Test Results to come back, and when they did not match. So cleared of rape anyway.

What I find odd and strange is that since Muang Muang was also considered a suspect, and since he allegedly claimed he was subject to the same torture as what the 2 accused were given, how is it that Muang Muang suffered 2 days of this torture and never confessed, when the 2 accused lasted less than 3 hours and both confessed? Is Muang Muang really that much more stronger then the accused? Is he that much more braver? If so why didn't he speak up in a court of law about these torture allegations when he had his chance and was under the protection of his own embassy?

But instead allegedly tells some human watch person who comes to court a year later to state his claim. One who stated that the police where ask 5 times to attend an inquest but never showed up. One in which the Media reported that the reason they did not show up was because a higher ranking police officer was asked to do that instead. Which he did show and answered all their questions. Which is why the Prosecution asked her this question. Which is why her answer was she did not know that to be true. So I wonder that if you can forget such an important event like this, what else did she forget that happen before this time and a year ago?

I am also waiting to hear more about the UK pressing Thailand about David Miller's Mobile Phone. We know the reason claimed as why. Did you hear who is going to make this contact, or when? I surely didn't. Odd to say in court someone is going to do this but not give out his name and when. Or at least I think so. Especially with all these people here claiming a statement made like this in court should be backed with some proof?

Oh Well. It will be interesting to see how the court handles all this Hearsay Evidence the Defense Team has put together, Who knows?

I don't know if the UK autopsy report has or will be considered as admissible as evidence in deciding the verdict, as you point out there is a big problem with it in that the prosecution doesn't have the ability to cross examine the coroner, all that is offered is a report as relayed by the defense.

I have no reasons to doubt the work of the UK coroner, but just as the defense had the opportunity to cross examine the prosecution witnesses it should be able for the prosecution to do the same, for example the question could be asked whether the results of the examination explicitly rule out the possibility of sexual assault or if there is simply no way to tell one way or the other based on the conditions at the time of the second autopsy.

Like when the prosecution asked the defense witness that examined the hoe if the partial DNA profile found on it did not, in fact, rule out the possibility that it belonged to one of the accused, and the answer was that it didn't rule out that possibility but neither could the partial profile be used for a positive identification.

One thing though, "Muang Muang" and "Mao Mao" are two different persons; the first one is the friend of the defendants that was arrested with them back in October, the second one is someone they met during detention. I don't know if Muang Muang had any contact with the defendants after their arrests, and as far as I know he went back to Myanmar and hasn't been heard of again.

As for why he was allowed to go and the other two not, obviously if the premise is that the police would do anything and everything to frame people for a crime then it stands to reason that making a confession or not wouldn't be a problem. Just declare that DNA matches and the suspect is not cooperating, done and done.

Under that framework the same could be said about any of the many other suspects that came and went, why would they embarrass themselves by going "We got a suspect!... oh, hang on, nope, sorry." multiple times?

But that didn't happen with these two, and from witness testimony the police were not the only ones with suspicions about them, after all the friend they gave the phone to declared that he decided to smash it because he became suspicious about it's origin, of course worth noting that this became known after they were arrested.

Between that, their flimsy (or non existent) alibi and the fact that they were in close proximity to the crime scene there is obviously more to it than simply the police pointing a finger and saying "those two" and torturing those circumstances into existence.

I stand corrected with Maung Muang and Mao Mao being 2 different people. I do know I read that they said Maung Maung was the incorrect name, and they changed it, but to what I forget. Like the friends who held the Mobile Phone. I find these names confusing at times. But none the less both took the stand already and neither one said that the 2 accused told them they were tortured. Moa Moa did say he saw some bruising on Lin's Chest, but never explained why in court and as far as I know or read. Also Muang Muang was accused of this crime to and also was held in prison for 2 days, and he never confessed.

With the Hoe at least we had the Forensic Expert who preformed this test on the Stand. As you pointed out he was not able to confirm one way or the other if one of the accused held this hoe. But he at least gave a plausible explanation as to why, with only having a partial DNA profile to match. Now the Prosecution had a chance to throw doubt in this explanation or examination, or let it pass.

