Koh Tao Murders: Defense Asks Court to Drop Charges

IslandLover · October 31, 2015

HUH, on 31 Oct 2015 - 09:06, said:

AGareth2, on 31 Oct 2015 - 08:40, said:

I want to come back to the hoe

David and Hannah's DNA were matched on the handle

we have other DNA

if this could be extracted and identified then we have some more suspects

Yes and I also think the hair is never going to go away as much as the prosecution would want it to.

They were using this mysterious blonde hair to match to suspects early on in the case but since then?? Where is it? who does it belong to? The real killer? (for sure)

A British man has become the prime suspect for the murder of two British tourists and his arrest is imminent, a senior Thai police officer told The Telegraph on Wednesday.

Prachum Ruangthong, the head of police on the Thai island of Koh Tao where the murder took place, said he believed a British man was the likely killer of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller.

Police would have closed the case by the end of the day once DNA testing on samples of hair found in Ms Witheridge's hand were concluded, he added.

"After this evening everything will become clear." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11100980/British-man-prime-suspect-in-Thailand-murder.html

Yes and I also think the hair is never going to go away as much as the prosecution would want it to.

Neither is the loss of Hannah's clothing, which must have had the killer(s) DNA all over it.

smedly · October 31, 2015

HUH, on 31 Oct 2015 - 09:06, said:

AGareth2, on 31 Oct 2015 - 08:40, said:

I want to come back to the hoe

David and Hannah's DNA were matched on the handle

we have other DNA

if this could be extracted and identified then we have some more suspects

Yes and I also think the hair is never going to go away as much as the prosecution would want it to.

They were using this mysterious blonde hair to match to suspects early on in the case but since then?? Where is it? who does it belong to? The real killer? (for sure)

A British man has become the prime suspect for the murder of two British tourists and his arrest is imminent, a senior Thai police officer told The Telegraph on Wednesday.

Prachum Ruangthong, the head of police on the Thai island of Koh Tao where the murder took place, said he believed a British man was the likely killer of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller.

Police would have closed the case by the end of the day once DNA testing on samples of hair found in Ms Witheridge's hand were concluded, he added.

"After this evening everything will become clear." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11100980/British-man-prime-suspect-in-Thailand-murder.html

Yes and I also think the hair is never going to go away as much as the prosecution would want it to.

Neither is the loss of Hannah's clothing, which must have had the killer(s) DNA all over it.

This might seem an odd question coming from me but what clothes were lost, her clothes were clearly seen at the crime scene and as you rightly say would have been a source for DNA testing

Are you saying that the clothes were lost and not tested ?

BritTim · November 1, 2015

This might seem an odd question coming from me but what clothes were lost, her clothes were clearly seen at the crime scene and as you rightly say would have been a source for DNA testing

Are you saying that the clothes were lost and not tested ?

According to the prosecution, they were not tested. They were not among the items shown in court. Whether they are actually "lost", or "used up", or "discarded as not relevent", or are still stored somewhere, as far as I know, has not been definitively established.

IslandLover · November 1, 2015

BritTim, on 01 Nov 2015 - 01:04, said:

smedly, on 31 Oct 2015 - 22:56, said:

This might seem an odd question coming from me but what clothes were lost, her clothes were clearly seen at the crime scene and as you rightly say would have been a source for DNA testing

Are you saying that the clothes were lost and not tested ?

According to the prosecution, they were not tested. They were not among the items shown in court. Whether they are actually "lost", or "used up", or "discarded as not relevent", or are still stored somewhere, as far as I know, has not been definitively established.

According to the defence, they have now gone missing. No one knows where they are. By clothes, I mean Hannah's pink top and white skirt which were still on her body when she was found.

stephenterry · November 1, 2015

Which really says it all about the Rtp. Any reasonable person would agree that if the b2 were real suspects the clothes would have been subject to forensic examination. A bright teenager could work that one out. And to think a few posters still believe that the b2 are guilty beggars belief.

stephenterry · November 1, 2015

In a just country, maybe, but this is Thailand. In a just country there wouldn't have been a trial, but here the authorities demanded it. So don't be surprised if the verdict is guilty.

stephenterry · November 1, 2015

Well done SE for posting these statements from Burin Kantabutra, clearly an educated Thai of high community standing. Wish he would post these in BP and Thai newspapers. But I guess he'd be censored, PDQ.

joebrown · November 1, 2015

Can anyone give a plausible explanation as to why Col. Chiewpreecha (a senior investigating police officer) didn't follow up the rumour about the altercation at the AC bar, which i believe was the last place Hannah and David were seen alive? It does seem strange that the 'lead' wasn't persued, because this should be standard practice in the RTP's investigation manual, since PM Chan Ocha says it's the same one the UK Met Police use.

