Sister of murdered backpacker Hannah Witheridge receives death threats

[Eirene]

^ Sounds like someones having a panic attack! Now take a deep breath....relax...

[lucky11]

Quite a contrast to the OTT gushing by the Miller family.

As I posted on another thread, it is hard to understand how the two families could come to such different conclusions. I posted a while ago that I had met someone who works with Hannah's cousin and she told me the family never believed what they had been told by the RTP. This certainly confirms that. Now we hear they had been offered money and been threatened. Could this explain the Miller's response? The fact the Miller's statement was prepared before the verdict and parroted the prosecution's claims suggests something very dark has been going on.

Hopefully this is a long way from over and eventually we will all see the light.

I think the Millers gave much credence to the phone evidence.

The RTP gave the Millers phone identification information (that may or may not have come from the phone possessed at one point by Wai Phyo) and confirmed for themselves that this number matched. Of course, if the RTP had David's phone in their possession, that would be the number they would provide. Assuming, however, that the phone Wai Phyo had in his possession was David's (admittedly likely) there are various ways it may have come into his possession that he is unwilling to reveal. It is possible to overstate the importance of the phone evidence. Further, Zaw Lin is not implicated in any way with this particular evidence.

Most of the rest of the evidence is based on the RTP's word. The fact that very frightened Burmese took many days to withdraw their confessions, that I am quite sure were extracted under duress, is no real surprise. They fully expected to be killed if they withdrew their confessions.

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

[Khun Han]

To call other members you do not agree with a shill or troll is just a waste of time in my opinion.

It's important to identify who is posting with honest intentions. Not everyone does. Welcome to the internet.

[BritTim]

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

A handwritten form by the in-house RTP forensics department claiming a DNA match with alterations and dated after the announcement of the Burmese kids confessions. What would normally be provided in the form of a chain of custody was not provided. The only documented DNA evidence presented in court was that the accuseds' DNA was not on the alleged murder weapon. Other relevant DNA samples were lost, used up or not tested. In my book, it still comes down to the RTP's word.

[MrTee]

More panic.

Slowly slowly it'll all unravel.

[Luang]

Then it was probably the police that advised her to take it down.

Translators working for western media outlets have also been threatened by the Thai mafia and stopped translating for those outlets. CSI LA recievied a threat from Mon himself. Who else would be threatening Laura?

I doubt that it was the police that advised her to take it down. I believe it was the "feeders" that advised her to take it down once they realised that she would not be able to substantiate her (exaggerated) claims.

More conspiracy theories from you. The rest of us prefer to deal with facts.

B2 convicted on dna the police said they had but never proved. So an unsubstantiated claim.

Laura posted on her facebook what she thought of the procedure and the thais dealing with her family. Fact.

Anything else you say is pi**ing in the wind.

You want facts, do you - try this one, the two accused from Myanmar were found guilty in the Thai courts of the rape and murder of Hannah Witheridge and the murder of David Miller!!

Now THAT is a fact!!

Thai Police and Courts are not to be trusted - FACT! Your statement has as much reasoning as my breakfast had!

[Khun Han]

Quite a contrast to the OTT gushing by the Miller family.

As I posted on another thread, it is hard to understand how the two families could come to such different conclusions. I posted a while ago that I had met someone who works with Hannah's cousin and she told me the family never believed what they had been told by the RTP. This certainly confirms that. Now we hear they had been offered money and been threatened. Could this explain the Miller's response? The fact the Miller's statement was prepared before the verdict and parroted the prosecution's claims suggests something very dark has been going on.

Hopefully this is a long way from over and eventually we will all see the light.

I think the Millers gave much credence to the phone evidence.

The RTP gave the Millers phone identification information (that may or may not have come from the phone possessed at one point by Wai Phyo) and confirmed for themselves that this number matched. Of course, if the RTP had David's phone in their possession, that would be the number they would provide. Assuming, however, that the phone Wai Phyo had in his possession was David's (admittedly likely) there are various ways it may have come into his possession that he is unwilling to reveal. It is possible to overstate the importance of the phone evidence. Further, Zaw Lin is not implicated in any way with this particular evidence.