But with this alleged 400 page UK Autopsy Report we don't have this or that choice. I honestly wasn't trying to discredit the UK Forensic Expert and this report as I don't see how one can do this when they don't even know if it was actually written by this person, or what is in it. I thought I covered that when I said in my first sentence "but it is how they are doing this which I find disturbing". So it is not the report itself, or the person who wrote it, but rather how they presented this in court.

From a alleged 400 page report we got a few sentences. The one concerning the possible rape they said that they could not determine if the rape occurred. That is one sentence in a 400 page report! There could have been many good reason given by the UK Expert Forensics Team as to why this is so, but since we did not see this report, and they were not on the Witness Stand to explain it, we may never know.

Some inquest in a different country down the road means nothing to this case here now. So that was my beef and not whether or not the Forensics Team in the UK is competent. I have no doubt that they are. It is how it was handled so far and in court I found disturbing. By snipping out one sentence in a full report.

Let me give you one example and what I tried to express here. Let me snip just one of your sentences from your post here and quote it to show you what I mean..

You said: "simply the police pointing a finger and saying "those two" and torturing those circumstances into existence".

From this you can see I wasn't a liar, as I quoted you exactly. But at the same time you will also see that this quote from you does not express what you were trying to say at all. In fact you were trying to say about the exact opposite. So you can also see how one could do this with 1 sentence in a 400 page report to. .

[fab99]

Ultimately the exact content of the report will be known, it can't be public for now as the inquest is not closed yet, but it was forwarded to the defense because it showed differences with the Thai report (which hasn't been made public either, and whose pictures have been denied to the defense for whatever reason).

We are talking here about a case where the B2 are facing the death penalty, so I think it is normal that anything credible (and I classify as so a report made by British coroner with verifiable credentials) that can show doubts about their culpability is receivable.

But I guess anything outside the "allowed" pieces of evidence and information showing a different scenario than the one presented by the RTP is difficult to accept by the prosecution side which is not used to having such ann opposition and wasn't adequately prepared for that.

The thing is the scenario depicted in the "reenactment" is really no longer believable not only because of the coroner report but because of various other elements provided by the defense team (the hoe, the CCTV analysis, the multiple torture allegations...).

We can all agree has done quite a good job so far with the limited resources they have, they have been a pain in the @$$ for the prosecution and been threatened for that.

Edited September 26, 2015 by fab99

[thailandchilli]

Ultimately the exact content of the report will be known, it can't be public for now as the inquest is not closed yet, but it was forwarded to the defense because it showed differences with the Thai report (which hasn't been made public either, and whose pictures have been denied to the defense for whatever reason).

We are talking here about a case where the B2 are facing the death penalty, so I think it is normal that anything credible (and I classify as so a report made by British coroner with verifiable credentials) that can show doubts about their culpability is receivable.

But I guess anything outside the "allowed" pieces of evidence and information showing a different scenario than the one presented by the RTP is difficult to accept.

The thing is this scenario is really no longer believable not only because of the coroner report but because of various other elements provided by the defense team, that we can all agree has done quite a good job so far with the limited resources they have.

Despite a couple of posters saying that the prosecution should have access to the full report to question it, the judges in the case do have the full report and so will make their own decision on this, lets hope its the right one.

[RWA]

I've said this before and will say it again: detectives should reenact the scenario which brought forth the 'Running Man' videos. I could set up a more realistic re-creation than any Thai gov't person investigator or cop. I would film it at the same location, using the same camera, and (as much as possible) same lighting. I would have ALL 'persons of interest' involved, not just B2, but also the original prime suspects. It's impossible for RTP to re-create that scenario for several reasons:

>>> they're sworn to protect the Headman's people from any further scrutiny

>>> they are incapable of doing things scientifically/objectively. Because they are Thai, they are genetically programmed to do everything subjectively with constant consideration of who everyone represents (status/money/connections).

>>> the Headman wouldn't allow his dear son to be looked at again in this case.

>>> Mon wouldn't comply.

It's indicative of nearly all RTP has done and not done in the past year. Despicable.

I still can't get my head around this ...

I can't believe there was not any "DNA" at all ...

It doesn't make any sense ...

