Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[iReason]

@catsanddogs

Sometimes it's better to show photos to the narrow minded.

Sorta like cartoons. Easier to comprehend the message.

Look at the bottom of your screen.

They have all fled. (they usually do when presented with, for example, graphic evidence of blatant manipulation. See my post #2265)

And you are right.

If they are so sure and content with their beliefs, fine.

Get on with their lives.

Clearly, an agenda is afoot.

I guess it's just the nature of the Troll...

[KunMatt]

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.

And that is the complete crux of the matter. We all followed the trial and heard what was presented by the prosecution and what the RTP all failed to deliver and lied about from the beginning, but at the end of the day the B2 were on trial in Thailand and that is the only reason they were found guilty and sentenced to death.

Had this trial happened in the UK or the US it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes without being dismissed.

All of you RTP cheerleaders who are celebrating this "victory" are all liars and frauds too, and you all know it.

[smedly]

To ST.

Who then used them in the court case!! so what's the problem? The defence was given the same results and for some unknown reason declined to use them.

What was their concern. Are you saying that the 3 universities fabricated the results handed to both teams? If not, then they were of more use to the prosecution in what they revealed!!

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

I will keep posting this as long as you refuse to accept what actually happened

[smedly]

The whole "DNA is lost!" brouhaha came from the time the Phangan police chief testified, what he said was that they didn't have the DNA evidence collected at the crime scene, because they had already sent it to Bangkok to the Forensic Institute. Somehow the last part got conveniently overlooked and next thing you hear was that the police said there was no more DNA evidence.

Do you have any credible link for that? Otherswise it's just hearsay.

"So when the defence lawyer asked him in the court about the DNA samples and evidence, he said he did not have them. This may have made people misunderstand that the evidence no longer exists or was lost," the police chief said.

Thawatchai agreed, saying the BBC had misunderstood the officer and that the evidence had not been lost. However, he said, some DNA samples may have been used up in accordance with the examination process."

How about you ask the people making the claim that the police said all DNA evidence was lost provide a source? The closest primary source is from a journalist saying that the evidence collected from Witheridge's body was "finished" (you see how nice I am, I'm even doing your job for you).

"Koh Tao trial. Items that can be retested: hoe, shoe, bag. Items that can't: ("finished") -all DNA from Hannah Witheridge body."

The context of that quote was the Phangan police chief being asked what evidence they (the Phangan local police) could provide for re-examination, they didn't have those DNA samples (taken at the crime scene) because they had been sent out, furthermore the post-mortem was done in Bangkok so any and all DNA evidence collected there (in particular the one from inside the victim) had nothing to do with what the Phangan police chief said so either way the preposition that DNA from Witheridge is lost is a non-starter.

But wait, it gets better than that, the only quote I've seen from Pol Lt-General Decha Butrnampetch is:

"Much of the defence’s case revolves around a bid to retest key forensic evidence, including DNA on cigarettes and a condom found near the crime scene as well as DNA swabs taken from the victims’ bodies.

“The DNA on the cigarettes is all finished,” the head of police on the nearby island of Koh Pha Ngan told the defence team outside the courtroom on Koh Samui on Thursday."

Which again it's a moot point because the cigarette butts were not used as evidence against the two Burmese anyway.

So what again is the problem here? That evidence that was not used against the Burmese supposedly can't be contested? To mix metaphors, this is nothing but clutching at windmills.

see my post above

[smedly]

As smedly would say, provide the original samples and test them independently against the b2. What's so difficult if it's genuine evidence? That would shut everyone up, but that won't happen because it won't match.

It's entirely possible that there was never any DNA found in Hannah. Brit forensics didn't find any. Thai forensics said they did and very quickly (and gleefully) claimed with certainty that it matched the scapegoats. Yet what has Thai forensics done right in their entire activity in this case? They lost Hannah's clothes. They lost the hair. They didn't find any DNA on the hoe, but Pontip's team did. They claim Nomsod's DNA is nowhere to be found at the crime scene, yet one of the head investigators couldn't say for sure whether Nomsod's DNA was ever typed, and if so, he was sure RTP didn't have any remaining DNA from him. Regardless, RTP wouldn't share DNA data with Brit experts. Thai forensics didn't notice any of the stab wounds on David. What has Thai forensics done right in this case? That's a real question.

that post will go unchallenged by certain people so I will make sure it stays relevant

I agree 100% with everything you say

Edited December 30, 2015 by smedly

[smedly]

since certain people keep repeating themselves over and over the 4 posts above are worthy of keeping for replies, copy them and keep them, I don't mind anyone quoting any points I have made ....hint hint

those same certain people don'y reply to these posts as they don't want them seen quoted or repeated

[dundee48]

The big picture is simple: The 2 accused have been convicted in Court. A request for appeal is due within 30 days of reading of the verdict. According to Section 193 of Thai Criminal Procedure (1934) an appeal must be based upon questions of fact and of Law.

