Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[Nowisee]

I'm just speculating here...

Any, judicial bound person with experience in a criminal murder trial, especially from the defense side, would almost certainly agree that this case is a joke.

Although they might use more court approved terminology.

[technologybytes]

The brother of one of the victims was in court, he is satisfied that guilt was proven. As none of us were in court, why do so many posters feel they know more than the people who were in court and actually saw the case against these two. ??

[MrTee]

What is wrong with you?

What you posted supports my assertion that there was no confirmation from UK Officials..

"The Thai police have testified in court that a police liaison officer at the British Embassy in Bangkok helped officers prove the phone belonged to murdered Jersey tourist, David Miller, aged 24, through its unique IMEI number.

However such assistance would have breached UK legal regulations, which prevent any assistance to a foreign case that might end in the death penalty."

Do you not understand the simple fact "he NEVER got the confirmation from any UK official in Thailand or the UK or anywhere else" clearly he made that up, clearly if a prosecutor is making up facts to suit his case he is in the wrong job.

Doesn't matter if the UK confirmed the number or not. Wei po himself said he and Muang Muang went back to the beach at 5 o'clock in the morning to look for shoes they left behind. Wei po said they separated and he amazingly found the phone on the beach as he was walking. How many phones do you think would be laying on the beach. If the possessions of the victim is in the hands of a person , that creates a direct link between victim and person. Originally we only knew Muang Muang woke up b2 in the morning. Now we know 2 of them went back to the crime at 5am looking for their belongings. And by the way, if you said your belongings were stolen when you were swimming, why would you go back to look for them? ?? They were there. I really don't understand why Muang Muang was let go.

It doesn't matter that an official, either a policeman or the prosecutor, lied to a court about such crucial information?

Really..

I guess it doesn't matter if your only objective is see the perp convicted at any cost, even if you need to compromise yourself, and bring in to doubt the veracity of everything you said an stand for..

You've made clear you position clear - thank you

[smedly]

The IMEA is not usually hard printed on the phone. It's in the software. To see it, the phone needs to be working and you press *#06# , but there may be ways to extract it from a dead phone,

The original box has those information

the IMEI number is on the phone somewhere, usually under the battery along with serial number and other information

[MrTee]

The IMEA is not usually hard printed on the phone. It's in the software. To see it, the phone needs to be working and you press *#06# , but there may be ways to extract it from a dead phone,

I know exactly what an IMEI..

"I understand that some iPhones have the IMEI in different locations on the phone.. where exactly was the IMEI taken from in this phone."

jog on.

Catterwell, some iPhones do have the IMEI hard printed on the device.. it is is printed in a different location depending on which version of iPhone.

And if the phone had been smashed, as alleged, then it would be very difficult, if not impossible to extract the IMEI..

There was a also phone the police had immediately after the discovery of Hannah's & David's lifeless bodies; as well as the one they said was Hannah's. They showed it, they described it as having blonde hairs on, which naively they said they would test for DNA.

Here a very important point:

Are there 3 phones?

Could one phone be missing, lost at the bottom of an evidence bag marked "TODO"?

Could the blonde hair, be a pointer to the someone involved in the brutal murder of Hannah and David?

Where is the confirmation that the IMEI is a match to one of the phones the police had?

When you are going to execute 2 men, and half the world is watching, it makes sense to for justice to be SEEN to be done.

The is especially true when an official of the prosecution has "accidentally" said that the confirmation of an IMEI match had been assured by a UK official, when clearly it had not.

All the dramatic, hollywood style "packages" turning up at the 11th hour are all very news-worthy and all, but personally I'd like to understand the details..

Much like with DNA evidence, there needs to be details, no good to say "it's a match, because I say so"

Edited December 27, 2015 by MrTee

[smedly]

The brother of one of the victims was in court, he is satisfied that guilt was proven. As none of us were in court, why do so many posters feel they know more than the people who were in court and actually saw the case against these two. ??

and that means what exactly, this case has been followed very closely in the media and through other information sources, the brother has simply passed his laymans opinion - nothing more than that and it means nothing more than that, as I have said before, I suggest the MIllar family consult with an expert back home who might be able to give them some unbiased expert guidence before they make any more public statements, and I say that with the utmost sympathy and can not imagine what pain they are experiencing right now

[hugh2121]

The flaws include lack of chain of custody in evidence

Presumably the DNA is evidence, without a chain there is no evidence, hence no DNA.

