Sister of murdered backpacker Hannah Witheridge receives death threats

[catsanddogs]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

[farcanell]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

When half full of pish, on a balmy night, nothing beats a swim in the sea ( unless your in known shark areas, of course), when there's a light rain.... And most people find me normal... I think.

As to the right to have an opinion.... Quite true... Everyone does have the right to their own opinion

But as to verbalising that right, we then have to factor in a whole cart load of factors.... Like is the forum your talking in the correct one? Eg, disparaging a hero, to the men, whose life he saved, while sacrificing his own.

I encourage all to voice your opinion, but do try to be civil and remember that we are in here talking about the sister of a brutally murdered young woman, so please also be respectful

[tingtongfarang]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

No evidence to support their alibi? so on this alone they were found guilty and the death penalty handed down,

By all civilised people your thought process-moral compass would be viewed as very warped.

[KunMatt]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

The judge deemed it worthy enough to support a death sentence with th whole wold watching - only in Thailand could this level of corruption happen with this level of arrogance

Oh and the enormous detail that the report went into describing the B2's criminal background because they were working in Thailand illegally. There is a more in depth account of that than the actual murder and lack of supporting evidence. It seemed to be saying that because they broke the law working in Thailand without a work permit then they were capable of murdering 2 tourists for some reason.

[JLCrab]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

In this instance it is the Judges who get to say what they consider normal.

[KunMatt]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

In this instance it is the Judges who get to say what they consider normal.

Isn't that exactly what is wrong with this, and many more, trials?

[JLCrab]

When you cross through Immigration at the airport or land border you are under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Thailand whether you think such judicial system is wrong or not.

[Happy Grumpy]

Follow the money.

Money flowed from a family to .....

Investigate all their business interests and look for changes in the months folowing.

New shareholders. Change of ownership. Etc etc.

[Khun Han]

When you cross through Immigration at the airport or land border you are under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Thailand whether you think such judicial system is wrong or not.

Ya don't say???

So all this discussion about whether or not said judicial system has been perverted in this case is irrelevent because when we cross the border, we just have to accept that TIT lock, stock and barrel?

[MrTee]

Luckily my old grandpa didn't think that when he crossed enemy lines to put things right!

[KunMatt]

When you cross through Immigration at the airport or land border you are under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Thailand whether you think such judicial system is wrong or not.

You didn't answer my question, you just posted a deflection to ignore it. I can see that you are become more and more like the other RTP shills, same tactics are starting to be used by you.

[mrrizzla]

This so called mafia family on KT seem to have been turned into some sort of mythical mega empire, with their claws reaching far and wide Does anyone know them, what hotels they own, had any dealings with them, even seen them. With these 100's of millions of £/$, would they still live on KT?

Yeah...why would they?

Live in a place where they are "king", where they make the rules, where you - literally - live and die by their sword?

Or to say it with the Dire Straits "Money for nothing and the chicks for free!"

Why would they?

I can't quiet figure it out!

Well...I guess, it will remain a mystery!

Maybe he missed this link.

http://www.planeless...e-is-the-story/

So yes roo860, their tentacles go all the way to the top!

[Isitjustme]

I have a question for the folks here who believe the RTP are completely honest and transparent courts too. Why were foreign journalists NOT allowed to take notes in court?

Exactly DK. Nail on the head!

I mentioned something similar in an earlier post. If the rtp/prosecution team had one valid and verifiable piece of evidence, just one scrap of proof or evidence that was irrefutable and proved the B2s guilt, then they would have been showcasing it for all the world to see. The chain of custody would have been in order, there would be samples(of dna) for the defence to retest as it would prove their guilt, translators would be encouraged not threatened away, reporters both foreign and Thai would be allowed full access to take notes and print the "truth'. Full transparency as you say.

In short they wouldn't have been able to restrain themselves from showing the world how competent they are and what a great criminal case they had put together.