All the rest is now side show.

So if at an appeal the defence brought a witness that's witnesed Mr X or Mr Y on the beach moving a couple of bodies and Mr X and Mr Y were not the 2 Burmese would the judge allow this or would that be a side show Thai style?

I guess that in part would depend upon when the the defense first found out about the new mystery witness. However, for that, the defense would have to been first granted an appeal. -- other than that, ask the Judge.

I was asking you, as you seem to have an incredible knowledge of the Thai legal system.

Only when the question suits his agenda.

[dundee48]

Let me get one thing straight: in the translated statement of the judge, I read something about the B2's semen in the vagina (one of them) and the anus of the female victim.

On the other hand, there is the statement, that no signs of rape were found.

Any ideas on that?

I have some of my own and one of them is very disturbing (and might also leave some marks).

Another one is: just another staged "evidence" by the glorious RTP!

Someone can have semen inside without being raped. Ever heard about consensual sex?

Now just imagine that some previous lover turns up at the point that 3 people have consensual sex, gets confused about the situation, and doesn't like what he sees.

He start to fight the 2 male parts, who defend themselves and actually kill him without intend. They panic at that point, as they realize that the sex scene has now become a murder scene.

So in their aim to destroy all traces to them they kill the female as well.

Remember the statement from Sean where says, "I know you only wanted to protect her David"? The same Sean that had blood on his guitar.

I think that Sean know much more and was actually a VERY CLOSE witness of it all

Wow,even your usual sycophants don`t `like` this crap.

[dundee48]

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.

Hi,i`m not being funny here but could you provide those links please so i could have a look for myself.You have repeated this statement 4 or 5 times now so it must be very compelling evidence.

Edited December 30, 2015 by dundee48

[JLCrab]

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.

And that is the complete crux of the matter. We all followed the trial and heard what was presented by the prosecution and what the RTP all failed to deliver and lied about from the beginning, but at the end of the day the B2 were on trial in Thailand and that is the only reason they were found guilty and sentenced to death.

Had this trial happened in the UK or the US it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes without being dismissed.

All of you RTP cheerleaders who are celebrating this "victory" are all liars and frauds too, and you all know it.

In the US there is a famous saying by a district Attorney that :I can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich. And admittance of evidence is at to the discretion of the Judge in US whether the viability or provenance of the evidence is in question or not. So at least for the US, that this case would certainly have been thrown out is your opinion. I don't celebrate anything just that once you pass through immigration control, you are under the Laws of Thailand and not in Kansas anymore.

[JLCrab]

The big picture is simple: The 2 accused have been convicted in Court. A request for appeal is due within 30 days of reading of the verdict. According to Section 193 of Thai Criminal Procedure (1934) an appeal must be based upon questions of fact and of Law.

All the rest is now side show.

Sounds like words emitted from a computer. Imagine for a moment, you were a family relation to one of the victims or to one of the scapegoats. Wouldn't you gladly welcome some new evidence which would shed light on who really committed the crimes? I would. Perhaps you think the investigation is completely over. I know RTP wished it was over 15 months ago - when they announced who did it and vowed to never mention the initial prime suspects again. But most of us in this discussion are eager for any evidence which could shed light on who really did the crime.

<snip>

If I were the family of the 2 convicted I would probably welcome any new evidence to exonerate the two even if totally fabricated new evidence but that ain't how things work. (End Post)

For employee training purposes we are conducting a survey. Please #1 if you would ike to participate in our survey

[KunMatt]

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.

And that is the complete crux of the matter. We all followed the trial and heard what was presented by the prosecution and what the RTP all failed to deliver and lied about from the beginning, but at the end of the day the B2 were on trial in Thailand and that is the only reason they were found guilty and sentenced to death.

Had this trial happened in the UK or the US it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes without being dismissed.

All of you RTP cheerleaders who are celebrating this "victory" are all liars and frauds too, and you all know it.

