Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[JLCrab]

I wouldn't rely too much on the Appeals process. Apart from taking years to exhaust the process, no new evidence is permitted. That means the Appeals court would only review what has already been trialled. Even if, by some miracle, sentences are reduced, this is what it means:-

The original sentences for each are 20 years life imprisonment for rape and two death sentences for murder and concealment of the crimes. I guess the B2 have many years ahead, incarcerated.

BTW, I posted a message on Andy Hall's Facebook page a few days ago, and not received any answer. Pity. Here it is:

Andy, it is clear to me that the Burmese two have weak alibis. They have said on more than one occasion that when the truth comes out, we will be exonerated from these crimes. While I can understand they may be in fear of their life if they spoke out what they know - don't you think it is appropriate to confide in strict confidence what really happened that night?

I would say -- and did say -- that the time for that was 26 December 2014.

[MrTee]

Emmanouil (Manolis) Dermitzakis - Professor of Genetics at the University of Geneva in Switzerland say that Race cannot be determined from DNA profiles.

See his Reddit AMA

I'd wager he knows more about DNA than most posters here.

Also population geneticist John Novembre say race cannot be determined by DNA profiling.

He explained it in a Reddit AMA: "There simply hasnt been enough time since we spread across the globe for extensive differences to have accumulated across the genome."

I'd wager he knows more about DNA than most posters here.

While certain characteristic can be shown by profiling DNA this is way beyond basic profiling and takes weeks if not months to develop a theory which may be more or less accurate.

[Ace of Pop]

The Family say much about it ?

[glenmohr]

If there was CCTV in the AC Bar and I have no doubt there is, where is the footage of that night?

Destroyed?....probably Why.....Possible motive for the later attack revealing suspects .

But again, why did the defence not ask these questions in the court? If CCTV was instaled in the AC Bar, the owner of the said bar should be in the witness box to explain where the recordings are. If I was defending the Burmese I would want to know exactly what has happened to these recordings.

Yes Morris. You would be good in that role. Very good in fact.

However it was noted by the BBC that the Thai defense team may not have wished to be seen to be taking advice from foreigners, therefore what occurred was a court case conducted Thai style. The adversarial style we have all grown up with was completely absent. In the west even the judge may have asked the missing questions.

[CharlieH]

Off topic remarks removed.

[lucky11]

As far as I know, samples were never sent to Singapore.

Lucky, happy for you to prove otherwise.

Believe what you want - all I know is that the presiding judge was completely confident about and satisfied with the authenticity of the DNA results that were given to him, and so was the defence, more importantly, as they didn't/couldn't refute them!! The rest is history.

Therefore, it doesn't matter where, when, how, by whom they were tested - they were good enough for him to find them both guilty on all accounts.

[HUH]

Inspiring such confidence in their DNA testing results, its the same lab that said they tested the hoe and found no DNA on it.

The defense team told Khaosod English that they will discuss which pieces of additional evidence they would like send to the Central Institute of Forensic Science, a lab administered by the Ministry of Justice.
Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon. No other DNA was found on the tool, she said.
She also did not supply the full documentation of the results she gathered in her forensic testing, citing a policy that bars scientists from providing investigative officers with detailed graphs of a person’s genetic makeup. http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437661326

Edited December 30, 2015 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[AGareth2]

As far as I know, samples were never sent to Singapore.

Lucky, happy for you to prove otherwise.

Believe what you want - all I know is that the presiding judge was completely confident about and satisfied with the authenticity of the DNA results that were given to him, and so was the defence, more importantly, as they didn't/couldn't refute them!! The rest is history.

Therefore, it doesn't matter where, when, how, by whom they were tested - they were good enough for him to find them both guilty on all accounts.

I for one think it is important that the truth is told

sorry about that

[MrTee]

And, there is the Rub..

Most of us come from cultures where we expect justice, fair justice..

Not only must justice be done; it must be seen to be done.

Like it or not there are many folk of all nationalities that want to see how this justice is served.

To have a few people decide behind closed doors decide on "justice" does not inspire people to believe them.

If you want to administer justice then you need to be transparent, open and above reproach..

[lucky11]

As far as I know, samples were never sent to Singapore.

Lucky, happy for you to prove otherwise.

Believe what you want - all I know is that the presiding judge was completely confident about and satisfied with the authenticity of the DNA results that were given to him, and so was the defence, more importantly, as they didn't/couldn't refute them!! The rest is history.

Therefore, it doesn't matter where, when, how, by whom they were tested - they were good enough for him to find them both guilty on all accounts.

