Lawyers Council to appeal Koh Tao convicts’ death sentence

[lucky11]

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:

catsanddogs, on 09 Feb 2016 - 02:02, said:

Greenchair - I find your most recent post relating to the discussion as to whether Hannah Witheridge was raped or not most disgusting.

You ask posters on this thread to be respectful to the late Hannah Witheridge. It appears the only person showing disrespect to the deceased lady is yourself. Hopefully the moderators here will see sense and have a quiet word.

Having looked at the recent flood of posts, those that think the B2 are innocent are acting in just the same way as Greenchair when it comes to discussing Hannah (and the sexual assault/rape) - just from different sides of the fence. Why don't you stop in your crude attempts to get him a suspension just to keep him quiet so that you lot can take over the thread.

Let the mods decide whether Greenchair is breaking the rules and cease the intimidation and veiled threats on him.

I think that it is disrespectful to Hannah and her memory to question whether it was rape or not as nobody knows the real answer. Everyone is discussing this aspect at the moment and it is not accomplishing anything at all. Surely, the 2 murders and who carried them out is more important and relevant.

Sorry to disappoint you, lucky11, but greenchair is a her, which makes her comments about the alleged rape of Hannah all the more disgusting IMO.

Why should I be disappointed by that!! The fact that Greenchair is female suggests that she is more understanding of the situation than you and your cohorts (being of the same gender).

Are you implying that a female's view is less relevant than yours? That is a very bigoted stance to take and you should be ashamed of such a view.

Don't forget, Greenchair was on your side at the beginning - but she saw the light as the case unfolded when the B2's involvement in the rape/murders became more and more obvious with their ridiculous stories and claims.I suspected them right from the beginning and the phone evidence and other facts that pointed to them being the perpetrators simply reinforced my opinion.

The fact that they admitted that they 'sexually assaulted' Hannah when they rather foolishly implicated themselves proves that they attacked her!!

[jayjay78]

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:

catsanddogs, on 09 Feb 2016 - 02:02, said:

Greenchair - I find your most recent post relating to the discussion as to whether Hannah Witheridge was raped or not most disgusting.

You ask posters on this thread to be respectful to the late Hannah Witheridge. It appears the only person showing disrespect to the deceased lady is yourself. Hopefully the moderators here will see sense and have a quiet word.

Having looked at the recent flood of posts, those that think the B2 are innocent are acting in just the same way as Greenchair when it comes to discussing Hannah (and the sexual assault/rape) - just from different sides of the fence. Why don't you stop in your crude attempts to get him a suspension just to keep him quiet so that you lot can take over the thread.

Let the mods decide whether Greenchair is breaking the rules and cease the intimidation and veiled threats on him.

I think that it is disrespectful to Hannah and her memory to question whether it was rape or not as nobody knows the real answer. Everyone is discussing this aspect at the moment and it is not accomplishing anything at all. Surely, the 2 murders and who carried them out is more important and relevant.

Sorry to disappoint you, lucky11, but greenchair is a her, which makes her comments about the alleged rape of Hannah all the more disgusting IMO.

Why should I be disappointed by that!! The fact that Greenchair is female suggests that she is more understanding of the situation than you and your cohorts (being of the same gender).

Are you implying that a female's view is less relevant than yours? That is a very bigoted stance to take and you should be ashamed of such a view.

Don't forget, Greenchair was on your side at the beginning - but she saw the light as the case unfolded when the B2's involvement in the rape/murders became more and more obvious with their ridiculous stories and claims.I suspected them right from the beginning and the phone evidence and other facts that pointed to them being the perpetrators simply reinforced my opinion.

The fact that they admitted that they 'sexually assaulted' Hannah when they rather foolishly implicated themselves proves that they attacked her!!

She will correct me if I'm wrong but I'm under the impression that islandlover is a female

[StealthEnergiser]

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:

catsanddogs, on 09 Feb 2016 - 02:02, said:

Greenchair - I find your most recent post relating to the discussion as to whether Hannah Witheridge was raped or not most disgusting.

