British man found dead on Koh Tao

[TheLobster]

Here are two questions, one of which you appear to have trouble answering. Do you disagree with the finding of the autopsy held inThailand and if so, why?

I think the points made are relevant. Nobody has seen the autopsy report from Thailand as far as I know. We just have the police statements which as I'm sure you know mean nothing when originating from this island.

[Moonsterk]

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day,

I will answer anyone when they have a sensible legitimate question to ask and is a poster that has earned my respect, I very seldom respond to demands, hope that clears that up for you and moonsterk

Here are two questions, one of which you appear to have trouble answering. Do you disagree with the finding of the autopsy held inThailand and if so, why? One has to earn respect from an anonymous TVF poster. Here's another question, please enlighten me how one accomplishes this? Demands, I don't think these are demands, just reasonable, sensible and legitimate questions, wouldn't you say? Oops, another question, sorry.

I've yet to see ANY kind of logical argument this was a covered up murder. All are based on compete fabrications of assumptions with an undercurrent of attention seeking and need to be ....involved, maybe?

How can anyone support what pain this is causing the family?

[Moonsterk]

Here are two questions, one of which you appear to have trouble answering. Do you disagree with the finding of the autopsy held inThailand and if so, why?

I think the points made are relevant. Nobody has seen the autopsy report from Thailand as far as I know. We just have the police statements which as I'm sure you know mean nothing when originating from this island.

I'm sure you know mean nothing when originating from this island.

No I don't know that but it sure is a great example of the ARP( Argument by Regurgitative process) assumptions used to create this false scenario.

I have no doubt the police autopsy states death by drowning as quoted in BBC report. Why on earth would police lie to the BBC about their findings? What would it achieve? Wouldn't it set them up to be exposed as liars- for no matter what is being put out about " body embalming made further examination impossible" a UK coroner is going to be able to see if Miller did indeed drown- or not.

[Moonsterk]

I think people are questioning the drowning because how can Police state ASAP "II WAS A CASE OF DROWNING" Did he perform surgery and open lungs, find filled with Chlorinated Pool Water? There has never been any statement in News or from Coroner's Office of this fact... This is only way to prove if in fact Death was caused by such. "Lungs have to be filled with water". Partially filled says corpse was dead before he hit water, filled says he was still alive and breathing when he went into pool! To say victim drowned because they found him floating in Pool? Asinine!!!!

A Thai coroner determined cause of death was drowning as quoted by police on BBC.

If a Thai police officer made an observation at the discovery of the body, "Gosh, looks like he drowned..." it's hardly evidence that a cover up is occurring when the observation is proved accurate.

That's the exact kind of pretzel logic used again and again to make the case of murder.

Thai police made the valid, logical, and perfectly reasonable determination it was accidental. Others are making the invalid, illogical and perfectly hysterical determinations that 1) CoD is not drowning and/ or;

2) young master Luke was beaten and tossed into a pool to drown.

Partially filled says corpse was dead before he hit water, filled says he was still alive and breathing when he went into pool!

OK so then- filled.

[Moonsterk]

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day, or on occasions offer SA one-liners. I too have had the pleasure of being dismissed in such a manner but not a worry as it shows they lack common sense and that some cannot offer a sound argument hence the regurgitating of the same scenario, day in and day out, week in and week out.

The way they act like attack dogs highlights their inability to look at a subject logically and gives rise to the weak arguments proffered by them in an attempt to shut down the debate when someone comes up with an opposing view.

The lack of analytical and comprehension skills by some is highlighted in many of the responses and one has to wonder why they continue to persist in wanting the incident to be recorded in any way other than what has been established during the Thailand autopsy.

This was carried out at a hospital, by trained medical staff, not the Thai Poice, yet given the way some are posting, if you read between the lines, they are intimating a conspiracy in order to conceal that the death came about by a cause other than drowning. And how did this come about, maybe by reading some unsubstantiated FB page and postings on TVF by someone whose identity cannot be established and from the deceased's so-called friends who allegedly took photos and sprouted to the world that they saw injuries inconsistent with what police allege. Then there are the guessing competitions and rumours being construed as fact. And so it goes on.