If there is no DNA, how can it trump anything?

[arrowsdawdle]

For those doubters who believe the police would never plant evidence in a case- google the case of Sherry Ann Duncan- there are many similarities. I do not know if the B2 are guilty or not- but I do know if I was a juror in the case and what evidence was presented- the prosecution did not make their case- The Chain of Custody is absolutely imperative to have as it removes the doubts- without the chain of custody there is no real proof. This case will follow the same process as the Duncan case- let's see if the result is the same. The Thai Supreme Court will free the B2 but years will pass.

Exactly! Chain of custody proves that dna collected is dna processed for the trial. Any fool could substitute after-the-fact dna samples from the B2 without bona fide chain of custody best practices.

[oneday]

Koh Tao Murders: Myanmar Journalists Urge Thai Press to ‘Reveal the Truth’

The problem is the Thai press has been handcuffed, hindered and hounded at every turn to try and uncover the truth.

[AleG]

What's this? is it to be 'trial by media' now. Someone tell them that what they print will have no influence on the proceedings to come and that they are wasting ink.

The defense has made this a "trial by media" from the start, even to the point of threatening media that don't stick to their story, this is from the man running the various donation campaigns to support the MWRN:

"(name removed) good, super early morning I was a bit pissed off so threatened basically everything against them if the didint retract. Even reached a few emergency email addresses. I really have never read somethign as horribly wrong as that. Especially as the only way we win. I repeat THE ONLY way we win is with the public on our side, so this shit and the FCO statement really hurt us.Average people take newspaper reports as fact. If they do not dramatically apologize and retract im sue we have pro bono lawyers on our side that would love to sue."

Threats and use of sock puppet accounts to give the impression of larger numbers. This is press intimidation and manipulation at work.

[StealthEnergiser]

What's this? is it to be 'trial by media' now. Someone tell them that what they print will have no influence on the proceedings to come and that they are wasting ink.

The defense has made this a "trial by media" from the start, even to the point of threatening media that don't stick to their story, this is from the man running the various donation campaigns to support the MWRN:

"(name removed) good, super early morning I was a bit pissed off so threatened basically everything against them if the didint retract. Even reached a few emergency email addresses. I really have never read somethign as horribly wrong as that. Especially as the only way we win. I repeat THE ONLY way we win is with the public on our side, so this shit and the FCO statement really hurt us.Average people take newspaper reports as fact. If they do not dramatically apologize and retract im sue we have pro bono lawyers on our side that would love to sue."

Threats and use of sock puppet accounts to give the impression of larger numbers. This is press intimidation and manipulation at work.

Jonathan Samuels

✔@jonathansamuels

Our Thai translator at backpacker murder trial says she's been 'warned off' by 'the Mafia'. Elements here clearly fear a fair trial. #kohtao

12:33 PM - 9 Jul 2015

[arrowsdawdle]

What is wrong with you?

What you posted supports my assertion that there was no confirmation from UK Officials..

"The Thai police have testified in court that a police liaison officer at the British Embassy in Bangkok helped officers prove the phone belonged to murdered Jersey tourist, David Miller, aged 24, through its unique IMEI number.

However such assistance would have breached UK legal regulations, which prevent any assistance to a foreign case that might end in the death penalty."

Do you not understand the simple fact "he NEVER got the confirmation from any UK official in Thailand or the UK or anywhere else" clearly he made that up, clearly if a prosecutor is making up facts to suit his case he is in the wrong job.

Doesn't matter if the UK confirmed the number or not. Wei po himself said he and Muang Muang went back to the beach at 5 o'clock in the morning to look for shoes they left behind. Wei po said they separated and he amazingly found the phone on the beach as he was walking. How many phones do you think would be laying on the beach. If the possessions of the victim is in the hands of a person , that creates a direct link between victim and person. Originally we only knew Muang Muang woke up b2 in the morning. Now we know 2 of them went back to the crime at 5am looking for their belongings. And by the way, if you said your belongings were stolen when you were swimming, why would you go back to look for them? ?? They were there. I really don't understand why Muang Muang was let go.

It doesn't matter that an official, either a policeman or the prosecutor, lied to a court about such crucial information?