To me, as I'm sure to any right-minded decent person, it's the total lack of any of these, their complete unwillingness/inability to "prove" their own competence as police officers that shows up the case for what it is. A farce. a sham. A complete cock-up.

Could not agree more even though the chief of police will set his legal people on to me for defamation tomorrow for me saying that. I am certain that if the case was watertight there would be no way you would lose the DNA evidence!

Exactly my thoughts.

But I'm sure we all know that nothing was lost or used up. It either was destroyed or never existed in the first place.

How do you "lose" a whole heap of clothes for example? And why weren't the butter-fingered "law enforcement officers" (haha) who were incapable of safeguarding the evidence in a major crime not disciplined/sacked/moved to inactive posts/whatever?

Answer as above: It wasn't lost. It was deliberately disposed of because it didn't support their case.

[catsanddogs]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

In this instance it is the Judges who get to say what they consider normal.

Few judges would go skinny-dipping in the rain I doubt. Very few people in the world are judges. Living a sheltered life can sometimes lead to believing pastimes that others partake in are 'not normal'. There is a saying-

'Happiness is wild swimming in the rain'

[glenmohr]

When you cross through Immigration at the airport or land border you are under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Thailand whether you think such judicial system is wrong or not.

However true that might be to you Mr Crab, there will be millions around who would argue that human rights have no borders. By your pic you are old enough to remember Saloth Sar AKA Pol Pot, When Vietnamese troops poured into Cambodia I cannot remember one single person saying hang on you must now you're in Cambodia do everything Pol Pot's way , No Sir quite the opposite the world clapped when the Vietnamese did it their way. What you are saying justifies the terrible deeds done by Hitler because it was done inside his borders, No Sir, No way. When Thailand did not follow a normal duty of care to visitors Hannah David, Nick, Luke et al and more importantly the B2 they have opened themselves to attacks on their sovereignty such as is happening with the Anonymous actions.

[catsanddogs]

From Pages 36-37 of the MWRN translation of the Full Court Judgment:

With regard to the Defendants’ alibi argument, both Defendants only present their testimonies in Court, without any other witnesses or evidence to support their whereabouts, that the Defendants were not at the crime scene. Details of which are self-contradict and are unable to refute the evidence of the Plaintiff that has clearly shown that both Defendants were the perpetrators of the crime in this case.

Under the testimony of both Defendants that claimed that after drinking beer they both wanted to go home and so decided to walk home, but that then both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible. This gives rise to the belief that their behaviour must instead have been conducted in a way tdestroy evidence on the bodies of both the Defendants. Bcause neither of the Defendants have any evidence to support their alibi then it appears only as an invalid alibi argument.

both went for a swim in the sea late at night while it was raining lightly, as the First Defendant has testified, this is unusual for normal people to do under such circumstances, and thus the testimonies are not credible.

Hilarious! Has God spoken? What is normal? Who is to say what is normal? Not only hilarious but outrageous.

In this instance it is the Judges who get to say what they consider normal.

Isn't that exactly what is wrong with this, and many more, trials?

Quite. Out of a jury of 12 random people who lead 'normal' lives, from all walks of life you could possibly find that 50% of them would consider swimming in the (light) rain a most pleasant and uplifting experience and quite a 'normal' pursuit.

[Basil B]

I've seen several "I've read the report posts" They are based on what many consider to to an unfair and biased trial.

Andy Hall is a clever guy and would not play his hand to point out the errors. This will be done at the next stage.

Rules of Engagement here:

Do not quote trolls/shills

Do not reply to trolls/shills just state what you are arguing against

Do not assume that everyone that likes your post is a supporter of truth and justice

Understand that a major ploy is misdirection in some posts

Understand there is no evidence of a murder having been committed by the B2 which leads to the question why a death sentence?

Be patient wait for the DNA evidence to be scrutinised

I doubt anything will come of any appeals or retrials... The whole legal systems seems to have been rigged, even if there was a complete change of government with a score or two to settle, these two are not going to get justice, Thailand has too much face to lose.

