Koh Tao: Suspects found guilty of murdering British backpackers

[HUH]

I posted a link to the "anonymous" facebook page, they have released a lengthy video on the KT case, for some reason its been deleted but never mind, I have no doubt it will be in the international press shortly

[Khun Han]

There's crime everywhere, does that make the B2 the innocent victims of a vast conspiracy? No, it doesn't.

You may have noticed that, contrary to the "everyone knows" theme that Burmese are used as scapegoats, none of the... hang on, the one murder that is mentioned had Burmese people used as scapegoats.

The other crimes mentioned are all business related events, none of tourists being targeted as victims.

The people running the place may be as bad as you wish to believe, but they make their money by making sure people keep coming, supposedly murdering a pair of young tourists at your business's doorstep does not work so well to that end.

Incidentally, that blog incorrectly says that laboratories in Bangkok are not certified with the ISO17025 standard, which I already shown to be false.

Yes, I apologize. I did not realize that only for this crime, because it involved British tourists and it attracted international media attention, scapegoats were used.

I did not realize that all the other murders were business related events so scapegoats did not need to be used. Next time I would love to travel to Koh Tao to see these "business people" firing shots at each other. I just hope I stay in the bar a little further from where they are using the guns. Well....not that one bar at least. On a second thought, it could be any bar. But hey, I'm happy with that as long as it makes me feel safe as a tourist and they don't shoot at me. Loving it.

Yeah those "bad people" are just trying to make a living off tourism, of course they would not want that jeopardized. Unless some do some coke or Yaba and for a split second, tourism longevity is no longer a major concern for them. I'm sure they did not think this would attract so much attention.

What the blog incorrectly or correctly states about the ISO has less relevance when the root of the problem is how the DNA evidence was obtained and how reliable it is.

Also worth pointing out that this happened in Koh Samui, why would the Samui "mafia" want to hamper the work of the press when the prosecution is presenting their case? And not a word of any such interference when the defense had their turn.

You got me with that one AleG, I don't have any insider information in regards to what the connections are between the "powerful ruling families" within the Ko Tao - Ko Phangan - Ko Samui triangle, but if you would provide us with more of an insight, that would be highly appreciated.

Didn't Nomsod make a post on Facebook, apologising to the Don of Koh Samui, Suthep Thaugsuban, for not being able to attend the 2014 anti-government protests due to his studies, referring to Suthep as 'uncle'?

[taony]

How can you possibly take something such as what he tweeted out of context? He said the DNA evidence was sound and the verdict also.
So you think he still believes they are innocent?

He said "IF the DNA evidence was sound, the verdict wa sound".
You missed out the "if" you also missed the sarcasm.

This is his tweet (unadulterated) - please point out where it say's the word IF!!!!

Jonathan Head ‏@pakhead 29 ธ.ค. 2558
the DNA match is sound, so is the verdict. It's that simple. That's why it was so bizarre that defence lawyers did not challenge DNA methods

10 รีทวีต2 ชื่นชอบ

More mis-representation. Unbelievable!

Thanks for posting the full tweet Stealth Energiser. Though it's been posted before and Lucky 11 chose to ignore it.

How can this continual purposely misquote be highlighted to the Admin. for action.?

It can't. They will claim that you simply disagree with him and are not allowed to report that. He is being protected just like his aliases were in the early days. When these tweets were first tweeted here he said the same until he was shown it was a misquote and then apologized. He had posts deleted and now is pretending that never happened. Trolling is against forum rules, but he will never get in trouble for it.

[boomerangutang]

Also worth pointing out that this happened in Koh Samui, why would the Samui "mafia" want to hamper the work of the press when the prosecution is presenting their case? And not a word of any such interference when the defense had their turn.

Is that a real question? There are a slew of reasons the Samui mafia (as you call them) would want to hamper the press re; reporting of the crime. Here are some reasons, The less info that gets out, .....