You ask posters on this thread to be respectful to the late Hannah Witheridge. It appears the only person showing disrespect to the deceased lady is yourself. Hopefully the moderators here will see sense and have a quiet word.

Having looked at the recent flood of posts, those that think the B2 are innocent are acting in just the same way as Greenchair when it comes to discussing Hannah (and the sexual assault/rape) - just from different sides of the fence. Why don't you stop in your crude attempts to get him a suspension just to keep him quiet so that you lot can take over the thread.

Let the mods decide whether Greenchair is breaking the rules and cease the intimidation and veiled threats on him.

I think that it is disrespectful to Hannah and her memory to question whether it was rape or not as nobody knows the real answer. Everyone is discussing this aspect at the moment and it is not accomplishing anything at all. Surely, the 2 murders and who carried them out is more important and relevant.

Sorry to disappoint you, lucky11, but greenchair is a her, which makes her comments about the alleged rape of Hannah all the more disgusting IMO.

Why should I be disappointed by that!! The fact that Greenchair is female suggests that she is more understanding of the situation than you and your cohorts (being of the same gender).

Are you implying that a female's view is less relevant than yours? That is a very bigoted stance to take and you should be ashamed of such a view.

Don't forget, Greenchair was on your side at the beginning - but she saw the light as the case unfolded when the B2's involvement in the rape/murders became more and more obvious with their ridiculous stories and claims.I suspected them right from the beginning and the phone evidence and other facts that pointed to them being the perpetrators simply reinforced my opinion.

The fact that they admitted that they 'sexually assaulted' Hannah when they rather foolishly implicated themselves proves that they attacked her!!

She will correct me if I'm wrong but I'm under the impression that islandlover is a female

Time to make some apolagies Lucy11

[lucky11]

Her profile implies that she is indeed female. Not very ladylike though to taunt other (female) posters with comments such as doing it 'just for the sport'!!

[TheLobster]

I keep seeing references to a cigarette, wine bottle and hoe.

The cigarette was found 60m away so hardly strong evidence of anything other than they had a smoke

The wine bottle wasn't submitted as evidence (along with many many other relevant things)

The hoe, the murder weapon did not provide any evidence against the B2 (No B2 DNA on the hose, none, zilch...)

[iReason]

Male or female, pretty tasteless to be concerned about "likes" and given such a serious subject, equally crude to remark that people:"enjoy my posts"

Enjoy? What a bizarre view.

What is there to "enjoy" about any of this?

#538 Greenhair

"Almost all of my posts have received many likes,... there are many on here that disagree with you and enjoy my posts."

[JLCrab]

Male or female, pretty tasteless to be concerned about "likes" and given such a serious subject, equally crude to remark that people:"enjoy my posts"

Enjoy? What a bizarre view.

What is there to "enjoy" about any of this?

#538 Greenhair

"Almost all of my posts have received many likes,... there are many on here that disagree with you and enjoy my posts."

What is there to enjoy? YOU -- and a few other members of the Truth&Justice squad.

[DM07]

Does it really matter whether they restrained her, or not? The bite marks on her breast imply that it was pretty brutal!!

Nooooo, of course it doesn't matter!

Also it does not matter, if CCTV- footage is made available or if boats left the island shortly after the murder!

All that matters- really- is botched DNA- evidence and a confession, most likely made under torture!

Jeeeeeezussssss....

Of course it matters, if "they" restrained her!

It matters in terms of how the whole thing went down, how many people were involved among many other things!

It matters a whole lot and the fact, that you think it doesn't speaks volume about how you view this whole case and the collection and presentation of "evidence"!

Edited February 9, 2016 by DM07

[greenchair]

Well jl crab and Inoreason it might surprise you to know that this is a chat sight, most of what is said on here and posters that come here are for a bizarre form of social media. Throughout all of the murder cases and deaths that we have joined together to chat about over the last year, there has been humour mixed with fact and sadnesses. Why is it that when I bring a light hearted spirit to the topic I am called all number of names.but when one of you makes a joke on a chat site that people make jokes, it's allowed to be funny. Now,since we have become somewhat of kindred spirits over the last year . I would like to apologise for the use of the word " donger " .at the time I was not intending it to be funny or rude at all. I wanted to ask the difference in definition and genuinely was interested in a reasonable reply. I could not think of a polite way to say p----, so foolishly I thought "donger" was

the politest way to metamorphise the p----. Please accept my apologies.

