Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[NCFC]

you cannot kill 2 people at the same time with one weapon... the hoe

so what was the other person doing while the first victim was being killed?

MM SM... Edited January 7, 2016 by NCFC

[Isitjustme]

are you saying family did not say they are happy with verdict or did not spend months with police both Thai and British or Burmese did not have top lawyers dont just knock this report say where its wrong

You forgot a very important aspect...........the verdict was bought and paid for long before the end of the trial so no matter what the family believed or how many "top lawyers" there were in attendance the guilty verdict was the "face saving", bought and paid for outcome.

When you approach this from two different perspectives you can see why a great majority of the posters here support the innocence of the B2, and yet just a few others support the guilty verdict, let me explain...........

Those who believe that the B2 are innocent are judging this on how such a case would be presented in a first-world country with a justice system which although not perfect, has, by and large, stood the test of time. They, like me, believe that the fact that the crime scene was contaminated, that the police collecting the evidence were not trained to do so, that crucial evidence has gone missing, that important CCTV footage was never viewed, that the supposed murder weapon was shown as two different hoes, that the wounds in David's head did not match the murder weapon...............and so much more.

All of the above and other aspects of the case would have ensured that in a first-world country the case would have been thrown out a long time ago.

Now consider the other perspective; the supporters of the guilty verdict are looking at it from their viewpoint, accepting that Thailand is a Third World country and is known for its corruption, human trafficking and other human rights violations, that the BIB have been proven to be corrupt time and time again as have many people in power, that money can buy absolutely ANYTHING (lives included), that saving face is more important than anything else............and so on, so you get the picture.

So they either accept the verdict because of the above, or because they refuse to believe that any of the points in the last paragraph actually do exist. In both cases I believe they are morally bankrupt.

And you can judge the intelligence level of one of them who posted something along the lines of, "wow, they are innocent because the date/time was incorrect" in a sarcastic remark relating to the huge discrepancies in DNA testing procedures, when that discrepancy alone would have ensured that evidence was considered "null and void" in any legal system apart from one in which the verdict was bought beforehand.

You assume that the police, and I suppose, the prosecution and the judges, were paid off but offer no proof that it happened. The defence supplied no evidence that anyone was paid off. It is an assumption made because, this is Thailand.

For sure investigation standards were not up to western standards but that doesnt mean that criminals are not guilty simply because western procedures have not been followed. Posters who believe that are behaving in an arrogant manner more befitting a 19th century colonial attitude.

There seems to be a wholesale denial that B2 semen was found inside Hannah's body. Some posters even claiming that the police made the B2 produce semen samples which they then planted in the victim. Well even the defence didn't try to present such a ridiculous defence. In fact the defence didn't even challenge the semen evidence in court at all

We know western standards were not adhered to but it is up to the defence to challenge, and they didn't, even though they had a foreign expert on hand.

I don't have an opinion on whether the B2 were guilty or not because I haven't and won't see all the evidence. But if the defence can't challenge the core evidence of semen in the victim's body then the balance of suspicion falls onto the B2 in my mind.

I know the supporters of the B2 will say that the DNA evidence is inadmissible because of procedural handling but the defence team didn't successfully challenge that supposition.

And for those who think the result was a foregone conclusion because, well this is Thailand, that is not proof that would stand up in court, either. You can't argue that standards of proof for DNA are unsatisfactory but equal standards of proof of corruption are not necessary because we all know what happens in Thailand.

this is not about western standards, it is about recognised global standards and to a point common sense and understanding the science. The recognised forensic institute of Thailand operate to global standards but were not allowed to be involved in this investigation - go figure

There's paying-off then there's paying-off. Money might not have been passed but there are many ways of paying-off.

You scratch my back/save my face and i'll..........save your career

.........look after you in the future

..........make sure your family sees their next birthday

..........etc etc etc

Then again..maybe it was a big wad of cash...many ways to pay off

Edited January 7, 2016 by Isitjustme

[Isitjustme]

Honestly guys, this case presented by the Thai police for me goes little further than finger pointing, it's like standing up in court pointing at someone and saying - they did it, case closed.......... guilty

The evidence they presented goes little beyond finger pointing simply because they cannot back it up in any convincing way - it really is as simple as that

I wish they had been able to back it up because I'd be first in line cheering as the guilty were hanged and it would have made me very happy indeed.