>>> ....the less chance of tourist revenue hurting

>>> ....less chance of the general population finding out about Nomsod's and Mon's possible involvement

>>> ....less likely the general public gets wind of Running Man videos which implicate Nomsod in the crime. Not just me and hundreds of thousands of other people see the resemblance. So too did the initial police investigative team.

I don't know about Samui mafia or Ko Tao mafia. I've seen/heard indications there are mafia-like operatives on Ko Tao. At least two farang backpackers have died on KT since the crime broke in Sept. '14. That's more backpackers than have died in all of Burma during that time. KT is a little bitty island. Burma is bigger than Thailand. Both those deaths were mysterious. One was at Mon's g.h. - a bright young woman who was studying journalism (what do journalists do? They ask probing questions. Perhaps she asked a too-probing question about fellow Brits dying tragically). Both after-the-double-murder deaths had odd circumstances which indicated foul play. It sure smells like more than coincidence.

Edited January 3, 2016 by boomerangutang

[DiscoDan]

^Mafia thugs always do their threatening in really public places don't they? Why would they do it discreetly when they can do it in full public view. Doesn't make sense.

So, after all the nonsense about Jonathan Head, about skin damage being repaired by the embalming process, etc, etc, etc. We now have posters deriding a British reporter's statement that their interpreters were frightened off by the mafia. It's like the Mad Hatter's Tea Party at times in these discussions! Black becomes white and white becomes black, and they're sticking to their opinions!

I am not saying the reporter is lying, who supplied him the translator ? the prosecution or the defense ? or did he bring his own because apparently the 3 translators on Samui were to scared to help.

As for the embalming everyone is welcome to google " washout out bite marks embalming "

I did:

"Note: Embalming may bring out bruises not necessarily noticed during previous examinations. After embalming, bite marks may remain visible; there may be a lesser chance for their survival in an uneblamed body."

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cR8tAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236&dq=+washout+out+bite+marks+embalming+&source=bl&ots=zaJpgYhltY&sig=-zjFY8GJH3YypWV-AM8o2jPPViw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja3MKE543KAhWBWhQKHf6JCnYQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=washout%20out%20bite%20marks%20embalming&f=false

So it would appear that embalming tends to do the opposite of what you claim.

Twist it whatever way you want bite marks fade embalmed or not, if this was such a great bit of evidence why did they not bring the person who did the report as a witness?

Instead flying in a dna expert and not letting her take the stand same as Mr Gait form the UK, Andy Hall has a degree in Law but did not realize he had to bring them to the court for the evidence to be admitted.? or rubbish evidence ?

[glenmohr]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

[MorristheRunt]

Maybe if the Burmese give a true account of that night, they will die regardless.

They and the defence lawyers know a lot more than have so far revelaed, that's the only conclusion of what was a very poor defence performance.

[iReason]

@boomerangutang

By the way, all of the journalist's notes disappeared...

[KunMatt]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

[HUH]

Bite marks a great bit of evidence!!! What evidence did they have of these bite marks??

Here's a 6 page document on the evidence and recording procedure of bite marks http://medind.nic.in/jal/t12/i1/jalt12i1p61.pdf

Here's a little snippet:

The most important evidence from the bite mark victim is photography. Numerous photographs of the injury should be taken immediately. Shots would include: 1. With and without the ABFO no.2 scale; 2. In colour and black and white; 3. On and off camera flash (oblique flashes can highlight the three dimensional nature of the same bites); 4. An overall body shot showing the location of the injury; 5. Close-ups that can easily be scaled1:1; 6. UV photography if the injury is fading; 7. If the bite is on a movable anatomic location, then several body positions should be adopted in order to assess the effect of movement. All the photographs should be taken with the camera at 90º (perpendicular) to the injury. It has been recommended that bite marks are photographed at regular 24 hour intervals on both deceased and living victim as their appearance can improve. [6] The lighting should be arranged at an angle to shadow indentations which will appear more definite on the positive print, but precautions should be taken to prevent excessive heat from the photographic lamps causing distortion of the material and filters may be used to mask or enhance various shades of coloration that are associated with the marks.[9] Photographs of the bite marks must be of highest standard if the forensic significance of the injury is to be maximized.[6]

The prosecution only produced photographs from the neck up! None of the bite marks.

