Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[AGareth2]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

[asiamaster]

In any case it's become clear from the time taken to do the "analysis" (less than 24 hours), and the lack of any laboratory account of what was done, that this DNA evidence is not true. For technical reasons sperm DNA must be isolated from the overwhelming background of victim DNA by chemical treatment. This treatment separates female from male DNA but it takes at least overnight to process, and then the actual DNA profile needs to be done. There was not enough time between collection and report of the "match" for this to really have been carried out.

When was the sperm collected? Did they wait with this time consuming isolation and profiling until they received the collected samples?? The profiling of the DNA taken with the swabs could easily have been done within 24 hours and the match would require a split second.

[cream]

Just found this on youtube,

Koh Tao Murders Exposed by Anonymous

Link,

[AleG]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

[asiamaster]

It's also probable (for certain values of probability) that a band of wayward Somali pirates were involved in the crimes. Should we waste time discussing this other unsupported scenario?

Too far fetched for you? How about the probable scenario that a rival family in Koh Tao tried to frame those guys for the murders by "staging a crime scene" right at their doorsteps as a way to gain a bigger slice of the pie? Not supported either but imagine the hours that could be wasted on it.

Nail on the head AleG

The family may "control" but do not own that tiny speck out in the Ocean. I can imagine that there would be many rivals.

Certainly they would not possess the clout to support the assertions that they could have bought their way out of this.

I recall that the notorious Kamnan Poh could not get away with murder -and he was really a big fish

Edited January 6, 2016 by asiamaster

[KunMatt]

What you are missing is that on one hand you assume Nomsod must had been hiding all the time before being named a suspect and on the other hand you assume that the B2 were not hiding before being named as suspects.

You base that on your assumption that Nomsod is guilty and the B2 innocent... and you use the idea that he was hiding all along as evidence that he must be guilty.

Here's your argument in as simple a form as I can put it:

-Is he guilty?

-Yes!

-Why?

-Because he did X (being supposedly hiding since the day of the murders)

-Why did he do X?

-Because he was guilty!

-Was he hiding?

-Yes!

-How do you know he was hiding?

-Because he is guilty!

-How do you know he is guilt?

-Because he was hiding!

But it's worse than just using flawed circular logic, when it comes to to the B2 you simply substitute the assumption of guilt for innocence:

-Where they hiding?

-No!

-How do you know they were not hiding?

-Because they are innocent!

-How do you know they are innocent?

-Because they were not hiding!

Your argument is flawed because it's entirely based on self serving assumptions.

By the way, the B2 didn't just do nothing during that time, for instance they tried to get rid of David Miller's phone; which, unlike your assumptions and speculation, is something supported by actual physical evidence and witness testimony presented in a court of law.

You are still talking like the B2 being guilty is the only scenario when we have already discussed at length the real possibility that the B2 are involved and so is Nomsod and Mon, seeing as they were both caught on CCTV at the crime scene.

If you are going to insist on the B2's involvement then you should also mention that they probably helped or witnessed Nomsod and Mon who were "definitely implicated in the crime" as proved by the very credible evidence of CCTV footage.

It's also probable (for certain values of probability) that a band of wayward Somali pirates were involved in the crimes. Should we waste time discussing this other unsupported scenario?

Too far fetched for you? How about the probable scenario that a rival family in Koh Tao tried to frame those guys for the murders by "staging a crime scene" right at their doorsteps as a way to gain a bigger slice of the pie? Not supported either but imagine the hours that could be wasted on it.

More bluster from you to ignore the fact that Mon and Nomsod were caught on CCTV at the crime scene, so your assertion that the B2 is valid but it also means that they were accomplices to Mon and Nomsod, doesn't it?

If this is not the case then everything you have said all along is a pure lie. So I am agreeing with everything you said about the B2, but you are missing out the part about their bosses involvement.

[RWA]

Someone kindly posted previously about the DNA findings in response to my question about methods, data, analysis - not really answering my question, but interesting all the same.