As the friends were not present when the incident occurred then what they are sprouting lacks credibility, it is only hearsay. In addition, their attendance at the hospital to take photos also remains uncorroborated, so who knows if they acted as alleged but if someone has unequivocal proof that they did, then I will stand corrected. Further, are they medically qualified to offer a reason as to what is consistent or inconsistent with what they police have stated? Were they present, they say they weren't therefore, any comment offered is insupportable, so how can anyone accept that what they allege is credible and fact?

And it isn't just the scenario put forth that is not credible (IMO.) Abusive rants when questioned on FB , threatening pm's, etc., do not lend to an aura of rationality.

IMO, it's a blatant seizing upon an incident to facilitate a personal agenda of attention seeking and then massaged and nurtured by others with their own personal agendas of international attention seeking. Practically an orgy.

[IslandLover]

Moonsterk, on 29 Feb 2016 - 04:06, said:Moonsterk, on 29 Feb 2016 - 04:06, said:

IslandLover, on 29 Feb 2016 - 02:02, said:IslandLover, on 29 Feb 2016 - 02:02, said:

Moonsterk, on 26 Feb 2016 - 09:00, said:Moonsterk, on 26 Feb 2016 - 09:00, said:Moonsterk, on 26 Feb 2016 - 09:00, said:

Only if he had hit his head, more supposition on your part. He may well have passed out and fell into the water, or a portion of his body hit concrete. Again I'm only offering up scenarios, as I read there were injuries that a drowning did not explain, and which Thai police offered up possible explanations such as above, which then- it seemed to me- the companions took as a form of hoodwinking and began this campaign of paranoia. (IMO)

I also have found out they stayed with Ms Hansen, ( Jack Hansen's mother) and there is someone who would have fed into the demonizing of Thai police - with good reason, too of course.

which then- it seemed to me- the companions took as a form of hoodwinking and began this campaign of paranoia. (IMO)

I'm glad you added (IMO) after that statement. When will you stop attacking the family of Luke Miller, or the two people who were with him on that holiday with your insistence that it was an accident? Not until the family has received the evidence they require from the Thai authorities and the inquest into Luke's death has been fully concluded in the UK will they have a better idea of what really caused his death. However, according to the family, the cause of death was not drowning. This information will have come from the U.K. autopsy report. The inquest into Luke's death has been opened and adjourned to later date, as is the norm in the U.K. It cannot be concluded until all the information has been received from the Thai authorities. The entire inquest process can take more than a year.

Attack is a subjective term, why are you " attacking" me I could well ask.

I am merely dissecting this accusation of foul play. I think it is wrong, and I think the motives for the campaign are wrong, and I think a small group like to urge on these wrong accusations for their own campaign of self -promotion in connection with another case, which is also wrong. Dead wrong.

I've really not read anything from the parents that indicates they have not accepted the conclusion of accidental drowning. " A better idea of the cause"? The CoD is already determined - drowning.

There would be an inquest in the UK no matter what the circumstances, that's the law when citizens die overseas- it has nothing to do with suspicions.

That's a way to mis-inform a reader. Make it seem as if because an inquest will be held, UK officials doubt the RTP. Such tactics of misinformation work well on sycophantic group of poor readers, most of which lack critical thinking skills.

My insistence is actually established by a police inquiry. You are the one insisting established facts are not correct.

The post- mortem was clear- CoD, drowning. The police scenario is perfectly valid and I have no doubt if the companions had not been, handled... is a good term for it, they likely would not have been so likely to continue their baseless accusations.

Handled, then stroked, groomed, adored, admired- who wants to give that up?

There's a real effort to control information, to influence opinion, and to put forth scenarios in this case, and the other, that need to be looked at.

Now please answer, if you can (preferably without involving any kind of personal evaluation or attack) what evidence exists that the companions seized upon as proof L Miller was murdered because I'd really like to know.

My answer is as follows:

The outcome of this case will only be known when the inquest into Luke's death is concluded in the U.K.

I have no idea what evidence exists that the companions seized upon as proof that Luke Miller was murdered, only they know that. By the same token, you have no real proof that Luke's death wasn't foul play. I wasn't there, but neither were you. All you are doing is quoting from the Thai police report and the Thai autopsy as reported in the press. CoD was drowning? Oh really? That is not what the U.K. autopsy revealed. In the case of David Miller, the Thai autopsy said he died from drowning, whereas at the recent inquest into his death, the Jersey Coroner ruled that David died from head injuries, having seen the U.K. autopsy report. So that is another example of the differences in Thai and U.K. autopsy reports.