What about the evidence of the tear in Hannahs vulva which the prosecution said there was and that it had been bleeding at the time of the attack?

The evidence from the 400 page UK coroner in contrast came with all the necessary evidence and photographs, no bite marks, no sign of rape.

[AleG]

I did:

"Note: Embalming may bring out bruises not necessarily noticed during previous examinations. After embalming, bite marks may remain visible; there may be a lesser chance for their survival in an uneblamed body."

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cR8tAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236&dq=+washout+out+bite+marks+embalming+&source=bl&ots=zaJpgYhltY&sig=-zjFY8GJH3YypWV-AM8o2jPPViw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja3MKE543KAhWBWhQKHf6JCnYQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=washout%20out%20bite%20marks%20embalming&f=false

So it would appear that embalming tends to do the opposite of what you claim.

Twist it whatever way you want bite marks fade embalmed or not, if this was such a great bit of evidence why did they not bring the person who did the report as a witness?

Instead flying in a dna expert and not letting her take the stand same as Mr Gait form the UK, Andy Hall has a degree in Law but did not realize he had to bring them to the court for the evidence to be admitted.? or rubbish evidence ?

The UK coroner's report was dismissed because the coroner was not available for cross examination; what we know about the issue is the claim that the UK coroner didn't find a bite mark, questions that can be raised during cross examination would be if she didn't find any mark at all or if she found a mark and she didn't/couldn't positively identify it as one done by biting therefore the "no bite mark" statement.

It may very well be a case of difference in judgement between specialists, and seeing how things have been spun in the past it wouldn't surprise me at all.

[HUH]

I did:

"Note: Embalming may bring out bruises not necessarily noticed during previous examinations. After embalming, bite marks may remain visible; there may be a lesser chance for their survival in an uneblamed body."

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cR8tAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236&dq=+washout+out+bite+marks+embalming+&source=bl&ots=zaJpgYhltY&sig=-zjFY8GJH3YypWV-AM8o2jPPViw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja3MKE543KAhWBWhQKHf6JCnYQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=washout%20out%20bite%20marks%20embalming&f=false

So it would appear that embalming tends to do the opposite of what you claim.

Twist it whatever way you want bite marks fade embalmed or not, if this was such a great bit of evidence why did they not bring the person who did the report as a witness?

Instead flying in a dna expert and not letting her take the stand same as Mr Gait form the UK, Andy Hall has a degree in Law but did not realize he had to bring them to the court for the evidence to be admitted.? or rubbish evidence ?

The UK coroner's report was dismissed because the coroner was not available for cross examination; what we know about the issue is the claim that the UK coroner didn't find a bite mark, questions that can be raised during cross examination would be if she didn't find any mark at all or if she found a mark and she didn't/couldn't positively identify it as one done by biting therefore the "no bite mark" statement.

It may very well be a case of difference in judgement between specialists, and seeing how things have been spun in the past it wouldn't surprise me at all.

Yes maybe, thats the way you would like it to be of course, but maybe you are wrong and there really was no bite marks. I certainly know whose judgement in specialists I would trust, one who says he cant remember the colour of the hair he found in Hannahs hand or the UK coronor who produces a professional and detailed 400 page report with photos.

[AleG]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

So instead of gossiping and making up fantasies about other people why don't you address relevant points, for example post #2881?

[KunMatt]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

So instead of gossiping and making up fantasies about other people why don't you address relevant points, for example post #2881?

