Forensic team to testify in Koh Tao murder trial

[StealthEnergiser]

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

Just about says it all if you read it.

If your given an exam paper and it has 10 pages missing you would say the same thing

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

Sorry no more explaining from me, if you don't understand English I cannot teach you.

When I see questions like that it makes me think certain people may be actively involved with prosecution side and they just keep digging and digging then pass the info on.

Another example of this is when Andy Hall kept being questioned by the prosecution this week about financial info that people have raised on thai visa before.

[GOLDBUGGY]

Lawyers of Koh Tao murder accused given more time

THE NATION

MYANMAR EMBASSY CLAIMS WITNESS WAS FORCED TO IMPLICATE DUO AFTER KILLINGS OF BRITISH PAIR ON TOURIST ISLAND

THE LAWYERS for two migrant workers from Myanmar accused of killing two British tourists on Koh Tao were yesterday granted more time to prepare their defence.

"There will be an extension," chief defence lawyer Nakhon Chompuchat said outside the court.

He told reporters the court had made the concession after his team had appealed for more time to show the defendants were being made scapegoats.

His team has been putting up the defence in the case of a high-profile double murder on Koh Tao. The battered bodies of two Britons were found on the island off Surat Thani last year. Post-mortem examination showed the female victim was also raped.

The appalling crimes have made headlines not just in Thailand but also overseas.

After weeks of investigation, police arrested Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun for the crimes. Despite their initial confession, the defendants have later insisted that they were coerced into admitting to the crimes.

A Myanmar Embassy official yesterday told the Koh Samui Provincial Court that a worker from Myanmar was forced into accusing the two defendants.

"Mao Mao told me that he was repeatedly kicked in his chest. He said [Thai] officials demanded that he speak the way they wanted or become a defendant himself," Aung Suu from the Myanmar Embassy in Bangkok said.

Police have used Mao Mao's words against the two defendants.

Inside the courtroom, Aung Suu also disclosed that he came to Koh Tao after the crime took place to talk to Myanmar people there.

"They all appeared frightened of the police. I was told police physically assaulted the Myanmar people during the interrogation," Aung Suu said.

He also said the Myanmar government and the Myanmar Embassy would not officially recognise the type of interpreter used by Thai police in this case.

The interpreter has Bengali ethnic origin while the defendants are of Rakhine ethnicity. The Bengali and Rakhine groups have had a history of conflict.

A Myanmar man, who teaches the Burmese language at Ramkhamhaeng University, also showed up as a witness yesterday. He too said the Bengalis and the Rakhine had had conflicts for more than 70 years already.

Being a member of the Office of the Royal Society here, he also said there was a risk of discrepancies in the interpretation services because while the interpreter might use the official Burmese language, his choice of words could still be influenced by his Bengali background.

The trial of the two Myanmar men has been mired in controversy, with their lawyers complaining of a patchy police investigation, marred by disputed forensics, a contaminated crime scene and selective use of surveillance video to implicate the accused.

Police have denied mistreating the Myanmar men and have stood by their investigation. Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha has said "nobody would dare" go after the wrong suspects because the case was so high-profile.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Lawyers-of-Koh-Tao-murder-accused-given-more-time-30269581.html

-- The Nation 2015-09-26

"Police have used Mao Mao's words against the 2 defendants".

What words against them?

All he said was that he was on the Beach with the 2 accused until 1 am then saw them both in bed sleeping at 5 am. If anything that helped them rather than hurt them.

But I guess as long as it sells newspapers, what the hell. Anything goes then.

[xylophone]

Maybe I'm missing something here however I just cannot understand how some posters here can support the RTP case against these Burmese guys, mainly because in light of the following, any sane, logical thinking and unbiased person could not possibly take the RTP side.

So let's take some of the facts as we know them……….

– – The hoe, the supposed murder weapon that was photographed with blood on it and tested for DNA was certainly not the same one on display at the trial/hearing.

– – The wounds in the back of David's head could not possibly have been caused by the hoe with a blade that size. Argue all you like that it has not been proven, however it is just not possible.

– – The crime scene was trampled over by all and sundry thereby making meaningful collection of evidence extremely suspect.

– – Doctor Pornthip chastised the police force because they did not use a forensic scientist in the gathering of evidence.

– – The focus of the investigation changed completely when it started to involve members of a powerful family on the island.

– – The rounding up of the suspects was done without legal representation on their behalf and there was no recording of the interview with them.