In the US there is a famous saying by a district Attorney that :I can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich. And admittance of evidence is at to the discretion of the Judge in US whether the viability or provenance of the evidence is in question or not. So at least for the US, that this case would certainly have been thrown out is your opinion. I don't celebrate anything just that once you pass through immigration control, you are under the Laws of Thailand and not in Kansas anymore.

And it's an opinion shared by 92% of members here and apparently the world as everyone is condemning the verdict. The opposition against the case is unprecedented from any I've ever seen before because it's clearly a sham trial and verdict.

So you are in the 8% of people which include members here who have acknowledged that they have businesses on Koh Tao and have many multiple accounts here with similar names that they use to cause as much disruption on this case as possible.

So how valuable if your opinion? Much less than 8% apparently.

[JLCrab]

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.

And that is the complete crux of the matter. We all followed the trial and heard what was presented by the prosecution and what the RTP all failed to deliver and lied about from the beginning, but at the end of the day the B2 were on trial in Thailand and that is the only reason they were found guilty and sentenced to death.

Had this trial happened in the UK or the US it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes without being dismissed.

All of you RTP cheerleaders who are celebrating this "victory" are all liars and frauds too, and you all know it.

In the US there is a famous saying by a district Attorney that :I can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich. And admittance of evidence is at to the discretion of the Judge in US whether the viability or provenance of the evidence is in question or not. So at least for the US, that this case would certainly have been thrown out is your opinion. I don't celebrate anything just that once you pass through immigration control, you are under the Laws of Thailand and not in Kansas anymore.

And it's an opinion shared by 92% of members here and apparently the world as everyone is condemning the verdict. The opposition against the case is unprecedented from any I've ever seen before because it's clearly a sham trial and verdict.

So you are in the 8% of people which include members here who have acknowledged that they have businesses on Koh Tao and have many multiple accounts here with similar names that they use to cause as much disruption on this case as possible.

So how valuable if your opinion? Much less than 8% apparently.

I have never been to Koh Tao. I was on Koh Samui in 1988. I have only one account. My opinion on legal matters under jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice in Thailand is worth the same as yours: Nothing.

[KunMatt]

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.

And that is the complete crux of the matter. We all followed the trial and heard what was presented by the prosecution and what the RTP all failed to deliver and lied about from the beginning, but at the end of the day the B2 were on trial in Thailand and that is the only reason they were found guilty and sentenced to death.

Had this trial happened in the UK or the US it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes without being dismissed.

All of you RTP cheerleaders who are celebrating this "victory" are all liars and frauds too, and you all know it.

In the US there is a famous saying by a district Attorney that :I can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich. And admittance of evidence is at to the discretion of the Judge in US whether the viability or provenance of the evidence is in question or not. So at least for the US, that this case would certainly have been thrown out is your opinion. I don't celebrate anything just that once you pass through immigration control, you are under the Laws of Thailand and not in Kansas anymore.

And it's an opinion shared by 92% of members here and apparently the world as everyone is condemning the verdict. The opposition against the case is unprecedented from any I've ever seen before because it's clearly a sham trial and verdict.

So you are in the 8% of people which include members here who have acknowledged that they have businesses on Koh Tao and have many multiple accounts here with similar names that they use to cause as much disruption on this case as possible.

So how valuable if your opinion? Much less than 8% apparently.

I have never been to Koh Tao. I was on Koh Samui in 1988. I have only one account. My opinion on legal matters under jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice in Thailand is worth the same as yours: Nothing.

I never said you specifically.

But why else anybody can believe the case against the B2 without any vested interest is beyond me.

[RWA]

If the British coroner's inquest states that neither victim was raped, then the RTP and judge may have some explaining to do.

And if this is stated I would think in most civilised country's at the very lease a re-trial ordered or an acquittal.

Also the injuries, particularly in David's case.....The small puncture wounds on his face were not caused by a hoe......never.

So what caused them? and again why has the defence not brought that into question?

The defence had access to ALL of the information - so you tell me why they didn't provide a commanding case!!

Trust me, if the defence thought there was any relevance of something that could benefit their case then they would use it.

However, you can only work with the tools that you are provided with and theirs clearly weren't up to standard.

... "defense had access to ALL of the information" ...

You have it ALL WRONG again!!!