Really..

I guess it doesn't matter if your only objective is see the perp convicted at any cost, even if you need to compromise yourself, and bring in to doubt the veracity of everything you said an stand for..

You've made clear you position clear - thank you

The problem is that the cultural tendency, especially with those in positions of authority, is to mouth off early because not having an answer is to lose face. Thus...their minds are on vacation and their mouths are working overtime.

Once they have blurted, they have inadvertently locked themselves into another face loss situation if they dare try to walk it back, and admitting a mistake is culturally incomprehensible, just like it would be incomprehensible to remain at the scene of an accident you caused when you could leave the scene and save face, which everyone understands and accepts.

So, what westerners may perceive as intrigue and conspiracy may be giving keystone cops too much credit, and cultural influences too little credit.

[lineofentry]

DNA is extremely dangerous, far too easy to frame people. When 'security service' ask for DNA databases to be set up, fight them with everything.

[Artisi]

The flaws include lack of chain of custody in evidence

Presumably the DNA is evidence, without a chain there is no evidence, hence no DNA.

If there is no DNA, how can it trump anything?

Because I said so, don't you know who I am?

[smedly]

Also on August 21, the defence withdrew a request to the court to have DNA tests re-taken on prosecution evidence. Up to that point defence lawyers had said that this was central to their case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html

can you explain to everyone what exactly the prosecution were offering for retest and I mean exactly, I will let you answer this first since you know so much about it, then I will refer you to possibly as many as 20 posts on TVF were I address this point

I will give you a clue - they were not offering original dna samples as they claimed they no longer had them lol

it's a bit like saying - this is the murder weapon that matches the balistics - but sorry we don't have the weapon as it was destroyed during testing - we wore it out, but hey here is one just like it would you like to test it

[metisdead]

A number of posts and replies have been removed this morning due to the following violations of forum rules:

6) You will not post comments that could be reasonably construed as defamation or libel.

Defamation is the issuance of a statement about another person or business which causes that person to suffer harm. It does not have to be false to be defamatory. Libel is when the defamatory statement is published either in a drawing, painting, cinematography, film, picture or letters made visible by any means, or any other recording instruments, recording picture or letters, or by broadcasting or spreading picture, or by propagation by any other means. Defamation is both a civil and criminal charge in Thailand.

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

8) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

[Dogmatix]

Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:

As the leader of a specialist group here in Chiang Mai I have been actively publicising this case to my group's membership, asking them to support the defence team's funding and care of the boys whilst in custody. The news of the verdict greatly shocked me and then statement by the brother of one of the victims disturbed me even more.

As Nigeone implies: something just doesn't add up. Has he seen something no-one reporting the case has seen - perhaps something in the UK's Metropolitan Police report, which they've refused to publish publicly or the UK Coroner's report, yet to be published publicly? I can think of no other logical explanation for making such a strong statement of support for the verdict, but he certainly needs to explain himself in view of all that has been publicised and reported by many reliable media sources who've followed the case.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck. Have they done another autopsy in Guernsey?

And what was Hannah doing while the B2 dragged David to the water? Waiting quietly? Or slowly moving 20m away and lying down between two rocks with her legs in the water ready to be raped and bludgeoned? Hannah was already dead or unconscious when bludgeoned. You cannot hit a moving target dead centre with a heavy hoe. And she would have defended herself with her hands. She was not held down, how do you hold someone whilst another strikes her face with a hoe without being in the way and how do you hold their head straight? In any event she could not have been held down from the side as the rocks are too close.

Like many others have said, I have no idea whether the B2 were involved but the official story just does not pass muster.

Why was David naked apart from one sock whilst Hannah was fully clothed (albeit in disarray) apart from her panties?

Why was Hannah's body arranged in that pose?

What happened to the condom found with supposedly Hannah's DNA on the outside and no DNA on the inside?

What happened to Hannah's clothes?

What happened to the shoe found at the scene? Whose was it? It was not either of the B2's. I recall there was also mention of some black trousers found at the scene.

Why did the Thai authorities initially say there was no sign of Hannah having been raped? A view later confirmed by the British Autopsy.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck.