STR vWA analysis: DNA from rectum of Hannah Witheridge

16 matching loci to Zaw Lin (Zoren) & 16 matching loci to Wai Phyo (Win)

STR vWA analysis: DNA from vagina of Hannah Witheridge

16 matching loci to Wai Phyo (Win)

STR D2S1338 analysis: DNA from right nipple of Hannah Witheridge

Positive match to Wai Phyo (Win), loci 20 & 25 missing

16 Matching loci on only the vWA Core Locus .. probability of 0.21 - that is just over one in five. 21 out of 100 people.

really.. not the whole geonome? to have a statistically meaningful identification you need to match on 13 locus (US)

Completely meaningless when there is zero documentation on how the samples were processed.. I simply do not believe that the DNA found on Hannah was correctly processed.

If the Samples were correctly processed then simple response is PROVE IT!

It is not enough just say there are 16 matches on a single locus. its is meaningless. Show you methods and your working out. Science 101!

PS do not shoot the messenger - personally I was grateful to STE for posting this information

This information is wrong as written, and so fairly meaningless.

STR vWA means "the short tandem repeat at the vWA locus."

"vWA" IS ONE single locus (a place in the genome that can be of different lengths in different people.) Each single locus is present ONCE on each of a pair of chromosomes and therefore each person can only have TWO values for the vWA locus (e.g. 11,17 ) because the vWA locus is present only twice in any one person, NOT sixteen times-this is nonsense. There can't be sixteen matches at vWA therefore.

Similarly D2S1338 is a SINGLE locus, that is a site present only once on each of a pair of chromosomes, it therefore can only have two numerical values in a single person (one for the length of the site on each chromosome e.g. 21, 23). It is therefore impossible for there to be sixteen matches.

At vWA and D2S1388 there would only be four figures for each suspect. A full DNA profile uses 10 different loci (plural of locus) in the UK, and 13 different loci in the US. Thus a high probability identification (less than one in a billion of being a chance match, i.e. a definitive identification) needs two numbers at each of 10 or 13 loci, that is a list of 20 or 26 different numbers, each of which must be identical in the suspect and the victim sample.

If this rather garbled account above is trying to say that the DNA samples from the victim match the suspects at four places (two numbers at vWA and two numbers at D2S1388) then the probability that this could happen by chance would be so high that it would be completely unacceptable in any court anywhere as identification.

All DNA reports (but obviously not the one submitted to the court , since apparently this was non-existent) give a calculated probability that the results obtained could be a chance match. When this probability is one in 50 million to several billion (as they always are in perfect matches of 20 or 26 number profiles from 10 or 13 loci) then the identification can be absolutely relied on. If only two loci and four numbers were used the probability of a chance match would be so high the result would be meaningless. A one in a 100 chance of getting the match would simply not identify anybody.

In any case it's become clear from the time taken to do the "analysis" (less than 24 hours), and the lack of any laboratory account of what was done, that this DNA evidence is not true. For technical reasons sperm DNA must be isolated from the overwhelming background of victim DNA by chemical treatment. This treatment separates female from male DNA but it takes at least overnight to process, and then the actual DNA profile needs to be done. There was not enough time between collection and report of the "match" for this to really have been carried out.

EDIT: just as a follow up to what some have written above: it is of course quite feasible in a table that consists of 16 or so pairs of numbers to just type in whatever numbers you want. If the records of how the numbers were obtained are not made available for examination ( why would they not be? graphs from the sequencing machines are stored as digital files indefinitely and can be printed out at will to show the actual peaks giving the numbers listed in the table) there is no way to prove that the numbers weren't just written in as desired and based on nothing.

Thank you!

(I've been missing you, almost praying for your input!)

[DM07]

AleG....

What point, dude?

The B2 were not hiding!

Why should they?

They had done nothing!

But your posterboy disappears without a trace for 10 days...not even his girlfriend can allegedly reach him!

What is it, I am missing?

What you are missing is that on one hand you assume Nomsod must had been hiding all the time before being named a suspect and on the other hand you assume that the B2 were not hiding before being named as suspects.

You base that on your assumption that Nomsod is guilty and the B2 innocent... and you use the idea that he was hiding all along as evidence that he must be guilty.

Here's your argument in as simple a form as I can put it:

-Is he guilty?