I can see your hard effort to get to the bottom of the things, so let me to help you here. I'll break it down in to a simple points for you:

1.) the defense had the ONLY access to a very carefully selected and incredibly small amount of info, that were bundled into a PROSECUTION file !!!

a) ... this bundle must have been revised and redone at least 3 times to be

even called (accepted) a Prosecution file.

... and yet, the "final product" (a Prosecution file) lacks any info / evidence

of a substance. It would not pass as a Prosecution file in any other court

outside Thailand. (even in Thailand, if not for this case in PARTICULAR,

the whole affair (as it's been thrown together) would be NOT accepted by

the Judge)

c) ,,, in Thailand, the defense (and the suspect) has NO way to access

(review / acknowledge) or demand ANY of the police investigation

files (witness statements, notes, info, evidence) - other than that

SELECTED (convenient bits), which are picked up by the

prosecutor - of those bits provided by the investigators, to form

and support their )prosecution) case, to be submitted to the court.

(it means, ANYTHING that may be useful to the defense, or disputed

during the trial, needs to be omitted: not listed, not recorded, excluded -

lost, forgotten or destroyed)

d) ... no suspect, NOR his ATTORNEY can learn ANY-BLOODY-THING about

the investigation (case) against him, until the court has accepted the

case and the trial started. ONLY then and there the attorney, i.e. suspect

can see what the prosecution has pulled together against him and start

to build the defense strategy - real QUICK, as the time given is extremely

and unfairly short.

e) ... NO WAY the defendant / defense can call on police investigators for

ANY evidence, statement, info, that they may even know that are in the

police possession, but haven't been included in the prosecution files!!!

ONCE AGAIN: no BODY will or can EVER see the whole police

investigation files officially!!! ... from the start to the very end!

There is NO CONTROL over what all has been done or collected - and

archived (!!!), during the whole investigation process and no BODY can

officially obtain or demand the access (other than the investigators -

police, themselves ... oh, apart of a "Special Branch" investigators -

revisers, if assigned, and even they would only see what has been

eventually "left" for them to see).

f) ... last but not the least, you hardly can "work" with any evidence that has

not been properly collected, numbered, bagged-sealed and photo-

documented (so much for all the "iPhones" confusion)

I agree with you, or share the same sentiment, about the prosecution's insufficient performance - regardless on all odds against them. However, the prosecution has been, after all, very "supportive" to the "strong defense" and yet the defense didn't take the full advantage of such. It seems to me, that their "main tactic" was to get out of this "local court" to bring the case to, hopefully more "competent" and less "influenced" appeal judges?

[RWA]

If the British coroner's inquest states that neither victim was raped, then the RTP and judge may have some explaining to do.

And if this is stated I would think in most civilised country's at the very lease a re-trial ordered or an acquittal.

Also the injuries, particularly in David's case.....The small puncture wounds on his face were not caused by a hoe......never.

So what caused them? and again why has the defence not brought that into question?

Maybe the defense is not capable to do their job, and some TV experts should have been asked for it.

Another theory is that the defense knows something the TV investigators don't .............................Naaah that isn't possible. Is it?

Yes I think thats very possible. I also think its possible the prosecution knows where the blond hair found in Hannah's hand is along with the clothes she was wearing that were never tested.

Maybe you would like to tell us what DNA on Hannah's clothes would have proved ?

Would it prove in a court of law she was murdered ?

Would it prove in a court of law she was raped ?

HUH doesn't need to tell you

Dr. Porntip did

IF Hannah was raped indeed, then it would, without the doubt, indicate the person (or some of the person's gang) who'd been in close touch with her body

wouldn't you think?

[Bluespunk]

The whole "DNA is lost!" brouhaha came from the time the Phangan police chief testified, what he said was that they didn't have the DNA evidence collected at the crime scene, because they had already sent it to Bangkok to the Forensic Institute. Somehow the last part got conveniently overlooked and next thing you hear was that the police said there was no more DNA evidence.

Do you have any credible link for that? Otherswise it's just hearsay.

"So when the defence lawyer asked him in the court about the DNA samples and evidence, he said he did not have them. This may have made people misunderstand that the evidence no longer exists or was lost," the police chief said.

Thawatchai agreed, saying the BBC had misunderstood the officer and that the evidence had not been lost. However, he said, some DNA samples may have been used up in accordance with the examination process."

How about you ask the people making the claim that the police said all DNA evidence was lost provide a source? The closest primary source is from a journalist saying that the evidence collected from Witheridge's body was "finished" (you see how nice I am, I'm even doing your job for you).