This was just a repeat of the mantra of the RTP and the prosecution. It bears no relation to the reality of what happened to David. Obviously the Miller family have not seen some of the crime scene photos I have. David also had defensive wounds to his hands (confirmed by the Thai autopsy) which meant he must have faced his attackers at some point. His DNA was found on the handle of the hoe as well which would indicate some sort of a struggle. No, he was not simply hacked from behind and disabled.

Also why would the attackers have bothered to stab David multiple times with a stubby sharp bladed instrument in the head and neck, if they had disabled him instantly with blows from behind? What was that instrument and why was it not mentioned by prosecutors or in the police autopsy?

[DiscoDan]

Also on August 21, the defence withdrew a request to the court to have DNA tests re-taken on prosecution evidence. Up to that point defence lawyers had said that this was central to their case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html

can you explain to everyone what exactly the prosecution were offering for retest and I mean exactly, I will let you answer this first since you know so much about it, then I will refer you to possibly as many as 20 posts on TVF were I address this point

I will give you a clue - they were not offering original dna samples as they claimed they no longer had them lol

it's a bit like saying - this is the murder weapon that matches the balistics - but sorry we don't have the weapon as it was destroyed during testing - we wore it out, but hey here is one just like it would you like to test it

Yes I will find plenty of posts but a link from the defense would be better.

they gave the excuse that they didn't need to test it anymore they never said they won't give us what we want to retest, but if you can find a link to confirm it I will stand corrected.

[lucky11]

No they didn't - Nixon did it to himself!!

If you are comparing Khaosod to US publications then I don't see that they will change anything.

[mrrizzla]

Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:

As the leader of a specialist group here in Chiang Mai I have been actively publicising this case to my group's membership, asking them to support the defence team's funding and care of the boys whilst in custody. The news of the verdict greatly shocked me and then statement by the brother of one of the victims disturbed me even more.

As Nigeone implies: something just doesn't add up. Has he seen something no-one reporting the case has seen - perhaps something in the UK's Metropolitan Police report, which they've refused to publish publicly or the UK Coroner's report, yet to be published publicly? I can think of no other logical explanation for making such a strong statement of support for the verdict, but he certainly needs to explain himself in view of all that has been publicised and reported by many reliable media sources who've followed the case.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck. Have they done another autopsy in Guernsey?

And what was Hannah doing while the B2 dragged David to the water? Waiting quietly? Or slowly moving 20m away and lying down between two rocks with her legs in the water ready to be raped and bludgeoned? Hannah was already dead or unconscious when bludgeoned. You cannot hit a moving target dead centre with a heavy hoe. And she would have defended herself with her hands. She was not held down, how do you hold someone whilst another strikes her face with a hoe without being in the way and how do you hold their head straight? In any event she could not have been held down from the side as the rocks are too close.

Like many others have said, I have no idea whether the B2 were involved but the official story just does not pass muster.

Why was David naked apart from one sock whilst Hannah was fully clothed (albeit in disarray) apart from her panties?

Why was Hannah's body arranged in that pose?

What happened to the condom found with supposedly Hannah's DNA on the outside and no DNA on the inside?

What happened to Hannah's clothes?

What happened to the shoe found at the scene? Whose was it? It was not either of the B2's. I recall there was also mention of some black trousers found at the scene.

Why did the Thai authorities initially say there was no sign of Hannah having been raped? A view later confirmed by the British Autopsy.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck.

This was just a repeat of the mantra of the RTP and the prosecution. It bears no relation to the reality of what happened to David. Obviously the Miller family have not seen some of the crime scene photos I have. David also had defensive wounds to his hands (confirmed by the Thai autopsy) which meant he must have faced his attackers at some point. His DNA was found on the handle of the hoe as well which would indicate some sort of a struggle. No, he was not simply hacked from behind and disabled.

Also why would the attackers have bothered to stab David multiple times with a stubby sharp bladed instrument in the head and neck, if they had disabled him instantly with blows from behind? What was that instrument and why was it not mentioned by prosecutors or in the police autopsy?

David's head wounds looked like stab wounds from those ninja shurikens but more of a clover shaped blade designed to be put between your fingers for a stabbing motion. Also he had wounds on his fist indicating that he fought with his attackers before he was over powered. The court are saying that he was savagely attacked from behind, if so you would imagine that he wouldn't of been able to stand up to defend himself.