"Under cross-examination yesterday, Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha, a senior investigating police officer, told judges that he had not looked into the rumour that Ms Witheridge had been involved in an argument with a Thai youth just hours before she was killed, according to a source present at yesterday’s hearing.

While Col Cherdpong admitted that he had heard about Ms Witheridge’s altercation with “Dodo” Toovichien, the son of Koh Tao’s wealthiest man and effectively the island chief, he said that neither he nor his officers actively followed up that line of enquiry." (Source Myanmar Times)

AleG · November 1, 2015

Can anyone give a plausible explanation as to why Col. Chiewpreecha (a senior investigating police officer) didn't follow up the rumour about the altercation at the AC bar, which i believe was the last place Hannah and David were seen alive? It does seem strange that the 'lead' wasn't persued, because this should be standard practice in the RTP's investigation manual, since PM Chan Ocha says it's the same one the UK Met Police use.

"Under cross-examination yesterday, Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha, a senior investigating police officer, told judges that he had not looked into the rumour that Ms Witheridge had been involved in an argument with a Thai youth just hours before she was killed, according to a source present at yesterday’s hearing.

While Col Cherdpong admitted that he had heard about Ms Witheridge’s altercation with “Dodo” Toovichien, the son of Koh Tao’s wealthiest man and effectively the island chief, he said that neither he nor his officers actively followed up that line of enquiry." (Source Myanmar Times)

Probably because the person the rumor referred to wasn't even on the island at the time.

StealthEnergiser · November 1, 2015

Well done SE for posting these statements from Burin Kantabutra, clearly an educated Thai of high community standing. Wish he would post these in BP and Thai newspapers. But I guess he'd be censored, PDQ.

The have now all gone I am not sure of the reason why but maybe somebody had reason to report them.

stephenterry · November 1, 2015

Can anyone give a plausible explanation as to why Col. Chiewpreecha (a senior investigating police officer) didn't follow up the rumour about the altercation at the AC bar, which i believe was the last place Hannah and David were seen alive? It does seem strange that the 'lead' wasn't persued, because this should be standard practice in the RTP's investigation manual, since PM Chan Ocha says it's the same one the UK Met Police use.

"Under cross-examination yesterday, Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha, a senior investigating police officer, told judges that he had not looked into the rumour that Ms Witheridge had been involved in an argument with a Thai youth just hours before she was killed, according to a source present at yesterday’s hearing.

While Col Cherdpong admitted that he had heard about Ms Witheridge’s altercation with “Dodo” Toovichien, the son of Koh Tao’s wealthiest man and effectively the island chief, he said that neither he nor his officers actively followed up that line of enquiry." (Source Myanmar Times)

Part of the cover-up to protect influential persons - besides that, Dodo (Nomsod) was said to be in BKK next morning according to his lawyer, who produced CCTV stills to 'evidence' his whereabouts.

If it is true that a cover-up occurred, then any leads that pointed to the influential families wouldn't have been followed-up. It could also be that the police officer wouldn't follow-up what he considered to be a rumour.

Take your pick.

StealthEnergiser · November 1, 2015

Guilt not shown in Koh Tao trial A defendant in the Koh Tao rape and murder of two British tourists said he was beaten into confessing.

To demonstrate that genuine rule of law exists in Thailand, justice must be not only be done, but must be seen to be done. Thai Criminal Code S134/4 stipulates that, for any statement given by a suspect to be admissible in court, he must first have been informed of his right to silence and to legal counsel during interrogation. Also, he cannot be tortured or misled.

So the prosecution should provide video of the entire interrogation that shows the suspect's lawyer was present throughout, and require the lawyer to swear under oath as to the video's veracity. But such proof of its compliance with S134/4 has not been provided.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Guilt-not-shown-in-Koh-Tao-trial-30270711.html

StealthEnergiser · November 1, 2015

more from that article above

Regarding the "confessions", Thai Criminal Code Article S134/4 states that a defendant is entitled to legal counsel during interrogations and must be informed of that right before questioning starts. Otherwise, any information given is inadmissible in court. Both defendants have retracted their "confessions", saying that they were obtained under pressure. The cops could easily disprove this claim by, say, showing video footage of the entire interrogation with the defendants' lawyers present - so why haven't they?