-Yes!

-Why?

-Because he did X (being supposedly hiding since the day of the murders)

-Why did he do X?

-Because he was guilty!

-Was he hiding?

-Yes!

-How do you know he was hiding?

-Because he is guilty!

-How do you know he is guilt?

-Because he was hiding!

But it's worse than just using flawed circular logic, when it comes to to the B2 you simply substitute the assumption of guilt for innocence:

-Where they hiding?

-No!

-How do you know they were not hiding?

-Because they are innocent!

-How do you know they are innocent?

-Because they were not hiding!

Your argument is flawed because it's entirely based on self serving assumptions.

By the way, the B2 didn't just do nothing during that time, for instance they tried to get rid of David Miller's phone; which, unlike your assumptions and speculation, is something supported by actual physical evidence and witness testimony presented in a court of law.

Yeah...you lost it!

Completely!

[kcirtapyelrah]

Australian scientist Jane Taupin questions Koh Tao death penalty evidence

Myanmar workers Win Zaw Htun, right, and Zaw Lin, left, both 22, escorted by officials after they were convicted in December last year of the murder Hannah Witheridge and David Miller. Photo: APBangkok:

An Australian forensic scientist has questioned key DNA evidence that led to two migrant workers being sentenced to death for the gruesome murders of two British backpackers on an idyllic Thai island.

Melbourne-based Jane Taupin says documents detailing how Thai investigators matched DNA from Myanmar workers Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun to the victims were not provided to a Thai court, in contravention of international DNA analysis and reporting standards.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/australian-scientist-jane-taupin-questions-koh-tao-death-penalty-evidence-20160106-gm05af.html#ixzz3wQQz8eqQ

The scientific records were not provided for review (for whatever reason) and thus as a scientist I could not perform a scientific review, or determine whether these records accorded with the principles of the standard," she said.

They should have allowed Dr Taupin to take the stand to make the point.

He said the defence lawyers are confused how concerns about the DNA evidence were not raised or noted by the UK government which sent a team

of detectives to review the investigation.

The British sent a forensic expert to cover this aspect didn’t they, what was the point then? They are amongst the very best in the field, they carried out their own autopsy and if there was the slightest trace of semen in Hannah’s womb they will have samples. I believe there’s a lot they can do to clarify things if they jump of the fence and do the right thing, there’s one thing for certain, they will know if he was hit with the hoe or not and they will be able to give an account of what type of weapons they believe were used on David, there was a cut underneath David chin that was clearly done with a blade type weapon and not a hoe.

[lkv]

The best way to get the truth sometimes is to negate what certain people say.

Then all of the sudden things will make sense.

“If there really is a mafia, locals and police detectives would have informed me already,” Pol.Gen. Somyot.

“Please have confidence in our work, there will be no scapegoats”

“The case is being watched closely, watched worldwide and we are working hard to make this case as airtight as possible” Lt Gen Panya

Actually, I think the latter either meant it, and then he was moved, or it was just a tactic to scare the concerned parts into paying.

Also, please negate everything AleG is saying

Edited January 6, 2016 by lkv

[asiamaster]

A masked vigilante yesterday stood up in a swell of protesters and said he has evidence that can prove the innocence of two Myanmar men sentenced to death in Thailand. http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/18341-masked-man-at-koh-tao-rally-demands-meet-with-interpol.html

OMG! Has CSI LA come out of his armchair??

[Darkknight666]

It's also probable (for certain values of probability) that a band of wayward Somali pirates were involved in the crimes. Should we waste time discussing this other unsupported scenario?

Too far fetched for you? How about the probable scenario that a rival family in Koh Tao tried to frame those guys for the murders by "staging a crime scene" right at their doorsteps as a way to gain a bigger slice of the pie? Not supported either but imagine the hours that could be wasted on it.

Nail on the head AleG

The family may "control" but do not own that tiny speck out in the Ocean. I can imagine that there would be many rivals.

Certainly they would not possess the clout to support the assertions that they could have bought their way out of this.

I recall that the notorious Kamnan Poh could not get away with murder -and he was really a big fish

What was the political climate like during that Kamnan Poh's ordeal?