I live here for more than 30 years and yes, I do have personal (numerous) experiences with RTP "modus operandi" in general, as well as with an individual officers in various situations / scenarios. Same goes for the court dealings.

I have (unfortunately) almost zero confidence in a Police work (any sort of INVESTIGATION) but somehow, the JUSTICE have been always served to me by the courts. It took always an ages and the procedure is more than just bizarre, messy, painstaking, unnecessarily complicated from one hand and very "simplified" from the other but the judges always managed to arrive at the rightful, fair conclusion without any sort of bribes or other influence apart from that what has been presented during the hearings.

I have never understood or comprehend how on earth can RTP solve up any case whatsoever. There's no system, no any trace of any discipline, rank of priorities, anything what may - even remotely, resemble some sort of investigative effort or principle. They have no proper training, they don't know what is the process of investigation, evidence gathering and evaluation, preservation, documentation, etc., There don't seem to be any rules, proper tactics and techniques, necessary patient and meticulous work ... only tons of completely useless forms to be filled out and archived.

I convinced myself that in Thailand the crimes are solved thanks to the "Thai gossip" ... that it is not much else but waiting for some motorbike taxi, or pissed of girlfriend, or jealous neighbor start talking to others. As they are always everywhere, see and hear everything and have a plenty of time and passion for observing and yapping ...

I have seen a "stubborn" officers who really wanted to work out all details to see "what is the matter" but their effort get, somehow, drawn down by the others and by the "system" itself

anyways,

THERE MUST HAVE BEEN some DNA FINDINGS there ...!!!

In the early stages ...

Why would they (the police) need to ponder upon their insufficient lab technology to determine the race for example? Why would they announce, this DNA belonging to the Asian men, instead of oh-so-convenient foreigners?

Why would they clear and allow to leave those "British friends"?

It was on the very beginning - there was not yet any "influence from above" or media (significant) pressure or anything ...?

Why wouldn't they simply announced there wasn't any useful DNA found?

Why would they just make this all up when there was no any strong need to cover anything yet?

I am sure there must have been some ... but then, where did they really get it from and what the heck they have done to it?

This whole thing just doesn't make one bit of sense to me ...

[metisdead]

A post with messed up quoted content has been removed.

[RWA]

Ultimately the exact content of the report will be known, it can't be public for now as the inquest is not closed yet, but it was forwarded to the defense because it showed differences with the Thai report (which hasn't been made public either, and whose pictures have been denied to the defense for whatever reason).

We are talking here about a case where the B2 are facing the death penalty, so I think it is normal that anything credible (and I classify as so a report made by British coroner with verifiable credentials) that can show doubts about their culpability is receivable.

But I guess anything outside the "allowed" pieces of evidence and information showing a different scenario than the one presented by the RTP is difficult to accept by the prosecution side which is not used to having such ann opposition and wasn't adequately prepared for that.

The thing is the scenario depicted in the "reenactment" is really no longer believable not only because of the coroner report but because of various other elements provided by the defense team (the hoe, the CCTV analysis, the multiple torture allegations...).

We can all agree has done quite a good job so far with the limited resources they have, they have been a pain in the @$$ for the prosecution and been threatened for that.

correct

the whole purpose of the UK coroner report was NOT an attempt to bring in one more piece of evidence (and pray for it to be accepted), but rather to FORCE the available ("existing") prosecution crucial evidence to be PROVIDED (disclosed)!

[fab99]

So, if we recapitulate, what made this case so water tight?

> the confession of the B2 : it was made under very very shady circumstances with a totally non qualified translator (a roti vendor for god's sake) and they had to sign the document in Thai which they can't read (a quite common thing in here by the way : never ever sign something you don't fully understand don't even take the word of your lawyer for it). Multiple reports of threats and torture to the Burmese community and the testimony of the defendants (more to come), the absence of any legal representation and recording of the interview conducted in a "safe house" and the fact that the summoned police refused to meet the Thai human rights investigator make this confession unacceptable. Confession : doubts.