Whether B2 are guilty or not I just cannot sit comfortably with this verdict based on what was presented by the police, it just doesn't sit well with me and for that I am sorry

Absolutely. Nailed it. You put my very thoughts into words. Flimsy doesn't qualify...it's just non-existent claptrap.

Just the need the BIB finger-pointing photo to wrap it up.

No way they're guilty. Four victims in this case, 2 dead, 2 sentenced to death.

[DiscoDan]

Been away for awhile. And it seems that a large portion of this thread is aimed at 1. Proving the guilt and/or innocence of the convicted and 2. Deflecting any unwanted attention away from the two (or more) original suspects (or persons of interest).

Having said that, since the OP is about the verdict I was curious to know if the defence team has yet lodged an appeal at the Apellate Court in Bangkok. If memory serves, they said they would file an appeal within 7 days. But I haven't seen or heard anything. Any updates from those "in the know?"

Also, going back to the very beginning of the crime and subsequent investigation, I recall the police mentioning something that they were looking for at least three assailants. This statement along with the fact that they only apprehended two of the suspected assailants (along with the myriad inconsistencies in the investigation, public disclosure, and trial) leads me to believe that there is AT LEAST one more criminal at large (if, in fact, the convicted parties are guilty as found by the court). If they are not (which I don't think we will ever know), then that means there are at least three murderers out there.

In any case, I am not an expert of any kind but common sense dictates that more than two individuals would be required to commit these crimes.

I believe this very small but (now) overlooked detail is the key to finding the truth.

3rd person was Maung Maung he can be seen in cctv footage at 2am wearing WPs Tshirt (he claimed he swapped shirts because he was cold) I presume they could not charge him as none of his Dna was found inside the victim.

[Isitjustme]

There are so many posts to wade through here I would like to ask a simple question to get something clear.

Has any DNA belonging to the B2 been found on or in either of the murdered people? The UK examination said there was no sign of rape but what of foreign DNA?

Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere but just too many posts to check.

No. At least no valid evidence produced. The police just claimed there was. Must be true,right?

[kcirtapyelrah]

.... leads me to believe that there is AT LEAST one more criminal at large (if, in fact, the convicted parties are guilty as found by the court). If they are not (which I don't think we will ever know), then that means there are at least three murderers out there. (snipped for brevity)

Yes I agree. At least 3 murderers and likely about 30 people who know for sure who did the crime. Likely people who know for sure: NS's g.f., NS's mom and dad, Mon definitely, at least a dozen cops including top brass, some of Mon's buddies who frequent the bars, and others.....

In most countries, it's a criminal offense to lie in court and/or not tell what one knows about a crime. In Thailand, it's a big fat mai pen rai.

More to the point can you create injuries like David had with a hoe?

NO.............

The hoe at the crime scene was very blunt and cement-encrusted, and had a large corner missing. The hoe shown by RTP was clean, newer and no corners missing. Even if RTP explained it was an example of the type of hoe used, it was far from accurate. It's akin to showing a serrated steak knife and saying it's the same as a butter knife. Some young Thais (seeking truth and justice), did an experiment after the crime. They took an old crusty hoe like the supposed murder weapon, and cut and smashed a watermelon with it. The resultant damage was nothing like the clean same-sizedpuncture wounds to David's neck and body. Indeed, I don't think Thai forensics even mentioned the stab wounds to David. Did they simply not see them?!? And the world is still waiting for Brit forensics to step forward with what they found out about David. They're on the public payroll, paid by taxpayer money, and doing thorough autopsy on a Brit citizen murdered overseas is one of their prime duties. They should have their paychecks frozen until they do their jobs. If you hired me to fix your plumbing leak and all I did was show up and leave (for 15 months), you wouldn't want to pay me, would you?

Perhaps everyone, truly, concerned in truth and justice should try bombarding David Cameron's parliamentary email address with their discontent.