Still waiting for you to answer the question I put to you that you ignored over and over before;

1. Do you believe that the B2 were tortured?

2. What smoking gun makes you believe that the B2 are guilty?

[asiamaster]

I posted a link to the "anonymous" facebook page, they have released a lengthy video on the KT case, for some reason its been deleted but never mind, I have no doubt it will be in the international press shortly

Maybe it was a counter hack by the Koh Tao maffia?

[HUH]

I posted a link to the "anonymous" facebook page, they have released a lengthy video on the KT case, for some reason its been deleted but never mind, I have no doubt it will be in the international press shortly

Maybe it was a counter hack by the Koh Tao maffia?

Thanks for the heads up, didn't realise any of the mods on here were members of the KT mafia as you call them, as for the video you can still watch it on the facebook page where the mods do not seem to have gained any influence yet

[AleG]

I did:

"Note: Embalming may bring out bruises not necessarily noticed during previous examinations. After embalming, bite marks may remain visible; there may be a lesser chance for their survival in an uneblamed body."

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cR8tAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236&dq=+washout+out+bite+marks+embalming+&source=bl&ots=zaJpgYhltY&sig=-zjFY8GJH3YypWV-AM8o2jPPViw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja3MKE543KAhWBWhQKHf6JCnYQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=washout%20out%20bite%20marks%20embalming&f=false

So it would appear that embalming tends to do the opposite of what you claim.

Twist it whatever way you want bite marks fade embalmed or not, if this was such a great bit of evidence why did they not bring the person who did the report as a witness?

Instead flying in a dna expert and not letting her take the stand same as Mr Gait form the UK, Andy Hall has a degree in Law but did not realize he had to bring them to the court for the evidence to be admitted.? or rubbish evidence ?

The UK coroner's report was dismissed because the coroner was not available for cross examination; what we know about the issue is the claim that the UK coroner didn't find a bite mark, questions that can be raised during cross examination would be if she didn't find any mark at all or if she found a mark and she didn't/couldn't positively identify it as one done by biting therefore the "no bite mark" statement.

It may very well be a case of difference in judgement between specialists, and seeing how things have been spun in the past it wouldn't surprise me at all.

Yes maybe, thats the way you would like it to be of course, but maybe you are wrong and there really was no bite marks. I certainly know whose judgement in specialists I would trust, one who says he cant remember the colour of the hair he found in Hannahs hand or the UK coronor who produces a professional and detailed 400 page report with photos.

To be precise, unless you have read that 400 page report what you are going on is Andy Hall's word on what the report said.

[AleG]

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

So instead of gossiping and making up fantasies about other people why don't you address relevant points, for example post #2881?

Still waiting for you to answer the question I put to you that you ignored over and over before;

1. Do you believe that the B2 were tortured?

2. What smoking gun makes you believe that the B2 are guilty?

Two questions that I have already answered before, 1) probably roughed up, played for all that it's worth to gain sympathy and definitely immaterial regarding the verdict.

2) Unbelievable alibi, lies told in court, DNA evidence that the defense was incapable of refuting during the trial.

Now, how about post #2881?

[asiamaster]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

You are really demonstrating that you are a conspiracy nutter KunMattHanHuh.

I have never set foot on Koh Tao. Closest I have been is Koh Samui and last time i was there is over 15 years ago.

[KunMatt]

Isn't it strange: hardly so much as a peep at the thread from The Team since Friday, then Team Leader pops up and suddenly they're all here, even the really daft 'headless chicken' one .

Which leads me to ask once more, are "they" in fact one person? "They" hardly ever post individually but as a tag team. If they are different people I suspect they are posting from the same location after meeting to discuss strategy on how to save their businesses.

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

You are really demonstrating that you are a conspiracy nutter KunMattHanHuh.

I have never set foot on Koh Tao. Closest I have been is Koh Samui and last time i was there is over 15 years ago.