[iReason]

^^^

Please don't include me in any of that trite, superficial drivel you have posted above.

You will never see me "joke" about a subject such as this. Ever.

It is the epitome of sick Trolling.

"I bring a light hearted spirit to the topic"

Bizarre.

P.S. There are plenty of other stories on TV where jokes are more than appropriate. More often than not, begging for it.

And believe me, you can find me there.

Edited February 9, 2016 by iReason

[JLCrab]

Yes -- and that you all don't see what makes some of your overly-serious posts so amusing is the big part of what makes them so amusing.

[greenchair]

I keep seeing references to a cigarette, wine bottle and hoe.

The cigarette was found 60m away so hardly strong evidence of anything other than they had a smoke

The wine bottle wasn't submitted as evidence (along with many many other relevant things)

The hoe, the murder weapon did not provide any evidence against the B2 (No B2 DNA on the hose, none, zilch...)

Just because the bottle was not used by the prosecution does not that it is irrelevant.

They were drinking wine and a wine bottle was found next to the victims. How many wine drinkers do you think were on the beach at 2am. Before the b2 were ever arrested the police said dna on the ciggerette butts matched dna on the victim.

60 meters is not that far. How many people were on the beach at that time smoking that brand of ciggerette that the b2 were seen buying at the shop.

The hoe had a 25 percent match found by the defense own witness.

It neither included nor excluded one of them. But how many people out of the thousands that could have that 25 percent match, drank wine, was at the beach, smoked that brand of cigarettes on that island at between 2am and 4.30 am and had the telephone of the victim in their possession.

The phone was not David's, but some else left on the beach. How many people would leave a phone on the beach on that night.

All of these things alone the butts, the wine bottle, the 25 percent ,having David's phone, being there at 2am going back at 4am. Mean absolutely nothing.

But all put together in one night,the odds of it not being at least one of them are staggering. Never could understand why mm was let go.

[Khun Han]

1.00 am MM was seen on CCTV on the motorbike at 1am

1.26am David is recorded walking from the club AC

1.56am Returns to Club AC

3am-4am Friends say David & Hannah left club according to police.

3.44am running man

4.00 am WP testified that he was out looking for his clothes

4.30 am MM is seen on CCTV

4.49 am Running Man

4.51 .25 big beard man with woman

5.40am "O testified he found bodies must have called Mon

5.30am Doctor Testified this was the estimated time of the deaths.

6.10 am O was approached by the resorts boss and a policeman who told him to put on a pair of gloves and return it to the scene, which he did.

6.30am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao, said he received a call by a fellow officer.

6.35am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao arrived at the beach and swiftly cordoned off the area.

8.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat comes to the scene.

9.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat left the scene

10am Dr Chasit Yoohat returned when he examined the bodies.

Mon was at the crime scene for almost 1 hour before the police were contacted.

What was he doing for all this time as we all know the first thing innocent people do is call the police when they see something so horrifi

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao Testified the clothes were piled neatly. photos show different.

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, 26, head of the Koh Tao public service centre, was the first prosecution witness to testify in the murder case of British backpackers David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the resort island in the early hours of Sept 15 last year.

The officer identified Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun to the court as the accused. Later, in cross-examination, he admitted he had not been involved in such a case before.

Lt Jakkrapan said he saw a body later identified as Mr Miller's at the water's edge at Sai Ree beach in front of the King Chulalongkorn statue, so he decided to move him to higher ground.

About five metres away, behind some rocks, lay a female body, later identified as Miss Witheridge.

The woman's skirt was pulled up to her waist, Pol Lt Jakkrapan told the three-member panel of judges. Bloodstains and human flesh was spotted on the rocks.