I for one think it is important that the truth is told

sorry about that

Why apologise? I think that's what we all strive for in life.

[Bluespunk]

Not all. Not even close to all.

[JLCrab]

And, there is the Rub..

Most of us come from cultures where we expect justice, fair justice..

Not only must justice be done; it must be seen to be done.

Like it or not there are many folk of all nationalities that want to see how this justice is served.

To have a few people decide behind closed doors decide on "justice" does not inspire people to believe them.

If you want to administer justice then you need to be transparent, open and above reproach..

And just a few posts above, we have a TV Member sending a Twitter message to Andy Hall suggesting that the defense or the defendants themselves might have information that might exonerate them that they chose not to reveal in Court. Instead the Defendants offered on one of the last days of the trial an explanation of their whereabouts the evening in question that in the Summary opinion the Judges considered as 'unimaginable'.

So the question of being open and transparent might not only refer to the Court and to the Prosecution but to the Defense as well

[balo]

I'm saying that it is highly unlikely that, don't forget, they were exceedingly drunk at the time because they allegedly rarely drunk alcohol and it took it's toll on them.

Now why would he (Win) clamber out of bed at 4.00/4.30 AM and go, all alone, down to the beach and mysteriously find a phone and sunglasses?

The whole episode is so far fetched that I wouldn't believe it if the pope told me himself.

If David and Hannah had been murdered, how did both his sunglasses and mobile end up lying in the sand and before you know it, in Win's possession. How did they get separated from him? Think about it, he (David) went to the beach with Hannah, supposedly dropped both his phone and sunglasses in the sand on the way to a secluded area and Win ended up finding them both at 5.00 AM in the morning.

I'm sorry, but in whatever way you look at it this is so ludicrous and sort of story made up by a 5 year old!!

Those that changed their minds as to their belief of innocence or guilt after hearing this series of events are to be commended (Greenchair definitely and I think Stander) others should remove their blinkers and do a bit of serious thinking about their current stance. Don't worry, only Thai's are concerned about losing face. We will congratulate you for manning up to your mistake and welcome you with open arms into our camp - the camp that wants justice delivered to the families for the tragic loss of a daughter and son!!

As I said previously,I had very little knowledge or interest in this case prior to the verdict and sentencing on the 24th, but I have followed with interest here and through links that friends and colleagues have given me.

I am now convinced of their guilt and as a proponent of the death penalty, believe it should be carried out as soon as all avenue of appeal are used up.

You already told us that 10 times. I wish Pinocchio could just take a break from this thread.

[smedly]

replicated DNA that was being offered to the defense for retesting is not an original sample, there is no way to tell if this dna came from slaiva - sperm - blood etc it has already been processed and extracted, it is absolutly usless to make a confirmation match in a criminal case, a criminal case involves matching dna from a crime scene to an accused, i.e. 2 sets of dna to be compared from two sources, extracted or processed dna could be from the same sample i.e. the accused saliva

It would be like taking another saliva sample from the B2 and comparing it with a saliva sample taken earlier - absolutely useless at proving anything

This is why I keep repeating (and certain people keep ignoring)that in order to do a confirmation dna retest,

************only the original samples taken from the victim can be used************

The offer from the prosecution was a ploy and the defence obviously under advisement - declined

but they should have made more of this and demanded the original samples even though a prosecution witness had already testified they no longer existed and shortly after that we had the police chief claiming they still had them, that point is still not clear

Edited December 30, 2015 by smedly

[Prbkk]

And, there is the Rub..

Most of us come from cultures where we expect justice, fair justice..

Not only must justice be done; it must be seen to be done.

Like it or not there are many folk of all nationalities that want to see how this justice is served.

To have a few people decide behind closed doors decide on "justice" does not inspire people to believe them.

If you want to administer justice then you need to be transparent, open and above reproach..

And just a few posts above, we have a TV Member sending a Twitter message to Andy Hall suggesting that the defense or the defendants themselves might have information that might exonerate them that they chose not to reveal in Court. Instead the Defendants offered on one of the last days of the trial an explanation of their whereabouts the evening in question that in the Summary opinion the Judges considered as 'unimaginable'.

So the question of being open and transparent might not only refer to the Court and to the Prosecution but to the Defense as well

In this jurisdiction, as in most other, the burden of proof is on the prosecution . By any reasonable measure the prosecution didn't come within a bull's roar of making out a case. Of course it doesn't prove innocence but any reasonable person looking at this case could not have been convinced of guilt. Why a few people choose to prattle on endlessly about irrelevancies is mystifying.