[asiamaster]

Hannah's inquest tomorrow

Wasn't it supposed to be on the 6th? Keep us posted on developments.

[Khun Han]

Been away for awhile. And it seems that a large portion of this thread is aimed at 1. Proving the guilt and/or innocence of the convicted and 2. Deflecting any unwanted attention away from the two (or more) original suspects (or persons of interest).

Having said that, since the OP is about the verdict I was curious to know if the defence team has yet lodged an appeal at the Apellate Court in Bangkok. If memory serves, they said they would file an appeal within 7 days. But I haven't seen or heard anything. Any updates from those "in the know?"

Also, going back to the very beginning of the crime and subsequent investigation, I recall the police mentioning something that they were looking for at least three assailants. This statement along with the fact that they only apprehended two of the suspected assailants (along with the myriad inconsistencies in the investigation, public disclosure, and trial) leads me to believe that there is AT LEAST one more criminal at large (if, in fact, the convicted parties are guilty as found by the court). If they are not (which I don't think we will ever know), then that means there are at least three murderers out there.

In any case, I am not an expert of any kind but common sense dictates that more than two individuals would be required to commit these crimes.

I believe this very small but (now) overlooked detail is the key to finding the truth.

3rd person was Maung Maung he can be seen in cctv footage at 2am wearing WPs Tshirt (he claimed he swapped shirts because he was cold) I presume they could not charge him as none of his Dna was found inside the victim.

Ahhh!!! Borrowed his friend's shirt before David and Hannah were murdered. That's quite the smoking gun you've uncovered there Sherlock.

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1412314798

"Another Burmese migrant worker who was detained by police alongside Win and Saw was proven unrelated to the murder, Pol.Gen. Somyot told reporters."

[TheLobster]

136 pages of debating and hearsay, some people have too much time on their hands!

Or have a motive to post on this forum ........

What is that motive?

Why do some people spend a large amount of time making comprehensive posts which actually prove nothing?

Edited January 7, 2016 by TheLobster

[SiSePuede419]

"A message from the Anonymous group more or less sums it up.."

Anonymous is wrong. The video won't deter the UK "geniuses" who go to Koh Tao.

Hell, I doubt Australia having the best reef diving in the world doesn't even deter Aussies from going there, 555

[TheLobster]

A message from the Anonymous group more or less sums it up, it should be posted and reposted every day until the B2 are free:

Copy/paste job

Not just that, it's propaganda laundering; the message is a laundry list of so called facts of the case produced by "activists" (some of which are here) that they sent to Anonymous, who were all too happy to regurgitate. Now the "activists" point at it and say "Look at what Anonymous has to say about this!" as a means to add credibility to a list they created in the first place.

In addition to that, becoming a spam-bot is hardly the trait of a person or group capable of defending their position.

I'm not an 'activist' by any means, what I want seems to be the same as these people that you suggest are 'activists'. Both sides appear to be capable of producing a 'laundry list' as you call it and 'laundry evidence' as I seem to interpret it.

You seem as capable as any member on these forums of producing 'laundry evidence' which is disappointing as it is obvious to me that you are an intelligent person and produce comprehensive and well written posts.

I want the 'Truth' to be told and 'Justice' to happen. It makes no difference to me who is sentenced to death as long as it is the right people that are convicted of this barbaric crime and that there is creditable evidence to prove that they committed murder.

[KunMatt]

A message from the Anonymous group more or less sums it up, it should be posted and reposted every day until the B2 are free:

Copy/paste job

Not just that, it's propaganda laundering; the message is a laundry list of so called facts of the case produced by "activists" (some of which are here) that they sent to Anonymous, who were all too happy to regurgitate. Now the "activists" point at it and say "Look at what Anonymous has to say about this!" as a means to add credibility to a list they created in the first place.

In addition to that, becoming a spam-bot is hardly the trait of a person or group capable of defending their position.

I'm not an 'activist' by any means, what I want seems to be the same as these people that you suggest are 'activists'. Both sides appear to be capable of producing a 'laundry list' as you call it and 'laundry evidence' as I seem to interpret it.

You seem as capable as any member on these forums of producing 'laundry evidence' which is disappointing as it is obvious to me that you are an intelligent person and produce comprehensive and well written posts.

