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

[lucky11]

Seems like there were loads of Myanmar migrant workers sitting around drinking on the beach in the vicinity of where the bodies were found and most of them had smashed iphones in their possession:

"Police said three of the Myanmar migrant workers were seen drinking near the beach where David William Miller, 24, and Hannah Victoria Witheridge, 24, were found dead on Monday, a police source said Tuesday.

Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong Khawsamang, Surat Thani police chief, said the six Myanmar nationals worked for a resort called Inthat, just 300m from the crime scene, and lodged in nine rooms there.

The six were detained after a pre-dawn search of their rooms uncovered four iPhones, two of which had shattered screens, along with a bloodstained pair of jeans, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said.

DNA samples were collected from the six and another four people for analysis, he said.

Although the six men were colleagues and lived as neighbours, they appear not to have been together on the night of the murders.

The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge.

But police have yet to press any charges against them pending an investigation outcome, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said.

They were freed after two rounds of interrogation by the police."

So if none of the Myanmar migrant workers being referred to in this statement from the police were the ones who eventually stood trial then it's obviously the norm for Myanmar migrant workers to have smashed iphones in their possession and so should not be seen as being incriminating.

And besides which, the police originally claimed to have found David's phone near the clock tower:

"The British team went to Sairee beach, where the two were murdered, and inspected the nearby location where the two suspects stayed and were seen playing guitar. They also went to the AC Bar where the two victims had been seen before their deaths, and stopped at a place near the clock tower where police claimed they had found Mr Miller's mobile phone"

"So if none of the Myanmar migrant workers being referred to in this statement from the police were the ones who eventually stood trial then it's obviously the norm for Myanmar migrant workers to have smashed iphones in their possession and so should not be seen as being incriminating".

Oh!! be real! - you really are scraping the barrel now.

In a survey of 6 people they found that 50% of those that had an iphone had a smashed screen - therefore it is understood that this is to be regarded as the norm for Burmese migrant workers.

Edited February 19, 2016 by lucky11

[JLCrab]

To J_BKK: Thanks -- And that's why I love you.

[lucky11]

We can fight about that number on the phone till the cows come home.

Since the

"the rtp planted the phone "

Theory fell in the mud.

I want ask

What are people's "theories" about who the phone belongs to ,that Wei Phyo "found"at 4am as he was out strolling around next to a murder.

You keep trying to equate that the phone equals the murders, which of course it does not. Whatever happened with the phone is not proof that either of the B2 murdered the 2 tourists. There are plenty of other scenarios such as they witnessed a bunch of locals do it and they stole the phone from the scene, but you will only accept the scenario that the B2 definitely killed both victims on their own with one weapon and your biggest proof of this is that you say they stole a phone which belonged to one of the victims, so either you are totally naive (which I don't think you are) or you are here with a purpose which makes you an appalling person when you consider what has happened and what you are doing.

As I said before in this thread, the hoe was not used to kill David and even if you have never seen or held one to realise it's capabilities all you need to do is to look at the injuries on both victims to realise that the same weapon was not used to cause such massively different injuries, to say otherwise is just further proof of deliberate ignorance for a reason. But despite everything else all you want to talk about is a phone which may or may have been stolen by one of the B2. The fact that you are trying so hard to derail any conversation by continually posting about something relatively irrelevant to the actual murders and you use the flawed trial verdict as your major source of proof just shows that you are either here to wind everyone up or you are here because it is in your best interests to post as much misinformation as possible to try and confuse anybody trying to read up on the case, so whichever it is it's a pretty abhorrent thing for you to do.

Greenchair is discussing the phone (element) BECAUSE this thread is about the phone - seems a justifiable reason to me!!

Are you trying to make everyone go off-topic because you don't like what is being revealed!!

As en exercise let's deconstruct KunMatt's post, shall we?

-"You keep trying to equate that the phone equals the murders,"

Strawman Argument, deliberately misrepresents Greenchair's views.

-"Whatever happened with the phone is not proof that either of the B2 murdered the 2 tourists."

What did happened with it is strong evidence against them, as per their own testimony.

-"There are plenty of other scenarios such as they witnessed a bunch of locals do it and they stole the phone from the scene, but you will only accept the scenario that the B2 definitely killed both victims on their own with one weapon"

Ignore their testimony and actual evidence, invoke imaginary scenarios not supported by either instead... Also, again, a Strawman Argument.