[lucky11]

That's more than a little harsh balo - he's simply proud that he joined on 'the side of right' and wants people to know it. I don't understand the reference to Pinnochio as he hasn't told anything resembling a lie!!

[lucky11]

And, there is the Rub..

Most of us come from cultures where we expect justice, fair justice..

Not only must justice be done; it must be seen to be done.

Like it or not there are many folk of all nationalities that want to see how this justice is served.

To have a few people decide behind closed doors decide on "justice" does not inspire people to believe them.

If you want to administer justice then you need to be transparent, open and above reproach..

And just a few posts above, we have a TV Member sending a Twitter message to Andy Hall suggesting that the defense or the defendants themselves might have information that might exonerate them that they chose not to reveal in Court. Instead the Defendants offered on one of the last days of the trial an explanation of their whereabouts the evening in question that in the Summary opinion the Judges considered as 'unimaginable'.

So the question of being open and transparent might not only refer to the Court and to the Prosecution but to the Defense as well

In this jurisdiction, as in most other, the burden of proof is on the prosecution . By any reasonable measure the prosecution didn't come within a bull's roar of making out a case. Of course it doesn't prove innocence but any reasonable person looking at this case could not have been convinced of guilt. Why a few people choose to prattle on endlessly about irrelevancies is mystifying.

You'd better inform the judge then!! You are perfectly right, the burden of proof is indeed on the prosecution and considering they carried the day, then one must assume that they provided it.

[glenmohr]

I'm saying that it is highly unlikely that, don't forget, they were exceedingly drunk at the time because they allegedly rarely drunk alcohol and it took it's toll on them.

Now why would he (Win) clamber out of bed at 4.00/4.30 AM and go, all alone, down to the beach and mysteriously find a phone and sunglasses?

The whole episode is so far fetched that I wouldn't believe it if the pope told me himself.

If David and Hannah had been murdered, how did both his sunglasses and mobile end up lying in the sand and before you know it, in Win's possession. How did they get separated from him? Think about it, he (David) went to the beach with Hannah, supposedly dropped both his phone and sunglasses in the sand on the way to a secluded area and Win ended up finding them both at 5.00 AM in the morning.

I'm sorry, but in whatever way you look at it this is so ludicrous and sort of story made up by a 5 year old!!

Those that changed their minds as to their belief of innocence or guilt after hearing this series of events are to be commended (Greenchair definitely and I think Stander) others should remove their blinkers and do a bit of serious thinking about their current stance. Don't worry, only Thai's are concerned about losing face. We will congratulate you for manning up to your mistake and welcome you with open arms into our camp - the camp that wants justice delivered to the families for the tragic loss of a daughter and son!!

As I said previously,I had very little knowledge or interest in this case prior to the verdict and sentencing on the 24th, but I have followed with interest here and through links that friends and colleagues have given me.

I am now convinced of their guilt and as a proponent of the death penalty, believe it should be carried out as soon as all avenue of appeal are used up.

Third time you've come out with this trite statement. It was BS the first time, the second time and remains so this third time.

Why not PM one of your buddies and ask them for advice on something more purposeful to say, because no one really cares what you think I'm afraid.

I have long suspected Bluespunk that the " hang the Burmese Brigade" are in fact only 2 people using several IDs. I would be very surprised if Stander exists separately from the main 2, Study the fact he has no opinion at all and just parrots the same post over and over. The timeline of their posts is very suspicious because they appear sometimes in 2/3 minute sequences. On one occasion 2 days ago they supplied 4 posts in 3 minute intervals.

[smedly]

replicated DNA that was being offered to the defense for retesting is not an original sample, there is no way to tell if this dna came from slaiva - sperm - blood etc it has already been processed and extracted, it is absolutly usless to make a confirmation match in a criminal case, a criminal case involves matching dna from a crime scene to an accused, i.e. 2 sets of dna to be compared from two sources, extracted or processed dna could be from the same sample i.e. the accused saliva

It would be like taking another saliva sample from the B2 and comparing it with a saliva sample taken earlier - absolutely useless at proving anything

This is why I keep repeating (and certain people keep ignoring)that in order to do a confirmation dna retest,

************only the original samples taken from the victim can be used************

The offer from the prosecution was a ploy and the defence obviously under advisement - declined

but they should have made more of this and demanded the original samples even though a prosecution witness had already testified they no longer existed and shortly after that we had the police chief claiming they still had them, that point is still not clear

until such times as this is sorted out I remain unconvinced of guilt and if the original samples cannot be produced then I will never ever believe that these samples existed in the first place - show me them prove me wrong

Maybe the UK autopsy will confirm this - no evidence of sperm found in the victim

[JLCrab]

And, there is the Rub..