It is my belief that David had come to try and rescue Hannah and was beaten by the gang that were there hence the wounds to his fists. David tried his best but was overpowered by numbers. Plus one of Nomsod's possy was a big fella for a Thai guy. He didn't really stand a chance.

[Dogmatix]

For those doubters who believe the police would never plant evidence in a case- google the case of Sherry Ann Duncan- there are many similarities. I do not know if the B2 are guilty or not- but I do know if I was a juror in the case and what evidence was presented- the prosecution did not make their case- The Chain of Custody is absolutely imperative to have as it removes the doubts- without the chain of custody there is no real proof. This case will follow the same process as the Duncan case- let's see if the result is the same. The Thai Supreme Court will free the B2 but years will pass.

Exactly! Chain of custody proves that dna collected is dna processed for the trial. Any fool could substitute after-the-fact dna samples from the B2 without bona fide chain of custody best practices.

The judgement emphasises that it would have been impossible to insert DNA material from the defendants into the victim's body in order to falsify the test results. However, given the fact that no samples were made available for independent testing and that the police's record keeping of the DNA testing process was very slipshod, done in handwriting with copious scratchings out and a wrong date, the difficulty of inserting DNA materials into the victim's body seems not very relevant. It should have been easy enough for the police just to insert the results of the defendants ' DNA saliva swabs into their hand written scrawls. Independent verification of the actual samples would have indicated what type of bodily fluids the samples were taken from but the police claimed the samples were all 'used up', making it relatively easy for them to insert anyone's DNA's results into their file, if they were so inclined.

It is still unclear why the defence team failed to cross examine the police pathologists on their protocols for DNA testing, as they were strongly advised to do by a foreign advisor. The Australian expert witness who was flown in to testify on this was inexplicably left like a jilted bride at the altar and never called to the stand by the defence. At the end of the day, in lieu of any direct challenge to the international acceptability of DNA testing, the judges concluded that the DNA match was done to international standards and was the most important piece of incontrovertible evidence used to convict the defendants. The testimony of Khunying Pornthip's team seems to have been totally disregarded but, as a Thai professional, she might not have been regarded as an expert on international standards and is known to have had many conflicts with police.

[B166ER]

....the pain the Millers are feeling right now will pale in comparison when they realize how erroneous their statement was....hey, maybe since they've got the real killers it would be a great time to chill out and what safer better place than the place where all this started. After all with the real perp's behind bars what could be safer place to visit. Maybe invite the Swedish Woman's Volley Ball team too while your at it....One big happy place....sighhhhhhhhhhh....

Edited December 27, 2015 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[lucky11]

Also on August 21, the defence withdrew a request to the court to have DNA tests re-taken on prosecution evidence. Up to that point defence lawyers had said that this was central to their case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html

Seems to me, that when the defence saw that the DNA evidence implicated the B2 as being the murderers, they suddenly lost interest in this as it was so damaging to their cause rather than being able to aid it as hoped. In the first instance, they were screaming to high heaven to be allowed to see the DNA evidence, then all of the sudden they mysteriously buried it once they had been allowed to view it and it was to pay no more of a role in the defence case from this point on!!

I think that it was at this point that they realised that they were 'well and truly sunk' and facing the inevitable truth that the B2 were in fact guilty and facing the gallows. The judges could see through the ruses that proliferated the defence teams case and dismissed them one by one, preferring to look at real hard evidence as supplied by the prosecutors.

[stephenterry]

Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:Mises, on 26 Dec 2015 - 18:01, said:

As the leader of a specialist group here in Chiang Mai I have been actively publicising this case to my group's membership, asking them to support the defence team's funding and care of the boys whilst in custody. The news of the verdict greatly shocked me and then statement by the brother of one of the victims disturbed me even more.

As Nigeone implies: something just doesn't add up. Has he seen something no-one reporting the case has seen - perhaps something in the UK's Metropolitan Police report, which they've refused to publish publicly or the UK Coroner's report, yet to be published publicly? I can think of no other logical explanation for making such a strong statement of support for the verdict, but he certainly needs to explain himself in view of all that has been publicised and reported by many reliable media sources who've followed the case.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck. Have they done another autopsy in Guernsey?