"your biggest proof of this is that you say they stole a phone which belonged to one of the victims"

Another Strawman Argument. Greenchair's position, as she has explained several times, is not just that they had that phone, but their actions regarding it are highly suspicious and not ones to be expected from people uninvolved in the crime.

-"so either you are totally naive (which I don't think you are) or you are here with a purpose which makes you an appalling person when you consider what has happened and what you are doing."

The tired, old tactic of accusing people of having some vague but nefarious hidden motives to hold a particular opinion.

-"As I said before in this thread, the hoe was not used to kill David and even if you have never seen or held one to realise it's capabilities all you need to do is to look at the injuries on both victims to realise that the same weapon was not used to cause such massively different injuries"

He says... contradicting what the professionals who performed the autopsy on the bodies determined (and the defense didn't contest), because apparently he thinks he knows better by virtue of having no qualifications and poring over a few photos on Internet... This is formally known as an Argument from Ignorance.

-"to say otherwise is just further proof of deliberate ignorance for a reason."

Again ascribing ulterior motives for disagreeing with his unsubstantiated claims.

-"But despite everything else all you want to talk about is a phone which may or may have been stolen by one of the B2."

-"The fact that you are trying so hard to derail any conversation..."

Derailing a thread, by talking about issues central to the topic topic of the thread... right.

-"... by continually posting about something relatively irrelevant to the actual murders"

Belongings from one of the victims being in possession of the suspects, the suspects actions being concordant with the beheaviour of someone trying to destroy incriminating evidence (as per their own testimony), all that, according to KunMatt is "relatively irrelevant to the actual murders". I mean, what to say to that but

-"you use the flawed trial verdict as your major source of proof"

As opposed to just plucking theories and "facts" out of thin air to support alternative theories?

In any case, another Strawman Argument, she is not using the verdict as a source of proof, she is using the facts disclosed during the trial as evidence, so a complete misrepresentation.

-"shows that you are either here to wind everyone up or you are here because it is in your best interests to post as much misinformation as possible to try and confuse anybody trying to read up on the case, so whichever it is it's a pretty abhorrent thing for you to do."

To finish it off, and for the third time, insinuate some vested interest for holding a position and attack Greenchairs character based on that assumption.

The term omnishambles comes to mind to describe a post like that.

Excellent post AleG - I have never seen a better dissection of a post to show the inaccuracies and falsities that abound throughout as this.

Each point put forward in his post is quashed in clinical fashion.

[Khun Han]

"DNA samples have failed to provide a match"

So they were among the first to have their DNA tested then Jimmy? And quite soon after the murders. So much for the argument that their DNA was in a large queue waiting to be tested when they were arrested weeks later. I note that the date of the article that can't be linked to is 18 September 2014, so it's not as though the article could have got it's timelines badly muddled up on this.

Like Jimmy says, Google the quote. It's the first hit. Just an advisory: the article contains one of the distressing photos from the RTP stitch-up of Hannah's family in Bangkok.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Khun Han

[Jai Dee]

Yet another troll post has been removed from this thread.

If the repetitive nonsense, insults, flames, and troll posts do not desist, this topic will be closed until there is some new breaking news on the subject.

[MickRobbo]

Try reading my post again with tongue-in-cheek Mick .

Yes, I understand your intent; but I'm now angry over this (amusement is over) as all the B2 did was brake one rule in Thailand 'having no money' and subsequently there afterwards was panic from tourism Thailand to create distance for all Thai nationals. It simply isn't right, I live here, often have lunch with RTP who I might add are nice blokes. The big difference is I don't live in Pattaya/Phuket/Koh Samui/Koh Toa city where cost of living is excessive (however my spouse does work in a government position). Now is the beginning of the sweeping the issue under the carpet for both the Thai and the UK authorities, neither could have acted alone. Big generalisations + the Scapegoat central factor. WRONG in every way, as these two guys simply weren't capable of such a sick act. Which means the true perpetrator is still roaming the island of Koh Toa which is chilling in itself, waiting for another opportunity; 0 deterrent.

[StealthEnergiser]

"But despite everything else all you want to talk about is a phone which may or may have been stolen by one of the B2". Your quote to GC - decrying the fact that she wants to talk about the phone. What exactly would you like her to discuss other than about the phone whereby she can stay on-topic? [/size][/font][/color][/background]

Yes, I know your game, this is what you always do, you pretend to not understand something and then harp on and on about a supposed misunderstanding for a week. Yes, this thread is about the phone, my point is that possession of the phone is not evidence of a murder especially when there is so much other proof that points to other people being involved, as I said the B2 could have been with the murderers and stolen the phone from the crime scene, it obviously does not automatically make them the murderers because they have a stolen phone found behind their house.