Most of us come from cultures where we expect justice, fair justice..

Not only must justice be done; it must be seen to be done.

Like it or not there are many folk of all nationalities that want to see how this justice is served.

To have a few people decide behind closed doors decide on "justice" does not inspire people to believe them.

If you want to administer justice then you need to be transparent, open and above reproach..

And just a few posts above, we have a TV Member sending a Twitter message to Andy Hall suggesting that the defense or the defendants themselves might have information that might exonerate them that they chose not to reveal in Court. Instead the Defendants offered on one of the last days of the trial an explanation of their whereabouts the evening in question that in the Summary opinion the Judges considered as 'unimaginable'.

So the question of being open and transparent might not only refer to the Court and to the Prosecution but to the Defense as well

In this jurisdiction, as in most other, the burden of proof is on the prosecution . By any reasonable measure the prosecution didn't come within a bull's roar of making out a case. Of course it doesn't prove innocence but any reasonable person looking at this case could not have been convinced of guilt. Why a few people choose to prattle on endlessly about irrelevancies is mystifying.

And some prattle on like this should be decided by popular vote. The Prosecution by the opinion of the Court with jurisdiction decided that there was sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt. If people here want to disagree with that opinion or to say the Court was Kangaroo court and the Police/Prosecution like Keystone Kops that's fine, but that doesn't change anything.

And when the Court all but says in writing that the Defendants were lying when testifying in their own defense in Court, there are problems no matter who has the final burden of proof.

Edited December 30, 2015 by JLCrab

[lucky11]

I'm saying that it is highly unlikely that, don't forget, they were exceedingly drunk at the time because they allegedly rarely drunk alcohol and it took it's toll on them.

Now why would he (Win) clamber out of bed at 4.00/4.30 AM and go, all alone, down to the beach and mysteriously find a phone and sunglasses?

The whole episode is so far fetched that I wouldn't believe it if the pope told me himself.

If David and Hannah had been murdered, how did both his sunglasses and mobile end up lying in the sand and before you know it, in Win's possession. How did they get separated from him? Think about it, he (David) went to the beach with Hannah, supposedly dropped both his phone and sunglasses in the sand on the way to a secluded area and Win ended up finding them both at 5.00 AM in the morning.

I'm sorry, but in whatever way you look at it this is so ludicrous and sort of story made up by a 5 year old!!

Those that changed their minds as to their belief of innocence or guilt after hearing this series of events are to be commended (Greenchair definitely and I think Stander) others should remove their blinkers and do a bit of serious thinking about their current stance. Don't worry, only Thai's are concerned about losing face. We will congratulate you for manning up to your mistake and welcome you with open arms into our camp - the camp that wants justice delivered to the families for the tragic loss of a daughter and son!!

As I said previously,I had very little knowledge or interest in this case prior to the verdict and sentencing on the 24th, but I have followed with interest here and through links that friends and colleagues have given me.

I am now convinced of their guilt and as a proponent of the death penalty, believe it should be carried out as soon as all avenue of appeal are used up.

Third time you've come out with this trite statement. It was BS the first time, the second time and remains so this third time.

Why not PM one of your buddies and ask them for advice on something more purposeful to say, because no one really cares what you think I'm afraid.

I have long suspected Bluespunk that the " hang the Burmese Brigade" are in fact only 2 people using several IDs. I would be very surprised if Stander exists separately from the main 2, Study the fact he has no opinion at all and just parrots the same post over and over. The timeline of their posts is very suspicious because they appear sometimes in 2/3 minute sequences. On one occasion 2 days ago they supplied 4 posts in 3 minute intervals.

If that was the case (there's only me BTW) then our effort to counter your entourage of posts becomes all the more impressive. Ever seen that film Zulu?

[AGareth2]

why are the BBC flogging this dead horse story?

unless of course there is some fire

[sambum]

From a BBC News article today:-

"Protests against the conviction in Thailand of two Burmese men for the murder of a pair of British tourists have been growing in Yangon.

The Thai embassy's consular section in the Burmese capital said it would be closed for the week in the wake of the "unexpected and prolonged" protests."

What DID they expect? Cheering crowds applauding the "fair and transparent trial"?