And what was Hannah doing while the B2 dragged David to the water? Waiting quietly? Or slowly moving 20m away and lying down between two rocks with her legs in the water ready to be raped and bludgeoned? Hannah was already dead or unconscious when bludgeoned. You cannot hit a moving target dead centre with a heavy hoe. And she would have defended herself with her hands. She was not held down, how do you hold someone whilst another strikes her face with a hoe without being in the way and how do you hold their head straight? In any event she could not have been held down from the side as the rocks are too close.

Like many others have said, I have no idea whether the B2 were involved but the official story just does not pass muster.

Why was David naked apart from one sock whilst Hannah was fully clothed (albeit in disarray) apart from her panties?

Why was Hannah's body arranged in that pose?

What happened to the condom found with supposedly Hannah's DNA on the outside and no DNA on the inside?

What happened to Hannah's clothes?

What happened to the shoe found at the scene? Whose was it? It was not either of the B2's. I recall there was also mention of some black trousers found at the scene.

Why did the Thai authorities initially say there was no sign of Hannah having been raped? A view later confirmed by the British Autopsy.

Michael Miller appears to be both misinformed and ill-informed. His statement: He [David] was hacked down from behind dragged into the sea and left to die rather gives this away. It seems Michael Miller does not know about the wounds on David's front shoulder and neck.

This was just a repeat of the mantra of the RTP and the prosecution. It bears no relation to the reality of what happened to David. Obviously the Miller family have not seen some of the crime scene photos I have. David also had defensive wounds to his hands (confirmed by the Thai autopsy) which meant he must have faced his attackers at some point. His DNA was found on the handle of the hoe as well which would indicate some sort of a struggle. No, he was not simply hacked from behind and disabled.

Also why would the attackers have bothered to stab David multiple times with a stubby sharp bladed instrument in the head and neck, if they had disabled him instantly with blows from behind? What was that instrument and why was it not mentioned by prosecutors or in the police autopsy?

David's head wounds looked like stab wounds from those ninja shurikens but more of a clover shaped blade designed to be put between your fingers for a stabbing motion. Also he had wounds on his fist indicating that he fought with his attackers before he was over powered. The court are saying that he was savagely attacked from behind, if so you would imagine that he wouldn't of been able to stand up to defend himself.

It is my belief that David had come to try and rescue Hannah and was beaten by the gang that were there hence the wounds to his fists. David tried his best but was overpowered by numbers. Plus one of Nomsod's possy was a big fella for a Thai guy. He didn't really stand a chance.

How David was killed was conveniently overlooked (or misinterpreted) by the court, when it ought to have taken precedence, and cast doubts on the ability of two small men being able to overpower and kill him while he was facing them. IMO, this is the biggest flaw in the prosecution's case. If the B2 were at the crime scene, I'd lay a pound to a penny that there were others - and I hope they will speak out and reveal the truth of what happened that night.

[lucky11]

So any of you who think the b2 are guilty, can you please explain what caused to puncture wounds on David?

If you mention a "hoe" then keep taking whatever it is you are taking as it isn't doing you any good.

The prosecution said a hammer was used as well but they couldn't find it, this came from a german reporter at the trial.

How do they 100% know it was a hammer if they can't find it?

In the same way that if they find a bullet hole through someone's head that a gun was used!!

[MrTee]

What's this? is it to be 'trial by media' now. Someone tell them that what they print will have no influence on the proceedings to come and that they are wasting ink.

The defense has made this a "trial by media" from the start, even to the point of threatening media that don't stick to their story, this is from the man running the various donation campaigns to support the MWRN:

"(name removed) good, super early morning I was a bit pissed off so threatened basically everything against them if the didint retract. Even reached a few emergency email addresses. I really have never read somethign as horribly wrong as that. Especially as the only way we win. I repeat THE ONLY way we win is with the public on our side, so this shit and the FCO statement really hurt us.Average people take newspaper reports as fact. If they do not dramatically apologize and retract im sue we have pro bono lawyers on our side that would love to sue."

Threats and use of sock puppet accounts to give the impression of larger numbers. This is press intimidation and manipulation at work.

Of course the police never made any statements to the press, and all you guys that are so sure the Burmese men are guilty got your information 1st hand..

The whole thing has been played out in the press, by both sides.

Doublethink much?

