Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[lucky11]

for gods sake, are you actually listening to yourself, the very fact of these technicalities as you call them then makes it impossible to say they are guilty, you have to prove they are guilty through sound verifiable evidence, what on earth is so difficult to understand about that, and may I also add, the judges are not DNA experts it is impossible for them to conclude anything about DNA, they must seek the advise of experts and take them under advisement, Dr Taupin was a renowned expert and she wasn't even allowed to testify in court, sounds to me like they didn't want to hear it spelled out to them on record - something they would have had difficulty ignoring, and do you think Dr Taupin was going to get up there and tell lies - I don't think so

Who is Dr. Taupin? Or did you perhaps mean Dr. Pornthip? And who says she did not testify?

Jane Taupin is an internationally recognised forensic science expert in her field. She is currently a self-employed national and international forensic consultant and trainer.

Jane has been an operational forensic scientist for over 25 years in both Australia and England. She has published many works, including journal articles, books, bulletins and conference papers.

She has been an expert witness in over 140 trials, including more than 40 murder trials. She has also been the lead biologist at numerous crimes scenes in Australia and England.

Yes and the defense decided not to let her take the stand, not the prosecution.

Correct!! DD - you've just ruined their story, shame on you!!

[Prbkk]

Kirsty Jones, Kelvin Bourke, Sheri Mc Farlane...some disturbing similarities with this case, particularly when it comes to the modus operandi of the RTP

[asiamaster]

okay I stand corrected. But Smedly claims that also Dr. Pornthip was excluded from the case which is not correct.

From BBC report on case

"Thailand's best-known forensic scientist, Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, whose institute was not allowed any involvement in the investigation, testified at the trial that the crime scene had been poorly managed and evidence improperly collected."

Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunand, the head of the Thai forensics institute, told judges that two DNA samples found on the bloodied hoe belonged to two males, but neither matched the defendants, reports the Guardian. The chief judge in the trial, which is taking place on Koh Tao’s neighboring island of Koh Samui, ordered DNA analysis on the hoe following a request from the defense team.

And yes she did criticise the police's handling at the crime scene - but that is something she does all the time....

[ianf]

The phone. Why did they have the victims phone.

To be honest mate I've followed this case and couldn't ascertain what phone and who it belonged too kept on getting mentioned..For sure the early phone produced by the RTP wasn't the same as the later one produced..Someone on here will be able to explain but the phone business was certainly not clear..Mind you that same statement would apply to the whole case..

We all fought black and blue the phone was not David's. Until the last day of court the family produced the serial number of the phone from England. It matched. Suddenly Zaw says he and Muang Muang went back to the area to look for their guitar. Zaw himself says he just happened to be walking along the beach at 5 o'clock in the morning and stumbled upon the phone. He then gave it to his friend. Who smashed it and threw it away. At that time I could no longer explain away their actions of the night. It seems like the classic crime. Commit crime, wash off blood, get rid of clothes covered in blood, take belonging of victim , get rid of and conceal belonging, go back to crime upon waking to find belongings left behind. At least one of them was not sleeping at 5 am when we all thought he was. It is Zaw himself that announced to the world that the phone in his possession was David's.

I was pretty convinced from the start that they had the right people in custody and he phone episode simply reinforces my opinion that they did it.

The fact that they tricked themselves into admitting to the rape just seals it for me and the Miller family's satisfaction that justice has been done means that it is a slam dunk!!

Well done the RTP (although they didn't cover themselves in glory) in bringing the right perpetrators to justice. I think that they will have learned a lot from this tragic case and I hope that it prepares them better for future cases of such a serious nature in correcting the errors they committed and in carrying out the forensics in a proper manner with experts brought in to undergo the proper procedures. It almost let these two get away with it - but for the overwhelmingly convincing DNA evidence sealing their fate!!

I think you are in a very small minority. To me the case is so obvious that it beggars belief that anyone could say that the Burmese boys are guilty. Oh well! Stranger things happen but this time it is bl...... tragic.

[sambum]

A long time ago a poster on here said that by virtue of the fact that the police had enough "evidence" to take the case to court, the accused were already deemed to be guilty.