He believed the areas where he saw flecks of blood on the sand were likely to be where Miller was assaulted.

He found a metal part of a shovel, a wooden stick, and three cigarette butts about 60m north of Miss Witheridge.

A used condom, grey pants with a belt, a pair of canvas shoes, and a pair of pink sandals were piled neatly nearby.

- See more at: http://www.theguardi...packer-killings

So Mon has admitted to being at the crime scene for nearly an hour before the police were called. And the crime scene was tampered with during this time. That would make Mon a prime suspect in any police textbook. No wonder Pol Gen Panya named him as being involved before his boss changed the direction of the investigation. Mon was involved.

[DM07]

I keep seeing references to a cigarette, wine bottle and hoe.

The cigarette was found 60m away so hardly strong evidence of anything other than they had a smoke

The wine bottle wasn't submitted as evidence (along with many many other relevant things)

The hoe, the murder weapon did not provide any evidence against the B2 (No B2 DNA on the hose, none, zilch...)

Just because the bottle was not used by the prosecution does not that it is irrelevant.

They were drinking wine and a wine bottle was found next to the victims. How many wine drinkers do you think were on the beach at 2am. Before the b2 were ever arrested the police said dna on the ciggerette butts matched dna on the victim.

60 meters is not that far. How many people were on the beach at that time smoking that brand of ciggerette that the b2 were seen buying at the shop.

The hoe had a 25 percent match found by the defense own witness.

It neither included nor excluded one of them. But how many people out of the thousands that could have that 25 percent match, drank wine, was at the beach, smoked that brand of cigarettes on that island at between 2am and 4.30 am and had the telephone of the victim in their possession.

The phone was not David's, but some else left on the beach. How many people would leave a phone on the beach on that night.

All of these things alone the butts, the wine bottle, the 25 percent ,having David's phone, being there at 2am going back at 4am. Mean absolutely nothing.

But all put together in one night,the odds of it not being at least one of them are staggering. Never could understand why mm was let go.

And here we go again!

The children have jumped on the merry- go- round once more!

Okay, I will give it one last try!

I guess, what our crustacean friend wants to say, is, that there were many, many, many things that could have provided valuable evidence and were not tested, lost, used up or whatever other excuse the RTP were using. To name but a few: Hannahs clothes, the hoe, Davids wound that where clearly not inflicted by a hoe, CCTV- footage from all over the island, but especially from the bars in question or the pier, shortly after the crime...

Most of these things seem not to have been tested for one and the same reason: they would not incriminate the B2, but maybe someone else!

Maybe the bottle of wine IS complete irrelevant!

One thing is for sure: it was NOT the bottle of wine, that was said to be the weapon that brought down David (allegedly...alleged by the "translator", if I am not mistaken), because it was not broken!

I am also 100% sure, that a cigarette bud, found approx. 60 meters away from the crime scene and covered in DNA of the victim or the B2, only makes one thing clear: someone was smoking a cigarette on the beach, sometime that night! Maybe the B2 and the victims (not THEIR victims, mind you) met at sometime during that night and actually shared a cigarette!

Or it is all just made up BS by the RTP and not re- testable, because...you know..."used up"... "gone"..."not enough money to file"...

Also: did you ever see, what wind can do with a cigarette bud?

As I recall, the cigarette brand was the one from Marlboro Country!

You know: one of the most popular brand in the WORLD!

"How many people were on the beach at that time smoking that brand of ciggerette that the b2 were seen buying at the shop."

How many, you ask?

All that evening, all that night?

Quiet a few, one might think!

25% of DNA matched?

It was pointed out many many many many times, that these 25% put you me and probably 75% of the Earths population in the spotlight, so what the ....?!

...and don't even get me started on the phone!

So what do we have: a wine- bottle, that was placed at sometime during the night "near" the scene of the crime by someone!

A cigarette bud from a world famous company, that was smoked by someone, somewhere "near" a crime scene, at some time during the night!

A 25% DNA- match on a hoe, which basically says nothing about anything...but also some "real" DNA, that was never accounted for!