Most of the rest of the evidence is based on the RTP's word. The fact that very frightened Burmese took many days to withdraw their confessions, that I am quite sure were extracted under duress, is no real surprise. They fully expected to be killed if they withdrew their confessions.

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

There is no DNA evidence.

[Luang]

Quite a contrast to the OTT gushing by the Miller family.

As I posted on another thread, it is hard to understand how the two families could come to such different conclusions. I posted a while ago that I had met someone who works with Hannah's cousin and she told me the family never believed what they had been told by the RTP. This certainly confirms that. Now we hear they had been offered money and been threatened. Could this explain the Miller's response? The fact the Miller's statement was prepared before the verdict and parroted the prosecution's claims suggests something very dark has been going on.

Hopefully this is a long way from over and eventually we will all see the light.

I think the Millers gave much credence to the phone evidence.

The RTP gave the Millers phone identification information (that may or may not have come from the phone possessed at one point by Wai Phyo) and confirmed for themselves that this number matched. Of course, if the RTP had David's phone in their possession, that would be the number they would provide. Assuming, however, that the phone Wai Phyo had in his possession was David's (admittedly likely) there are various ways it may have come into his possession that he is unwilling to reveal. It is possible to overstate the importance of the phone evidence. Further, Zaw Lin is not implicated in any way with this particular evidence.

Most of the rest of the evidence is based on the RTP's word. The fact that very frightened Burmese took many days to withdraw their confessions, that I am quite sure were extracted under duress, is no real surprise. They fully expected to be killed if they withdrew their confessions.

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

Inconclusive and unreliable DNA evidence i.e. the police said it was kosher - you're 100% WRONG

[JLCrab]

As to Post above that there is NO DNA evidence, from page 2 of the 6 page Judgment Summary released 25DEC2015:

The medical examiner conducted an autopsy on the bodies of both the victims and found the DNA of more than one offender in the vagina and rectum of the second victim. This evidence is commonly accepted under international standards as being an effective proof of a person’s identity and the evidence arose, existed and was obtained legally before the arrest of the defendants. Therefore the DNA testing result can link and prove the identity of the offenders.

So apparently the Judges do not agree as to there being no DNA evidence.

Edited January 13, 2016 by JLCrab

[Khun Han]

From page 2 of the 6 page Judgment Summary released 25DEC2015:

The medical examiner conducted an autopsy on the bodies of both the victims

and found the DNA of more than one offender in the vagina and rectum of the second

victim. This evidence is commonly accepted under international standards as being

an effective proof of a persons identity and the evidence arose, existed and was obtained

legally before the arrest of the defendants. Therefore the DNA testing result can

link and prove the identity of the offenders.

So apparently the Judges do not agree as to there being no DNA evidence.

Firstly, a sample of the physical DNA was not presented to the court as evidence. Therefore, there is no proof that it exists: it's just RTP hearsay.

Secondly, the British coroner was so concerned by discrepancies between the British autopsy results and the RTP autopsy results that she took the extraordinary step of releasing the British autopsy report early, to the trial.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Khun Han

[lucky11]

I am not wrong - I am 100% right in this. The judge based his judgement on the DNA evidence, stating that it was this that led him to hand down the guilty verdict as it was so overwhelming that it trumped all of the other evidence and was conclusive enough on its own.

You are making the mistake, that, you think the DNA evidence was flawed, but you are not the presiding judge in the case and therefore this presumption of yours is irrelevant!!

[TheCruncher]

To call other members you do not agree with a shill or troll is just a waste of time in my opinion.

It's important to identify who is posting with honest intentions. Not everyone does. Welcome to the internet.

And you are the chosen one to select who is qualified to post?