Of course, the two accused might, in fact, be guilty - but that cannot be proved on the basis of the evidence thus far presented.

As in the Phuket court's acquittal of the Phuketwan defendants, the Samui court can best serve Thailand by showing that justice has been done - and throw the cops' botched case out.

Burin Kantabutra

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Koh-Tao-investigation-full-of-holes-30269495.html

AleG · November 1, 2015

more from the above article

The police say that DNA found on the female victim's body will show the truth. But the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA, the police lab is not ISO-certified to analyse DNA samples, and having their own lab test the DNA is clearly a conflict of interest. [/size]

The cops haven't shown that they've followed S134/4, they haven't let the defence analyse the victim's DNA, the police lab wasn't internationally certified to analyse DNA, and they should have used a neutral, fully qualified lab.[/size]

The accused might well be guilty of the rape and murder, but the evidence presented doesn't prove it. To show that justice has been done, and thus preserve Thailand's image, both defendants must be freed.[/size]

Burin Kantabutra[/size]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Guilt-not-shown-in-Koh-Tao-trial-30270711.html

If you are going to start a cut and paste Appeal to Authority campaign at least do it with someone who can maintain his credibility past a couple paragraphs, this is false :"the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA" and it's repeated three times.

The court issued an order so that the defense could have the evidence analyzed, they (the defense) declined to do so. That is a documented fact and it doesn't matter how many times it is denied, facts are those pesky things that don't go away if you stop believing in them.

The Samui Provincial Court has ordered remaining forensic evidence in the Koh Tao tourist murders case to be sent for re-examination at the Thai Justice Ministry's Central Institute of Forensic Science in line with a defence request, according to local Thai media reports on July 10.

The court, in Surat Thani, yesterday ordered public prosecutors to work with investigators to send all remaining forensic evidence found at the crime scene, including a shovel, for forensic retesting.

And then what happened?

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

stephenterry · November 1, 2015

A poster quoting a selection of statements from a media source is posting that report, which is as it should be. With reference to the alleged DNA evidence, that has been debated at length on here, and it's enough to state that neither the prosecution or defence has any independently substantiated proof of its veracity or existence, as the original samples (according to the RTP) have been 'all used up'. It should be crystal clear to any fair-minded reader that only original samples would be acceptable for testing.

So, please can we all put this particular debating point to rest.

StealthEnergiser · November 1, 2015

more from the above article

The police say that DNA found on the female victim's body will show the truth. But the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA, the police lab is not ISO-certified to analyse DNA samples, and having their own lab test the DNA is clearly a conflict of interest. [/size]

The cops haven't shown that they've followed S134/4, they haven't let the defence analyse the victim's DNA, the police lab wasn't internationally certified to analyse DNA, and they should have used a neutral, fully qualified lab.[/size]

The accused might well be guilty of the rape and murder, but the evidence presented doesn't prove it. To show that justice has been done, and thus preserve Thailand's image, both defendants must be freed.[/size]

Burin Kantabutra[/size]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Guilt-not-shown-in-Koh-Tao-trial-30270711.html

If you are going to start a cut and paste Appeal to Authority campaign at least do it with someone who can maintain his credibility past a couple paragraphs, this is false :"the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA" and it's repeated three times.

The court issued an order so that the defense could have the evidence analyzed, they (the defense) declined to do so. That is a documented fact and it doesn't matter how many times it is denied, facts are those pesky things that don't go away if you stop believing in them.

The Samui Provincial Court has ordered remaining forensic evidence in the Koh Tao tourist murders case to be sent for re-examination at the Thai Justice Ministry's Central Institute of Forensic Science in line with a defence request, according to local Thai media reports on July 10.

The court, in Surat Thani, yesterday ordered public prosecutors to work with investigators to send all remaining forensic evidence found at the crime scene, including a shovel, for forensic retesting.

And then what happened?

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

So I put a news article up and you call it a cut and paste appeal ?????????????

KamalaRider · November 1, 2015

http://esctoday.com/977/sarah_yuen_executive_project_manager_live_events/

It's Sarah Yuen who is responsible now for the organisation of the Eurovision Song Contest.

So you mean because of she got the job everyone in Europe in television wants, she not qualified to report on Koh Tao trial?