> the reenactment : I won't go into details but the fact that the confession and the reenactment were made before the B2 had access to any legal representation make it not valid either. Plus the B2 were directed by the RTP and their translator as clearly shown by the video, and that is against the rule of this process. I guess they had no choice though, the B2 had no clue what really happened there and what they were supposed to say... Reenactment : doubts

> the RTP scenario : in normal circumstances, it is highly difficult to believe that the B2 could have conducted this attack against two conscious young persons, David being also a lot taller than them. They explained it by the element of surprise, but the fact that is has been proven that the victims held the hoe for enough time to have their DNA on it contradicts this. When we add the fact that it is also doubtful that David was murdered with the hoe (not a trace of his blood on it and wounds not consistent with the weapon), the scenario just doesn't fit. Scenario : doubts

> the most important evidence is the DNA of the B2 that matched the semen. First of all, the original DNA is not available for retest, it has been used up apparently, how convenient... Second of all the British report apparently shows that Hannah may not have been raped, so there is a chance (I don't say it is so, but there is a chance) that this semen that isn't available for tests has never existed in the first place. The chain of custody isn't available to the defense and the tests have all be done in the control of the RTP and never in the independent forensic lab of Pornthip in Bangkok, so their reliability is further questioned. The defense wanted to use a very recognized expert in Forensic to go through the documents, but the documents have never been provided, they have been requested for months. DNA match : doubts

May I remind that the B2 are facing the death penalty, there is no place for un professionalism, for doubts, for approximation in a capital case, and that is all we have seen so far. Two innocent persons died already, we don't need two more.

I truly want those responsible for the despicable, un humane act to get what they deserve, but I also don't want someone to pay for something they haven't done.

The Burmese are people too (some probably just don't see it that way though), with families that are also going through a terrible time, and they have spent a year in a Thai jail already for something they may have not done.

Edited September 26, 2015 by fab99

[GOLDBUGGY]

People, this thread has only just been reopned after being closed for bikering between posters. Please think about what you are posting before hitting the post button, a lot of us are keen to keep up to date with the case especially at this critical point.

Most here are keen to keep it open, rising to baiting posts and bikering will only see the thread closed again and the couple of people trying to derail it suceed once again.

Keep the thread alive! Getting it closed is a win for the rtp supporters!

But again trotting out the tired old line that because "the couple of people" have the temerity to have a different opinion from you they are RTP supporters, whose purpose on here is to get the thread closed, is, of course, not 'baiting'! Are you familiar with the term, 'self righteous hypocrisy'?

I call this having a difference of opinion which last I heard you are allowed to have here.

But people who use such terms as Baiting, Trolling, Shrill, RTP Supports, and so on, when referring to an individual, is not voicing a different of opinion. He is Name Calling which is not allowed here.

If one cannot handle a difference of opinion then may I suggest you just ignore them or go someplace else. Contrary to many beliefs, I highly doubt anyone here wants to see this post closed over some childish Name Calling or Personal attacks.

So lets just stick to the subject can we please.

[BritTim]

Ultimately the exact content of the report will be known, it can't be public for now as the inquest is not closed yet, but it was forwarded to the defense because it showed differences with the Thai report (which hasn't been made public either, and whose pictures have been denied to the defense for whatever reason).

We are talking here about a case where the B2 are facing the death penalty, so I think it is normal that anything credible (and I classify as so a report made by British coroner with verifiable credentials) that can show doubts about their culpability is receivable.

But I guess anything outside the "allowed" pieces of evidence and information showing a different scenario than the one presented by the RTP is difficult to accept.

The thing is this scenario is really no longer believable not only because of the coroner report but because of various other elements provided by the defense team, that we can all agree has done quite a good job so far with the limited resources they have.

Despite a couple of posters saying that the prosecution should have access to the full report to question it, the judges in the case do have the full report and so will make their own decision on this, lets hope its the right one.

On a point of information, the prosecution have also been given a copy of the UK autopsy report.

[thailandchilli]

Ultimately the exact content of the report will be known, it can't be public for now as the inquest is not closed yet, but it was forwarded to the defense because it showed differences with the Thai report (which hasn't been made public either, and whose pictures have been denied to the defense for whatever reason).

We are talking here about a case where the B2 are facing the death penalty, so I think it is normal that anything credible (and I classify as so a report made by British coroner with verifiable credentials) that can show doubts about their culpability is receivable.