"Koh Tao trial. Items that can be retested: hoe, shoe, bag. Items that can't: ("finished") -all DNA from Hannah Witheridge body."

The context of that quote was the Phangan police chief being asked what evidence they (the Phangan local police) could provide for re-examination, they didn't have those DNA samples (taken at the crime scene) because they had been sent out, furthermore the post-mortem was done in Bangkok so any and all DNA evidence collected there (in particular the one from inside the victim) had nothing to do with what the Phangan police chief said so either way the preposition that DNA from Witheridge is lost is a non-starter.

But wait, it gets better than that, the only quote I've seen from Pol Lt-General Decha Butrnampetch is:

"Much of the defences case revolves around a bid to retest key forensic evidence, including DNA on cigarettes and a condom found near the crime scene as well as DNA swabs taken from the victims bodies.

The DNA on the cigarettes is all finished, the head of police on the nearby island of Koh Pha Ngan told the defence team outside the courtroom on Koh Samui on Thursday."

Which again it's a moot point because the cigarette butts were not used as evidence against the two Burmese anyway.

So what again is the problem here? That evidence that was not used against the Burmese supposedly can't be contested? To mix metaphors, this is nothing but clutching at windmills.

In a similar vein, the confessions and everything surrounding that weren't either. In other words, everything they have contested about was irrelevant to the trial and played no part in it. That stuffed those interfering HR organisations as they kept on bleating about, torture, plastic bags, beatings, lighters, gasoline etc: just like they do at every opportunity they can find to make them look and feel useful.

If they thought that Bin Laden was being persecuted - there they would be, jumping to his defence!!

Uh oh, you're starting to lose it now. Be careful as your true colours are showing.

No one with a conscience would oppose human rights being respected and defend torture as you do here.

Bin Laden? Dear me, a note of hysterical hyperbole entering into your posts as well.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Artisi]

Activist group Anonymous joins protest against convictions of men for David Miller's death http://www.itv.com/news/channel/update/2015-12-30/activist-group-anonymous-joins-protest-against-convictions-of-men-for-david-millers-death/

That was started and is being organized by the same man that has run the MWRN fundraisers.

So not so anonymous.

The village glee club in full voice, keep it up, with a bit of luck you might get to the top of the charts.

[bunglebag]

Am I on the wrong thread?

Because, what I see written in the recent past, is way off the topic of:

"Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers"

Now it’s:

"Started the protests started the protests"? (Remind’s me of a DeNiro movie)

"Bin Ladin"??

"Activist group Anonymous"?

"Fundraising"??

Misdirection folks.

It appears some posters who have been here virtually day and night, have run out of gas…

Quite. There are some posters on here who are very happy with the guilty verdict. That's their prerogative. What I don't get is why they feel the need to continue to battle with those people who are not satisfied with the guilty verdict. They (a minority) are fixed in their views and content with the fact that the two Burmese men have been sentenced to death. If I was happy with the verdict I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time on TV slinging mud. I wonder why it is that some people keep hanging on in?

That is a very very good point. If the verdict had gone the other way I certainly wouldn't be spending all my time here defending it.

[007cableguy]

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

The police have arrested a suspect in the murder of two British tourists in Koh Tao and are still hunting for a second suspect who has escaped into Bangkok.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

He is the brother of a village headman in Koh Tao.

He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said.

He also said another suspect is also a son of that village headman. But he has already to Bangkok.

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

He said the southern police were coordinating with the metropolitan police to hunt him down, and expected to apprehend him today.

The southern police chief also assured the public that there was no arrest of scapegoats in this murder case as it now is a focal attention of the world.

He also dismissed any suggestion of local mafias or influential people that could twist the investigation with promise that local influence would pose no obstacle to the police investigation.

Instead the police will eliminate all these mafias, he said.

Meanwhile a police source said the police are also looking into the cooperation of those who helped to arrange the suspect to escape. They also will be arrested.

Question to the Glee Club (alig,lucy11,desperate dan etc)

I've the highlighted sentence's I need your views on, Why would the police make this statement that they had seen both Mon & Nomsod on cctv ?,Surely they couldn't of made a mistake or there eyesight was that bad to make such a huge error!.

I would love to see the cctv footage and the evidence they had! ......Pretty sure that's long gone now!

[stephenterry]

I have no connection with any other posters here and not wanting to repeat myself, I can say that now that I am more acquainted with the facts, I am content with the guilty verdict and as proponent of the death penalty, I do support the sentence.