HUH · November 1, 2015

Robert Holmes The problem with the DNA evidence retrieved from the victim is that the prosecution have presented the court with evidence that the DNA
from the accused matches the DNA retrieved from the victim. The onus is then on the defence to cross examine the
forensic scientists who analysed the samples and to call evidence from an expert as to the international standard universally applied for the proper analysis of such samples. In my opinion that has not been done and if there is a conviction it will be because of that. There's plenty of doubt but the fact remains there is a DNA analysis report on the court record and the judges have to get their
collective heads around the fact that it shows a match....that evidence needed to be strongly contested and in my view it hasn't been.The

prosecution will rely on

that, mark my words.The evidence of Khun ying Pornthip does not negate the alleged DNA match....This whole case revolves around that. In any other competent jurisdiction the defence would have vigorously cross examined the prosecution forensic witnesses as to their procedures and would have required them to produce their case notes and all other relevant documentation. This simply has not happened in this case.

Your cherry picking and forgetting to balance out the arguments. Robert was only at court for 3 days and many that are commenting on that post from Andy were there daily including Sarah Yeun:

Sarah Yuen:: Robert Holmes I was there for all of them and the cross examination was laborious in many cases. As for the know it all foreigner, that is the way the Thais will see it and I can imagine a Brit court might even feel the same way. People would far rather listen to their own. We whiteys can be quite patronising when we want to be, wandering around the world telling everyone how to run everything, So I think the decision was made to find Thai forensic experts instead. Pornthip did give evidence on the time, and so did her colleague, and both said it wasn’t feasible. Also many different police forensic experts were asked about the speed of the result. It was made clear that they arrested the B2 on the 2nd, and Somyot claimed they had the results by midnight on the 2nd. He went on TV to say so before the reenactment on October 3rd. So they had to get the DNA, get it to Bangkok and test it and get the result for Somyot to announce it. Within the day. That was pointed out in court. The B2 also confirmed in court to the prosecution that they were not randomly tested prior to their arrests. I agree that the defence probably didn’t labour many points by beating the witnesses over the head metaphorically, like we would in a UK court, but then I don’t know how the Thai culture handles the whole face issue in a courtroom. Because to do a good job you have to essentially show the witness up if they are lying. And that really can’t sit well.

But since your placing so much credibility to Roberts posts what about this little snippet.

"My main concern has always been that I didn't want the court to have any grounds for accepting what I have always held to be flawed evidence"

Robert Homes studied law at QUT where did Sarah Yuen study law ?

She was at the court house everyday but missed the evidence of the phone on the 23rd september and then went on to announce it on sky as breaking news on the 11 Oct ? maybe she should stick to the eurovision song contest.

As to his last statement thats his opinion and not fact, and the fact is the prosecution has shown a match to the B2 and DNA found in the victim this is the most important piece of evidence yet and the defense have failed to discredit the evidence that is FACT.

Robert Holmes Rich. Original DNA is not presented to a court...the conclusions are. What is in question here is the validity as to their findings.
Jane Taupin was a defence witness not a prosecution witness. She wasn't called by the defence....she would have been able to give direct evidence as to the internationally accepted standard For DNA analysis. Why wasn't she called?

You'd have to ask the defence that question.

Yes he's a qualified lawyer. please refer back to his opinion : "My main concern has always been that I didn't want the court to have any grounds for accepting what I have always held to be flawed evidence"

CharlieH · November 1, 2015

Its been said before "dont get personal" or make personal remarks, they will simply get binned,

if you persist you will be "benched" until the trial is over, as others have discovered.

Your choice !

RolandRat · November 1, 2015

I dont think the RTP are useless at all, I think they were very clever, and have done what they seem to do repeatedly, when required, make a total and deliberate mess of things, muddy the waters, so that focus is taken away from the actual and real perpetrators of the crime and is quickly focused elsewhere.

Its not about whose been arrested and charged, its about whose been allowed to walk away. (IMHO)

RolandRat · November 1, 2015

Sadly, in my opinion, the outcome of this case was already decided back in September, its now a matter of seeing it through, things "seen to be done", justice, no !, credible?, not really.

Its all smoke and mirrors, I said previously, its sad, that the truth will probably never be known, it will be whispered and hinted at in certain "bars".