I fully expect you to reply with the exact same point you already wrote above and pretending that you don't understand what I just said. Go on, do it.

That's a really good post Khun Matt very accurate and precise no need for a 500 word answer .

[jayjay78]

Seems like there were loads of Myanmar migrant workers sitting around drinking on the beach in the vicinity of where the bodies were found and most of them had smashed iphones in their possession:

"Police said three of the Myanmar migrant workers were seen drinking near the beach where David William Miller, 24, and Hannah Victoria Witheridge, 24, were found dead on Monday, a police source said Tuesday.

Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong Khawsamang, Surat Thani police chief, said the six Myanmar nationals worked for a resort called Inthat, just 300m from the crime scene, and lodged in nine rooms there.

The six were detained after a pre-dawn search of their rooms uncovered four iPhones, two of which had shattered screens, along with a bloodstained pair of jeans, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said.

DNA samples were collected from the six and another four people for analysis, he said.

Although the six men were colleagues and lived as neighbours, they appear not to have been together on the night of the murders.

The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge.

But police have yet to press any charges against them pending an investigation outcome, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said.

They were freed after two rounds of interrogation by the police."

So if none of the Myanmar migrant workers being referred to in this statement from the police were the ones who eventually stood trial then it's obviously the norm for Myanmar migrant workers to have smashed iphones in their possession and so should not be seen as being incriminating.

And besides which, the police originally claimed to have found David's phone near the clock tower:

"The British team went to Sairee beach, where the two were murdered, and inspected the nearby location where the two suspects stayed and were seen playing guitar. They also went to the AC Bar where the two victims had been seen before their deaths, and stopped at a place near the clock tower where police claimed they had found Mr Miller's mobile phone"

Apparently the clock tower is located not far from the Koh Tao Rescue services location near Mae Head

[jayjay78]

"But despite everything else all you want to talk about is a phone which may or may have been stolen by one of the B2". Your quote to GC - decrying the fact that she wants to talk about the phone. What exactly would you like her to discuss other than about the phone whereby she can stay on-topic? [/size][/font][/color][/background]

Yes, I know your game, this is what you always do, you pretend to not understand something and then harp on and on about a supposed misunderstanding for a week. Yes, this thread is about the phone, my point is that possession of the phone is not evidence of a murder especially when there is so much other proof that points to other people being involved, as I said the B2 could have been with the murderers and stolen the phone from the crime scene, it obviously does not automatically make them the murderers because they have a stolen phone found behind their house.

I fully expect you to reply with the exact same point you already wrote above and pretending that you don't understand what I just said. Go on, do it.

That's a really good post Khun Matt very accurate and precise no need for a 500 word answer .

There's a prolific poster on here who fails to understand that sometimes less is more, unless of course you're deliberately muddying the waters

[Khun Han]

Also from the article found by Jimmy:

"Police also found a pair of Ware's blood-stained pants from in Miller's luggage and an Apple iPhone with long blonde hairs snagged on it."

Note that the report is dated 18 September 2014

[KunMatt]

Also from the article found by Jimmy:

"Police also found a pair of Ware's blood-stained pants from in Miller's luggage and an Apple iPhone with long blonde hairs snagged on it."

Note that the report is dated 18 September 2014

It's been stated that David only had 1 iPhone so there goes the theory that the B2 stole that one if the police found it in his luggage before the 18th Sept.

[AleG]

"No other source makes the same claim as that article, so obviously the article is poorly written and the "they" is referring to the two Burmese suspects, not the police and it should read "where police claimed they (the suspects) had found Mr Miller's mobile phone"" Hmmm... is that really what you believe? That if no other source makes the same claim it is an obvious sign that an article is poorly written? No possibility that the author spoke to a cop that other journos didn't have access to? Never heard of the term "exclusive" in journo parlance? Wow - you're a little more naive than I had previously given you credit for. It is now becoming abundantly clear why you are so convinced the 2 Burmese lads are guilty. Awww.... Bless!

"What you are doing is cherry picking the only place were such thing is said ignoring that every single other source says the phone was found, by the police, near their lodgings." No, but I think there is no disguising what you are doing, which is unilaterally deciding that a published news article is poorly written and re-writing it to give it a meaning that fits with your propaganda, or in fact re-writing it so that it can become part of your propaganda... (Pssst: You're being way too obvious here AleG - I know you can do better than this - time to step up your game, son!)