I want the 'Truth' to be told and 'Justice' to happen. It makes no difference to me who is sentenced to death as long as it is the right people that are convicted of this barbaric crime and that there is creditable evidence to prove that they committed murder.

I've explained the same thing to him a few times that it makes no difference to any of us who is guilty of the crime as long as the real culprits are tried. And it makes no sense to say that there is a witch hunt against locals on Koh Tao cuz until this crime none of us knew any of them so we hold no prejudice against anyone involved in the case prior to the crime.

The only thing that does make sense is certain members are unable to talk about the involvement of Koh Tao locals, and the fact that they cannot do his just proves that that are shills for those people. So don't expect any rational debate with the handful of shills on here, they are not here to talk about the case but to just recite the script they have that the B2 are guilty and could only have done it on their own with is complete BS.

Edited January 7, 2016 by KunMatt

[Eirene]

Hi RWA...The date for Hannah's inquest hearing is still blank at the Norfolk Coroner's site. It was originally opened on Oct.1st.2014 and was adjourned. Completed inquests are listed.

Hannah's inquest tomorrow

[TheLobster]

>>> self-appointed head cop Somyot and his wife bought $12 million of stock in Wattana Capital weeks after the Headman's people were permanently and totally excused from any further investigation.

Please can you explain his role in providing a case against the convicted B2 and evidence that his financial circumstances increased substantially in the same time period.

Thank you.

[TheLobster]

Mr Roti is the weak link in the chain of disseat that is the prosecution case.

Where is this man? He needs to be interviewed and brought before the appeal court.

He must be a worried man, and he needs to be spoken to before he is silenced forever.

I said much the same thing last week and also asked if this man was still on Koh Tao selling "Roti's" (which I doubt) nobody responded, he is a weak link as you say, knows enough to cause problems - can't return to his home country - has a few million baht that he didn't earn selling roti's, wouldn't take much to persaude him to talk.

I suspect he is in hiding or has vanished completely, either way if I was the director of this seedy business I'd be writting him out of the script

No he is not still on Koh Tao selling roti - he never was

Where this guy is or was is misdirection. It is irrelevant.

He is not likely to provide creditable evidence, let it go.

[iReason]

"136 pages of debating and hearsay, some people have too much time on their hands!"

Or, some just don't care...

Edited January 7, 2016 by iReason

[iReason]

Chief Ombudsman Panit Nitithanprapas:

"Royal Thai Police found to be most corrupt"

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/ombudsman-royal-thai-police-found-to-be-most-corrupt-11502

Said Chief, has been erased from history on:

http://www.ombudsman.go.th/10/eng/3_2.asp

Edited January 7, 2016 by iReason

[davidstipek]

Everyone needs to stop!

First step that quite a few have forgotten. What type of trial was this? By Thai Judges... In Thailand!

Are the Suspects Thai? No they are as it stands (unless they are released) from Burma or if you want to correct me, Myammar.

Now are the Victims from Thailand? No they were both British Subjects!

So if they were tried in a Thai Court, by Thai Judges. This Court was bound to abide by International Law! Thus the trail was ordained in the normal Thai fashion, fashioned by the people who thought it would, like smoke... just disappear.

I don't think any of the evidence push through the Court, addressed International Requirements.

As the B2 being found the perpetrators in the case of Murder of both Victims... The Court being presented with the fact the presented Murder weapon being a "Hoe"... Yet their DNA was not found anywhere on it! What was found was Hannah's and that of two yet unnamed individuals! DNA here was classified by the Police as of no coincidence, so it was not introduced. Why because it would have help the presiding Justice's see a huge flaw. In fact David was not killed with it he was knocked unconscious, and either by the massive trauma's his head underwent (physical blows and punctures) then dropped in the surf possibly Drowned. Not once was the major trauma to his face... Sides of his head... Even disclosed in Court. Fact being this sounds being close to an inch deep each, everyone being identical, the massive blood that was loss here was major! How much flesh does a human have covering their scull?

Now you decide if International Law was followed here...