[oldsailor35]

It would be par for the course that what compensation the Thai authorities offered the Witheridges, they also offered similar to the Miller family. In Laura's statement they rejected the offers, and were then subjected to ongoing indescribable abuse and death threats by THAIS. Logically then, the B2 could not be the killers (because why should the THAIS care?).

That didn't happen to the Millers. So, tell me what decision did the Millers make? Go with the flow. Keep an open mind. Suck up to the hand that feeds it? After all, the B2 were probably implicated, so what's the problem?

As to the murdering stopping, there's little chance of that until the killer(s) are caught - and that won't happen until the island is cleared by the Junta. In Luke Miller's case, the PM should have immediately sent no-nonsense (if any exist) BKK RTP to investigate, not rely on local RTP to fudge the truth yet again.

There was a "no nonsense" Police inspector on the case, until he pointed the finger at certain members of a powerful island family. He was quickly removed and the new guy found a couple of Burmese " patsies" to pin it on.

[sweatalot]

I have a question for the folks here who believe the RTP are completely honest and transparent courts too. Why were foreign journalists NOT allowed to take notes in court?

Exactly DK. Nail on the head!

I mentioned something similar in an earlier post. If the rtp/prosecution team had one valid and verifiable piece of evidence, just one scrap of proof or evidence that was irrefutable and proved the B2s guilt, then they would have been showcasing it for all the world to see. The chain of custody would have been in order, there would be samples(of dna) for the defence to retest as it would prove their guilt, translators would be encouraged not threatened away, reporters both foreign and Thai would be allowed full access to take notes and print the "truth'. Full transparency as you say.

In short they wouldn't have been able to restrain themselves from showing the world how competent they are and what a great criminal case they had put together.

To me, as I'm sure to any right-minded decent person, it's the total lack of any of these, their complete unwillingness/inability to "prove" their own competence as police officers that shows up the case for what it is. A farce. a sham. A complete cock-up.

Could not agree more even though the chief of police will set his legal people on to me for defamation tomorrow for me saying that. I am certain that if the case was watertight there would be no way you would lose the DNA evidence!

Exactly my thoughts.

But I'm sure we all know that nothing was lost or used up. It either was destroyed or never existed in the first place.

How do you "lose" a whole heap of clothes for example? And why weren't the butter-fingered "law enforcement officers" (haha) who were incapable of safeguarding the evidence in a major crime not disciplined/sacked/moved to inactive posts/whatever?

Answer as above: It wasn't lost. It was deliberately disposed of because it didn't support their case.

because it would have supported quite a different case

[z42]

I can't honestly see the powers that be keeping a lid on this whole disgraceful mess they've created. Just constant denials and poorly constructed lies / half truths are fooling nobody.

The whole case file was a giant red flag essentially. Too many aggrieved parties. Will be interesting to see what anonymous do next. God speed to the B2 and their families, I hope they find some amount of solace in the fact that a very healthy percentage of the people following the case rooting for them, and more importantly a wholly transparent and accountable legal process.

As for Laura, I admire her grace in the face of serious adversity. I hope somebody somewhere can support her and do right by her. The UK authorities have been nothing short of a disgrace throughout this whole thing

[TheLobster]

I've seen several "I've read the report posts" They are based on what many consider to to an unfair and biased trial.

Andy Hall is a clever guy and would not play his hand to point out the errors. This will be done at the next stage.

Rules of Engagement here:

Do not quote trolls/shills

Do not reply to trolls/shills just state what you are arguing against

Do not assume that everyone that likes your post is a supporter of truth and justice

Understand that a major ploy is misdirection in some posts

Understand there is no evidence of a murder having been committed by the B2 which leads to the question why a death sentence?

Be patient wait for the DNA evidence to be scrutinised

I doubt anything will come of any appeals or retrials... The whole legal systems seems to have been rigged, even if there was a complete change of government with a score or two to settle, these two are not going to get justice, Thailand has too much face to lose.