But I guess anything outside the "allowed" pieces of evidence and information showing a different scenario than the one presented by the RTP is difficult to accept.

The thing is this scenario is really no longer believable not only because of the coroner report but because of various other elements provided by the defense team, that we can all agree has done quite a good job so far with the limited resources they have.

Despite a couple of posters saying that the prosecution should have access to the full report to question it, the judges in the case do have the full report and so will make their own decision on this, lets hope its the right one.

On a point of information, the prosecution have also been given a copy of the UK autopsy report.

Glad to hear that.

Its a crime that the prosecution have not however given the defense or judges the chain of custody documents to the alleged DNA evidence against the suspects. Let alone all the other physical evidence that is extremely significant and has not been produced or tested.

[klauskunkel]

Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha has said "nobody would dare" go after the wrong suspects because the case was so high-profile.

Well, dear PM, that statement might have some merit in a society where the police force has an average IQ of higher than 50, where the officials involved would actually understand the ramifications of "high-profile", where the culture of "acting with impunity" was replaced with "acting responsibly".

[lucky11]

Very strange nothing is mentioned of all the stab wounds to David's neck, throat, arm and the defensive wounds to his hands. Is this something that the defense wanted to bring up when it got the photos from the prosecution. Has the focus only been on Hannah's autopsy?

The focus is on that because the defense wants to cast doubt on the rape, because the UK autopsy didn't reveal rape related lesions. The Thai report doesn't mention lesions, only mentions evidence of rape and specifies semen traces, which are of course evidence of rape.

Semen traces are not evidence of rape.

Not if they consent to sex. If they found semen then it WAS rape!!

[JoopJoop]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

Edited September 26, 2015 by JoopJoop

[BritTim]

Semen traces are not evidence of rape.

Not if they consent to sex. If they found semen then it WAS rape!!

Taking other circumstances into consideration, if there was semen taken from Hannah, and if there were credible DNA results proving the semen came from the Burmese kids, then they would have a strong case to answer. And, there I think, you have the basis of the Witheridge family statement. They just assumed the RTP would have acted like the police back home.

[Toknarok]

Today's Guardian reports that the trial has been extended for at least a month and a result will not be known until the end of October or early November. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/26/thai-judge-extends-british-backpacker-trial

[thailandchilli]

Andy Hall ‏@Atomicalandy 25m25 minutes ago

Finally 10/11 Oct Koh Tao murder case accused Zaw Lin/Wai Phyo have the chance to tell the world their story. Don't miss it @ samui court

[JoopJoop]

"The murders on an idyllic beach shocked the UK and Thailand due to their brutality."...quoted from the Guardian.

I don't about the UK but as a resident here, Thailand is not "shocked". Perhaps Thai Gen Y are aware but ask anyone else, it's a shrug of the shoulders.

I understand Thai media and broadcasters may be bound by Article 44, but they really need to take this case by the balls, so to speak. Deplorable.

Edited September 26, 2015 by JoopJoop

[fab99]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

I totally agree, I have lived here for six years already, so I know quite a few places that deserve to be seen far more than the common tourist spots.

So I do my part in preventing my friends and family money to go anywhere near the pockets of the people that have any part in this atrocious event.

Of all the people I know who came here last year, not one have spent a minute near Koh Tao / KPN / Koh Samui, too risky with beastly murderers on the loose with impunity.

I am thinking also about doing more to make people aware.

I feel sorry for the people that have businesses over there who have nothing to do with it, but objectively, I don't want it to happen again (and frankly it could) and I want the people who have something to do with it (even very remotely by covering anything) to suffer financially, that is what matters the most to this kind of people.

Edited September 26, 2015 by fab99

[realenglish1]

"Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha has said "nobody would dare" go after the wrong suspects because the case was so high-profile."

Whoever believes this statement also believes in the Easter Bunny

No one respects the investigative abilities or authenticity of the Thai Police.

Mr. Prime Minister you say you are trying to reform the system here in Thailand Start with the corrupt police force. The police are here

to serve the People If the people do not trust their work then a major overhaul is necessary

[Yann55]

"The murders on an idyllic beach shocked the UK and Thailand due to their brutality."...quoted from the Guardian.