...and that is, what you base a death- sentence on!

Brilliant!

[lucky11]

^^^

Please don't include me in any of that trite, superficial drivel you have posted above.

You will never see me "joke" about a subject such as this. Ever.

It is the epitome of sick Trolling.

"I bring a light hearted spirit to the topic"

Bizarre.

P.S. There are plenty of other stories on TV where jokes are more than appropriate. More often than not, begging for it.

And believe me, you can find me there.

She is not joking about the subject, you can make jokes within the subject matter of a discussion about an unrelated event.

Have you never been to a funeral where people, who are reunited with others for maybe the first time in several years, that seem to be laughing in conversation? They are not laughing because their friend/relative has died,are they!!

[lucky11]

Does it really matter whether they restrained her, or not? The bite marks on her breast imply that it was pretty brutal!!

Nooooo, of course it doesn't matter!

Also it does not matter, if CCTV- footage is made available or if boats left the island shortly after the murder!

All that matters- really- is botched DNA- evidence and a confession, most likely made under torture!

Jeeeeeezussssss....

Of course it matters, if "they" restrained her!

It matters in terms of how the whole thing went down, how many people were involved among many other things!

It matters a whole lot and the fact, that you think it doesn't speaks volume about how you view this whole case and the collection and presentation of "evidence"!

Well I don't think that it does matter - hope that doesn't hurt your feelings.

[manxninja]

I hope one positive thing that comes out of this, is that young people try to be more aware when drinking.

[greenchair]

That's right lucky. I have never joked about the subject itself. But have found humour in many of the comments ,especially the comments that have been directed at me by the stalkers. I respond back with humour, rather than malice, which in no way demeans the serious nature of the topic.

[MorristheRunt]

1.00 am MM was seen on CCTV on the motorbike at 1am

1.26am David is recorded walking from the club AC

1.56am Returns to Club AC

3am-4am Friends say David & Hannah left club according to police.

3.44am running man

4.00 am WP testified that he was out looking for his clothes

4.30 am MM is seen on CCTV

4.49 am Running Man

4.51 .25 big beard man with woman

5.40am "O testified he found bodies must have called Mon

5.30am Doctor Testified this was the estimated time of the deaths.

6.10 am O was approached by the resorts boss and a policeman who told him to put on a pair of gloves and return it to the scene, which he did.

6.30am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao, said he received a call by a fellow officer.

6.35am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao arrived at the beach and swiftly cordoned off the area.

8.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat comes to the scene.

9.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat left the scene

10am Dr Chasit Yoohat returned when he examined the bodies.

Mon was at the crime scene for almost 1 hour before the police were contacted.

What was he doing for all this time as we all know the first thing innocent people do is call the police when they see something so horrifi

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao Testified the clothes were piled neatly. photos show different.

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, 26, head of the Koh Tao public service centre, was the first prosecution witness to testify in the murder case of British backpackers David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the resort island in the early hours of Sept 15 last year.

The officer identified Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun to the court as the accused. Later, in cross-examination, he admitted he had not been involved in such a case before.

Lt Jakkrapan said he saw a body later identified as Mr Miller's at the water's edge at Sai Ree beach in front of the King Chulalongkorn statue, so he decided to move him to higher ground.

About five metres away, behind some rocks, lay a female body, later identified as Miss Witheridge.

The woman's skirt was pulled up to her waist, Pol Lt Jakkrapan told the three-member panel of judges. Bloodstains and human flesh was spotted on the rocks.

He believed the areas where he saw flecks of blood on the sand were likely to be where Miller was assaulted.

He found a metal part of a shovel, a wooden stick, and three cigarette butts about 60m north of Miss Witheridge.

A used condom, grey pants with a belt, a pair of canvas shoes, and a pair of pink sandals were piled neatly nearby.

- See more at: http://www.theguardi...packer-killings

So Mon has admitted to being at the crime scene for nearly an hour before the police were called. And the crime scene was tampered with during this time. That would make Mon a prime suspect in any police textbook. No wonder Pol Gen Panya named him as being involved before his boss changed the direction of the investigation. Mon was involved.