Yes but why repeat this as a daily, repeated message in the forum ?

It will not help either side , I also believe B2 are involved somehow and not just some random scape goats , but when not all the facts are on the table , you just can't defend a death sentence, especially in this case

I do support a life sentence , if they are the real killers.

I agree completely, balo. A very balanced opinion.

How can you agree completely? he supports a life sentence if they are guilty as do I. You states that they are 100% innocent.

I would hope everyone would agree a life sentence for the real killers at the minimum, but I don't think the b2 are the real killers nor do I agree that the prosecution proved their case and thus I cannot support a death sentence. What's so difficult to understand? I also think the b2 have not disclosed everything they know, and if they expect the truth to emerge they need to facilitate it.

[AleG]

The whole "DNA is lost!" brouhaha came from the time the Phangan police chief testified, what he said was that they didn't have the DNA evidence collected at the crime scene, because they had already sent it to Bangkok to the Forensic Institute. Somehow the last part got conveniently overlooked and next thing you hear was that the police said there was no more DNA evidence.

Do you have any credible link for that? Otherswise it's just hearsay.

"So when the defence lawyer asked him in the court about the DNA samples and evidence, he said he did not have them. This may have made people misunderstand that the evidence no longer exists or was lost," the police chief said.

Thawatchai agreed, saying the BBC had misunderstood the officer and that the evidence had not been lost. However, he said, some DNA samples may have been used up in accordance with the examination process."

How about you ask the people making the claim that the police said all DNA evidence was lost provide a source? The closest primary source is from a journalist saying that the evidence collected from Witheridge's body was "finished" (you see how nice I am, I'm even doing your job for you).

"Koh Tao trial. Items that can be retested: hoe, shoe, bag. Items that can't: ("finished") -all DNA from Hannah Witheridge body."

The context of that quote was the Phangan police chief being asked what evidence they (the Phangan local police) could provide for re-examination, they didn't have those DNA samples (taken at the crime scene) because they had been sent out, furthermore the post-mortem was done in Bangkok so any and all DNA evidence collected there (in particular the one from inside the victim) had nothing to do with what the Phangan police chief said so either way the preposition that DNA from Witheridge is lost is a non-starter.

But wait, it gets better than that, the only quote I've seen from Pol Lt-General Decha Butrnampetch is:

"Much of the defence’s case revolves around a bid to retest key forensic evidence, including DNA on cigarettes and a condom found near the crime scene as well as DNA swabs taken from the victims’ bodies.

“The DNA on the cigarettes is all finished,” the head of police on the nearby island of Koh Pha Ngan told the defence team outside the courtroom on Koh Samui on Thursday."

Which again it's a moot point because the cigarette butts were not used as evidence against the two Burmese anyway.

So what again is the problem here? That evidence that was not used against the Burmese supposedly can't be contested? To mix metaphors, this is nothing but clutching at windmills.

see my post above

You didn't address any of the points I raised, you still have not provided any substantiation to your claim that only replicated DNA samples were available to be retested, you simply copy and paste the same stuff which just goes to show that you are simply responding in an unthinking, knee jerk fashion to anything that contradicts your beliefs, that is to say, you are in denial.

[bunglebag]

Spotted a post containing the following on Heidi's facebook page:

In Case No: HQ15X0311,Queen Bench Division, Justice Green posed the following scenario, and it is worth repeating now because it was so prophetic.

"A foreign prosecutor fails to disclose to a defendant a key piece of evidence of great value to the defendant in a criminal case. This item is however recorded in an MPS (Met Police) report and amounts to personal data.
“The report explains that there is compelling evidence that the foreign forensic scientists employed by the police abroad have mixed up DNA samples. It also records that the prosecution are nonetheless seeking to rely in court upon the wrong DNA evidence to inculpate the accused.
“This entry might be pivotal to the defence and might quite literally represent a matter of life or death. In those circumstances does the Court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?
“ The MPS submitted that such was the power and force of the public interest objectives the MPS advanced that even in such extreme circumstances the public interest would still trump the private interest.
“Does the court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?”
In effect, according to last week's judgment, it did.

As he made his ruling rejecting the application he said:

“I cannot ignore the fact that this is a death penalty case conducted with the accused arguing with their eyes closed.’…

“ I feel considerable unease. I sit a long way from the seat of the trial and do not have a true hands-on feeling for the way evidence has been tendered by the prosecution or the main lines of defence.”