It now seems that the poster was correct, and I congratulate him/her on the insight to the Thai legal system. In spite of all the flaws in the case (and there are MANY) the guilty decision now seems to have been already made the moment that the accused stepped into court.

However, the longer the case went on. and the more shortcomings in the case came to light, the more difficult it was becoming to justify the the already predetermined decision/verdict. The solution was to base the decision purely on the DNA evidence, and say that it overrides everything else. Hence, although the collection, storage, and handling of this is at best, dubious, all other "evidence" therefore has no credibility whatsoever, which is possibly the judges' way of saying.that the only evidence that is "worth a light" is the DNA evidence,

So, regardless of a botched crime scene, a farcical crime scene reenactment, and a myriad of conflicting statements, about turns, and downright incompetence, the die is already cast, and the only thing left to worry about is damage limitation, so everything except the DNA evidence is swept under the carpet,

So now, roll on the appeal, which, by the way, one of the judges had already forewarned the prosecution about MONTHS ago when he advised them to "get their evidence in a more presentable order before the appeal" !!!

Edited December 26, 2015 by sambum

[StealthEnergiser]

for gods sake, are you actually listening to yourself, the very fact of these technicalities as you call them then makes it impossible to say they are guilty, you have to prove they are guilty through sound verifiable evidence, what on earth is so difficult to understand about that, and may I also add, the judges are not DNA experts it is impossible for them to conclude anything about DNA, they must seek the advise of experts and take them under advisement, Dr Taupin was a renowned expert and she wasn't even allowed to testify in court, sounds to me like they didn't want to hear it spelled out to them on record - something they would have had difficulty ignoring, and do you think Dr Taupin was going to get up there and tell lies - I don't think so

Who is Dr. Taupin? Or did you perhaps mean Dr. Pornthip? And who says she did not testify?

Jane Taupin is an internationally recognised forensic science expert in her field. She is currently a self-employed national and international forensic consultant and trainer.

Jane has been an operational forensic scientist for over 25 years in both Australia and England. She has published many works, including journal articles, books, bulletins and conference papers.

She has been an expert witness in over 140 trials, including more than 40 murder trials. She has also been the lead biologist at numerous crimes scenes in Australia and England.

...............but not a lot of help in Thailand, evidently!!

So you disagree with this ??

"The case files of the Thai forensic lab should have been provided to the defence," Ms Taupin said.

"This is so the scientific data contained within, and used to provide conclusions, could be examined for a scientific review.

"The essence of scientific method is the testing and review of hypotheses. If these are not viewed, or even stated, then this does not inspire confidence in the scientific analysis.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35170419

[Artisi]

Kirsty Jones, Kelvin Bourke, Sheri Mc Farlane...some disturbing similarities with this case, particularly when it comes to the modus operandi of the RTP

Modus operandi of the RTP, is that anything like, she'll be right, near enough, that's good - lets wrap it up and head off for a beer or 2.

[lucky11]

I'm just stating the facts as to what she came up with, maybe she was having an off-day. As DD commented, it was the DEFENCE that disqualified her from giving evidence as they found her conclusions to be worthless for their case and complete gobbledegook.

If you consider that I'm making fun of her then that's your view. They are not children for god's sake and I am glad that I didn't spawn these to murderous individuals as it would be nothing to be proud of!!

Show me an example of where I have made fun of THIS CASE.

[MrTee]

From the BBC website.

Ms Taupin was not allowed to testify, one of several inexplicable decisions by the defence, but she highlighted several important aspects of DNA testing which neither the defence team, the police, nor the judges appeared to understand.[/size]

It seems that the seven (yes seven) so called top notch defence lawyers didn't have a clue what she was going on about and they decided/chose not to include her in the defences evidence as she could not add anything to their already weak evidence!!