Mon was very much involved, so why did the defence not call him?

Under Thai law are they entitled to call him?

[lucky11]

1.00 am MM was seen on CCTV on the motorbike at 1am

1.26am David is recorded walking from the club AC

1.56am Returns to Club AC

3am-4am Friends say David & Hannah left club according to police.

3.44am running man

4.00 am WP testified that he was out looking for his clothes

4.30 am MM is seen on CCTV

4.49 am Running Man

4.51 .25 big beard man with woman

5.40am "O testified he found bodies must have called Mon

5.30am Doctor Testified this was the estimated time of the deaths.

6.10 am O was approached by the resorts boss and a policeman who told him to put on a pair of gloves and return it to the scene, which he did.

6.30am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao, said he received a call by a fellow officer.

6.35am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao arrived at the beach and swiftly cordoned off the area.

8.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat comes to the scene.

9.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat left the scene

10am Dr Chasit Yoohat returned when he examined the bodies.

Mon was at the crime scene for almost 1 hour before the police were contacted.

What was he doing for all this time as we all know the first thing innocent people do is call the police when they see something so horrifi

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao Testified the clothes were piled neatly. photos show different.

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, 26, head of the Koh Tao public service centre, was the first prosecution witness to testify in the murder case of British backpackers David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the resort island in the early hours of Sept 15 last year.

The officer identified Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun to the court as the accused. Later, in cross-examination, he admitted he had not been involved in such a case before.

Lt Jakkrapan said he saw a body later identified as Mr Miller's at the water's edge at Sai Ree beach in front of the King Chulalongkorn statue, so he decided to move him to higher ground.

About five metres away, behind some rocks, lay a female body, later identified as Miss Witheridge.

The woman's skirt was pulled up to her waist, Pol Lt Jakkrapan told the three-member panel of judges. Bloodstains and human flesh was spotted on the rocks.

He believed the areas where he saw flecks of blood on the sand were likely to be where Miller was assaulted.

He found a metal part of a shovel, a wooden stick, and three cigarette butts about 60m north of Miss Witheridge.

A used condom, grey pants with a belt, a pair of canvas shoes, and a pair of pink sandals were piled neatly nearby.

- See more at: http://www.theguardi...packer-killings

So Mon has admitted to being at the crime scene for nearly an hour before the police were called. And the crime scene was tampered with during this time. That would make Mon a prime suspect in any police textbook. No wonder Pol Gen Panya named him as being involved before his boss changed the direction of the investigation. Mon was involved.

Mon was very much involved, so why did the defence not call him?

Under Thai law are they entitled to call him?

Good point!! hardly surprising though, as they pretty well cocked up at every opportunity that was open to them during the case. I could have done a better job than these incompetents.

I wonder, if the B2 actually understood how much they were let down, whether they would have trusted this lot with the appeal (how much say did they have over this)?.

The flip side of the coin is that they had no defence to work with and were doomed to fail, even if they excelled themselves by putting in a stellar performance as the prosecutions case was so overwhelming in pointing to their their guilt.

[berybert]

Her profile implies that she is indeed female. Not very ladylike though to taunt other (female) posters with comments such as doing it 'just for the sport'!!

When she makes mention of how many likes she is getting, maybe that's the truth.

[stephenterry]

Good point!! hardly surprising though, as they pretty well cocked up at every opportunity that was open to them during the case. I could have done a better job than these incompetents.

I wonder, if the B2 actually understood how much they were let down, whether they would have trusted this lot with the appeal (how much say did they have over this)?.

The flip side of the coin is that they had no defence to work with and were doomed to fail, even if they excelled themselves by putting in a stellar performance as the prosecutions case was so overwhelming in pointing to their their guilt.

The same flaming drivel. The inadequate prosecution case is appealed. No doubt the court will uphold the verdict as no way are the Thai judicial going to oppose their peers. Sad, really.