There is plenty to come and plenty for the defence to look at on appeal. My observations from the report are that all police statements were accepted as fact but most of the defence evidence was not acceptable as credible, such as the UK Autopsy report (presented by Andy Hall).

A few extracts:

According to the CCTV footage, the Second Deceased was found walking into the AC Bar with her friends at 00.15 hrs, whereas the Second Deceased walked into the AC Bar at 02.08.37 hrs. Thereafter, both Deceased were never found walking out of the Bar until their bodies were found.

The results of the DNA tests on the exhibited cigarette butts indicated that the second defendant and Mr Mau Mau had smoked the exhibited cigarettes, which was confirmed by the testimonies of the two defendants that they took it in turns to smoke the same exhibited cigarettes. This indicates that the examination conducted by the Central Forensic Bureau was accurate and correct thus giving weight to the credibility of the test results and indicating that the test results are admissible.

even after the crime has been committed Mr O continued to use the exhibited hoe before it was sent off for examination

Even though the report of the results of the DNA tests conducted by the Institute of Forensic Science according to Document number Lor. 29 summarises the results and conclusions of the examination that the DNA of the two Defendants did not match the mixed DNA of a male found on the exhibited hoe, this is not significant or inconsistent because the mixed DNA of a male that was found on the hoe matched the DNA of the First Deceased.

The evidence and connected circumstances lead to the conclusion that there can be no other Finding than that the two Defendants used the exhibited hoe as a weapon to attack and kill the Second Deceased at the crime scene.

The swimming observation which is already being commented about.

There is a lot of evidence that wasn't presented or was ignored in the report which to a layman like me would seem significant such as the hair found in Hannah's hand ....

[Khun Han]

Quite. Out of a jury of 12 random people who lead 'normal' lives, from all walks of life you could possibly find that 50% of them would consider swimming in the (light) rain a most pleasant and uplifting experience and quite a 'normal' pursuit.

It's many years since I last went skinny dipping in the sea at night, but I went swimming (not skinny dipping I hasten to add) with my lad in the 20th floor pool at the Baiyoke Sky last year. It was raining quite hard at the time, and a bit breezy. And we weren't the only guests in there enjoying ourselves .

[glenmohr]

"Prisoners B1 and B2 you will be taken to a secure place and held for 20 years for raping a woman who was not your wife."

If it was not serious it would be funny.

[Isitjustme]

I've seen several "I've read the report posts" They are based on what many consider to to an unfair and biased trial.

Andy Hall is a clever guy and would not play his hand to point out the errors. This will be done at the next stage.

Rules of Engagement here:

Do not quote trolls/shills

Do not reply to trolls/shills just state what you are arguing against

Do not assume that everyone that likes your post is a supporter of truth and justice

Understand that a major ploy is misdirection in some posts

Understand there is no evidence of a murder having been committed by the B2 which leads to the question why a death sentence?

Be patient wait for the DNA evidence to be scrutinised

I doubt anything will come of any appeals or retrials... The whole legal systems seems to have been rigged, even if there was a complete change of government with a score or two to settle, these two are not going to get justice, Thailand has too much face to lose.

There is plenty to come and plenty for the defence to look at on appeal. My observations from the report are that all police statements were accepted as fact but most of the defence evidence was not acceptable as credible, such as the UK Autopsy report (presented by Andy Hall).

A few extracts:

According to the CCTV footage, the Second Deceased was found walking into the AC Bar with her friends at 00.15 hrs, whereas the Second Deceased walked into the AC Bar at 02.08.37 hrs. Thereafter, both Deceased were never found walking out of the Bar until their bodies were found.