In Luke Miller's case it comes down to two things:

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

You appear to believe both, but that doesn't mean others can't have a different opinion.

I personally have an open mind on what caused Luke's death and I do not necessarily believe he was murdered, but it can't be ruled out at this stage. His death remains suspicious.

What I really can't abide is this crusade to force your opinions on to the family of Luke Miller and the Gissings (not to mention posters in this thread) and belittle them in doing so, which is not only hurtful but is tantamount to bullying.

I stand by everything I said in my previous post.

[IslandLover]

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 03:22, said:

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 06:32, said:

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day, or on occasions offer SA one-liners. I too have had the pleasure of being dismissed in such a manner but not a worry as it shows they lack common sense and that some cannot offer a sound argument hence the regurgitating of the same scenario, day in and day out, week in and week out.

The way they act like attack dogs highlights their inability to look at a subject logically and gives rise to the weak arguments proffered by them in an attempt to shut down the debate when someone comes up with an opposing view.

The lack of analytical and comprehension skills by some is highlighted in many of the responses and one has to wonder why they continue to persist in wanting the incident to be recorded in any way other than what has been established during the Thailand autopsy.

This was carried out at a hospital, by trained medical staff, not the Thai Poice, yet given the way some are posting, if you read between the lines, they are intimating a conspiracy in order to conceal that the death came about by a cause other than drowning. And how did this come about, maybe by reading some unsubstantiated FB page and postings on TVF by someone whose identity cannot be established and from the deceased's so-called friends who allegedly took photos and sprouted to the world that they saw injuries inconsistent with what police allege. Then there are the guessing competitions and rumours being construed as fact. And so it goes on.

As the friends were not present when the incident occurred then what they are sprouting lacks credibility, it is only hearsay. In addition, their attendance at the hospital to take photos also remains uncorroborated, so who knows if they acted as alleged but if someone has unequivocal proof that they did, then I will stand corrected. Further, are they medically qualified to offer a reason as to what is consistent or inconsistent with what they police have stated? Were they present, they say they weren't therefore, any comment offered is insupportable, so how can anyone accept that what they allege is credible and fact?

And it isn't just the scenario put forth that is not credible (IMO.) Abusive rants when questioned on FB , threatening pm's, etc., do not lend to an aura of rationality.

IMO, it's a blatant seizing upon an incident to facilitate a personal agenda of attention seeking and then massaged and nurtured by others with their own personal agendas of international attention seeking. Practically an orgy.

It was your attitude that resulted in the abusive rants and threatening PMs. That is not to say I agreed with their response, I don't, but on the other hand, I can hardly blame them.

[IslandLover]

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 11:10, said:

smedly, on 29 Feb 2016 - 07:53, said:

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 06:32, said:

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day,

I will answer anyone when they have a sensible legitimate question to ask and is a poster that has earned my respect, I very seldom respond to demands, hope that clears that up for you and moonsterk

Here are two questions, one of which you appear to have trouble answering. Do you disagree with the finding of the autopsy held inThailand and if so, why? One has to earn respect from an anonymous TVF poster. Here's another question, please enlighten me how one accomplishes this? Demands, I don't think these are demands, just reasonable, sensible and legitimate questions, wouldn't you say? Oops, another question, sorry.

I would disagree with the finding of any autopsy held in Thailand when the death has been suspicious - be it murder, 'suicide', or otherwise 'unexplained' for reasons which should be obvious. This is an opinion held by many families of western tourists who have died in Thailand, with good reason, given the likelihood of a cover-up. It should also be noted that Thai autopsies are not very thorough compared to those conducted in western countries. Some examples: Nick Pearson, Liam Whitaker, the Belanger sisters, Hannah Witheridge, David Miller. In all these cases autopsies conducted in their own countries showed different results from the Thai autopsies.

[Moonsterk]

My answer is as follows:

The outcome of this case will only be known when the inquest into Luke's death is concluded in the U.K.

I have no idea what evidence exists that the companions seized upon as proof that Luke Miller was murdered, only they know that. By the same token, you have no real proof that Luke's death wasn't foul play. I wasn't there, but neither were you. All you are doing is quoting from the Thai police report and the Thai autopsy as reported in the press. CoD was drowning? Oh really? That is not what the U.K. autopsy revealed. In the case of David Miller, the Thai autopsy said he died from drowning, whereas at the recent inquest into his death, the Jersey Coroner ruled that David died from head injuries, having seen the U.K. autopsy report. So that is another example of the differences in Thai and U.K. autopsy reports.