Indeed Justice Green had absolutely no idea what was being undone in the court in Koh Samui.

I am not suggesting that Scotland Yard knew of any evidence being tampered with of course.

After all, as was made clear in the High Court, British police were not present at any interviews, were not witness to any DNA procedures, and were reliant on the documents and videos placed in front of them and what they were told through a Thai police interpreter, or English speaking Thai officers.

The Scotland Yard report did however state that the two young Burmese confessed in front of a judge and counsel.

We know that not to be true

[Lantern]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

https://www.facebook.com/CSILA90210/posts/722722867805441

[StealthEnergiser]

since certain people keep repeating themselves over and over the 4 posts above are worthy of keeping for replies, copy them and keep them, I don't mind anyone quoting any points I have made ....hint hint

those same certain people don'y reply to these posts as they don't want them seen quoted or repeated

Thanks Smedly I will take a copy

Edited December 31, 2015 by StealthEnergiser

[seahorse]

The iPhone found 16Sept. 2014 does not belong to David Miller.

David's friend confirm that he got iPhone 4s not iPhone 4.

The big question still remains: : To who belongs the iphone the police found first?

Capture Not Davids phone.PNGIPhone4SiPhone4 Comparison ikik.png

Sean McAnna?

[AGareth2]

Spotted a post containing the following on Heidi's facebook page:

In Case No: HQ15X0311,Queen Bench Division, Justice Green posed the following scenario, and it is worth repeating now because it was so prophetic.

"A foreign prosecutor fails to disclose to a defendant a key piece of evidence of great value to the defendant in a criminal case. This item is however recorded in an MPS (Met Police) report and amounts to personal data.

“The report explains that there is compelling evidence that the foreign forensic scientists employed by the police abroad have mixed up DNA samples. It also records that the prosecution are nonetheless seeking to rely in court upon the wrong DNA evidence to inculpate the accused.

“This entry might be pivotal to the defence and might quite literally represent a matter of life or death. In those circumstances does the Court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?

“ The MPS submitted that such was the power and force of the public interest objectives the MPS advanced that even in such extreme circumstances the public interest would still trump the private interest.

“Does the court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?”

In effect, according to last week's judgment, it did.

As he made his ruling rejecting the application he said:

“I cannot ignore the fact that this is a death penalty case conducted with the accused arguing with their eyes closed.’…

“ I feel considerable unease. I sit a long way from the seat of the trial and do not have a true hands-on feeling for the way evidence has been tendered by the prosecution or the main lines of defence.”

Indeed Justice Green had absolutely no idea what was being undone in the court in Koh Samui.

I am not suggesting that Scotland Yard knew of any evidence being tampered with of course.

After all, as was made clear in the High Court, British police were not present at any interviews, were not witness to any DNA procedures, and were reliant on the documents and videos placed in front of them and what they were told through a Thai police interpreter, or English speaking Thai officers.

The Scotland Yard report did however state that the two young Burmese confessed in front of a judge and counsel.

We know that not to be true

what is it she is trying to say?!

[Artisi]

Spotted a post containing the following on Heidi's facebook page:

In Case No: HQ15X0311,Queen Bench Division, Justice Green posed the following scenario, and it is worth repeating now because it was so prophetic.

"A foreign prosecutor fails to disclose to a defendant a key piece of evidence of great value to the defendant in a criminal case. This item is however recorded in an MPS (Met Police) report and amounts to personal data.

“The report explains that there is compelling evidence that the foreign forensic scientists employed by the police abroad have mixed up DNA samples. It also records that the prosecution are nonetheless seeking to rely in court upon the wrong DNA evidence to inculpate the accused.

“This entry might be pivotal to the defence and might quite literally represent a matter of life or death. In those circumstances does the Court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?

“ The MPS submitted that such was the power and force of the public interest objectives the MPS advanced that even in such extreme circumstances the public interest would still trump the private interest.

“Does the court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?”

In effect, according to last week's judgment, it did.

As he made his ruling rejecting the application he said:

“I cannot ignore the fact that this is a death penalty case conducted with the accused arguing with their eyes closed.’…

“ I feel considerable unease. I sit a long way from the seat of the trial and do not have a true hands-on feeling for the way evidence has been tendered by the prosecution or the main lines of defence.”

Indeed Justice Green had absolutely no idea what was being undone in the court in Koh Samui.