Edited December 27, 2015 by MrTee

[stephenterry]

Also on August 21, the defence withdrew a request to the court to have DNA tests re-taken on prosecution evidence. Up to that point defence lawyers had said that this was central to their case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html

Seems to me, that when the defence saw that the DNA evidence implicated the B2 as being the murderers, they suddenly lost interest in this as it was so damaging to their cause rather than being able to aid it as hoped. In the first instance, they were screaming to high heaven to be allowed to see the DNA evidence, then all of the sudden they mysteriously buried it once they had been allowed to view it and it was to pay no more of a role in the defence case from this point on!!

I think that it was at this point that they realised that they were 'well and truly sunk' and facing the inevitable truth that the B2 were in fact guilty and facing the gallows. The judges could see through the ruses that proliferated the defence teams case and dismissed them one by one, preferring to look at real hard evidence as supplied by the prosecutors.

Oh dear, more misinformation and pure conjecture. It might have escaped your notice that the defence repeatedly requested the original samples so they could re-test them, and that was granted by the courts both at the July hearing and subsequently - but the prosecution refused to supply them at any point. No original samples - all used up. Plus the B2 willingly had their DNA taken at the trial, and independently tested, so if the results matched the so called samples (if they actually existed) it would be conclusive evidence. Strikes me that is the action of innocent men.

So, what do you think of that?

Edited December 27, 2015 by stephenterry

[Zeberdee]

So any of you who think the b2 are guilty, can you please explain what caused to puncture wounds on David?

If you mention a "hoe" then keep taking whatever it is you are taking as it isn't doing you any good.

The prosecution said a hammer was used as well but they couldn't find it, this came from a german reporter at the trial.

How do they 100% know it was a hammer if they can't find it?

In the same way that if they find a bullet hole through someone's head that a gun was used!!

Numerous things could have caused David's injuries, even a shark tooth ring.

[evadgib]

Can someone please post a link or PDF of the English translation of the court ruling? I haven't been able to view all the pages on AH's twitter a/c nor am I able to zoom in order to comfortably read.

Re IMEI (Individual Mobile Equipment Identifier); Entering *#06# into most phones identifies each phone. IMEI's can also be retrieved from the receipt, original packaging or service provider as was likely in this case.

HTH

Edited December 27, 2015 by evadgib

[lucky11]

Also on August 21, the defence withdrew a request to the court to have DNA tests re-taken on prosecution evidence. Up to that point defence lawyers had said that this was central to their case.

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/16198-thai-police-confirm-british-cooperation-in-koh-tao-case.html

Seems to me, that when the defence saw that the DNA evidence implicated the B2 as being the murderers, they suddenly lost interest in this as it was so damaging to their cause rather than being able to aid it as hoped. In the first instance, they were screaming to high heaven to be allowed to see the DNA evidence, then all of the sudden they mysteriously buried it once they had been allowed to view it and it was to pay no more of a role in the defence case from this point on!!

I think that it was at this point that they realised that they were 'well and truly sunk' and facing the inevitable truth that the B2 were in fact guilty and facing the gallows. The judges could see through the ruses that proliferated the defence teams case and dismissed them one by one, preferring to look at real hard evidence as supplied by the prosecutors.

Oh dear, more misinformation and pure conjecture. It might have escaped your notice that the defence repeatedly requested the original samples so they could re-test them, and that was granted by the courts both at the July hearing and subsequently - but the prosecution refused to supply them at any point. No original samples - all used up. Plus the B2 willingly had their DNA taken at the trial, and independently tested, so if the results matched the so called samples (if they actually existed) it would be conclusive evidence. Strikes me that is the action of innocent men.

So, what do you think of that?

From AP

Authorities have possession of crucial DNA evidence in the murder trial of two Burmese migrants accused of killing two young British tourists on a Thai resort island, the national police chief insisted Friday, disputing reports that it might have been lost.

``It is not lost,'' national police chief Gen. Somyot Poompanmoung told reporters in Bangkok. ``I repeat: Nothing is lost.''

Somyot called it a misunderstanding that stemmed from foreign media covering the case who might have poor Thai language skills.

Somyot said the local police investigator, Lt Col Somsak Nurod, was vague in histestimony and therefore was misinterpreted. Somsak was no longer in possession of the DNA evidence since he collected it and then sent it to the Forensics Medicine Institute in Bangkok, Somyot said.

``Nothing is missing. It's a misunderstanding,'' the police chief said.

Seems that the DNA evidence was not lost after all.