This is what this top expert came up with in her conclusions:

[/size]Jane Taupin, a renowned Australian forensic scientist brought in by the defence team, questioned the plausibility of working this quickly, saying "extracting DNA from mixed samples was difficult and time-consuming". Wow, that is staggering information!! I can see why they chose not to include her now .[/size]

You said "it doesn't matter whether they are guilty or not" so you are saying that even if they were guilty ie: they DID rape her and kill them both - because they were tortured (no proof of this by the way) and didn't have lawyers in attendance at times when they should have been represented then they should have been released. So what conspired in the course of the case overrides whether they committed this crime or not. Unbelievable!!

Where there is no chain of custody DNA evidence is meaningless. Simple are that.

Its not a difficult concept to grasp, unless you have an agenda.

An agenda? How and what could that be?

I'm simply a poster that believes that they are guilty of rape and murder and I'm just giving my views as to this fact.

Because despite a world renowned forensic scientist explaining that the Police's version of events is implausible you still maintain they were correct, and then proceed to mock her.

You clearly have an agenda..

I do too. I'd like to know with some certainty that 2 men who could be executed are indeed guilty of the crime they are accused of.

My agenda is to understand the evidence that removes from my mind the doubt that they are innocent.

The big problem I have is there is nothing, not one credible iota of evidence, nothing that suggest to me they are the people that brutally murdered Hannah and David on the beach in Koh Tao.

There is no weapon. The hoe did not makes those cuts on David.

There is no credible DNA.. No chain of custody means the DNA is worthless.

There is the phone, but so much confusion over who's phone. and I recall the police had this phone before the Burmese men were arrested. The prosecution told the court that the UK Embassy had told them there was a match to the phone's IMEI when clearly they had not. The phone appears to be the strongest piece of evidence, but that alone does in no way prove murder

I have difficulty understanding why they would leave the crime scene in the way it was found.

Who ever did that to Hannah wanted to humiliate her in the extreme! it wasn't a case of someone covering up a crime. They way her body was left, and the extreme nature of the assault on Hannah shows the perp was angry, very angry, angry enough to literally destroy her.

[smedly]

Does anyone really know if the original semen samples were taken and the DNA testing was done to the correct Thai standards? People keep saying that it wasnt done to International standards and wasnt verified, chain of custody etc... Perhaps all that is required in the Thai justice system is that it was done to the correct Thai standards.

there is only one standard, ask Dr Porntip who heads the official internationally recognised forensic science authority in Thailand who were excluded from involvement in this case

aha you recognised your mistake Pornthip not Taupin. But can you prove to me that she was not involved in this case?

I did not make any mistake, Dr Taupin was to give testimony at the trial and was refused by the judges, she is a well respected forensic expert, she was called as a witness by the defence but I see her simply as an expert telling it as it is, no deflections untruths or lies - a spade is a spade

[mihalis]

for all those who call out injustice, how many actually donated a dime to help these boys.. Secondly, nobody is privy to what parents have been told, to suggest they were brain washed by Thai police is ludicrous...............

[stoffel45]

SHAME and INJUSTICE is in the DNA of the Thai 'In-Justice System".

[asiamaster]

There is the phone, but so much confusion over who's phone. and I recall the police had this phone before the Burmese men were arrested. The prosecution told the court that the UK Embassy had told them there was a match to the phone's IMEI when clearly they had not. The phone appears to be the strongest piece of evidence, but that alone does in no way prove murder

The serial number was provided by the family at the last day of court and it matched.

[lucky11]

Surely, you must agree that presenting this evidence to the presiding judges is far more important. It was, and they decided that they were guilty based primarily on the DNA evidence they saw, before handing down the guilty verdicts.

Of what use would this damning evidence be to the defence team, I fail to see any!!

[smedly]

for gods sake, are you actually listening to yourself, the very fact of these technicalities as you call them then makes it impossible to say they are guilty, you have to prove they are guilty through sound verifiable evidence, what on earth is so difficult to understand about that, and may I also add, the judges are not DNA experts it is impossible for them to conclude anything about DNA, they must seek the advise of experts and take them under advisement, Dr Taupin was a renowned expert and she wasn't even allowed to testify in court, sounds to me like they didn't want to hear it spelled out to them on record - something they would have had difficulty ignoring, and do you think Dr Taupin was going to get up there and tell lies - I don't think so

Who is Dr. Taupin? Or did you perhaps mean Dr. Pornthip? And who says she did not testify?

