Evidence from UK's National Crime Agency 'critical' in sentencing Koh Tao killers to death
Staff writer



BANGKOK: -- Buzzfeed News reporting has found that the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) provided supposedly ‘critical’ evidence to the Thai police in a murder investigation without seeking written assurances that it not be used to sentence the suspects to death.

Mobile phone evidence was provided by the NCA and used as a part of the prosecution of Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo, the Burmese migrant workers who were sentenced to death at the end of last year for the murders of British tourists David Miller and Hannah Witheridge on the island of Koh Tao.

The NCA apparently verbally provided the Royal Thai Police with the serial number of David Miller’s iPhone which was supposedly found, broken, in a property linked to the two murder suspects.

British police are not allowed, except with ministerial permission, to supply evidence to their foreign counterparts in countries that utilise the death penalty without having written assurance that the suspect will not be sentenced to death. This is an important part of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Strategy for the Abolition of the Death Penalty.

One exception to this rule is if the evidence will be used “to safeguard the integrity of evidence or protect British lives”, decided after consultation with various branches of the UK government.

Fearing for other British tourists on Koh Tao with the murderers still at large, the NCA acted on this exception, according to Buzzfeed, with the caveat that it be used for intelligence only and not in court.

Full story: http://whatsonsukhumvit.com/evidence-from-uks-national-crime-agency-critical-in-sentencing-koh-tao-killers-to-death/

-- (c) What's on Sukhumvit 2016-02-16

If communication has helped in this case it was done so with full intention of getting to the truth,

Due process for these two is still in progress,

ambiguous statement

serial number of David Miller’s iPhone which was supposedly found, broken, in a property linked to the two murder suspects.

and before anyone else makes a comment - this changes absolutely nothing, it all comes down to which iphone was found where, an IMEI was submitted for verification, only the Thai police know which phone was found where

The iPhone found at the crime scene was unimportant it seems - and has remained so

nothing new here, this has been discussed over and over on these forums

it adds nothing

serial number of David Miller’s iPhone which was supposedly found, broken, in a property linked to the two murder suspects.

and before anyone else makes a comment - this changes absolutely nothing, it all comes down to which iphone was found where, an IMEI was submitted for verification, only the Thai police know which phone was found where

The iPhone found at the crime scene was unimportant it seems - and has remained so

nothing new here, this has been discussed over and over on these forums

I would like to know the source of this news article and why it has been released - it adds nothing

who on earth is ................What's on Sukhumvit................seriously

and from the source Buzzfeed news

Lawyers representing the pair said DNA samples from the alleged murder weapon – a garden hoe – did not match that of the two men, and Thailand’s leading forensic scientist told the court that the evidence had been so badly mishandled that it was worthless.

The prosecution case had also rested heavily on sperm samples collected from the crime scene, but when the defence asked to have the DNA independently tested Thai police officers failed to hand it over.

hmmmmm nothing new here

""Fearing for other British tourists on Koh Tao with the murderers still at large, the NCA acted on this exception, according to Buzzfeed, with the caveat that it be used for intelligence only and not in court.""

But the murderers are STILL at large...

serial number of David Miller’s iPhone which was supposedly found, broken, in a property linked to the two murder suspects.

and before anyone else makes a comment - this changes absolutely nothing, it all comes down to which iphone was found where, an IMEI was submitted for verification, only the Thai police know which phone was found where

The iPhone found at the crime scene was unimportant it seems - and has remained so

nothing new here, this has been discussed over and over on these forums

I would like to know the source of this news article and why it has been released - it adds nothing

who on earth is ................What's on Sukhumvit................seriously

and from the source Buzzfeed news

Lawyers representing the pair said DNA samples from the alleged murder weapon – a garden hoe – did not match that of the two men, and Thailand’s leading forensic scientist told the court that the evidence had been so badly mishandled that it was worthless.