One last point to remind everyone... Yes the B2's DNA was charged to be on or in Hannah's body. What was presented in Court was " Here Say!" No evidence was every produced or presented!

It seems that the DNA that was collected, mixed with Hannah's was from 3 males! Not just 2... But the 3rd was conveniently omitted... Why? If the sperm found on a Victim is enough to convict individuals of Murder... Who is the 3rd Male? Plus just so you understand, Hannah was alive! When she had sex! This is proven by certain chemicals to be mixed with the boys DNA!

What it seems is that in Thailand you can be Sentenced to Death on "Only" someones word...

Edited January 7, 2016 by davidstipek

[iReason]

Follow the money.

Who benefitted?

Panya is transferred.

Right in the middle of the biggest high profile murder case Thailand has ever seen.

Along with a bunch of scumbags moved away from the trough.

Who personally took over the case?

“The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated”

Promulgated.

You know what that means? Not yet officially signed off on.

That’s right. Not previously scheduled for transfer.

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-police-chief-says-regrets-names-replacement/36049#ad-image-0

Edited January 7, 2016 by iReason

[catsanddogs]

Follow the money.

Who benefitted?

Panya is transferred.

Right in the middle of the biggest high profile murder case Thailand has ever seen.

Along with a bunch of scumbags moved away from the trough.

Who personally took over the case?

“The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated”

Promulgated.

You know what that means? Not yet officially signed off on.

That’s right. Not previously scheduled for transfer.

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-police-chief-says-regrets-names-replacement/36049#ad-image-0

Those photos posted - pic number 2 - lady 2nd left sitting down - her face sums that farce up really.

[iReason]

cats,

I thought the whole front row looks disgusted...

[smedly]

Follow the money.

Who benefitted?

Panya is transferred.

Right in the middle of the biggest high profile murder case Thailand has ever seen.

Along with a bunch of scumbags moved away from the trough.

Who personally took over the case?

“The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated”

Promulgated.

You know what that means? Not yet officially signed off on.

That’s right. Not previously scheduled for transfer.

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-police-chief-says-regrets-names-replacement/36049#ad-image-0

although a very serious matter and you nailed it BTW - I can't help thinking that Leslie Nielsen (police squad) is going to appear in that video, or that it is a new police academy movie.......we have many many men, said the same thing in a post last year, the ultimate in farcical police comedy played out live in Thailand without a script

[catsanddogs]

cats,

I thought the whole front row looks disgusted...

Yes, and embarrassed. Not a resolute face amongst them.

[Eirene]

cats,

I thought the whole front row looks disgusted...

Yes, and embarrassed. Not a resolute face amongst them.

A picture is worth a thousand words!

[Artisi]

Follow the money.

Who benefitted?

Panya is transferred.

Right in the middle of the biggest high profile murder case Thailand has ever seen.

Along with a bunch of scumbags moved away from the trough.

Who personally took over the case?

The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated

Promulgated.

You know what that means? Not yet officially signed off on.

Thats right. Not previously scheduled for transfer.

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-police-chief-says-regrets-names-replacement/36049#ad-image-0

although a very serious matter and you nailed it BTW - I can't help thinking that Leslie Nielsen (police squad) is going to appear in that video, or that it is a new police academy movie.......we have many many men, said the same thing in a post last year, the ultimate in farcical police comedy played out live in Thailand without a script

Not even the Keystone Cops could top this, however the outcome is for real and not a comedy- even if full of comedy actors......

[davidstipek]

Maybe it should be addressed just a little bit deeper...

The Victims were not Thai... They were both from the U.K. here in Thailand as tourists! Yet they were not afforded their rights to be protected by International Law!

This was their God Given Right!

Should not all Countries now be worried when their Citizens go on a vacation to Thailand when they are accepted here. Entry is logged in their Passport, being accepted as visitors through Immigrations, then not afforded the rights promised to them that was written in their Passport???

Should not Thailand be put on a Watch List? All Tourists be warned that if a Major Incident should occur... "They or Their Families" stand a very good chance of being washed under the table. Their rights being of no consequence here in Thailand...

Every Major News Outlet should be making this a headline, It should be Posted at every Terminal outgoing to Thailand!