In Luke Miller's case it comes down to two things:

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

You appear to believe both, but that doesn't mean others can't have a different opinion.

I personally have an open mind on what caused Luke's death and I do not necessarily believe he was murdered, but it can't be ruled out at this stage. His death remains suspicious.

What I really can't abide is this crusade to force your opinions on to the family of Luke Miller and the Gissings (not to mention posters in this thread) and belittle them in doing so, which is not only hurtful but is tantamount to bullying.

I stand by everything I said in my previous post.

The companion ( who is not family-who are silent on the matter) has made many statements on public blogs, and fb pages regarding this issue.

I am allowed my opinion those statements are not credible because the source is not reliable- I'd like to hear why you think they are credible, then I can post up some evidence to counter it.

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I'm aware of no discrepancy in above. Is it a mistake?

I do not believe your statement you have access to a UK autopsy report that is not public, and I do not believe it contradicts the Thai report. (And so it seems the body was able to be examined despite statements on AD blog that "embalming made further examination impossible..)

And if you'll tell me someone is telling you this, I'd say they are likely putting out assumptions and misinformation deliberately- as is the MO within the LMWM group, and again their credibility is zilch. (IMO)

Show us this report, please.

[Moonsterk]

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 11:10, said:

smedly, on 29 Feb 2016 - 07:53, said:

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 06:32, said:

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day,

I will answer anyone when they have a sensible legitimate question to ask and is a poster that has earned my respect, I very seldom respond to demands, hope that clears that up for you and moonsterk

Here are two questions, one of which you appear to have trouble answering. Do you disagree with the finding of the autopsy held inThailand and if so, why? One has to earn respect from an anonymous TVF poster. Here's another question, please enlighten me how one accomplishes this? Demands, I don't think these are demands, just reasonable, sensible and legitimate questions, wouldn't you say? Oops, another question, sorry.

I would disagree with the finding of any autopsy held in Thailand when the death has been suspicious - be it murder, 'suicide', or otherwise 'unexplained' for reasons which should be obvious. This is an opinion held by many families of western tourists who have died in Thailand, with good reason, given the likelihood of a cover-up. It should also be noted that Thai autopsies are not very thorough compared to those conducted in western countries. Some examples: Nick Pearson, Liam Whitaker, the Belanger sisters, Hannah Witheridge, David Miller. In all these cases autopsies conducted in their own countries showed different results from the Thai autopsies.

Maybe those families have been subjected to videos put out by conspiracy sites, sort of a runaway train of conspiracy theories packaged for the masses void of critical thinking. And where deaths such as Christine Annelsy and Dimitri Povse are included in the list of "cover-ups". Maybe they go to FB pages that have pics of all of the above, and Luke Miller in a montage of " covered up murders"

Social media the great dis-informer with a lot of ARP'ing. And of course tabloidal blogs looking for site hits.

Pearson, fell(or pushed ?) off a cliff. Can you give me a media link, please that indicates two versions of CoD

Liam Whitaker, hung, did police do it? That's the question, not the manner of death.

The Belangor sisters, I'm not aware any definitive CoD was found in a Thai autopsy. And many would argue with the Canadian findings as outside the time frame for definitive results.

We could go on for dozens of deaths...

My point is, this topic, this death of Luke Miller is being referred to as " suspicious" for no other reason than prior deaths are being referred to a "cover -ups, " linked through publicity seeking FB pages and tabloid style blogs.

It's the perfect storm of hysteria and self promotion.

As for the

[Moonsterk]

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 03:22, said:

Si Thea01, on 29 Feb 2016 - 06:32, said:

I would love to see the answer also. It's funny that when someone has a legitimate and opposing view, how some on here cannot or will not answer, or when they cannot come up with anything substantive, they dismiss you totally like a certain party did the other day, or on occasions offer SA one-liners. I too have had the pleasure of being dismissed in such a manner but not a worry as it shows they lack common sense and that some cannot offer a sound argument hence the regurgitating of the same scenario, day in and day out, week in and week out.

The way they act like attack dogs highlights their inability to look at a subject logically and gives rise to the weak arguments proffered by them in an attempt to shut down the debate when someone comes up with an opposing view.