Jane Taupin is an internationally recognised forensic science expert in her field. She is currently a self-employed national and international forensic consultant and trainer.

Jane has been an operational forensic scientist for over 25 years in both Australia and England. She has published many works, including journal articles, books, bulletins and conference papers.

She has been an expert witness in over 140 trials, including more than 40 murder trials. She has also been the lead biologist at numerous crimes scenes in Australia and England.

okay I stand corrected. But Smedly claims that also Dr. Pornthip was excluded from the case which is not correct.

Dr Porntip and her organisation were excluded from the investigation, also I fail to understand why the police need to have their own forensics lab, maybe because they have more control over what goes on there

[asiamaster]

I did not make any mistake, Dr Taupin was to give testimony at the trial and was refused by the judges, she is a well respected forensic expert, she was called as a witness by the defence but I see her simply as an expert telling it as it is, no deflections untruths or lies - a spade is a spade

I already corrected that but you were also stating that Porthip did not testify which is not correct - she was even asked to do the DNA testing on the hoe and testified in court.

Also Dr. Taupin was only CONSIDERED to be called by the defense but it was the defense that decided not to let her take the stand, not the prosecution.

Edited December 26, 2015 by asiamaster

[Bluespunk]

okay I stand corrected. But Smedly claims that also Dr. Pornthip was excluded from the case which is not correct.

From BBC report on case

"Thailand's best-known forensic scientist, Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, whose institute was not allowed any involvement in the investigation, testified at the trial that the crime scene had been poorly managed and evidence improperly collected."

Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunand, the head of the Thai forensics institute, told judges that two DNA samples found on the bloodied hoe belonged to two males, but neither matched the defendants, reports the Guardian. The chief judge in the trial, which is taking place on Koh Tao’s neighboring island of Koh Samui, ordered DNA analysis on the hoe following a request from the defense team.

And yes she did criticise the police's handling at the crime scene - but that is something she does all the time....

You said she wasn't excluded from the case.

I just posted to show she was excluded from the investigation.

That in itself is a questionable decision.

Edited December 26, 2015 by Bluespunk

[asiamaster]

Dr Porntip and her organisation were excluded from the investigation, also I fail to understand why the police need to have their own forensics lab, maybe because they have more control over what goes on there

So you probably also fail to understand that everywhere in the world the police has their own forensic labs.

Dr. Pornthip and her organisation are excellent forensic researchers and it was thanks to her constant rivalry with the police labs that she became a celebrity. She quite rightfully critisiced the handling of the bodies in this case but that does not mean that the DNA analysis was incorrect.

And have we heard any comments from Dr. Pornthip these past few days?

[MrTee]

There is the phone, but so much confusion over who's phone. and I recall the police had this phone before the Burmese men were arrested. The prosecution told the court that the UK Embassy had told them there was a match to the phone's IMEI when clearly they had not. The phone appears to be the strongest piece of evidence, but that alone does in no way prove murder

The serial number was provided by the family at the last day of court and it matched.

Yes but before then, and as asserted by Lucky11 in other threads, "The prosecution told the court that the UK Embassy had told them there was a match to the phone's IMEI when clearly they had not"

I understand that there was some collusion between David's family and the Prosecution over the IMEI of David's phone, this in itself is not compelling.

Relatives , who have a vested interest, providing evidence to convict someone. I guess you see no problem with that.

But the prosecution said it had been confirmed by the UK Officials (who denied it). This is beyond the pale. Prosecution making up facts and presenting them to the court.

Any court official shown to be creating their own facts to support a guilty verdict should be removed from the proceedings with immediate effect, as that action alone brings in to doubt everything the prosecution presents..

[bunglebag]

for all those who call out injustice, how many actually donated a dime to help these boys.. Secondly, nobody is privy to what parents have been told, to suggest they were brain washed by Thai police is ludicrous...............

raises hand. yes donated more than a dime, and these guys can be very charming / convincing / seemingly earnest when they have an agenda or want something as I'm sure you know.