I am not suggesting that Scotland Yard knew of any evidence being tampered with of course.

After all, as was made clear in the High Court, British police were not present at any interviews, were not witness to any DNA procedures, and were reliant on the documents and videos placed in front of them and what they were told through a Thai police interpreter, or English speaking Thai officers.

The Scotland Yard report did however state that the two young Burmese confessed in front of a judge and counsel.

We know that not to be true

True not true, doesn't mean anything in the shambles of the Thai police and judicial system....

[bunglebag]

Spotted a post containing the following on Heidi's facebook page:

In Case No: HQ15X0311,Queen Bench Division, Justice Green posed the following scenario, and it is worth repeating now because it was so prophetic.

"A foreign prosecutor fails to disclose to a defendant a key piece of evidence of great value to the defendant in a criminal case. This item is however recorded in an MPS (Met Police) report and amounts to personal data.

“The report explains that there is compelling evidence that the foreign forensic scientists employed by the police abroad have mixed up DNA samples. It also records that the prosecution are nonetheless seeking to rely in court upon the wrong DNA evidence to inculpate the accused.

“This entry might be pivotal to the defence and might quite literally represent a matter of life or death. In those circumstances does the Court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?

“ The MPS submitted that such was the power and force of the public interest objectives the MPS advanced that even in such extreme circumstances the public interest would still trump the private interest.

“Does the court sacrifice the accused for the wider principle of comity and trust between authorities?”

In effect, according to last week's judgment, it did.

As he made his ruling rejecting the application he said:

“I cannot ignore the fact that this is a death penalty case conducted with the accused arguing with their eyes closed.’…

“ I feel considerable unease. I sit a long way from the seat of the trial and do not have a true hands-on feeling for the way evidence has been tendered by the prosecution or the main lines of defence.”

Indeed Justice Green had absolutely no idea what was being undone in the court in Koh Samui.

I am not suggesting that Scotland Yard knew of any evidence being tampered with of course.

After all, as was made clear in the High Court, British police were not present at any interviews, were not witness to any DNA procedures, and were reliant on the documents and videos placed in front of them and what they were told through a Thai police interpreter, or English speaking Thai officers.

The Scotland Yard report did however state that the two young Burmese confessed in front of a judge and counsel.

We know that not to be true

what is it she is trying to say?!

I think the quoted lines are what the British judge said when he had to deny the defence access to the UK police report regarding this case.

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/UK_judge_withholds_report_from_Thai_death_penalty_defendants

Edited December 31, 2015 by bunglebag

[AleG]

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

The police have arrested a suspect in the murder of two British tourists in Koh Tao and are still hunting for a second suspect who has escaped into Bangkok.

Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon.

He is the brother of a village headman in Koh Tao.

He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said.

He also said another suspect is also a son of that village headman. But he has already to Bangkok.

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

He said the southern police were coordinating with the metropolitan police to hunt him down, and expected to apprehend him today.

The southern police chief also assured the public that there was no arrest of scapegoats in this murder case as it now is a focal attention of the world.

He also dismissed any suggestion of local mafias or influential people that could twist the investigation with promise that local influence would pose no obstacle to the police investigation.

Instead the police will eliminate all these mafias, he said.

Meanwhile a police source said the police are also looking into the cooperation of those who helped to arrange the suspect to escape. They also will be arrested.

Question to the Glee Club (alig,lucy11,desperate dan etc)

I've the highlighted sentence's I need your views on, Why would the police make this statement that they had seen both Mon & Nomsod on cctv ?,Surely they couldn't of made a mistake or there eyesight was that bad to make such a huge error!.

I would love to see the cctv footage and the evidence they had! ......Pretty sure that's long gone now!

The chain of events as far as I have pieced it together was the police asked for help from the public to identify the man on the CCTV footage, AKA the running man; the people at CSI-LA didn't like when Nomsod went to their page to contend their BS and decided he looked like that man, then the police used that supposed ID to make their statement.

You know, the same way that people here decided that anyone that doesn't jump in the "Scapegoats" bandwagon must be connected with the murders or the supposed cover up.

This was posted last year by the man running the CSI-LA page "Nom Sod" and his friends had posted comments on CSI during the time that Sean leaked out a statement that he was being threatened and bullied by the mafia. In many ways, this allowed Admin and people on CSI LA page to. see the suspicious behavior and we were able to recognize the close similarity in the physical features of the suspect betweem the CCTV video and "Nom Sod"."