There will be a "public display" and a quiet already agreed solution behind closed doors, that will be the reality of all this.

labelled as a travesty, talked about as "RTP bungles again etc", in reality, objective achieved !...........and that's the sad part.

aphuketinsider · November 1, 2015

Well we find out more of what happened when the judges reach there verdict as they have to make a report,

You might have to wait a long time. They declared they're not going to submit a closing statements to the judge. Is this common? Is this rude? Have they seen the vacuity of their case and just thrown their hands up as if to say, "whatever, dudes. We did what RTP told us to do. It went over like a lead balloon. Let's not make it worse with a closing statement. It's going to go to appeals anyway, so why waste the calories with writing and submitting a closing statement. If it appears rude to the court, what the heck."

As we know the defense likes to keep secrets from the public, Andy hall admitted himself that on the 23rd sept evidence shown to him in court confirmed a match from Davids computer to his phone, but this info was never came out till the last day in court when the translation was given, So I know for a FACT we are not getting all the information.

Andy Hall What's more, regarding the evidence from David's family, this evidence was first presented to me during my testimony on 23rd September,Sarah Yuen reporting for Sky News and other has been misunderstood that she reported it came to court on Sunday last minute before close of trial, what came to court was an official translation of a document previously submitted on 23rd September. The evidence was presented to me as a witness during my cross examination

Ironically there are people here who are claiming the defense likes to keep secrets from the public!

Then base their arguments on a facebook post & comments deliberately made public by Andy Hall. He could have kept it private for his friends only but instead makes it public viewing.

The post and comments your referring to has some very credible people on there and it gives good insight into some of the aspects of the trial in its informative comments. However taking comments out of context without posting the entire thread is foolhardy and bias as it does not give the complete picture. I would suggest if your going to do that then post the entire thread. Otherwise going back and forth with the debates on the thread is futile.

aphuketinsider · November 1, 2015

Re time of death.

Whilst the time of death of Hannah is not known it might be possible to arrive at a more precise time of when she was bludgeoned using the crime scene photos.

Hannah was already dead or unconscious when bludgeoned. You can’t hit a moving target dead centre with a heavy hoe. And she would have defended herself with her hands. She was not held down, how do you hold someone whilst another strikes her face with a hoe without being in the way and how do you hold their head straight? In any event she could not have been held down from the side as the rocks are too close.

High tide was around 02:19am (1.55m) and low tide 07:33am (1.22m) on Monday 15/09/2014. This is only a 330mm! (13”) tide which won’t help but Hannah’s feet and lower left leg were in the water but not her elbows.

So observation of the crime scene on a similar tide might give a much more precise time than has been speculated to date.

I do wonder where the Doctor on the scene of the crime got the estimated time of death as 5.30am. Clearly incorrect.

smedly · November 1, 2015

more from the above article

The police say that DNA found on the female victim's body will show the truth. But the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA, the police lab is not ISO-certified to analyse DNA samples, and having their own lab test the DNA is clearly a conflict of interest. [/size]

The cops haven't shown that they've followed S134/4, they haven't let the defence analyse the victim's DNA, the police lab wasn't internationally certified to analyse DNA, and they should have used a neutral, fully qualified lab.[/size]

The accused might well be guilty of the rape and murder, but the evidence presented doesn't prove it. To show that justice has been done, and thus preserve Thailand's image, both defendants must be freed.[/size]

Burin Kantabutra[/size]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Guilt-not-shown-in-Koh-Tao-trial-30270711.html

If you are going to start a cut and paste Appeal to Authority campaign at least do it with someone who can maintain his credibility past a couple paragraphs, this is false :"the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA" and it's repeated three times.

The court issued an order so that the defense could have the evidence analyzed, they (the defense) declined to do so. That is a documented fact and it doesn't matter how many times it is denied, facts are those pesky things that don't go away if you stop believing in them.

The Samui Provincial Court has ordered remaining forensic evidence in the Koh Tao tourist murders case to be sent for re-examination at the Thai Justice Ministry's Central Institute of Forensic Science in line with a defence request, according to local Thai media reports on July 10.

The court, in Surat Thani, yesterday ordered public prosecutors to work with investigators to send all remaining forensic evidence found at the crime scene, including a shovel, for forensic retesting.

And then what happened?

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

how many times do you have to be told - the only DNA samples the defense would be interested in retesting in an approved lab are the original samples, the police were not offering the original samples because they claim they no longer have them - go figure

What they were offering was some processed extract that could not be verified as to its source - it could in fact have been saliva samples from the accused, no way to tell, why would the defense want to test samples they could not even verify if they came from the victims body - seriously ?