Thanks for enlightening us all.

[Khun Han]

To call other members you do not agree with a shill or troll is just a waste of time in my opinion.

It's important to identify who is posting with honest intentions. Not everyone does. Welcome to the internet.

And you are the chosen one to select who is qualified to post?

Thanks for enlightening us all.

Not at all. But I choose who I think is credible and not credible.

Talking of credibility, look who you got a like from first. You must feel quite proud .

[Khun Han]

I am not wrong - I am 100% right in this. The judge based his judgement on the DNA evidence, stating that it was this that led him to hand down the guilty verdict as it was so overwhelming that it trumped all of the other evidence and was conclusive enough on its own.

You are making the mistake, that, you think the DNA evidence was flawed, but you are not the presiding judge in the case and therefore this presumption of yours is irrelevant!!

There is no DNA evidence.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Khun Han

[TheCruncher]

To call other members you do not agree with a shill or troll is just a waste of time in my opinion.

It's important to identify who is posting with honest intentions. Not everyone does. Welcome to the internet.

And you are the chosen one to select who is qualified to post?

Thanks for enlightening us all.

Not at all. But I choose who I think is credible and not credible.

Talking of credibility, look who you got a like from first. You must feel quite proud .

He get's also many times a like from me, as i consider his posts credible, something I can't say about yours.

[007cableguy]

I am not wrong - I am 100% right in this. The judge based his judgement on the DNA evidence, stating that it was this that led him to hand down the guilty verdict as it was so overwhelming that it trumped all of the other evidence and was conclusive enough on its own.

You are making the mistake, that, you think the DNA evidence was flawed, but you are not the presiding judge in the case and therefore this presumption of yours is irrelevant!!

lol

Hissy fit coming on!

[Khun Han]

It's important to identify who is posting with honest intentions. Not everyone does. Welcome to the internet.

And you are the chosen one to select who is qualified to post?

Thanks for enlightening us all.

Not at all. But I choose who I think is credible and not credible.

Talking of credibility, look who you got a like from first. You must feel quite proud .

He get's also many times a like from me, as i consider his posts credible, something I can't say about yours.

^Troll alert.

[lucky11]

I am not wrong - I am 100% right in this. The judge based his judgement on the DNA evidence, stating that it was this that led him to hand down the guilty verdict as it was so overwhelming that it trumped all of the other evidence and was conclusive enough on its own.

You are making the mistake, that, you think the DNA evidence was flawed, but you are not the presiding judge in the case and therefore this presumption of yours is irrelevant!!

lol

Hissy fit coming on!

What do you do when a hissy fit comes on - I'm concerned for you!! I just hope that the repercussions of suffering one is not too dangerous for your health and you can get over it without any permanent damage caused.

[JLCrab]

From page 2 of the 6 page Judgment Summary released 25DEC2015:

The medical examiner conducted an autopsy on the bodies of both the victims

and found the DNA of more than one offender in the vagina and rectum of the second

victim. This evidence is commonly accepted under international standards as being

an effective proof of a persons identity and the evidence arose, existed and was obtained

legally before the arrest of the defendants. Therefore the DNA testing result can

link and prove the identity of the offenders.

So apparently the Judges do not agree as to there being no DNA evidence.

Firstly, a sample of the physical DNA was not presented to the court as evidence. Therefore, there is no proof that it exists: it's just RTP hearsay.

Secondly, the British coroner was so concerned by discrepancies between the British autopsy results and the RTP autopsy results that she took the extraordinary step of releasing the British autopsy report early, to the trial.

That was the written opinion of the Court from the Official Court summary. You are welcome to disagree if you so choose.

[lucky11]

I am not wrong - I am 100% right in this. The judge based his judgement on the DNA evidence, stating that it was this that led him to hand down the guilty verdict as it was so overwhelming that it trumped all of the other evidence and was conclusive enough on its own.