Never said anything about you. Did you forget your username?? ")

[Khun Han]

^And of course, Andy Hall is going to completely destroy his hard-earned good reputation by lying about the contents of the report (which will eventually be released to the public, when Andy's comments can be verified or not ) .

[HUH]

It may very well be a case of difference in judgement between specialists, and seeing how things have been spun in the past it wouldn't surprise me at all.

Yes maybe, thats the way you would like it to be of course, but maybe you are wrong and there really was no bite marks. I certainly know whose judgement in specialists I would trust, one who says he cant remember the colour of the hair he found in Hannahs hand or the UK coronor who produces a professional and detailed 400 page report with photos.

To be precise, unless you have read that 400 page report what you are going on is Andy Hall's word on what the report said.

Aaaah that will be it then, A.H. must have lied when he read the report, all 400 pages of it even knowing that his lie would be read by the judges and prosecution who he gave copies to, recorded by the international and local press, lawyers and human rights activists at the trial and hoping the Witheridge family would also be in on it knowing of course they had already read it, of course should have thought of that, thanks

[KunMatt]

That's always been my thinking. The 5 or 6 members here who continually harp on about petty points to detract from any real conversation are more than likely to be the same person. DiscoAleGinasia11 would probably be a better username. Take the handful of similar trolls out of this thread and the entire RTP cheerleading squad is gone.

So instead of gossiping and making up fantasies about other people why don't you address relevant points, for example post #2881?

Still waiting for you to answer the question I put to you that you ignored over and over before;

1. Do you believe that the B2 were tortured?

2. What smoking gun makes you believe that the B2 are guilty?

Two questions that I have already answered before, 1) probably roughed up, played for all that it's worth to gain sympathy and definitely immaterial regarding the verdict.

2) Unbelievable alibi, lies told in court, DNA evidence that the defense was incapable of refuting during the trial.

Now, how about post #2881?

So you admit that the B2 didn't freely admit to the crimes they were accused of? It means the confessions were not real. Confessions which were the sole basis of establishing the B2's guilt at the beginning of the case before the DNA evidence was retrofitted.

It means, according to you, that the whole case is a sham and you are only here defending it because you have an agenda.

Thanks for the confirmation.

[asiamaster]

Never said anything about you. Did you forget your username?? ")

Am I not the Asia part of DiscoAleGinasia11 then? Thank God, what a relief!

[KunMatt]

Never said anything about you. Did you forget your username?? ")

Am I not the Asia part of DiscoAleGinasia11 then? Thank God, what a relief!

No you are not who I was referring to by "inasia"

[AleG]

Still waiting for you to answer the question I put to you that you ignored over and over before;

1. Do you believe that the B2 were tortured?

2. What smoking gun makes you believe that the B2 are guilty?

Two questions that I have already answered before, 1) probably roughed up, played for all that it's worth to gain sympathy and definitely immaterial regarding the verdict.

2) Unbelievable alibi, lies told in court, DNA evidence that the defense was incapable of refuting during the trial.

Now, how about post #2881?

So you admit that the B2 didn't freely admit to the crimes they were accused of? It means the confessions were not real. Confessions which were the sole basis of establishing the B2's guilt at the beginning of the case before the DNA evidence was retrofitted.

It means, according to you, that the whole case is a sham and you are only here defending it because you have an agenda.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Your strawman is kind of cute, but (allegedly) beating someone doesn't magically turn everything they said into lies, and you are ignoring their other confessions to the Human Rights Commission and Myanmar Embassy representatives, not to mention that as I said before, the confession to the police had no part in the verdict.

Also this is completely false "Confessions which were the sole basis of establishing the B2's guilt at the beginning of the case before the DNA evidence was retrofitted."

Last but not least your conclusion doesn't even follow from your nonsensical premises.

One thing though, you forgot to address post #2881, they testified they were not summoned to provide DNA samples before their arrest, there's a photo of one of them doing just that, please explain how you reconcile those two things.