That is why they declined

Further - I can think of no good reason why the claimed original samples are no longer available considering the plentiful source, I can only conclude that either they never existed or police have destroyed them

I wish you would stop posting this inaccurate nonsense

joebrown · November 1, 2015

Can anyone give a plausible explanation as to why Col. Chiewpreecha (a senior investigating police officer) didn't follow up the rumour about the altercation at the AC bar, which i believe was the last place Hannah and David were seen alive? It does seem strange that the 'lead' wasn't persued, because this should be standard practice in the RTP's investigation manual, since PM Chan Ocha says it's the same one the UK Met Police use.

"Under cross-examination yesterday, Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha, a senior investigating police officer, told judges that he had not looked into the rumour that Ms Witheridge had been involved in an argument with a Thai youth just hours before she was killed, according to a source present at yesterday’s hearing.

While Col Cherdpong admitted that he had heard about Ms Witheridge’s altercation with “Dodo” Toovichien, the son of Koh Tao’s wealthiest man and effectively the island chief, he said that neither he nor his officers actively followed up that line of enquiry." (Source Myanmar Times)

Probably because the person the rumor referred to wasn't even on the island at the time.

'Errm, so you would have us believe!

Notwithstanding the whereabouts of the 'absent' person, why is it that when this investigation was described as 'perfect' by the Thai PM, there was never an in-depth examination of the happenings at the A C Bar, the last place the murder victims were seen alive. From what I recall of events, the owner/manager Mon withheld the CCTV recordings from the police, on the basis they were his 'private' property. This is hardly what could be considered the actions of a man 'helping the police with their enquiries'. What do you think?

AleG · November 1, 2015

more from the above article

The police say that DNA found on the female victim's body will show the truth. But the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA, the police lab is not ISO-certified to analyse DNA samples, and having their own lab test the DNA is clearly a conflict of interest. [/size]

The cops haven't shown that they've followed S134/4, they haven't let the defence analyse the victim's DNA, the police lab wasn't internationally certified to analyse DNA, and they should have used a neutral, fully qualified lab.[/size]

The accused might well be guilty of the rape and murder, but the evidence presented doesn't prove it. To show that justice has been done, and thus preserve Thailand's image, both defendants must be freed.[/size]

Burin Kantabutra[/size]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Guilt-not-shown-in-Koh-Tao-trial-30270711.html

If you are going to start a cut and paste Appeal to Authority campaign at least do it with someone who can maintain his credibility past a couple paragraphs, this is false :"the defence has not been allowed to analyse that DNA" and it's repeated three times.

The court issued an order so that the defense could have the evidence analyzed, they (the defense) declined to do so. That is a documented fact and it doesn't matter how many times it is denied, facts are those pesky things that don't go away if you stop believing in them.

The Samui Provincial Court has ordered remaining forensic evidence in the Koh Tao tourist murders case to be sent for re-examination at the Thai Justice Ministry's Central Institute of Forensic Science in line with a defence request, according to local Thai media reports on July 10.

The court, in Surat Thani, yesterday ordered public prosecutors to work with investigators to send all remaining forensic evidence found at the crime scene, including a shovel, for forensic retesting.

And then what happened?

The defence team in the Koh Tao murder trial has dramatically reversed its demands to retest the DNA found on the body of Norfolk student Hannah Witheridge, and said they “don’t need it any more.”

how many times do you have to be told - the only DNA samples the defense would be interested in retesting in an approved lab are the original samples, the police were not offering the original samples because they claim they no longer have them - go figure

What they were offering was some processed extract that could not be verified as to its source - it could in fact have been saliva samples from the accused, no way to tell, why would the defense want to test samples they could not even verify if they came from the victims body - seriously ?

That is why they declined

Further - I can think of no good reason why the claimed original samples are no longer available considering the plentiful source, I can only conclude that either they never existed or police have destroyed them

I wish you would stop posting this inaccurate nonsense

It's very easy to tell DNA from a buccal swab and semen during analysis.

As for your claim that it was only what you say what was offered to the defense, every single time I have asked you to substantiate that claim your answer has been:

So I'm not going to bother to ask again.

The whole premise of the innocence of the Burmese men and their supposed use as scapegoats is based on things that are known not to be true, things that are not known to be true and willfully ignoring and downplaying facts that don't fit with the narrative.

Sign In

Koh Tao Murders: Defense Asks Court to Drop Charges

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US