[glenmohr]

what was sent to Singapore?

Some of the DNA samples for independent verification.

The quoTe from the Nation stated that it WILL be sent. There is no evidence that it was ever sent.

[greenchair]

WPs Alibi (not retracted confession) concerning the phone was he found it on the beach then gave it to his as it was locked then they heard about the murders so they destroyed it

What was not confirmed was who's phone it was,

The British government and the phone company are not allowed to give that information so Davids Dad took a screen print of davids computer which had the imei number

This was first brought to the courts attention when Andy hall took the stand but he never reported this or any of his journalist friends.

Then on the last day of the trial Sarah Yuen did a breaking sky news interview saying a package was delivered to court and it confirmed the phone belonged to David. (but this was just a translation from the embassy)

So now you can see we have not been getting the whole story.

So a late screengrab from a civilian on the other side of the world (possibly biased depending on what he has been told by RTP etc. - David's brother certainly seemed to be very anti B2) is one of the things that the court and yourself have used as a basis for the verdict? I'm surprised something like this can even be used as evidence as it would be open to being doctored. I'm not saying it was at all, just that it would be possible without much difficulty so I'm surprised it was admissable (well in this particular case less so I suppose I am less surprised). Also probably not difficult for someone with knowledge to change the number in the application, or on the screen prior to screenshot also. I do hope RTP didn't tell what number they were looking for prior to receiving this. I'd feel more comfortable about it if had come from a more formal source. If all above board and if the alleged timeline of this particular phone was true then it could tie him in to finding the phone as he claimed, and the charge of theft of the phone.

Once a death sentence has been given does that then negate the reason that the UK govt / phone company etc cannot comply with such requests?

nobody is disputing that the imei number given to the Millar family was from Davids phone, they checked that and confirmed it, but it was only a number, the issue I have with this is only the police have said that that particular phone was found at the B2 residence, the black iPhone 4s found at the crime scene and put on display before any arrests has effectively disappeared, B2 claim they found "a" phone they did not say they found Davids phone, I want to know where is the phone from the crime scene - it should be in evidence

But, but, the immigrant rights super hero Andy Hall said "the phone was found lying in the sand at 5.00 AM in the morning by one of the B2" - which was carelessly disposed of the next morning after they couldn't unlock it, just in case it belonged to one of the victims in the story they had just heard about and they didn't want to be accused of the murders!! Yeh right!! Hilarious story with zero truth in it. Anyone with a modicum of sense could see through that.

Hilarious, to say the least. So another mysterious person just happened to leave their phone in the sand, that just happened to be near a murder. And that phone (that couldn't possibly be David's ) was found by Wei Phyo at 5 o'clock in the morning while he was looking for his shoes. That just happened to be left near but not at the scene of a double murder.

And the person that left the phone on the beach, has not come forward. because oh they are the real murderers. And they dropped the phone while running away.

If Wei Phyo denied all the way that he did not give the phone to his friend. Or that he bought the phone at a market a week ago. I could believe that. What was he doing at the beach at 5am

.

[lucky11]

what was sent to Singapore?

Some of the DNA samples for independent verification.

The quoTe from the Nation stated that it WILL be sent. There is no evidence that it was ever sent.

The second quote that I gave from the Nation stated that they 'WERE' sent. I had to explain to on of your boys that were is not the future tense.

Edited December 30, 2015 by lucky11

[fab99]

I'm saying that it is highly unlikely that, don't forget, they were exceedingly drunk at the time because they allegedly rarely drunk alcohol and it took it's toll on them.

Now why would he (Win) clamber out of bed at 4.00/4.30 AM and go, all alone, down to the beach and mysteriously find a phone and sunglasses?

The whole episode is so far fetched that I wouldn't believe it if the pope told me himself.

If David and Hannah had been murdered, how did both his sunglasses and mobile end up lying in the sand and before you know it, in Win's possession. How did they get separated from him? Think about it, he (David) went to the beach with Hannah, supposedly dropped both his phone and sunglasses in the sand on the way to a secluded area and Win ended up finding them both at 5.00 AM in the morning.

I'm sorry, but in whatever way you look at it this is so ludicrous and sort of story made up by a 5 year old!!

Those that changed their minds as to their belief of innocence or guilt after hearing this series of events are to be commended (Greenchair definitely and I think Stander) others should remove their blinkers and do a bit of serious thinking about their current stance. Don't worry, only Thai's are concerned about losing face. We will congratulate you for manning up to your mistake and welcome you with open arms into our camp - the camp that wants justice delivered to the families for the tragic loss of a daughter and son!!