Edited December 26, 2015 by bunglebag

[asiamaster]

You said she wasn't excluded from the case.

I just posted to show she was excluded from the investigation.

That in itself is a questionable decision.

So the DNA testing of the hoe was not part of the investigation?

[Bluespunk]

You said she wasn't excluded from the case.

I just posted to show she was excluded from the investigation.

That in itself is a questionable decision.

So the DNA testing of the hoe was not part of the investigation?

Was the hoe introduced into the trial as evidence by the prosecution?

Did they introduce evidence that the DNA found on it did not belong to the accused?

In fact was it their analysis of the DNA on the hoe that was used by the defence?

Edited December 26, 2015 by Bluespunk

[MrTee]

You said she wasn't excluded from the case.

I just posted to show she was excluded from the investigation.

That in itself is a questionable decision.

So the DNA testing of the hoe was not part of the investigation?

As I understand Pornthip was excluded from thw investigation, but was used as part of the defence case to show the police's mishandling of the evidence was tantamount to incompetence (putting it mildly).

[lucky11]

But she DID testify - this is what the Pattaya Mail states referring to Porntip.

BANGKOK (AP) — An expert witness at the trial of two Burmese workers accused of killing two British tourists in Thailand has testified that DNA found on what police say was the murder weapon does not belong to the defendants.

The judge decided that the DNA found inside Hannah was of far more relevance and sealed the fate of the B2. Perhaps they should have used condoms when they sexually violated her which they admitted to doing!!

[berybert]

'Boing!'...

Time to Close?

How about you just don't click on the link. You can do that all by yourself and have no need to rely on somebody else. Isnt being grown up wonderful.

[berybert]

If the B2 are indeed guilty, how come:

1) They don't try to blame each other, in order to save their own sorry backside?

2) Why attack a girl, who is with a much stronger and bigger partner? (Plenty of single girls around, drunk or drugged out of their minds=Easier victim)

3) Why were they tried as a pair? Only one of them could have executed the blow that killed the victims!

4) Why the meaningless violence used on Hannah? Makes it personal, like a big face Thai kid being publicly rejected, not like a horny and drunk migrant worker!!

This case stinks, I don't care what "evidence" the police and prosecutor presented to the court. The officials(even the defense-team) in this case were presented with an wanted outcome of the trial by the powers. And they adjusted the "evidence" accordingly!!

1) they admitted to the crime and later retracted the confession but still admitted they were on the beach together that night, so how could they try to blame each other without being part of the crime

2)Go find the biggest and strongest man on this planet and wrap a hoe around his head while his back is turned and there is a good chance you will knock him out.

3)doesn't matter who inflicted the final blow they committed the crime together, in some states in the US if you are in a group committing a crime and one of the members shoot someone you are all charged with murder.

4)No this is not a crime scene from a loss of face its a necrophiliac better known as serial killers (google Bulger killers ) this is also ties in with Hannahs body being left in a pose the nearest serial killer that has a lot of the same hallmarks is Ted Bundy.

last point pretty much sums up most of the posters on here who had made there mind up before the trial even started.

" I don't care what "evidence" the police and prosecutor presented to the court."

Can I pull you up on point two ?

If I was to wrap a hoe around the biggest man on the planet I would expect to to make more than a 1 inch cut on his head.

If I was to wrap that hoe around his head 7 or 8 times, I would expect it to make more than 7 or 8 uniformed 1 inch cuts.

You also seem to be letting us have a glimsp into your own little world when you mention necrophilia.

[greenchair]

The phone. Why did they have the victims phone.

To be honest mate I've followed this case and couldn't ascertain what phone and who it belonged too kept on getting mentioned..For sure the early phone produced by the RTP wasn't the same as the later one produced..Someone on here will be able to explain but the phone business was certainly not clear..Mind you that same statement would apply to the whole case..