The lack of analytical and comprehension skills by some is highlighted in many of the responses and one has to wonder why they continue to persist in wanting the incident to be recorded in any way other than what has been established during the Thailand autopsy.

This was carried out at a hospital, by trained medical staff, not the Thai Poice, yet given the way some are posting, if you read between the lines, they are intimating a conspiracy in order to conceal that the death came about by a cause other than drowning. And how did this come about, maybe by reading some unsubstantiated FB page and postings on TVF by someone whose identity cannot be established and from the deceased's so-called friends who allegedly took photos and sprouted to the world that they saw injuries inconsistent with what police allege. Then there are the guessing competitions and rumours being construed as fact. And so it goes on.

As the friends were not present when the incident occurred then what they are sprouting lacks credibility, it is only hearsay. In addition, their attendance at the hospital to take photos also remains uncorroborated, so who knows if they acted as alleged but if someone has unequivocal proof that they did, then I will stand corrected. Further, are they medically qualified to offer a reason as to what is consistent or inconsistent with what they police have stated? Were they present, they say they weren't therefore, any comment offered is insupportable, so how can anyone accept that what they allege is credible and fact?

And it isn't just the scenario put forth that is not credible (IMO.) Abusive rants when questioned on FB , threatening pm's, etc., do not lend to an aura of rationality.

IMO, it's a blatant seizing upon an incident to facilitate a personal agenda of attention seeking and then massaged and nurtured by others with their own personal agendas of international attention seeking. Practically an orgy.

It was your attitude that resulted in the abusive rants and threatening PMs. That is not to say I agreed with their response, I don't, but on the other hand, I can hardly blame them.

My attitude? You are mistaken, although I noted this before on the Koh Tao murder (for real) thread in trying to assign an identity to me.

I think it is a tactic to get the thread shut in fact, because to the casual reader, (and that is who I write for,) your argument dwindles to above, supporters wane, and better suits your purpose.

I never posted my thoughts on the Justice for Luke Miller page, nor would I have as it was not appropriate to do so. But saw posts elsewhere where it was appropriate, by others asking for evidence that were responded to in a shockingly abusive manner which was not conducive to relaying a stable persona. Not at all.

If someone wants to make an international appeal a bud was beat to a pulp and thrown in a pool to drown, and police are making up stories and falsifying autopsy results to cover it up because, well just 'cause they ALWAYS DO THAT, best not abuse the audience-they tend to not find you credible for it.

And making threats of violence is never excusable, well shouldn't be, hardly blame them.

[balo]

I have to agree about how strong social media can be and the effect of it, sometimes it only ends up as gossip and rumors that has no root in the real world, other times social media can actually help to solve the case .

I personally believe this was not a murder , but without substantial evidence there's always a chance something else might have happened.

[Jai Dee]

A troll post and reply have been removed from this thread.

A little respect please.

[jayjay78]

In Luke Miller's case it comes down to two things:

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I personally have an open mind on what caused Luke's death and I do not necessarily believe he was murdered, but it can't be ruled out at this stage. His death remains suspicious.

Correct, that about sums it up for me to. Much speculation about it being an accident, much speculation about it being a murder. Currently nothing can be ruled out unless you fall for the rtp version hook line and sinker

[IslandLover]

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 04:55, said:

The companion ( who is not family-who are silent on the matter) has made many statements on public blogs, and fb pages regarding this issue.

I am allowed my opinion those statements are not credible because the source is not reliable- I'd like to hear why you think they are credible, then I can post up some evidence to counter it.

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I'm aware of no discrepancy in above. Is it a mistake?

I do not believe your statement you have access to a UK autopsy report that is not public, and I do not believe it contradicts the Thai report. (And so it seems the body was able to be examined despite statements on AD blog that "embalming made further examination impossible..)

And if you'll tell me someone is telling you this, I'd say they are likely putting out assumptions and misinformation deliberately- as is the MO within the LMWM group, and again their credibility is zilch. (IMO)

Show us this report, please.

In answer to post # 1222

This not only concerns the travelling companions of Luke Miller. Luke's family is NOT silent on the matter. There have been numerous posts by the siblings of Luke Miller in response to the harassment they have received from Boycott Thailand and another individual who is connected with it (no doubt the incriminating posts will have been deleted now, although some will have taken screenshots as evidence). One family member has even posted in this thread, and no doubt family members are still reading it.