You are making the mistake, that, you think the DNA evidence was flawed, but you are not the presiding judge in the case and therefore this presumption of yours is irrelevant!!

There is no DNA evidence.

You had better tell the judge this, as HE knows there is, having seen it and in basing his judgement on it! The DNA evidence that you claim doesn't exist was damning in its conclusiveness and 'done for them'.

[bannork]

From page 2 of the 6 page Judgment Summary released 25DEC2015:

The medical examiner conducted an autopsy on the bodies of both the victims

and found the DNA of more than one offender in the vagina and rectum of the second

victim. This evidence is commonly accepted under international standards as being

an effective proof of a persons identity and the evidence arose, existed and was obtained

legally before the arrest of the defendants. Therefore the DNA testing result can

link and prove the identity of the offenders.

So apparently the Judges do not agree as to there being no DNA evidence.

Firstly, a sample of the physical DNA was not presented to the court as evidence. Therefore, there is no proof that it exists: it's just RTP hearsay.

Secondly, the British coroner was so concerded by discrepancies between the British autopsy results and the RTP autopsy results that she took the extraordinary step of releasing the British autopsy report early, to the trial.

According to this report from Thailand Justice the Norfolk coroner's report was given to the prosecution and judge and Andy Hall obtained a copy. Andy said there were serious discrepancies between the Thai and UK regarding bite marks but he doesn't refer to the DNA semen results.

Why oh why did the defence not put Jane Taupin on the stand?

Still, they have 2 more shots, the Appeal and then the Supreme Court-a final verdict is years away.

Wasn't the Norfolk coroner's report supposed to be made public in January?

http://thailandjustice.com/thai-murder-trial-told-of-autopsy-discrepancies-in-reports-relating-to-hannah-witheridge/

Edited January 13, 2016 by bannork

[lucky11]

From page 2 of the 6 page Judgment Summary released 25DEC2015:

The medical examiner conducted an autopsy on the bodies of both the victims

and found the DNA of more than one offender in the vagina and rectum of the second

victim. This evidence is commonly accepted under international standards as being

an effective proof of a persons identity and the evidence arose, existed and was obtained

legally before the arrest of the defendants. Therefore the DNA testing result can

link and prove the identity of the offenders.

So apparently the Judges do not agree as to there being no DNA evidence.

Firstly, a sample of the physical DNA was not presented to the court as evidence. Therefore, there is no proof that it exists: it's just RTP hearsay.

Secondly, the British coroner was so concerded by discrepancies between the British autopsy results and the RTP autopsy results that she took the extraordinary step of releasing the British autopsy report early, to the trial.

According to this report from Thailand Justice the Norfolk coroner's report was given to the prosecution and judge and Andy Hall obtained a copy. Andy said there were serious discrepancies between the Thai and UK regarding bite marks but he doesn't refer to the DNA semen results.

Why oh why did the defence not put Jane Taupin on the stand?

Still, they have 2 more shots, the Appeal and then the Supreme Court-a final verdict is years away.

Wasn't the Norfolk coroner's report supposed to be made public in January?

Yes, you may ask 'oh why' - is it because they were unable to counter it or did Andy and his 'E-team' drop an enormous clanger. I prefer to think that it is the former. Let's face it 'a craftsman is only as good as his tools'.

[catsanddogs]

Laura Witheridge's Facebook statement is the long overdue outpouring of her disgust at the investigation and the treatment her and her family have been subjected to. She is under no obligation to divulge any extra information to any of us on here to justify what she has said. I believe what she has said. It is completely in keeping with everything else which is evil about this investigation, court case and verdict. I understand from the fundraising page Laura set up that the Witheridges' were planning to return to Thailand to hear the verdict read. They didn't return though. I have come to my own conclusion as to why. There is no mention in Laura's statement of the Burmese men who have been found guilty of the murder of her sister and David Miller. What there is though is a link to the Anonymous video which would signify she is in support of their views.