I don't about the UK but as a resident here, Thailand is not "shocked". Perhaps Thai Gen Y are aware but ask anyone else, it's a shrug of the shoulders.

I understand Thai media and broadcasters may be bound by Article 44, but they really need to take this case by the balls, so to speak. Deplorable.

I'm with you on this JoopJoop ... Regularly I read on this thread statements like 'they better get it right because the whole world is watching' ... and I wonder about the guys who write such phrases. Where do they live ? On TVF Planet, most likely, because that's the only 'world' where effectively, a whole bunch of people are concerned (and rightly so) with the Koh Tao murders and the ensuing legal rigmarole.

In the UK, obviously, some citizens are also following the story, albeit from a distance, because the victims were British so the British newspaper do write episodically about it.

As for the rest of Europe, the US, and the rest of the world including South East Asian countries, sadly, it must be said in all honesty that 99% of the people don't even know about it. Even those who do don't care much because they feel it's just one more bad news in an ocean of bad news : disasters, wars, massacres, mounting racism, terrorism ...

That's the truth of it. I'm not saying it's right, but pretending that 'the whole world' is watching the Koh Tao murders investigation and trial is nothing short of delusional.

[AleG]

I've said this before and will say it again: detectives should reenact the scenario which brought forth the 'Running Man' videos. I could set up a more realistic re-creation than any Thai gov't person investigator or cop. I would film it at the same location, using the same camera, and (as much as possible) same lighting. I would have ALL 'persons of interest' involved, not just B2, but also the original prime suspects. It's impossible for RTP to re-create that scenario for several reasons:

>>> they're sworn to protect the Headman's people from any further scrutiny

>>> they are incapable of doing things scientifically/objectively. Because they are Thai, they are genetically programmed to do everything subjectively with constant consideration of who everyone represents (status/money/connections).

>>> the Headman wouldn't allow his dear son to be looked at again in this case.

>>> Mon wouldn't comply.

It's indicative of nearly all RTP has done and not done in the past year. Despicable.

"Because they are Thai, they are genetically programmed to do everything subjectively"

As if there was any doubt of the racist element running through his discussion.

[AleG]

The yellow lines are the direction the feet are pointing at, the blue the overall direction of motion.

The problem is that it's plain to see that both on the second and fourth still frames the left feet (which are planted on the ground) and arrow are not pointing in the same direction; in any case making accurate measurements out of short, low quality footage like that is quite impossible and the validity of that technique to positively identify people is questionable.

That is why, as someone pointed out before, it's not a recommended method for identification.

Wasn`t it you who pointed it out before?

No, it was JLCrab:

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

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

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/405528/Image_Comparison_and_Interpretation_Guidance_Issue_1_160115.pdf

[springheeled jack]

I wont go into detail about this case if by any chance these two boys are exonerated will the rtp go after the real murderers ? ,I say murderers because there was more than one person involved one person was given the cold shoulder by Hannah witheridge, a likely suspect angry at losing face a motive for murder?

[stephenterry]

One thing I'm pretty sure about. For the prosecution to gain a conviction they will have to provide the court with the complete DNA documentation including chain of custody. That's if they have any. I anticipate them using the same ploy and providing the same when the closing statements are made. The judges are no fools - they know that their verdict will have to be backed by sound reasoning and facts.

Should the verdict then be a guilty one (and the intervention of the Public Relations Department would support this verdict), the defence could appeal, and (in the meantime) examine these documents in preparation for the next higher court. Should they be able to successfully contest the profiles and discredit the chain of custody, it is a possibility that the Appeals court overturns the verdict.

All in all, a pretty sorrowful scenario.

[MockingJay]

"Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha has said "nobody would dare" go after the wrong suspects because the case was so high-profile."

There is not one logical sentence that guy has spoken whenever he opened his mouth in regards to the case. The worst ever was his babble about sexy girls wearing sexy dresses and bikinis (Hannah was properly dressed and wearing a skirt) being at fault themselves if they get raped and killed. I believe that quote should have driven more attention and condemnation worldwide, thus it should be repeated whenever possible to show what kind of person is ruling this country with his iron fist...