The results of the DNA tests on the exhibited cigarette butts indicated that the second defendant and Mr Mau Mau had smoked the exhibited cigarettes, which was confirmed by the testimonies of the two defendants that they took it in turns to smoke the same exhibited cigarettes. This indicates that the examination conducted by the Central Forensic Bureau was accurate and correct thus giving weight to the credibility of the test results and indicating that the test results are admissible.

even after the crime has been committed Mr O continued to use the exhibited hoe before it was sent off for examination

Even though the report of the results of the DNA tests conducted by the Institute of Forensic Science according to Document number Lor. 29 summarises the results and conclusions of the examination that the DNA of the two Defendants did not match the mixed DNA of a male found on the exhibited hoe, this is not significant or inconsistent because the mixed DNA of a male that was found on the hoe matched the DNA of the First Deceased.

The evidence and connected circumstances lead to the conclusion that there can be no other Finding than that the two Defendants used the exhibited hoe as a weapon to attack and kill the Second Deceased at the crime scene.

The swimming observation which is already being commented about.

There is a lot of evidence that wasn't presented or was ignored in the report which to a layman like me would seem significant such as the hair found in Hannah's hand ....

Having read through it all I think the only crime the B2 are guilty of is Littering in a public place ie the cigarette butts. death sentence seems a tad harsh methinks.

[farcanell]

The next question will be about were a retrial is to he heard... KT is a biased jury pool, so in IMHO, the retrial needs to be moved to Bangkok, or somewhere else, were the jury pool has no (or little) vested interest in the case.

Now, that is something that the British consul could attempt to influence, without forcing a loss of face.

[TheLobster]

The next question will be about were a retrial is to he heard... KT is a biased jury pool, so in IMHO, the retrial needs to be moved to Bangkok, or somewhere else, were the jury pool has no (or little) vested interest in the case.

Now, that is something that the British consul could attempt to influence, without forcing a loss of face.

I do really dislike it when ill informed people post on the forum, I really do, For deleted deleted ! Which Jury? When was there a trial on KT?

[MickRobbo]

Laura Witheridge

https://www.facebook.com/laura.witheridge?fref=nf

So, as some of you may have already seen- there has been another death of yet another British National on koh tao. I wasn’t going to post anything, not until I logged on here this morning to see that a friend had shared the link warning people not to go there… it wasn’t the sharing of the link or the warning that triggered this lengthy status, as I hope people do share these things and try and warn people not to go… it was the ignorant comment someone had made about how Thailand is ‘the most beautiful place in the world’ that frustrated me this morning. Aesthetically, on a postcard or photograph, maybe… However, literally… I have to disagree. Lots of things ‘look’ beautiful. You only have to consider a lion, or tiger… beautiful to look at, yes… but get too close and they will tear you apart and feed you to their young. My point being that aesthetic beauty can lure you into a very dangerous trap.

Since Hannah was taken from us, I am continually asked whether I will warn the World about the dangers of Thailand… I am asked if I will warn people because I might just ‘save someone’s life’. This person’s comment serves as a perfect example of why I would be wasting my time. People can be ignorant and many, probably the majority, have very short memories. Countless times, I have logged in to facebook and seen statuses made by people who know both Hannah and I, who have gone out there anyway. They think it wont happen to them… Well, guess what? Neither did we. No one is immune. Many thai’s hate westeners and they have little to no regard for human life. I don’t say this lightly, or without reason. Let me share a few facts with you about this ‘beautiful’ place you speak of…

Would it surprise you if I told you that the thai’s view drug possession as a more serious offence than rape or murder? Or that the vast majority of the thai police force are corrupt? What if I told you that when we went to Thailand to bring Hannah home, we were offered the opportunity to go to the Royal Thai police headquarters for an ‘official update’… but that, on arrival, we were taken into a large room, left for 5 minutes before the door opened and around 200 journalists were allowed into the room and we were ambushed by this mob of hungry journalists shoving cameras in our faces… The thai police chief had no intentions of giving us an update… after all, the bungled investigation meant he had nothing to tell us. The invitation was merely an opportunity for the press to take photographs of our family. This link serves as evidence of this: http://bangkok.coconuts.co/…/we-need-digest-trial-outcome-s…

What if I told you that since we lost Hannah there have been many more suspicious deaths on koh tao. You probably haven’t heard of them all, as not all were British Nationals. The deaths, where possible, are covered up as suicides and accidents. This would have happened with Hannah, if it had not been for the hideous brutality of her passing. I highly suspect that with this latest tragedy, the thai’s will say that it was an accidental death caused by drugs. Hiding the truth and offering a story that suits, is something that they do often… My thoughts are with Luke Miller's family and friends.