– – An unqualified translator was used in this process.

– – The DNA from the Burmese guys which the police said was on the hoe has not proven to be the case.

– – Some of Hannah’s clothes have gone "missing" when they should have been able to provide some very important clues as to the crime scene and perpetrators.

– – The post-mortem from the UK on Hannah has shown up some important discrepancies and therefore questions the validity of the Thai post-mortem report and the police case.

– – The police have been unwilling/unable to provide detailed process/procedures of most of their actions during their investigation.

– – The extremely important semen samples have not been/cannot be produced to support the police case.

Actually, I think I will stop there even though there are other facts regarding this case, this because just reading the above should be sufficient enough for ANYONE to suspect that there is already potentially a miscarriage of justice in place and to think that ANYONE could take the side of the police in light of what has been disclosed is downright ludicrous and would be laughable if it did not involve such a serious and tragic case.

[thailandchilli]

Seems like we have one of the RTP's forensic scientists also committing perjury in the court:

According to the prosecution, the key pieces of incriminating evidence are semen found in the female victim’s body, and DNA on cigarette stubs found close to the crime scene.

Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon. No other DNA was found on the tool, she said.

We know this to be completely untrue!

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437661326

[AleG]

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

That's how spin works, doesn't it? From DNA chain of evidence incomplete to No DNA evidence at all in one simple twirl.

I will try to remember the article I read this on, but from memory one mentioned that there was an error on the date for the results on the DNA tests of the two defendants, they were a day of; the article mentioned that the error was caused by using the date of the mail parcel delivery instead of the date of the results inside the envelope or something like that.

Also, apparently, the date on David Miller's death certificate was wrong, again, obviously an innocent mistake.

In any case it would show how easy is to cast grave doubts by pointing at a fact that does not actually prove anything beyond a simple clerical error.

[thailandchilli]

Incomplete evidence in the testing of DNA is not good enough no matter what spin you try and put on it. If it was complete then it would have been in court, it is not complete. Plain and simple, the defense have requested it, but it has not been provided, FACT. Now if anyone would like to create further spin on that then go ahead and show your true agenda:

EDIT just seen the below post providing an excellent example of the agenda I was speaking of

Edited September 26, 2015 by thailandchilli

[BritTim]

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

[Fat Haggis]

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridges clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.The documents have been edited. The dates are not right, Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

Just about says it all if you read it.

If your given an exam paper and it has 10 pages missing you would say the same thing

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

Sorry no more explaining from me, if you don't understand English I cannot teach you.

When I see questions like that it makes me think certain people may be actively involved with prosecution side and they just keep digging and digging then pass the info on.

Another example of this is when Andy Hall kept being questioned by the prosecution this week about financial info that people have raised on thai visa before.

Andy Hall has been made aware of the comments about himself, and the professional subject matter experts within the defence team and how their professional backgrounds have been called into question by anonymous internet experts

[StealthEnergiser]

Seems like we have one of the RTP's forensic scientists also committing perjury in the court:

According to the prosecution, the key pieces of incriminating evidence are semen found in the female victim’s body, and DNA on cigarette stubs found close to the crime scene.

Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon. No other DNA was found on the tool, she said.

We know this to be completely untrue!

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437661326

It seems they have committed perjury here also

Senior police officers give contradictory evidence at Hannah Witheridge murder trial

In court today, one of the main police investigators, Lieutenant Colonel Somsak Nurod, said he had spoken to the police pathologist on the 2nd and 3rd of October, at the same time as the defendants were arrested and two weeks after the autopsies, but otherwise he had no further contact with him.

However, the defence lawyers representing the two Myanmar workers produced a statement from the pathologist, stating that Lt Col Nurod had made two separate trips to meet with him in Bangkok in late October, and again on the November 18 after both defendants had retracted their confessions.

The pathologist’s statement said that the meetings had included discussion on the hair found in Ms Witheridge’s hand.

When challenged in court, Lt Col Nurod admitted that further discussion about the hair strand had indeed taken place, but he did not reveal exactly what was said.

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/senior_police_officers_give_contradictory_evidence_at_hannah_witheridge_murder_trial_1_4215995?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[BritTim]

Seems like we have one of the RTP's forensic scientists also committing perjury in the court:

According to the prosecution, the key pieces of incriminating evidence are semen found in the female victim’s body, and DNA on cigarette stubs found close to the crime scene.

Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon. No other DNA was found on the tool, she said.

We know this to be completely untrue!

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437661326

To be fair, it may have been another of the prosecution witnesses (who claimed no check for DNA traces other than examination with a magnifying glass) who committed perjury. I know some prosecution witnesses claimed the hoe was cleaned, and thus no fingerprints or touch DNA remained. My guess is that the local police rubbed off visible fingerprints and sweat marks, but (like most everything else they did) messed up, allowing a professional body like the CIFS to still be able to detect residual traces.

[cookee68]

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.

That is the million dollar question, who doe's the judge favor on what he feels to be right and wrong, That's why i am glad they have a jury system in most civilized countries, who knows maybe the judge doe's not like the B2, or maybe don't like the RTP who knows only one man, that's the problem here, it is all down to how one person feels about it.

[GOLDBUGGY]

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

That's how spin works, doesn't it? From DNA chain of evidence incomplete to No DNA evidence at all in one simple twirl.

I will try to remember the article I read this on, but from memory one mentioned that there was an error on the date for the results on the DNA tests of the two defendants, they were a day of; the article mentioned that the error was caused by using the date of the mail parcel delivery instead of the date of the results inside the envelope or something like that.

Also, apparently, the date on David Miller's death certificate was wrong, again, obviously an innocent mistake.

In any case it would show how easy is to cast grave doubts by pointing at a fact that does not actually prove anything beyond a simple clerical error.

Yes, exactly AleG.

The same as not testing Hannah's clothes to no clothes. The same as saying replicated DNA as being no DNA. The same as saying Dr. Pornthip saying to the media that the police report indicating that Hannah and David were having sex together was unfounded, and now meaning Dr. Pornthip said that Hannah wasn't raped. Then this list goes on and on.

[Fat Haggis]

Lying is endemic within the RTP, all you need to do is look at recent high profile cases, they are simply not anything close to the majority of our own National Poice Forces/services and that's where we are all failing, it's like comparing a Shetland pony to a shire horse, sure there's the odd copper dedicated to his job, but sadly there are more with vested interests and questionable wealth, all part of the current establishment.

The fact that we're are constantly made aware that others are entitled to their opinions that differ, it's not their opinions that are questionable, it's there manner in which they do it.

One announcing they were a gait expert without so much as a shred of evidence to back this claim up. Why say such things? When you have a person like Partington who clearly knows his/her stuff about DNA, they are shot down in flames with the same old mantra.

The same people stating that the conspiracy people are only listening to hearsay, when that's exactly what the evidence th prosecution have presented.

Then it's deflection time by calling out the defence witnesses backgrounds all whilst sitting there on their keyboards hiding behind an anonymous name, without so much as a pubic hairs worth of experience nor expertise in that witnesses background, it's laughable really if it wasn't so tragic, and 94-98% members can see that the RTPs version of events are about as accurate and reliable as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest!!

Opinions sure, agendas definitely!!

[joebrown]

At an early trial date Dr. Pornthip said they had the Chain of Custody of the Prosecution's DNA, so I am wondering which documents are the Defense asking for now before they put their Star Witness on the Stand.

"She said pools of blood found on the sand on Sairee beach in Koh Tao last September had not been gathered for DNA testing, nor had any of Ms Witheridge’s clothing which was still on her body at the time of her death. Insufficient photographs had been taken of the scene to be useful to a forensic examination, and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete, she said.“The documents have been edited. The dates are not right,” Dr Pornthip, who has decades of experience in forensic science, told the three sitting judges."

I just can't see how she can say the "chain of custody of the DNA evidence was incomplete" if she did not have them to look at and even know this. So I don't see how or why everyone is claiming they don't have them now when she testified in court already saying they do.

http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/dna_found_on_murder_weapon_does_not_match_with_two_men_on_trial_for_killing_hannah_witheridge_1_4228734

Your use of sarcasm is noted in the words 'Star Witness'. Judging by her credentials, I would describe her as a professional in her chosen field. Fortunately the civilised world has such dedicated people, who work selflessly ie do not claim to have done a perfect job nor prematurely claim financial rewards for incomplete incompetent work.

In my estimation the defence's 'Star Witness' has already appeared on stage in this charade. Please step forward and take a bow, all you prosecution witnesses, your audience is in raptures of delight and laughter.

BTW, if you need proof of police incompetence, please refer to the 2nd paragraph of your post, which you have predictably opted to ignore!