[Luang]

I posted a link to the "anonymous" facebook page, they have released a lengthy video on the KT case, for some reason its been deleted but never mind, I have no doubt it will be in the international press shortly

Maybe it was a counter hack by the Koh Tao maffia?

It's on YouTube. Just type Anon + KT murders

[KunMatt]

Still waiting for you to answer the question I put to you that you ignored over and over before;

1. Do you believe that the B2 were tortured?

2. What smoking gun makes you believe that the B2 are guilty?

Two questions that I have already answered before, 1) probably roughed up, played for all that it's worth to gain sympathy and definitely immaterial regarding the verdict.

2) Unbelievable alibi, lies told in court, DNA evidence that the defense was incapable of refuting during the trial.

Now, how about post #2881?

So you admit that the B2 didn't freely admit to the crimes they were accused of? It means the confessions were not real. Confessions which were the sole basis of establishing the B2's guilt at the beginning of the case before the DNA evidence was retrofitted.

It means, according to you, that the whole case is a sham and you are only here defending it because you have an agenda.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Your strawman is kind of cute, but (allegedly) beating someone doesn't magically turn everything they said into lies, and you are ignoring their other confessions to the Human Rights Commission and Myanmar Embassy representatives, not to mention that as I said before, the confession to the police had no part in the verdict.

Also this is completely false "Confessions which were the sole basis of establishing the B2's guilt at the beginning of the case before the DNA evidence was retrofitted."

Last but not least your conclusion doesn't even follow from your nonsensical premises.

One thing though, you forgot to address post #2881, they testified they were not summoned to provide DNA samples before their arrest, there's a photo of one of them doing just that, please explain how you reconcile those two things.

When an entire case is based on just a confession which was extracted from torture then it doesn't look good for a case which has been full of lies and discrepancies since the outset. There isn't one piece of non- discredited evidence against the B2 but many which shown the police lied and fitted them up. You know this, that isn't why you believe their guilt though. Your connection to Koh Tao island was established long ago so you have zero credibility to be impartial on this case.

Like someone else said before, you got the result you wanted and 2 innocent guys are toast because of it. Hope you are happy and I also hope that karma catches up with you. What are you still doing here, surely your job is done and you are no longer on the payroll?

Edited January 3, 2016 by KunMatt

[greenchair]

Greenchair, who do you think the local mafia on Koh Tao are? The Burmese migrant workers? Why would the local mafia not want the trial translated into English for the foreign media?

Really I have no idea about this mafia codswallop. I am only interested in the time of 1am to 6am who was where doing what ???and why they were doing that, and how they came to be in the place they are now. The rest is fairy tales and speculation. I don't trust the police. I don't trust the prosecutor. I am interested in the b3 own story.

There are questions, I have about the story. Nobody wants to address it. I don't know why.

One more thing to consider, why would they lie about not having been summoned to have DNA samples taken?

CXsPTXtUMAAGukU.jpg

"The B2 also confirmed in court to the prosecution that they were not randomly tested prior to their arrest."

So why is Zaw Lin waiting in line on the day they were doing the DNA mass collection?

Their story changes like the weather. Really I don't know what to believe anymore.

[RWA]

If were talking hairstyles, it seemed a little strange that a certain student in Bangkok suddenly had a very different hairstyle when he appeared with his lawyer to explain his innocence!

Also the same student suddenly went into the monkhood as soon as the Burmese were arrested.

Coincidence....maybe.....but could also be something very different..

Oh yes very different. Kindly provide some pics so we can do a comparison. Preferably just before the murder and just after he had his haircut.

Ah yes very suspicious that he went into monk hood. Quite uncommon with guys his age is it?

Maybe if you look at the CCTV which was released by the students lawyer of him entering his University residence the morning after the murders, you will see a very significant different hairstyle to the one when he appeared a few days later to protest his innocence.

Maybe he is a follower of fashion and wanted to look good on TV or maybe.......