The prosecution case had also rested heavily on sperm samples collected from the crime scene, but when the defence asked to have the DNA independently tested Thai police officers failed to hand it over.

hmmmmm nothing new here

yes something new , or i've missed something : lots (me too) believed that it was the Miller family who talked to prosecutors/rtp about the imei....

Why all this reminds me of Beria, Stalin's head henchman: " Show me a man and Ill find the crime! ":

""Fearing for other British tourists on Koh Tao with the murderers still at large, the NCA acted on this exception, according to Buzzfeed, with the caveat that it be used for intelligence only and not in court.""

But the murderers are STILL at large...

... but they (mostly?) have been behaving themselves.

An abomination, simple as that

British intelligence used to put two migrant workers on Thailand’s death row
National Crime Agency criticised for involvement in case of murdered backpackers
Paul Peachey

LONDON: -- Thailand used evidence supplied by the National Crime Agency (NCA) to put two migrant workers on death row despite senior British officials warning that such a move could damage the reputation of UK policing, it has been revealed.

In December, two Burmese labourers were convicted of the 2014 murder of backpackers David Miller and Hannah Witheridge despite the concerns of human rights groups. During their trial, the defendants claimed that they had been tortured into confessing their role in the killing.

On 15 February, an investigation by BuzzFeed News disclosed that the NCA handed over details about Mr Miller’s iPhone to Thai police. The information – the phone’s serial number – was used in the criminal trial to link Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo to the killing, as it proved that a smashed iPhone found on a property linked to the two Burmese migrants had belonged to the victim.

Full story: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/british-intelligence-used-to-put-two-migrant-workers-on-thailand-s-death-row-a6875841.html

-- THE INDEPENDENT 2016-02-16

......the smashed iPhone found on a property linked to the two Burmese migrants had belonged to the victim.......

maybe someone tossed the iPhone over the fence.........

The defence is at the mercy of the Thai court.

The Thai court found the defendants guilty chiefly on the strength of two points, the DNA evidence presented by the police and the phone.

Whatever you may think of that, that is what the Court of First Instance came to in their judgement.

The defence, therefore, must seek to undermine and dispute these findings.

One way to do this would be to belie the Thai police claim that the phone info came from the British authorities. This would undermine the police evidence with regards to the phone.

It is all a moot point. The police failed to link possession of the phone to the accused, yet the court went with it. Just as the court accepted the confessions which were the result of torture and written by a man who could not speak the language of the accused or Thai with any degree of competency. They also accepted DNA evidence which appears to have been done by a 5 year old in the kitchen and recorded in crayon.

If the court didn't care about any of that then...

It is all a moot point. The police failed to link possession of the phone to the accused, yet the court went with it. Just as the court accepted the confessions which were the result of torture and written by a man who could not speak the language of the accused or Thai with any degree of competency. They also accepted DNA evidence which appears to have been done by a 5 year old in the kitchen and recorded in crayon.

If the court didn't care about any of that then...

Everything you say is correct.

But the Court makes the rules and everyone else has to play by them.

We need to remember that there are two issues with this conviction.

1/ Did the prosecution prove their case.

2/ Did they do it.

It seems clear that the case was not proven to western standards of evidence, but that's not to say they didn't do it.

The court seemed to attach more significance to the question of "did they do it" than "can we prove it".

We need to remember that there are two issues with this conviction.

1/ Did the prosecution prove their case.

2/ Did they do it.

It seems clear that the case was not proven to western standards of evidence, but that's not to say they didn't do it.

The court seemed to attach more significance to the question of "did they do it" than "can we prove it".

wrong ! the court didn't care if they did it or not (proof or not). This is a question only a western standard court could care ...

More entertaining that Billy's Smarts Circus.......

What are actually the names of the B2?

I have seen:-

Win Zaw Tun

Win Zaw Htun (presume the same as above)

Zaw Lin

Wai Phyo

We need to remember that there are two issues with this conviction.