Edited September 26, 2015 by joebrown

[GOLDBUGGY]

Incomplete evidence in the testing of DNA is not good enough no matter what spin you try and put on it. If it was complete then it would have been in court, it is not complete. Plain and simple, the defense have requested it, but it has not been provided, FACT. Now if anyone would like to create further spin on that then go ahead and show your true agenda:

EDIT just seen the below post providing an excellent example of the agenda I was speaking of

Nobody claimed it was good enough. All that was said is what the media reported what Dr. Pornthip said at the trial and how that got twisted around.

I never saw what Dr. Pornthip saw as Forensic Evidence, so I really can't comment on it being good enough or not. But then neither have you.

[thailandchilli]

This has always interested me and again does not fit the scenario and the whole case that has been created by the RTP

Hannah Witheridge shared cigarette with someone before attack, say police

Traces of Miss Witheridge's DNA and that of one other person were found on a cigarette butt some 50 yards from where her body was found, suggesting the 23-year-old shared it with her attackers and even had a conversation with them before being killed.

So one of the key pieces of evidence that the prosecution has, ie the DNA on the cigarette butts is of course vanished and not available for retesting:

This is in the daily mail not available in Thailand but you can still view through Google translate: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2762055%2FThai-divers-hunt-missing-murder-weapon-tourists-flock-spot-British-duo-murdered.html&edit-text=&act=url

The defense was very keen to have the butts tested however:

Interview with Dr Pornthip

There were previous reports that DNA found on the butt of a cigarette shared by the two suspects matched that found on the female victim’s body. Were you able to consider that evidence?

No. Because the police said that all that evidence was destroyed already. The police said there was no evidence left to send to our institute.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/interview/dr-pornthip-victims-or-suspects-have-the-right-to-ask-for-a-second-opinion.html

Edited September 26, 2015 by thailandchilli

[thailandchilli]

Incomplete evidence in the testing of DNA is not good enough no matter what spin you try and put on it. If it was complete then it would have been in court, it is not complete. Plain and simple, the defense have requested it, but it has not been provided, FACT. Now if anyone would like to create further spin on that then go ahead and show your true agenda:

EDIT just seen the below post providing an excellent example of the agenda I was speaking of

Nobody claimed it was good enough. All that was said is what the media reported what Dr. Pornthip said at the trial and how that got twisted around.

I never saw what Dr. Pornthip saw as Forensic Evidence, so I really can't comment on it being good enough or not. But then neither have you.

Well I'm glad you agree its not good enough so why labour the point. Not good enough for verification means incomplete evidence. Not good enough to make a conviction on

[GOLDBUGGY]

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

[mcm991]

Lying is endemic within the RTP, all you need to do is look at recent high profile cases, they are simply not anything close to the majority of our own National Poice Forces/services and that's where we are all failing, it's like comparing a Shetland pony to a shire horse, sure there's the odd copper dedicated to his job, but sadly there are more with vested interests and questionable wealth, all part of the current establishment.

The fact that we're are constantly made aware that others are entitled to their opinions that differ, it's not their opinions that are questionable, it's there manner in which they do it.

One announcing they were a gait expert without so much as a shred of evidence to back this claim up. Why say such things? When you have a person like Partington who clearly knows his/her stuff about DNA, they are shot down in flames with the same old mantra.

The same people stating that the conspiracy people are only listening to hearsay, when that's exactly what the evidence th prosecution have presented.

Then it's deflection time by calling out the defence witnesses backgrounds all whilst sitting there on their keyboards hiding behind an anonymous name, without so much as a pubic hairs worth of experience nor expertise in that witnesses background, it's laughable really if it wasn't so tragic, and 94-98% members can see that the RTPs version of events are about as accurate and reliable as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest!!

Opinions sure, agendas definitely!!

I always smile when posters try to 'change the mind' of a few regular posters here who do their best to have threads shut down.

By trying to convice them of the obvious shambles of this investigation one fails to understand their motives. They are not here to express a different opinion or point of view. And they are certainly not here to have the flaws pointed out to them.

They are here to shield the murderers.

The best thing to do is to ignore or to point out the pure evil.

Not easy to do while staying within the bounds of forum rules. But evil is evil ....... anyway one looks at it.

[BritTim]

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

I am just saying this doesn't add up.

At last something we can agree upon.

[fab99]

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

I think you think that Ms Pornthip is part of the defense team, she is NOT, she was one of their witnesses and has otherwise made some comments before the trial, as an independant forensic expert.