Then lets see if the loss of a Major source of Income here in Thailand "Tourists" will get the citizens here to rise up and request Thailand's Visitors be given the same rights (not offered) that Thai's are guaranteed when they, travel abroad!

All the way around Major Income is going to be lost if the Judicial System here is not educated in what is mandated of them!

Even if every Tourist here cut back on there expenditure's by 2/3rd's it would cause a Major Alarm to ring in someones pocket!

Think about it! If you died tomorrow, can you be fully confident that your rights and those of your family be 100% protected??

I think not!

If I should disappear, we all know why! I have hit a nerve... Thus exposing the Truth! Thus I have exposed the true perpetrators in this Crime. What I have posted has been read, copied to thumb drives here and abroad to protect us all (Actually the complete file here is automatically copied so everyone comments are saved - 128Gb)

Edited January 8, 2016 by davidstipek

[AleG]

Everyone needs to stop!

First step that quite a few have forgotten. What type of trial was this? By Thai Judges... In Thailand!

Are the Suspects Thai? No they are as it stands (unless they are released) from Burma or if you want to correct me, Myammar.

Now are the Victims from Thailand? No they were both British Subjects!

So if they were tried in a Thai Court, by Thai Judges. This Court was bound to abide by International Law! Thus the trail was ordained in the normal Thai fashion, fashioned by the people who thought it would, like smoke... just disappear.

I don't think any of the evidence push through the Court, addressed International Requirements.

As the B2 being found the perpetrators in the case of Murder of both Victims... The Court being presented with the fact the presented Murder weapon being a "Hoe"... Yet their DNA was not found anywhere on it! What was found was Hannah's and that of two yet unnamed individuals! DNA here was classified by the Police as of no coincidence, so it was not introduced. Why because it would have help the presiding Justice's see a huge flaw. In fact David was not killed with it he was knocked unconscious, and either by the massive trauma's his head underwent (physical blows and punctures) then dropped in the surf possibly Drowned. Not once was the major trauma to his face... Sides of his head... Even disclosed in Court. Fact being this sounds being close to an inch deep each, everyone being identical, the massive blood that was loss here was major! How much flesh does a human have covering their scull?

Now you decide if International Law was followed here...

One last point to remind everyone... Yes the B2's DNA was charged to be on or in Hannah's body. What was presented in Court was " Here Say!" No evidence was every produced or presented!

It seems that the DNA that was collected, mixed with Hannah's was from 3 males! Not just 2... But the 3rd was conveniently omitted... Why? If the sperm found on a Victim is enough to convict individuals of Murder... Who is the 3rd Male? Plus just so you understand, Hannah was alive! When she had sex! This is proven by certain chemicals to be mixed with the boys DNA!

What it seems is that in Thailand you can be Sentenced to Death on "Only" someones word...

"What was found was Hannah's and that of two yet unnamed individuals!"

One of the male profiles was from David Miller, the other was a partial profile that matched 25% of one of the Burmese's profile:

The prosecution asked Mr Waiyawuth if the third, incomplete, profile could belong to one of the suspects. He replied that only a quarter of the indicators from one of the suspects matched the partial profile.

The prosecution said: “So his participation cannot be ruled out.”

Mr Waiyawith replied: “No, but he cannot be included either.”

"DNA here was classified by the Police as of no coincidence, so it was not introduced"

The results you are talking about came from the defense retest of the hoe, so it was not part of the prosecution case.

"Why because it would have help the presiding Justice's see a huge flaw. In fact David was not killed with it he was knocked unconscious, and either by the massive trauma's his head underwent (physical blows and punctures) then dropped in the surf possibly Drowned. Not once was the major trauma to his face... Sides of his head... Even disclosed in Court"

The summary of the judgment specifically says you are wrong:

The characteristics of the wounds on the body of the first victim also matched the shape of the exhibited hoe. This circum stance therefore indicated that both defendants used the exhibited hoe as a weapon to harm the first victim, in order to facilitate committing the action of rape to the second victim

"Fact being this sounds being close to an inch deep each"

I suppose you mean wounds not sounds. Where do you get the "fact" that they are an inch deep each? From looking at poor quality photos or just repeating what online "detectives" say after looking at poor quality photos?