1/ Did the prosecution prove their case.

2/ Did they do it.

It seems clear that the case was not proven to western standards of evidence, but that's not to say they didn't do it.

The court seemed to attach more significance to the question of "did they do it" than "can we prove it".

The real question was "who said they did it"? That's what the court paid attention to.

What are actually the names of the B2?

I have seen:-

Win Zaw Tun

Win Zaw Htun (presume the same as above)

Zaw Lin

Wai Phyo

b2

Did they find ANY fingerprints on the phone?

regards Worgeordie

The KT defence league must be scrambling to post their weak defense of this utterly travesty of justice in yet another thread. I suspect they'll be here shortly.

Did they find ANY fingerprints on the phone?

regards Worgeordie

whatever they have found (fingerprints or not , phone or not), the court didn't care

serial number of David Millers iPhone which was supposedly found, broken, in a property linked to the two murder suspects.

and before anyone else makes a comment - this changes absolutely nothing, it all comes down to which iphone was found where, an IMEI was submitted for verification, only the Thai police know which phone was found where

The iPhone found at the crime scene was unimportant it seems - and has remained so

nothing new here, this has been discussed over and over on these forums

I would like to know the source of this news article and why it has been released - it adds nothing

who on earth is ................What's on Sukhumvit................seriously

and from the source Buzzfeed news

Lawyers representing the pair said DNA samples from the alleged murder weapon a garden hoe did not match that of the two men, and Thailands leading forensic scientist told the court that the evidence had been so badly mishandled that it was worthless.

The prosecution case had also rested heavily on sperm samples collected from the crime scene, but when the defence asked to have the DNA independently tested Thai police officers failed to hand it over.

hmmmmm nothing new here

But that's of course not correct. They initially didn't hand it over but after the big ruckus of "all used up" they finally agreed to hand it over for independent testing. And then the defense decided not to test.

What's Buzzfeed's source?

During the trial it was reported that the UK police wouldn't hand over IMEI information so Miller's father had to get it from the mobile company himself.

Edit- For example, "Smashed phone found at second defendants home was proven to belong to Miller, with help from Millers father to identify the IMEI serial number."

""Fearing for other British tourists on Koh Tao with the murderers still at large, the NCA acted on this exception, according to Buzzfeed, with the caveat that it be used for intelligence only and not in court.""

But the murderers are STILL at large...

As you are stating that as fact and not an opinion then I assume you must know who did murder them?

Unless of course you are just blowing hot wind and love to Thai bash?

The Thai tourism industry needs an impressive outcome, that being that the murderers are dead, or at least forever incarcerated.

So even if there is evidence that would lead to an acquittal, no one will know about it.

It is all a moot point. The police failed to link possession of the phone to the accused, yet the court went with it. Just as the court accepted the confessions which were the result of torture and written by a man who could not speak the language of the accused or Thai with any degree of competency. They also accepted DNA evidence which appears to have been done by a 5 year old in the kitchen and recorded in crayon.

If the court didn't care about any of that then...

Everything you say is correct.

But the Court makes the rules and everyone else has to play by them.

Exactly what the hell is your point here? That everyone should shrug their shoulders at this travesty, and go back to their Guinness?

People need to make noise, and plenty of it, until this is reversed.

Really, I can't fathom your comment...

It is all a moot point. The police failed to link possession of the phone to the accused, yet the court went with it. Just as the court accepted the confessions which were the result of torture and written by a man who could not speak the language of the accused or Thai with any degree of competency. They also accepted DNA evidence which appears to have been done by a 5 year old in the kitchen and recorded in crayon.

If the court didn't care about any of that then...

The defendants admitted to finding the phone. That's when their story changed to returning back to the beach at 5am to collect their clothes.

To me this case was bungled, rushed and concluded quickly and for me that's a signal 'someone in the know' wanted it out of the way. Does anyone know of any appeal progress?