The UK autopsy report is nobody's business but the family's. Certainly not yours, and certainly not mine.

You can believe what you like but I am asking you politely to stop harassing Luke's family and his two travelling companions.

[IslandLover]

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 06:39, said:

IslandLover, on 01 Mar 2016 - 03:45, said:

It was your attitude that resulted in the abusive rants and threatening PMs. That is not to say I agreed with their response, I don't, but on the other hand, I can hardly blame them.

My attitude? You are mistaken, although I noted this before on the Koh Tao murder (for real) thread in trying to assign an identity to me.

I think it is a tactic to get the thread shut in fact, because to the casual reader, (and that is who I write for,) your argument dwindles to above, supporters wane, and better suits your purpose.

I never posted my thoughts on the Justice for Luke Miller page, nor would I have as it was not appropriate to do so. But saw posts elsewhere where it was appropriate, by others asking for evidence that were responded to in a shockingly abusive manner which was not conducive to relaying a stable persona. Not at all.

If someone wants to make an international appeal a bud was beat to a pulp and thrown in a pool to drown, and police are making up stories and falsifying autopsy results to cover it up because, well just 'cause they ALWAYS DO THAT, best not abuse the audience-they tend to not find you credible for it.

And making threats of violence is never excusable, well shouldn't be, hardly blame them.

No, I'm not mistaken. The Justice for Luke Miller group was made private for a very good reason. Granted there were a few posts full of profanities but that's hardly making threats of violence, unless you consider the comment about the ladyboy to be a serious threat

It has never been my tactic to get a thread closed on ThaiVisa - just the opposite in fact - but I actually wish this thread would close because your continued attacks on the Gissings and Luke's family are serving no purpose.

[catsanddogs]

I've just watched the Koh Tao documentary (Asian version) on the murders of Hannah and David and it reports that Luke Miller did not die from drowning.

[Moonsterk]

In Luke Miller's case it comes down to two things:

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I personally have an open mind on what caused Luke's death and I do not necessarily believe he was murdered, but it can't be ruled out at this stage. His death remains suspicious.

Correct, that about sums it up for me to. Much speculation about it being an accident, much speculation about it being a murder. Currently nothing can be ruled out unless you fall for the rtp version hook line and sinker

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

So what is the difference between the two? Please explain.

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 04:55, said:

The companion ( who is not family-who are silent on the matter) has made many statements on public blogs, and fb pages regarding this issue.

I am allowed my opinion those statements are not credible because the source is not reliable- I'd like to hear why you think they are credible, then I can post up some evidence to counter it.

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I'm aware of no discrepancy in above. Is it a mistake?

I do not believe your statement you have access to a UK autopsy report that is not public, and I do not believe it contradicts the Thai report. (And so it seems the body was able to be examined despite statements on AD blog that "embalming made further examination impossible..)

And if you'll tell me someone is telling you this, I'd say they are likely putting out assumptions and misinformation deliberately- as is the MO within the LMWM group, and again their credibility is zilch. (IMO)

Show us this report, please.

In answer to post # 1222

This not only concerns the travelling companions of Luke Miller. Luke's family is NOT silent on the matter. There have been numerous posts by the siblings of Luke Miller in response to the harassment they have received from Boycott Thailand and another individual who is connected with it (no doubt the incriminating posts will have been deleted now, although some will have taken screenshots as evidence). One family member has even posted in this thread, and no doubt family members are still reading it.

The UK autopsy report is nobody's business but the family's. Certainly not yours, and certainly not mine.

You can believe what you like but I am asking you politely to stop harassing Luke's family and his two travelling companions.

.

I'm not harassing anyone on any page and politely ask you stop making such accusations. And if I were, it's none of your business what I do elsewhere. On this forum I'm discussing a thread topic and a narrative I believe is wrong, and questioning the veracity of the authors. That's the topic, please stick to it and leave the presumptive hints of identities out of it.

I'm making the same sort of arguments on other sites, I do not attack, I do not ridicule, nor dismiss but I state my opinion in a reasoned manner and my goal is to convince others of my views.

You're telling the reader you know what the UK Coroner report states, that sort of makes it fair play on the thread. So.... tell us what you know, please.