[AleG]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

Well, good luck with that:

Thailand's top cop warns of legal action over critical Koh Tao social media posts

BANGKOK: Royal Thai Police Commissioner Pol Gen Somyot Phumphanmuang has warned of tough legal action against anyone posting false information on social networks criticising the handling of the Koh Tao murders case by the police.

He said such posts could cause rifts and be a threat to the Thai economy. Posting information which is inaccurate and false could breach Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act, which carries a penalty of five years’ imprisonment and a B100,000 fine, or both.

[StealthEnergiser]

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.

With all her experience and world recognition I would think all that information she gave the judges would have torn holes on the information provided by the prosecution

And in my opinion her closing statement would have been -

"with the information received it is impossible to verify that there is dna from the b2 in the body of hannah ".

Edited September 26, 2015 by StealthEnergiser

[stephenterry]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

Well, good luck with that:

Thailand's top cop warns of legal action over critical Koh Tao social media posts

BANGKOK: Royal Thai Police Commissioner Pol Gen Somyot Phumphanmuang has warned of tough legal action against anyone posting false information on social networks criticising the handling of the Koh Tao murders case by the police.

He said such posts could cause rifts and be a threat to the Thai economy. Posting information which is inaccurate and false could breach Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act, which carries a penalty of five years’ imprisonment and a B100,000 fine, or both.

And this is the same Somyot who said (commenting on the arrest of the BKK bombers) that the Thai police force are the best in the world. Maybe he should take a look in the mirror.

JoopJoop, you are taking a risk. At best they'll humour you.

[AleG]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

Well, good luck with that:

Thailand's top cop warns of legal action over critical Koh Tao social media posts

BANGKOK: Royal Thai Police Commissioner Pol Gen Somyot Phumphanmuang has warned of tough legal action against anyone posting false information on social networks criticising the handling of the Koh Tao murders case by the police.

He said such posts could cause rifts and be a threat to the Thai economy. Posting information which is inaccurate and false could breach Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act, which carries a penalty of five years’ imprisonment and a B100,000 fine, or both.

And this is the same Somyot who said (commenting on the arrest of the BKK bombers) that the Thai police force are the best in the world. Maybe he should take a look in the mirror.

JoopJoop, you are taking a risk. At best they'll humour you.

Humor, as in being laughed out of the door, yes, best case scenario.

You guys really, really need to have a reality check before you end up hurting yourselves.

[Darkknight666]

Are you aware of Brazil's approval of "lynching"?

75% of the public condone the practice.

I recently returned from a BASE trip there.....and even the girls and lads I was with are aware of this atrocity and the subsequent ineptitude.

I said "tell your friends and family not to come here".

I've also told all of my Aus family and friends.

I'm tempted to hand out flyers down Khao San Road asking travelers to boycott Death Island.

Lynching...you catching my drift?

I must go to Chidlom Monday and plan to drop in to RTP Headquarters.

I have the greatest respect for the positive contributors on this thread but now wish to act proactively myself and within the bounds of the law.....whatever the <deleted> that is.

Well, good luck with that:

Thailand's top cop warns of legal action over critical Koh Tao social media posts

BANGKOK: Royal Thai Police Commissioner Pol Gen Somyot Phumphanmuang has warned of tough legal action against anyone posting false information on social networks criticising the handling of the Koh Tao murders case by the police.

He said such posts could cause rifts and be a threat to the Thai economy. Posting information which is inaccurate and false could breach Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act, which carries a penalty of five years imprisonment and a B100,000 fine, or both.

And this is the same Somyot who said (commenting on the arrest of the BKK bombers) that the Thai police force are the best in the world. Maybe he should take a look in the mirror.

JoopJoop, you are taking a risk. At best they'll humour you.

I'm terrified!

Holy cow, The jails will be full of opinionated farangs soon won't it Those kind of threats may work on the local population, or some of them but it's not slowing anyone here down.

I'd like to know exactly why the DNA documents are still being withheld from the defense. Without that the case against the B2 is weak-sauce at best. I'm beginning to think the goal is to keep as much evidence as possible out of the court and if they lose the case, so what? They will appeal the verdict eternally and the case will be buried just like Kristy Jones's case.

Dispicable indeed.