Care to explain why translators were warned off and by whom? That's a fact, jack... Was it the Burmese mob?

[StealthEnergiser]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

It would be nice see your comments about Anonymous do you think there investigative powers will turn anything up ?

Edited January 6, 2016 by StealthEnergiser

[asiamaster]

Nail on the head AleG

The family may "control" but do not own that tiny speck out in the Ocean. I can imagine that there would be many rivals.

Certainly they would not possess the clout to support the assertions that they could have bought their way out of this.

I recall that the notorious Kamnan Poh could not get away with murder -and he was really a big fish

What was the political climate like during that Kamnan Poh's ordeal?

Care to explain why translators were warned off and by whom? That's a fact, jack... Was it the Burmese mob?

Same same but different, suppose you are referring to Thaksin and Banharn trying to get the Kamnan's son Sonthaya Kunplome out of his government seat?

Edited January 6, 2016 by asiamaster

[StealthEnergiser]

A masked vigilante yesterday stood up in a swell of protesters and said he has evidence that can prove the innocence of two Myanmar men sentenced to death in Thailand. http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/18341-masked-man-at-koh-tao-rally-demands-meet-with-interpol.html

OMG! Has CSI LA come out of his armchair??

Have your fun while you can but don't be surprised if the truth about shillville is found out soon.

[catsanddogs]

A team put together by the Myanmar embassy to assist the defence claimed early on that witnesses from the migrant community could prove the defendants’ innocence. But dozens of interviewed witnesses fled back to Myanmar for fear of being implicated in the case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/18341-masked-man-at-koh-tao-rally-demands-meet-with-interpol.html

[AGareth2]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

lame!

scientific verification please

[AGareth2]

is it can't or not willing?

the scientific community is laughing

[JusticeKT]

In view of so many other cases where the RTP tried to pin a murder onto someone innocent and even producing matching DNA to support their false accusations, as a defending party I would surely not ask for a re-testing of DNA. Having seen the crime scene photos and how unprofessional the police handled the case, followed by the highly questionable "chain of custody" or any solid proof that the DNA submitted to the lab was indeed taken from the victims body at the time the RTP arrived at the crime scene, any re-testing makes no sense. DNA samples could have been swapped or tampered with too easily - for example when they were kept at the headman's fridge over night or any time later on after it transpired that the headman's people were about to be arrested). The chain of custody has not been documented and is thus more than flawed - the outcome of re-testing would then only show whatever result the RTP had wanted it to be........ In the UK, we work by the book and this is very different from submitting a few scribbles to court in a murder trial. WE would get thrown out of the court room if we arrived with some scribbled notes. Scientist testify in court and have a whole file of docs with them from their lab results.

I am perplexed and shocked to see such unprofessionalism in Thailand and all the lies and permanent contradictions by the RTP in this case.

[boomerangutang]

All this talk of DNA is getting tiresome. Even so, here are some points that stick out....

>>> Nomsod and Mon initially refused for days to allow DNA testing.

>>> Nomsod only agreed when he had his daddy, his lawyer and his newly very rich chief of police literally by his side. Months later, at the trial, a lead inspector doubted whether Nomsod's DNA was actually typed, but he knew no officials had his DNA, and Thai experts were certainly not going to share DNA data with Brit experts. Why? Because the PM and Chief of Police said "British experts already know we're doing a perfect job, so there is no need to share DNA info with them."

>>> At the trial, no DNA samples were presented. Only reports. In effect, the prosecution hinged its case on hearsay from their RTP handlers.

>>> Defense wanted DNA to re-test. Judges agreed, but then changed their minds. They later they agreed, but under very restrictive parameters. No clothing, nobody from the Headman's family, no friends of Mon (some of whom are implicated in the crime), no hair (which conveniently was lost).

>>> Some of Hannah's clothing items were also conveniently lost.

>>> Police experts claim the blood on the hoe didn't match David, yet they insist David was bludgeoned and stabbed by the hoe. Cop experts couldn't find DNA on the hoe handle. Other experts did, and showed that none matched the scapegoats'.