What if I told you that I have had many death threats from thai people since they murdered my sister? That they defaced photographs of me saying that the killers had only done ‘half the job’… what if I told you that people commented on these photographs saying things like ‘there is still time’, and ‘tick tock tick tock’. What if I told you that I have been sent crime scene photographs? What if I told you that I have been chased in my car? What if I told you that the thais offered us ‘compensation’? Obviously we were absolutely appalled and declined.

What if I told you that I am now frightened of my own shadow? That I am constantly looking over my shoulder? That I am exhausted, but frightened to sleep because of the nightmares? I miss my sister desperately. My heart is heavy and my mind is tired.

Still think Thailand is beautiful? If your answer is still ‘yes’ then I would suggest you watch the following:

https://youtu.be/BRi8AqoXxio

Please feel free to share this post

Stop using Facebook (change your e-mail), the Thai mafia/police will track you using it (if you haven't done so already) for your location - you're dealing with very spiteful xenophobic police who have their own private black hat hackers based in BKK. My experience with them was extremely unsavoury, I am very very sorry for your loss and hope you can move on in some way soon. I know all of what you state to be true as I live in Thailand, I will say it is not all as you have described. These behavioural patterns are confined to the heavily tourist orientated areas luckily (which are total traps) and are extremely lucrative with high use of illicit substances. I believe #Anonymous & @Atomicalandy will bring this to a slightly better conclusion now as 2 innocent men will not be convicted inappropriately, being ultimately put death for the murder of your sister and David. I can only recommend you do not return here now to view any conclusions - but speak out for the Burmese men (which I believe you are) go public (get your revenge and make the police accountable in some way), following the most recent developments, Thai police are extremely vindictive following loss of face at this level. I wish you good luck in the future Laura

[MrTee]

So Even TVF gets a mention by Anonymous on this whole affair..

"Various sock puppet accounts appear on online message boards such as Thaivisa.com attempting to derail commentary on the incident and the character assassination of the only witness begins."

[farcanell]

The next question will be about were a retrial is to he heard... KT is a biased jury pool, so in IMHO, the retrial needs to be moved to Bangkok, or somewhere else, were the jury pool has no (or little) vested interest in the case.

Now, that is something that the British consul could attempt to influence, without forcing a loss of face.

I do really dislike it when ill informed people post on the forum, I really do, For deleted deleted ! Which Jury? When was there a trial on KT?

Well you certainly put me right on that score, didn't you... Sort of.... But the sentiment stands as Samui will be compromised too.... I really do dislike it when smug Martha $u{rs post without bothering to inform or correct simple mistakes

[TheLobster]

They said

"#‎Anonymous are awaiting photos that will show just how much corruption and lies by the Thai police on the Island of Koh Tao exist. Our picture will clearly show it was more than just a drowning......We are awaiting pictures the Thai police do not know were taken."

so they actually "have" nothing...at the moment. I hope they produce some evidence to back up their claims.

They will !!

Can you remind me what was your stance on people distributing photos of the victims on Internet?

Because, IIRC, you (and company) have expressed outrage at such photos of David Miller and Hannah Witheridge being released.

There was no doubt than Hannah was murdered in a most diabolical way. Pictures were posted by individuals on facebook which were completely disrespectful to her and her family by people in authority no less.

In this case (Luke Miller) it is unclear whether it was an accident or murder so pictures that show evidence that it was not an accidental drowning would seem to be appropriate.