Those who are slating Laura for what she has exposed can only be people who continue to want the truth about the crimes buried. Well there lots more to come out yet and that is going to happen pretty damn soon thankfully.

[JLCrab]

The 24 DEC 2015 opinion of the Samui Court is subject to appeal at several levels. However, some of you write as if the opinion of the Court is a mere technicality.

[SamuiLoner]

Quite a contrast to the OTT gushing by the Miller family.

As I posted on another thread, it is hard to understand how the two families could come to such different conclusions. I posted a while ago that I had met someone who works with Hannah's cousin and she told me the family never believed what they had been told by the RTP. This certainly confirms that. Now we hear they had been offered money and been threatened. Could this explain the Miller's response? The fact the Miller's statement was prepared before the verdict and parroted the prosecution's claims suggests something very dark has been going on.

Hopefully this is a long way from over and eventually we will all see the light.

I think the Millers gave much credence to the phone evidence.

The RTP gave the Millers phone identification information (that may or may not have come from the phone possessed at one point by Wai Phyo) and confirmed for themselves that this number matched. Of course, if the RTP had David's phone in their possession, that would be the number they would provide. Assuming, however, that the phone Wai Phyo had in his possession was David's (admittedly likely) there are various ways it may have come into his possession that he is unwilling to reveal. It is possible to overstate the importance of the phone evidence. Further, Zaw Lin is not implicated in any way with this particular evidence.

Most of the rest of the evidence is based on the RTP's word. The fact that very frightened Burmese took many days to withdraw their confessions, that I am quite sure were extracted under duress, is no real surprise. They fully expected to be killed if they withdrew their confessions.

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

Try Google with; Unlocking the DNA of doubt

Very informative and interesting reading. As the saying goes, We all learn something new every day..!

[lucky11]

The 24 DEC 2015 opinion of the Samui Court is subject to appeal at several levels. However, some of you write as if the opinion of the Court is a mere technicality.

It seems that they rely too much on their emotions, fictional beliefs and 'red herring' technicalities. Unfortunately for them, none of these carry any weight. Well, certainly not as much as factual arguments and decisions handed down by better informed and more highly educated professionals than them!!

[lucky11]

Don't see the relevance, plus I've got better things to do with my time.

[TheCruncher]

The verdict was not based on the RTP's word. It was based on the DNA evidence!!

A handwritten form by the in-house RTP forensics department claiming a DNA match with alterations and dated after the announcement of the Burmese kids confessions. What would normally be provided in the form of a chain of custody was not provided. The only documented DNA evidence presented in court was that the accuseds' DNA was not on the alleged murder weapon. Other relevant DNA samples were lost, used up or not tested. In my book, it still comes down to the RTP's word.

Lack of chain of custody doesn't invalidate the DNA evidence, it may make it disputable but that's all.

I recall posts in the other Koh Tao threads that OJ Simpson was acquitted because of lack of chain of custody, well it was not, he was acquitted because the forensic team was unable to explain the forensic evidence in an to the jury understandable language.

[SamuiLoner]

Don't see the relevance, plus I've got better things to do with my time.

555... How big are those Blinkers you're wearing.?

[Darkknight666]

The 24 DEC 2015 opinion of the Samui Court is subject to appeal at several levels. However, some of you write as if the opinion of the Court is a mere technicality.

It seems that they rely too much on their emotions, fictional beliefs and 'red herring' technicalities. Unfortunately for them, none of these carry any weight. Well, certainly not as much as factual arguments and decisions handed down by better informed and more highly educated professionals than them!!

Professional? This court? Cute.

I am certainly not satisfied with their work and many people share that sentiment, While few share yours. How you can believe the RTP's case is beyond me. Try to keep in mind that for something to be a fact it must be proven, what has the prosecution proved? Not a hell of a lot, lucky for them that's all they need. Yuk it up now fellas, appeals might wipe that smirk off your face.