[Khun Han]

1.00 am MM was seen on CCTV on the motorbike at 1am

1.26am David is recorded walking from the club AC

1.56am Returns to Club AC

3am-4am Friends say David & Hannah left club according to police.

3.44am running man

4.00 am WP testified that he was out looking for his clothes

4.30 am MM is seen on CCTV

4.49 am Running Man

4.51 .25 big beard man with woman

5.40am "O testified he found bodies must have called Mon

5.30am Doctor Testified this was the estimated time of the deaths.

6.10 am O was approached by the resorts boss and a policeman who told him to put on a pair of gloves and return it to the scene, which he did.

6.30am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao, said he received a call by a fellow officer.

6.35am Police Lieutenant Jakkapan Kaewkao arrived at the beach and swiftly cordoned off the area.

8.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat comes to the scene.

9.00 am Dr Chasit Yoohat left the scene

10am Dr Chasit Yoohat returned when he examined the bodies.

Mon was at the crime scene for almost 1 hour before the police were contacted.

What was he doing for all this time as we all know the first thing innocent people do is call the police when they see something so horrifi

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao Testified the clothes were piled neatly. photos show different.

Pol Lt Jakkrapan Kaewkhao, 26, head of the Koh Tao public service centre, was the first prosecution witness to testify in the murder case of British backpackers David Miller, 24, and Hannah Witheridge, 23, on the resort island in the early hours of Sept 15 last year.

The officer identified Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun to the court as the accused. Later, in cross-examination, he admitted he had not been involved in such a case before.

Lt Jakkrapan said he saw a body later identified as Mr Miller's at the water's edge at Sai Ree beach in front of the King Chulalongkorn statue, so he decided to move him to higher ground.

About five metres away, behind some rocks, lay a female body, later identified as Miss Witheridge.

The woman's skirt was pulled up to her waist, Pol Lt Jakkrapan told the three-member panel of judges. Bloodstains and human flesh was spotted on the rocks.

He believed the areas where he saw flecks of blood on the sand were likely to be where Miller was assaulted.

He found a metal part of a shovel, a wooden stick, and three cigarette butts about 60m north of Miss Witheridge.

A used condom, grey pants with a belt, a pair of canvas shoes, and a pair of pink sandals were piled neatly nearby.

- See more at: http://www.theguardi...packer-killings

So Mon has admitted to being at the crime scene for nearly an hour before the police were called. And the crime scene was tampered with during this time. That would make Mon a prime suspect in any police textbook. No wonder Pol Gen Panya named him as being involved before his boss changed the direction of the investigation. Mon was involved.

Mon was very much involved, so why did the defence not call him?

Under Thai law are they entitled to call him?

What worries me is that there appear to have been some basic ground rules set in this trial: you can argue that the defendants are not guilty, but not at the expense of producing evidence or witnesses that will point to the involvement of other people.

[greenchair]

I well agree lucky. They were bamboozled as we all were, into believing the defense was going to produce the magic revelation that would show their innocence and walk them out the door.

Instead the one witness they called for the defense of dna, found a 25 percent match on the hoe ,that the rtp themselves did not even know about . Then andy called himself, which no offence

I know he was trying to help but what could he contribute. They could have called Mon, they could have called mm. They could have called the gait analyse guy to come here. But like you say there was so much, it just got to hard to explain away.

They certainly were robbed. Even though they did a terrible thing, I can have compassion that they are very young.

Someone should advise them to drop the not guilty plea. So they will be eligible for the kings pardon. Get on with their sentence and out st 35 years old.

[rockingrobin]

I well agree lucky. They were bamboozled as we all were, into believing the defense was going to produce the magic revelation that would show their innocence and walk them out the door.

Instead the one witness they called for the defense of dna, found a 25 percent match on the hoe ,that the rtp themselves did not even know about . Then andy called himself, which no offence

I know he was trying to help but what could he contribute. They could have called Mon, they could have called mm. They could have called the gait analyse guy to come here. But like you say there was so much, it just got to hard to explain away.

They certainly were robbed. Even though they did a terrible thing, I can have compassion that they are very young.