I question whether Hannah was raped, because nearly everything the police claim is proving to be false. RTP can't produce any bodily fluids nor anything viable which can be tested. The judges based a large part of their decision on hearsay from police with a thick agenda (and thick wallets).

[boomerangutang]

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

It's clear that the defense, after waiting months and being turned down repeatedly (re; being allowed to re-test DNA), finally said, 'no thanks' because it was clear that any items provided to the defense for DNA testing would have gone through RTP handlers. How trustworthy would those items be? Apparently not trustworthy enough for defense experts. Plus, the judge already placed very restrictive parameters on what could and could not be tested. RTP and prosecution themselves admitted that they had nearly nothing which was original source. All they had was sequenced and second-generation stuff.

It would be nice to see your (AleG's) comments about Anonymous do you think there investigative powers will turn anything up ?

SE, why ask AleG to comment? We all know he will refute anything/everything which implicate NS and Mon. What's more interesting are the points which AleG doesn't address: Those are likely the implications that even he has no rebuttal for, so offers no response. A bigger person might concede a few things (like, for example, RTP intentionally losing some of Hannah's clothing. Or the RTP not mentioning phone records), but like I say, if there are points which stand on their own veracity, they will likely be ignored by those who can only echo the RTP and Thai establishment's stance.

[lkv]

Thailand 'one of the most dangerous tourist destinations on Earth': Expat investigation lifts lid on dark side of the Land of Smiles - Source Daily Mail UK

Although the title is exaggerated (there are other places more dangerous) here are a few interesting points:

Australian author John Stapleton suggests that widespread police corruption, violence and crime are all blighting a country once commonly referred to as the ‘Land of Smiles’.

‘In reality, the relations between ethnic Thais and foreigners are often difficult; and there has been growing friction and disengagement, a drift from curiosity to contempt, as visitor numbers have increased.

After being repeatedly robbed and attacked, he began looking into news reports on the welfare of tourists, which he describes as ‘scandalous’, suggesting that the police have little interest in helping foreigners who report crimes.

‘The attitude of murderous indifference to the welfare of strangers is ingrained enough in the Thai psyche for it to justify formal government warnings to the many hundreds of thousands of tourists venturing into the bars and clubs of Thailand on a nightly basis.

‘It is standard operating procedure in Thailand for the bars and clubs to pay bribes to the local police and municipal authorities in order to be able to open their doors.

‘If a bar, club or parlour does not make this payment in all likelihood they will be closed down.

'The police are not acting in the best interests of the visitors making complaints for the simple reason that they are being paid by bar and club owners; the commonplace complaints of tourists about being robbed are simply shrugged off.'

Unlike many expatriates and tourists, I spent a lot of time with the Thais themselves.

‘Having spent so much time with them, I finally began to understand how they thought; and to understand that they actively dislike foreigners, have no compunction in robbing them, and that their cultural distaste for foreigners and ultra-nationalistic pride in their own country fuels and justifies the crimes against tourists.'

‘Overwhelmed with millions of tourists, many of whom appear to save their worst behaviour for the streets and bars of Thailand, cries of “Mai Chop Farang”, I don’t like foreigners, and “Thailand is for Thais” can be heard from one end of the country to the other.

‘Those who think that mishaps only befall those who are misbehaving are fooling themselves.'

​PS: Do note that the above quotes do not necessarily represent my opinion, they are just quotes from the above mentioned article. However, I do find some of them worrying.

Edited January 6, 2016 by lkv

[RWA]

Hannah's inquest tomorrow

[Khun Han]

you can only hide when you know someone is looking for you

It's amazing how you can't see that you are proving my point.

nobody has ever actually understood any point you have tried to make here on TVF, please explain, or rather never mind

It's not my fault if you all get tangled on your self contradictory, ad-hoc rationalizations.

Boomerangutang, once again, tried to argue that Nomsod was hiding since the day of the murders, even though the police didn't name him a suspect and start looking for him until later, and that relatively long period of "hiding" made him look suspicious.

I demonstrated how specious that argument is by pointing out that on the basis that a person can be assumed to be hiding even before being named a suspect and the police starts looking for them, Wai Phyo and Zaw Lin were "hiding" for an even longer time than Nomsod, thus accepting that argument they would be even more guilty than Nomsod.