"I will point out though that from very early on the investigation:"The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge."

Zaw Lin, Wei Phyo and MM admitted being those three men."

"The only thing you have proven with your post is that the police were not simply looking for Burmese scapegoats. Also that you have trouble following what is being said, the police found out those six men were not together on the night of the murder, therefore the three men seen on the beach would had been some other group of people and the police was still looking for those three men at that time. " Oh dear! You're really not doing yourself any favours at the moment son - it seems you're having an off-day... Either that or as Cyndi Lauper would've said, your true colours are shining through <**that one's for you Mr Crabs...**> It's you that appears to have difficulty following what is being said - by what twisted, self-serving logic are you able to deduce that because the six men were not together on the night of the murder that the three men seen on the beach must have been a different group of people? Are we to believe that this group of six men only venture outside when there are six of them together? Sounds a bit far-fetched to me. I think anyone who can stay off the happy pills for a couple of hours would be capable of understanding that the three men who were seen on the beach drinking were part of the six, only they hadn't gone out as a group of six that night, but thanks for confirming that "Zaw Lin, Wei Phyo and MM admitted being those three men."

Maybe the following will make things clearer and help you understand why the DNA evidence in which you have such faith is such a farce (I have added some comments in red to help you follow what is being said):

"The focus on the suspect seen in the video footage came after police tried in vain Tuesday to identify the killer, detaining six Myanmar workers for questioning for possible involvement in the crime. (6 Myanmar workers...)

Each was released without charges. (All 6 released...)

Police said three of the Myanmar migrant workers (3 of the 6...) were seen drinking near the beach where David William Miller, 24, and Hannah Victoria Witheridge, 24, were found dead on Monday, a police source said Tuesday.

Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong Khawsamang, Surat Thani police chief, said the six Myanmar nationals worked for a resort called Inthat, just 300m from the crime scene, and lodged in nine rooms there.

The six were detained after a pre-dawn search of their rooms uncovered four iPhones, two of which had shattered screens, along with a bloodstained pair of jeans, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said. (There are those iphones...)

DNA samples were collected from the six and another four people for analysis, he said. (And there's them getting their DNA tested...)

Although the six men were colleagues and lived as neighbours, they appear not to have been together on the night of the murders. (Not as a group of 6...)

The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge. (As you said, Zaw Lin, Wei Phyo and MM admitted being those three men...)

But police have yet to press any charges against them pending an investigation outcome, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said.

They were freed after two rounds of interrogation by the police. (Guess their DNA didn't match then... I mean... the 3 men who were seen drinking near the crime scene... the ones you seem to agree were Zaw Lin, Wei Phyo and MM...)

The other three suspects were released earlier in the day after investigators could not link them to the murders, said Pol Col Prachum Ruangthong, chief of Koh Phangan police station." (In case there was any more confusion, I guess the DNA of the other 3 didn't match then...)

<Source: A national publication that we cannot link to...>

But what the hell... Just coz the DNA don't match today it don't mean it won't match tomorrow, right...?

You quoted isolated paragraphs in your first post, out of context this:

"The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge."

Reads as what the police was saying since very early on, that three men seen drinking, playing a guitar and singing while sitting in a log near the crime scene were prime suspects.

And yes, if an article in one paragraph says that six men were not together on that night and then on the next talks about three of them being together that article is poorly written.

Obviously the full article talks about another group of three men men drinking in that area on that night since WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage; what they all have testified (even after they recanted their confession) was that they were on the location were those "prime suspects" were seen sitting on a log on the beach (as they were), drinking (as they were) and playing a guitar (as they were)... yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?

Again, the only thing you have demonstrated by bringing up that article is that the police were not out simply to grab Burmese scapegoats, if there was no evidence they let them go.

[AleG]

Also from the article found by Jimmy:

"Police also found a pair of Ware's blood-stained pants from in Miller's luggage and an Apple iPhone with long blonde hairs snagged on it."

Note that the report is dated 18 September 2014

It's been stated that David only had 1 iPhone so there goes the theory that the B2 stole that one if the police found it in his luggage before the 18th Sept.

That section of the article is about when Chris Ware was investigated, Miller was staying with him and another person in the same room, you are just assuming that this other iPhone was Miller's, even though only the blood-stained pants are mentioned to had been in his luggage; which turned out not to be blood stained but you still prefer press reports that have been proven to be unreliable over the trial records... go figure.