The abusive posts I've seen by the LMWM group were initially on the We Are Anon page (aka conspiracy central; Chem-trails, GMO mosquitoes?) in response to a civil question by someone else: "What evidence is there this was a murder. The resulting responses were most convincing that the story being put out was not defensible, and I saw how irrational and emotional a person really was.

There was another, less severe onslaught on JFLM page, against an innocuous member who dared to ask why the page had dissolved into a memorial.

On the BT page, on the one thread devoted to the subject, the LMWM posts are consistently dismissive, and more than a few downright silly. I have seen others that were abusive, and were removed, the author banned. Regardless, not one post makes a convincing argument but collectively seek to ridicule and dismiss instead. (Sort of like the proponents of this theory on this thread.) In fact the group's talking points are completely garbled in details and urgently needs a new PR leader to get them all on the same page.

The disturbing pm were sent to the admin of BT by one of the companions and advocated an extreme violent assault. The messages were posted, but since removed. You wish to excuse this kind of reaction, it's your choice, but to the casual reader, does it help or hinder your argument ?

I've not seen one report of Luke parents making any accusation such as the LMWM page was making. It's a large clan, I've seen posts from one half/brother - who also posted the more dismissive posts on BT.

(Until parents start calling press, and issuing statements I'm not convinced.)

At this point the companions should not even be quoted by responsible media outlets ( and they aren't ) and the only one that has, a blogger who isn't above manufacturing headlines and encouraging hysteria and misinformation also has some credibility problems.

(In fact this forum forbids quotes and links from him. )

I'm told JFLM page it is now completely silent on the topic, has moved further from any kind of " Justice..." and now is posting up travel vids.

[Moonsterk]

I've just watched the Koh Tao documentary (Asian version) on the murders of Hannah and David and it reports that Luke Miller did not die from drowning.

Can you please provide a link

[Moonsterk]

Moonsterk, on 01 Mar 2016 - 06:39, said:

IslandLover, on 01 Mar 2016 - 03:45, said:

It was your attitude that resulted in the abusive rants and threatening PMs. That is not to say I agreed with their response, I don't, but on the other hand, I can hardly blame them.

My attitude? You are mistaken, although I noted this before on the Koh Tao murder (for real) thread in trying to assign an identity to me.

I think it is a tactic to get the thread shut in fact, because to the casual reader, (and that is who I write for,) your argument dwindles to above, supporters wane, and better suits your purpose.

I never posted my thoughts on the Justice for Luke Miller page, nor would I have as it was not appropriate to do so. But saw posts elsewhere where it was appropriate, by others asking for evidence that were responded to in a shockingly abusive manner which was not conducive to relaying a stable persona. Not at all.

If someone wants to make an international appeal a bud was beat to a pulp and thrown in a pool to drown, and police are making up stories and falsifying autopsy results to cover it up because, well just 'cause they ALWAYS DO THAT, best not abuse the audience-they tend to not find you credible for it.

And making threats of violence is never excusable, well shouldn't be, hardly blame them.

No, I'm not mistaken. The Justice for Luke Miller group was made private for a very good reason. Granted there were a few posts full of profanities but that's hardly making threats of violence, unless you consider the comment about the ladyboy to be a serious threat

It has never been my tactic to get a thread closed on ThaiVisa - just the opposite in fact - but I actually wish this thread would close because your continued attacks on the Gissings and Luke's family are serving no purpose.

No you're not mistaken? So you are deliberately accusing me of actions that are not true?

As I've written I've not made any post on the " Justice" page, nor would I, it's a tribute page and any rational dissections of the theory are not welcome. Before it went to private I only saw one mild dissenter abused and thrown out. He asked " This is just a memorial, when will the page start actions.."

I suppose it was made private because others may have well been going to it and seeing it was not in fact a Justice page, but a simple tribute page that was leaning toward a somewhat obvious ego massaging page.

I'm not attacking the family, I've noted some dismissive posts were not convincing made by a half brother on BT that refused to post up the accusations as they were not validated independently. The admin received abusive pm's advocating violence from someone else.

If you wish to see the pm's and other posts please send me an email on this messenger, and I will forward along.

l am making arguments against a claim, and the credibility of the persons and person who made the claim publicly, and so is fair discussion.

[Moonsterk]

In Luke Miller's case it comes down to two things:

1) whether you believe the RTP

2) whether you believe the Thai autopsy report

I personally have an open mind on what caused Luke's death and I do not necessarily believe he was murdered, but it can't be ruled out at this stage. His death remains suspicious.