The fact that she read the report and commented on it absolutely doesn't mean that the defense team has it.

They have requested the documents many times, the documents have been presented by the prosecution when they presented their case but they have never been provided them to the defense team (if I recall, supposedly citing a thai law preventing transmission of personnal information as an excuse), so I really don't think the Forensic Expert (better than the term "star witness" GB is using) had anything to analyze, not even an incomplete report.

Damn lack of transparency in this trial...

Edited September 26, 2015 by fab99

[GOLDBUGGY]

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

I am just saying this doesn't add up.

At last something we can agree upon.

It appears we do.

[HUH]

There's a lot of things you've not seen to be able to comment on, but you do, I'm curious as to what your background is that is making you sound like some sort of expert?

Not a few days ago I believe you made a claim that you knew Thai law, and yet when you first arrived on these threads you stated you never knew Thai Law.

You come across as a person of reasonable understanding yet pretty much right from the get go, without any evidence having been made public, you sided with the RTPs version of events, and believed all their statements. How is that possible I've yet to see any interest from you in the Erawan shrine bombing, every bit as horrendous as this case, in fact I don't believe you've ever posted in these threads, and yet you are constantly reminding us mere mortals that you only want to see justice, and yet it's actually only here that You wish to see justice, nowhere else when a farang is killed, why is that?

It may have something to do the Sperm Samples found in Hannah's Raped Body, which is alleged by the Police to belong to the 2 accused on trial right now. So far I have also not heard that this has been thrown out of court yet, or disproved by the Defense team, which are still working on that now.

As to what I do, or whom I am, or where I live, or anyone else's here, is none of your damned business. It is posts like yours that get this forum shut down. None of us are on Trial here. I have no interest whatsoever in what you or anyone else does. So please stop trying to investigate the people here and try to spend more time investigating this case.

There's no evidence of the rape of Hannah. In fact this has been contested by the UK autopsy report and Dr Pornthip. As for the sperm samples there is no verified account of these apart from the RTP saying so in court and providing insufficient evidence to back that up. Just because the prosecution states this does not make it true. Or are you in the habit of believing things before they have been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

[GOLDBUGGY]

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

I think you think that Ms Pornthip is part of the defense team, she is NOT, she was one of their witnesses and has otherwise made some comments before the trial, as an independant forensic expert.

The fact that she read the report and commented on it absolutely doesn't mean that the defense team has it.

They have requested the documents many times, the documents have been presented by the prosecution when they presented their case but they have never been provided them to the defense team (if I recall, supposedly citing a thai law preventing transmission of personnal information as an excuse), so I really don't think the Forensic Expert (better than the term "star witness" GB is using) had anything to analyze, not even an incomplete report.

Damn lack of transparency in this trial...

So you are saying that Dr. Pornthip, a Forensic Expert, can get these documents, but the Defense Team can't and don't know what she is going to say before putting her on the Witness Stand? That now, another Forensic Expert from Australia, can't get these same documents to testify?

Well it would sure make it difficult to Cross-examine a witness if you had not idea where she got this information from or what it was. Especially when the Prosecution was told to hand over all evidence to the Defense Team a long time ago.

[joebrown]

Which explains why the rtp have acted to protect Thais. They probably are furious with the defence for not supporting them. No one dare question a Thai authority. It's ingrained in Thai society.

I've posted before about Andy Hall not being a very popular individual in the eyes of the Thai establishment. This was exemplified by him being berated by senior Thai policemen outside the Samui courthouse on the 1st day of the trial. They were annoyed by the fact that he had the sheer audacity to support the B2 and not their corrupted version of justice.

[thailandchilli]

Which explains why the rtp have acted to protect Thais. They probably are furious with the defence for not supporting them. No one dare question a Thai authority. It's ingrained in Thai society.

I've posted before about Andy Hall not being a very popular individual in the eyes of the Thai establishment. This was exemplified by him being berated by senior Thai policemen outside the Samui courthouse on the 1st day of the trial. They were annoyed by the fact that he had the sheer audacity to support the B2 and not their corrupted version of justice.

100% agreed, he also received threats from the Samui prison governor and there is a current hate propaganda campaign being carried out by a small group in Samui. Yes one posts on here.

[StealthEnergiser]

Sorry but I did not read anywhere where Dr. Pornthip said any of these documents were missing. Did you? She just said they were incomplete, and gave examples of this incompleteness by the documents being edited and the dates not right.