As I said previously,I had very little knowledge or interest in this case prior to the verdict and sentencing on the 24th, but I have followed with interest here and through links that friends and colleagues have given me.

I am now convinced of their guilt and as a proponent of the death penalty, believe it should be carried out as soon as all avenue of appeal are used up.

Third time you've come out with this trite statement. It was BS the first time, the second time and remains so this third time.

Why not PM one of your buddies and ask them for advice on something more purposeful to say, because no one really cares what you think I'm afraid.

I have long suspected Bluespunk that the " hang the Burmese Brigade" are in fact only 2 people using several IDs. I would be very surprised if Stander exists separately from the main 2, Study the fact he has no opinion at all and just parrots the same post over and over. The timeline of their posts is very suspicious because they appear sometimes in 2/3 minute sequences. On one occasion 2 days ago they supplied 4 posts in 3 minute intervals.

Even if it looks like it, I kind of doubt it because the admins would probably have seen that as they have the IP of the posters (posting from the same IP address, but they could find a way to avoid that).

They sure spend a lot of time here to make sure their view looks a lot more common than it is, they are obviously part of a small minority but try to make this thread theirs by posting very often, even if it is to repeat the same things over and over (repeat a lie a 1000 times it becomes the truth...).

Funny to see how the 3 posters like each others posts invariably... they must feel quite isolated...

Edited December 30, 2015 by fab99

[stander]

I'm saying that it is highly unlikely that, don't forget, they were exceedingly drunk at the time because they allegedly rarely drunk alcohol and it took it's toll on them.

Now why would he (Win) clamber out of bed at 4.00/4.30 AM and go, all alone, down to the beach and mysteriously find a phone and sunglasses?

The whole episode is so far fetched that I wouldn't believe it if the pope told me himself.

If David and Hannah had been murdered, how did both his sunglasses and mobile end up lying in the sand and before you know it, in Win's possession. How did they get separated from him? Think about it, he (David) went to the beach with Hannah, supposedly dropped both his phone and sunglasses in the sand on the way to a secluded area and Win ended up finding them both at 5.00 AM in the morning.

I'm sorry, but in whatever way you look at it this is so ludicrous and sort of story made up by a 5 year old!!

Those that changed their minds as to their belief of innocence or guilt after hearing this series of events are to be commended (Greenchair definitely and I think Stander) others should remove their blinkers and do a bit of serious thinking about their current stance. Don't worry, only Thai's are concerned about losing face. We will congratulate you for manning up to your mistake and welcome you with open arms into our camp - the camp that wants justice delivered to the families for the tragic loss of a daughter and son!!

As I said previously,I had very little knowledge or interest in this case prior to the verdict and sentencing on the 24th, but I have followed with interest here and through links that friends and colleagues have given me.

I am now convinced of their guilt and as a proponent of the death penalty, believe it should be carried out as soon as all avenue of appeal are used up.

Third time you've come out with this trite statement. It was BS the first time, the second time and remains so this third time.

Why not PM one of your buddies and ask them for advice on something more purposeful to say, because no one really cares what you think I'm afraid.

It’s not about whether you care or not, read lucky11’s post and you will see I was simply clarifying my position.

[sambum]

As far as I know, samples were never sent to Singapore.

Lucky, happy for you to prove otherwise.

Believe what you want - all I know is that the presiding judge was completely confident about and satisfied with the authenticity of the DNA results that were given to him, and so was the defence, more importantly, as they didn't/couldn't refute them!! The rest is history.

Therefore, it doesn't matter where, when, how, by whom they were tested - they were good enough for him to find them both guilty on all accounts.

Of course it matters! You should engage your brain before making such a ridiculous statement!

[glenmohr]

As to an overly-nested post above as to whether corroborable evidence exists, for now, the written opinion of the Judges says there is sufficient evidence for a conviction whether wiser-heads disagree or could give 100 or 200 reasons why such opinion is faulty or not.

A lesson for honourable poster Mr Crab, JL.

When the embers of the fire are subsiding, and to the throbbing sounds of the didgeridoo, the indigenous folk in Australia hold a corroboree , this results in corroboration. Even Rolph Harris knows that!

Every else one knows that Thailand was never colonised by anyone except the Japanese and Burmese. Therefore the corroboration you are seeking could never be found in Thailand. Like the DNA, it does not exist, except to say the DNA did exist but got used up.