Correct, that about sums it up for me to. Much speculation about it being an accident, much speculation about it being a murder. Currently nothing can be ruled out unless you fall for the rtp version hook line and sinker

Sure, it's all speculation as to what happened. So you look at what's more likely.

Scenario 1; Police initiate a cover -up involving the coroner and assorted police and hospital personnel because, well we don't know why but some guys were taking pics around the scene later, and they are friends with someone else who has been connected by hysteria, hearsay, BS videos chock full of errors ( We Are Anonymous) and assorted innuendo and witch-hunting from a publicity seeking FB page ( CSI LA ) to an established murder that was 16 months prior. Oh, and there was a communication from a junior police cadet on his private FB page that said " we will investigate...it is suspicious.." (when 26 yo men die.)

OR

Scenario 2; A young British man, in a group that celebrates risk taking, ( standing on a spindly rail above a great height while tripping ) that celebrates incessant binge drinking at home and on holiday, that celebrates illicit drug use, (and posts it all publicly ) has an accident involving heights, barbed wire, possible involvement of concrete and the unfortunate drowning in a small body of water. The issuers of this scenario show themselves to be emotional, irrational, abusive and advocate violence when the narrative is questioned.

[007cableguy]

I have just watched the program and it states that Lukes cause of death was NOT by drowning!

[IslandLover]

007cableguy, on 02 Mar 2016 - 04:34, said:

I have just watched the program and it states that Lukes cause of death was NOT by drowning!

Yeah, me too. So, the truth is out there finally. Well done, Channel News Asia!

[Moonsterk]

And you think that makes for a convincing argument? Posting a pic of a vid that supposedly has proof of your claim? And what is your point about the BT page, not seeing anything that supports conspiracy theory, either.

All those points addressed already , supposition based on taking suggestions as facts. ; He " jumped" not fell, not lost his hand hold on the way up, on the way down, hanging out on top, pretending to fly, etc. etc. etc.

I'm not here to argue I just post whats out there, I'll leave all the speculation to you. Careful though one of your posts has already vanished for being disrespectful to the family

No need to exaggerate the post was just a play on words involving a Sci-fi character. Hardly disrespectful to the family - I bet the subject would have appreciated it, in fact .

You seem to be embarking on a ARP - anyone not buying Scenario 1 is " disrespectful... attacking the family.." in another attempt to simply get my viewpoint dismissed.

However I'll argue, for the reader, against anyone, family or not making claims of Scenario 1, and I'll show they are basing their opinion on supposition and exposure to media that has not presented an accurate view, but instead has an agenda of self- promotion.

I have just watched the program and it states that Lukes cause of death was NOT by drowning!

Link, please.

[jayjay78]

007cableguy, on 02 Mar 2016 - 04:34, said:

I have just watched the program and it states that Lukes cause of death was NOT by drowning!

Yeah, me too. So, the truth is out there finally. Well done, Channel News Asia!

Yes now also looking forward to the other version of the doc thats intended for the UK

[Moonsterk]

No doubt based on We Are Anonymous Conspiracy Central with a sub plot by CSI LA Self Promoter King.

[Moonsterk]

Just a few of the awards this production company has won http://www.makeproductions.com/awards/

I just don't find the pic of the video that allegedly makes a claim supporting your argument convincing in any way. Perhaps if you'd provide a link to the claim you are making? Why would you not?

I can find nothing on above link regarding the Luke Miller death and in fact the latest video appears to be from October.

And what was the point about the BT posts you c/p? You avoided that query and went off with this diversion that doesn't seem to exist.

And how exactly does the RTP contradict the Thai Autopsy. ( Or is a typo mistake no one seems to want to admit?)

[smedly]

I have just watched the program and it states that Lukes cause of death was NOT by drowning!

That cannot be true because moonsterk says otherwise, we need to wait for her approval.......right ?

so he was dead before he jumped in the pool, how did he manage that I wonder, moonsterk will be along to explain

[Khun Han]

Yes, I watched the video through the link provided on the Witheridge family thread, and it definitely stated that the cause of Luke's death was not drowning. That means that he had to be dead before he went into the pool, and that kyboshes the RTP version of events.

[Moonsterk]

Actually I've only asked for a link to this alleged video as I can find none on the site on the prior link