If you want to read into this they are missing, as in lost or never done, then this is just an assumption. Which brings me back to my question as to what are the Defense Team asking for and waiting for these past 2 weeks? For the Prosecution edit more documents, or invent some, as I figure they must have everything the Prosecution has already.

So, if I understand you correctly, what the prosecution has already provided (insufficient to even make it possible for Jane Taupin, the world renowned forensic specialist to testify) is all they have, right? And you consider that sufficient to convict two Burmese kids of a brutal rape and double murder?

I am not implying anything.

All I am saying is that over 2 weeks ago they got the DNA Reports from the Prosecutors. They knew then that these documents were incomplete.

So why fly in some Hot Shot Forensics Expert to testify, and then not do so, because they haven't received these documents yet, which they had? Is it because the Defense Team feels there was more documents the Prosecution was holding, and thus expected them to hand them over? If so where did they get this assumption from?

So I am not implying anything. I am just saying this doesn't add up.

she is a professional not a hot shot or star witness where is your respect.

artington, on 25 Sept 2015 - 19:00, said:

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.

[glenmohr]

This has always interested me and again does not fit the scenario and the whole case that has been created by the RTP

Hannah Witheridge shared cigarette with someone before attack, say police

Traces of Miss Witheridge's DNA and that of one other person were found on a cigarette butt some 50 yards from where her body was found, suggesting the 23-year-old shared it with her attackers and even had a conversation with them before being killed.

So one of the key pieces of evidence that the prosecution has, ie the DNA on the cigarette butts is of course vanished and not available for retesting:

This is in the daily mail not available in Thailand but you can still view through Google translate: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2762055%2FThai-divers-hunt-missing-murder-weapon-tourists-flock-spot-British-duo-murdered.html&edit-text=&act=url

The defense was very keen to have the butts tested however:

Interview with Dr Pornthip

There were previous reports that DNA found on the butt of a cigarette shared by the two suspects matched that found on the female victim’s body. Were you able to consider that evidence?

No. Because the police said that all that evidence was destroyed already. The police said there was no evidence left to send to our institute.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/interview/dr-pornthip-victims-or-suspects-have-the-right-to-ask-for-a-second-opinion.html

Interesting topic the cigarette butt, because it was reported somewhere last year that Hannah was a non smoker!?!?

[thailandchilli]

This has always interested me and again does not fit the scenario and the whole case that has been created by the RTP

Hannah Witheridge shared cigarette with someone before attack, say police

Traces of Miss Witheridge's DNA and that of one other person were found on a cigarette butt some 50 yards from where her body was found, suggesting the 23-year-old shared it with her attackers and even had a conversation with them before being killed.

So one of the key pieces of evidence that the prosecution has, ie the DNA on the cigarette butts is of course vanished and not available for retesting:

This is in the daily mail not available in Thailand but you can still view through Google translate: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2762055%2FThai-divers-hunt-missing-murder-weapon-tourists-flock-spot-British-duo-murdered.html&edit-text=&act=url

The defense was very keen to have the butts tested however:

Interview with Dr Pornthip

There were previous reports that DNA found on the butt of a cigarette shared by the two suspects matched that found on the female victim’s body. Were you able to consider that evidence?

No. Because the police said that all that evidence was destroyed already. The police said there was no evidence left to send to our institute.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/interview/dr-pornthip-victims-or-suspects-have-the-right-to-ask-for-a-second-opinion.html

Interesting topic the cigarette butt, because it was reported somewhere last year that Hannah was a non smoker!?!?

Yes apparently I remember reading that somewhere also, but that was in a forum or social media, I never saw a credible report saying she did not smoke. Her old facebook page certainly did not have any pics with her smoking so I don't think she did, but maybe in party mode she dabbled?

[AleG]

Which explains why the rtp have acted to protect Thais. They probably are furious with the defence for not supporting them. No one dare question a Thai authority. It's ingrained in Thai society.

I've posted before about Andy Hall not being a very popular individual in the eyes of the Thai establishment. This was exemplified by him being berated by senior Thai policemen outside the Samui courthouse on the 1st day of the trial. They were annoyed by the fact that he had the sheer audacity to support the B2 and not their corrupted version of justice.

Actually the confrontation was, according to Andy Hall, for "disrespecting the families of the victims", and from what I've hear it has something to do with events described at the end of this article.