We all fought black and blue the phone was not David's. Until the last day of court the family produced the serial number of the phone from England. It matched. Suddenly Zaw says he and Muang Muang went back to the area to look for their guitar. Zaw himself says he just happened to be walking along the beach at 5 o'clock in the morning and stumbled upon the phone. He then gave it to his friend. Who smashed it and threw it away. At that time I could no longer explain away their actions of the night. It seems like the classic crime. Commit crime, wash off blood, get rid of clothes covered in blood, take belonging of victim , get rid of and conceal belonging, go back to crime upon waking to find belongings left behind. At least one of them was not sleeping at 5 am when we all thought he was. It is Zaw himself that announced to the world that the phone in his possession was David's.

I remember police first stating the phone was Hannah's and that's what everyone started in on as the investigation was flawed, lead by CSI LA. Turned out it was David's phone, someone misspoke or otherwise a mistake was made, but was never used as a defense.
Just a tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that tipped over the " enough evidence to implicate" pile..

does nobody here read and follow what went on as reported by the police.

The phone the police put on display early on (before any arrests) and thought was Hannah's phone was found at the crime scene, what happened to that one ? who owned it ? and why was it completely forgotten about ? or was it ? only the police can answer that

As for the declaration in court, if my memory serves me correctly the B2 had already mentioned the phone found at the residence before the prosecution submitted a claim that it was David's phone confirmed by "an" EMEI number they provided to the family, which phone did the EMEI number come from ? we have again only their word for that and a huge black hole as to who owned the phone from the crime scene, and I'm sure these phones were properly recorded bagged and tagged like all the other evidence ......right ?

Well no they did say yes they gave the phone to a friend. But it was only revealed on that court day that Zaw went back to the scene to get shoes with Muang Muang. And that he amazingly stumbled on the telephone of someone that had just been murdered. Up until the parents produced the em, there was no proof it belonged to David. The parents had to petition the court to get that number by the way.
There's a huge sign in my head. Why did they have David's phone? Dna, torture, confessions. None of it has effected me to doubt them. But we went back to the crime scene at 5am to get shoes and we had David's phone in our possession. Can't get that out of my mind.

[StealthEnergiser]

British backpacker murders: the killings that put a country’s justice system on trial The brutal murders of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller exposed a dark side to life on the picture postcard holiday island of Koh Tao

With its half-mile arc of palm tree-fringed white sands and clear emerald waters, Sairee Beach on the small Thai holiday island of Koh Tao is the stuff of a picture postcard paradise.

“I’ve never been happier than here,” David Miller, a 24-year-old Briton on holiday with friends, told relatives in Jersey in what was to be his last phone call home.

Hannah Witheridge, 23, from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, was also revelling in her time staying at Sairee Beach with another group of travelling companions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/12066600/British-backpacker-murders-the-killings-that-put-a-countrys-justice-system-on-trial.html

[freedom4life]

Latest from Andy Hall is that the defence's case will be heard by Region 8 Appeals court (Surat Thani) and the outcome likely from October 2016. Koh Samui is in the Surat Thani province, and I have little doubt that they would agree with the verdict made by their legal colleagues.

In which case, the defence will present it to the Supreme court - and by then we could be looking at late 2017 for the outcome. By then, war in Syria would have taken precedence.

Maybe time to close the thread until then? All this misguided armchair speculation might be titillating for some, but is distasteful and doesn't help anyone.

Totally agree with you Brewsterbudgen, coarse and repeated speculations of armchair detectives carry on our foreheads an undeserved shame.

- First they insulted the police

- Then they insulted and accused a businessman of the island.

- After they challenged and insulted the judges

- Now they insult the Miller family simply because it does not share their ragots.

I pray that Thais do not make the mistake of thinking that we are all also definitely bounded.

For me this is the first time in my life that I follow a criminal case and confronted me with various facts lovers I regarded as the dregs of society. I can say here that this will be the last.

Interesting post in reply !! And not worth a reply as what you have written is not factually correct...

I won't miss your contributions though..not sure anyone else will either...Happy Xmas...

Merry Christmas

Edited December 26, 2015 by freedom4life

[stander]

OK, who of YOU think it is an open and shut case to execute folk.....?

YES/NO, reasons, I don't care.....TALK...

Yes guilty as charged

Edited December 26, 2015 by stander