Someone should advise them to drop the not guilty plea. So they will be eligible for the kings pardon. Get on with their sentence and out st 35 years old.

Assumptions based on a lack of knowledge

Mon was called by the prosecution in the early days of the trial

GC you state you dont understand why MM was let go , are you suggesting that there was some kind of conspiracy

[IslandLover]

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:14, said:

Does it really matter whether they restrained her, or not? The bite marks on her breast imply that it was pretty brutal!!

The British autopsy found no evidence of bite marks.

[IslandLover]

jayjay78, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:45, said:jayjay78, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:45, said:jayjay78, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:45, said:

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:31, said:lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:31, said:lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:31, said:

IslandLover, on 09 Feb 2016 - 04:06, said:IslandLover, on 09 Feb 2016 - 04:06, said:IslandLover, on 09 Feb 2016 - 04:06, said:

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 03:05, said:

Having looked at the recent flood of posts, those that think the B2 are innocent are acting in just the same way as Greenchair when it comes to discussing Hannah (and the sexual assault/rape) - just from different sides of the fence. Why don't you stop in your crude attempts to get him a suspension just to keep him quiet so that you lot can take over the thread.

Let the mods decide whether Greenchair is breaking the rules and cease the intimidation and veiled threats on him.

I think that it is disrespectful to Hannah and her memory to question whether it was rape or not as nobody knows the real answer. Everyone is discussing this aspect at the moment and it is not accomplishing anything at all. Surely, the 2 murders and who carried them out is more important and relevant.

Sorry to disappoint you, lucky11, but greenchair is a her, which makes her comments about the alleged rape of Hannah all the more disgusting IMO.

Why should I be disappointed by that!! The fact that Greenchair is female suggests that she is more understanding of the situation than you and your cohorts (being of the same gender).

Are you implying that a female's view is less relevant than yours? That is a very bigoted stance to take and you should be ashamed of such a view.

Don't forget, Greenchair was on your side at the beginning - but she saw the light as the case unfolded when the B2's involvement in the rape/murders became more and more obvious with their ridiculous stories and claims.I suspected them right from the beginning and the phone evidence and other facts that pointed to them being the perpetrators simply reinforced my opinion.

The fact that they admitted that they 'sexually assaulted' Hannah when they rather foolishly implicated themselves proves that they attacked her!!

She will correct me if I'm wrong but I'm under the impression that islandlover is a female

Indeed I am . Sorry to disappoint you again, lucky11.

Edited February 9, 2016 by IslandLover

[IslandLover]

lucky11, on 09 Feb 2016 - 05:54, said:

Her profile implies that she is indeed female. Not very ladylike though to taunt other (female) posters with comments such as doing it 'just for the sport'!!

Errrr, greenchair was far from ladylike with her crude post about Hannah's alleged rape. I would never, ever use such words on a public forum, nor in private actually.

[IslandLover]

greenchair, on 09 Feb 2016 - 10:21, said:greenchair, on 09 Feb 2016 - 10:21, said:

That's right lucky. I have never joked about the subject itself. But have found humour in many of the comments ,especially the comments that have been directed at me by the stalkers. I respond back with humour, rather than malice, which in no way demeans the serious nature of the topic.

especially the comments that have been directed at me by the stalkers

Please define "stalkers", greenchair. What is it about this forum and stalkers? People are complaining about being stalked all of a sudden. Is looking at someone's User Profile considered stalking? I could say more, but I won't.

Oh, and while I'm at it, most humourous comments seem to get deleted on this forum. Pigeons and Chess, anyone?

Edited February 9, 2016 by IslandLover

[IslandLover]

transam, on 09 Feb 2016 - 10:30, said:

greenchair, on 09 Feb 2016 - 10:21, said:

That's right lucky. I have never joked about the subject itself. But have found humour in many of the comments ,especially the comments that have been directed at me by the stalkers. I respond back with humour, rather than malice, which in no way demeans the serious nature of the topic.

One thing is for sure.....Hannah would be NO friend of yours......

Did someone post you are a bird.....?

Yes, me.