The conclusion of the autopsy, you know, by someone that had more to go on than a crummy photo, is that the wounds matched the shape of the hoe.

"One last point to remind everyone... Yes the B2's DNA was charged to be on or in Hannah's body. What was presented in Court was " Here Say!" No evidence was every produced or presented!"

Except for the people that did the DNA analysis testifying in court, that is not hearsay, that is first hand witness testimony which the defense did not contest.

"It seems that the DNA that was collected, mixed with Hannah's was from 3 males! Not just 2"

No, it doesn't seem like that, that's just the internet rumor machine doing its job, there was DNA from 2 males at 3 places.

"What it seems is that in Thailand you can be Sentenced to Death on "Only" someones word..."

Again, why don't you read the judgment summary to inform yourself?

The Prosecutor’s evidence both the DNA testing result, where the DNA of both defendants matched with the DNA of the offenders, and the material evidence at the crime scene as well as the circumstantial evidence both before and after the incident are relevant and valid as they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that both of the defendants were the offenders who raped the second victim, even without considering any other facts or circumstances such as the defendants’ confessions following a rrest and at the interrogation stages.

Material evidence is "not someone's word"

[boomerangutang]

3rd person was Maung Maung he can be seen in cctv footage at 2am wearing WPs Tshirt (he claimed he swapped shirts because he was cold) I presume they could not charge him as none of his Dna was found inside the victim.

I think the reason they let MM go was he was savvier than his two buddies. He probably asked for a lawyer at the so-called 'safe house.' Incidentally, there was a lawyer at the interrogations, but he didn't identify himself to the scapegoats. That alone should warrant disciplinary action against that lawyer. Indeed, the lawyer didn't say anything to the scapegoats. MM probably also knows who did the crime, so that's an even bigger reason for Thai officials to get rid of him. He scooted back to Burma, not to be heard of again. Sounds like what happened with Sean, doesn't it?

Will we ever see/hear recording of the inquisition? No. No more than we'll ever hear about:

>>> phone data or flight data

>>> or the hair or Hannah's clothes which were lost

>>> or 59.9 hrs of CCTV which Thai authorities and/or Mon conveniently trashed.

>>> or recording/transcript of the 3 hour interview with Mon

>>> or the boat driver who ran away and wouldn't talk to police

>>> or the other Maung Maung (MM/DJ) who said he witnessed tense interactions in AC bar between Nomsod and others. He also split to Burma - never to be heard of again.

Incidentally, if MM/B3 had any incriminating evidence against his 2 buddies, the prosecution would have been eager to put him on the stand at trial. Conversely, if MM/B3 had any info which would incriminate those who should be shielded, then he would be scooted out of the country and told to keep his mouth shut. ...which is what happened, to MM and to Sean.

As for "DNA found within the victim" ....it remains heresay. In 16 months, RTP forensics have not provided one modicum of bodily fluid evidence for independent or for defense testing. Not one swab, nothing. If Thai officials lie about everything else, why would they not also lie about semen in Hannah? Brit forensics didn't find any, either.

[AleG]

Follow the money.

Who benefitted?

Panya is transferred.

Right in the middle of the biggest high profile murder case Thailand has ever seen.

Along with a bunch of scumbags moved away from the trough.

Who personally took over the case?

“The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated”

Promulgated.

You know what that means? Not yet officially signed off on.

That’s right. Not previously scheduled for transfer.

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-police-chief-says-regrets-names-replacement/36049#ad-image-0

“The transfer orders had yet to be promulgated”

Well well, how convenient that you only used half the quote, the full quote is:

"Gen Krajang explained to the Gazette today that the transfer orders had yet to be promulgated, though they were expected to be upheld as the postings had been submitted by the Royal Thai Police for royal approval."

By the way, promulgate does not mean "Not yet officially signed off on", it means not yet publicly announced, just because something is not yet announced doesn't mean it hasn't been decided upon.

[Gutenberg]

So, finally I got through all the 140 pages but I still don't get what "B2" means?!