You almost, almost got it.

You tried to dismiss what I said by responding "you can only hide when you know someone is looking for you"... which is exactly the point I was making when the carcass of this long death horse was once again dragged upon the stage by Boomerangutang, so he could have another swing at it by again claiming Nomsod was hiding for over a week, even thought he reported to the police at most two days after they started looking for him... to which you somehow didn't see fit to say "you can only hide when you know someone is looking for you"

So, perhaps, next time read carefully what I said before summarily dismissing it.

Is prevarication taught as a degree course in some uni's?

[AleG]

It's also probable (for certain values of probability) that a band of wayward Somali pirates were involved in the crimes. Should we waste time discussing this other unsupported scenario?

Too far fetched for you? How about the probable scenario that a rival family in Koh Tao tried to frame those guys for the murders by "staging a crime scene" right at their doorsteps as a way to gain a bigger slice of the pie? Not supported either but imagine the hours that could be wasted on it.

More bluster from you to ignore the fact that Mon and Nomsod were caught on CCTV at the crime scene, so your assertion that the B2 is valid but it also means that they were accomplices to Mon and Nomsod, doesn't it?

If this is not the case then everything you have said all along is a pure lie. So I am agreeing with everything you said about the B2, but you are missing out the part about their bosses involvement.

So now you know for a fact that there's footage of them at the crime scene, and I'm the one that lies.

[Compo]

If they did it, my Mother's the Pope..............

No sensible, impartial person could convict on this ( lack of ) evidence.

They are wrongly convicted.

[AleG]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

It would be nice see your comments about Anonymous do you think there investigative powers will turn anything up ?

Let me guess you asked them to hack me?

[KunMatt]

It's also probable (for certain values of probability) that a band of wayward Somali pirates were involved in the crimes. Should we waste time discussing this other unsupported scenario?

Too far fetched for you? How about the probable scenario that a rival family in Koh Tao tried to frame those guys for the murders by "staging a crime scene" right at their doorsteps as a way to gain a bigger slice of the pie? Not supported either but imagine the hours that could be wasted on it.

More bluster from you to ignore the fact that Mon and Nomsod were caught on CCTV at the crime scene, so your assertion that the B2 is valid but it also means that they were accomplices to Mon and Nomsod, doesn't it?

If this is not the case then everything you have said all along is a pure lie. So I am agreeing with everything you said about the B2, but you are missing out the part about their bosses involvement.

So now you know for a fact that there's footage of them at the crime scene, and I'm the one that lies.

The police chief said that Nomsod and Mon were on the CCTV footage of the crime scene and were definitely implicated. Did the police say that or am I lying?

[StealthEnergiser]

a lie is a lie

even when repeated a thousand times

the DNA findings might be true

but if they are they can be verified

if not then then they are at best a mistake

at worst.... well no need to say more

On the other hand it appears that if one stands up for the thousandth time to challenge a lie brought back for the thousandth time.. one is a troll.

The defense should have had the DNA retested and are getting flak even from people that believe the B2 are innocent for declining to do so and offering weak excuses as an explanation.

Having said that, the results can't be a mistake, there's no way to accidentally come up with not one but two matches; either they are genuine or they were deliberately altered which the judge dismissed as a possibility due to the way events unfolded during the investigation, as explained on the judgement report.

It would be nice see your comments about Anonymous do you think there investigative powers will turn anything up ?

Let me guess you asked them to hack me?

Don't be paranoid I am sure they don't need my input to make decisions.

[AleG]

So now you know for a fact that there's footage of them at the crime scene, and I'm the one that lies.

The police chief said that Nomsod and Mon were on the CCTV footage of the crime scene and were definitely implicated. Did the police say that or am I lying?

Since they didn't say that the second option wins by default.

"He said both suspects were captured by CCTV cameras and the police have gathered enough evidence to implicate them in the murders."

Nothing about footage from the crime scene, let alone footage of them in the crime scene; but of course nothing stops you from providing a citation for your "fact".

You were complaining about me spreading misinformation not long ago, right? Just checking.