Edited February 19, 2016 by AleG

[Khun Han]

The Cat Ate AleG's Homework pt 2493.

Chris Ware or A N Other left his iphone in David's luggage.

By the way, the article refers to the police being mistaken in thinking that the stains on the trousers were blood, when they turned out to be a chemical substance. So the report's perfectly accurate in that respect.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Khun Han

[jimmybkk]

"So if none of the Myanmar migrant workers being referred to in this statement from the police were the ones who eventually stood trial then it's obviously the norm for Myanmar migrant workers to have smashed iphones in their possession and so should not be seen as being incriminating".

Oh!! be real! - you really are scraping the barrel now.

In a survey of 6 people they found that 50% of those that had an iphone had a smashed screen - therefore it is understood that this is to be regarded as the norm for Burmese migrant workers.

Bravo! You're catching on fast lad. Not the norm then, agreed? Meaning that the chances are that Zaw Lin, Wei Phyo and MM are 3 of the 6 found with the 4 iphones, 2 of which were smashed, and seeing as how all 6 were questioned, DNA tested and then released with no match being found... well, are you seeing what doesn't add up now?

Incidentally, these are the other 3 of the 6:

[boomerangutang]

Finally Khun Han, a slight admission to the truth. All I want is for posters to acknowledge facts that can longer be refuted. That it is possible and probable that the phone was taken from the scene.

No Khun Han, it does not prove murder. It does prove, they are lying to cover up. Even now, they could reveal the truth. But no, they choose to remain silent. I do not believe they acted alone, they may not have held the weapon even. But they were there. So unless they want to fess up, they are just as guilty as anyone else that was there. The law in thailand says, if you stand and watch a crime and do nothing to assist, you are just as guilty as the person doing the action.

We can remember the jody foster movie.

Finally you've gone off script and said something reasonable for a change, yes the scenario that they were only accomplices or witnesses to the murder is a very real one. If you believe that they were only involved but may not have held the murder weapon then why have you stated so many times that you are glad that they will be executed asap?

I have never said I would be glad anybody would be executed.

I have said only, I am glad they were Brought to trial and convicted. It does not mean, I agree with the death sentence.

Also, I complain because with all that evidence that the defense had to dispute, they in fact did not dispute and wasted the whole trial going on about gait analyse and human rights.

I feel that with their young age, they were very poorly advised. Had they stayed with the guilty plea, they would have received a half sentence and been out in around 15 years.

The people to blame were the defense for encouraging these young lads to defend what looks to me to be undefendable.

The court simply followed the laws of this country.

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

[jimmybkk]

You quoted isolated paragraphs in your first post, out of context this:

"The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge."

Reads as what the police was saying since very early on, that three men seen drinking, playing a guitar and singing while sitting in a log near the crime scene were prime suspects.

And yes, if an article in one paragraph says that six men were not together on that night and then on the next talks about three of them being together that article is poorly written.

Obviously the full article talks about another group of three men men drinking in that area on that night since WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage; what they all have testified (even after they recanted their confession) was that they were on the location were those "prime suspects" were seen sitting on a log on the beach (as they were), drinking (as they were) and playing a guitar (as they were)... yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?

Again, the only thing you have demonstrated by bringing up that article is that the police were not out simply to grab Burmese scapegoats, if there was no evidence they let them go.

Nope - nothing out of context in what I quoted. I copied and pasted as it was printed, but from 2 different web pages. The first was from an educational page, the second was from the same publication's weekly synopsis of events.

It seems that as the wheels are now falling off your argument you're getting a bit confused here son - what you initially decided was a poorly written article that needed some "adjustment" in order for it to match more closely with your preferred version of events was from a totally different article and a totally different publication than the one which mentions the three men seen drinking near the crime scene, but don't let that stop you. I guess anything published that doesn't reinforce your propagandist agenda should be considered poorly written and in need of a bit of a "touch up"...

In your previous post you were proudly declaring that WP, ZW and MM had admitted to being the three men seen drinking near the crime scene, but when it shown that those three men were DNA tested, interviewed and released you're now suggesting that those were 3 different men... but they also had smashed iphones... and were drinking on the beach near the crime scene... Damn! It sure was busy down there... and all these smashed iphones too... you'd better let Lucky know about this. He's gonna find it hard to believe...

"Obviously the full article talks about another group of three men men drinking in that area on that night since WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage; what they all have testified (even after they recanted their confession) was that they were on the location were those "prime suspects" were seen sitting on a log on the beach (as they were), drinking (as they were) and playing a guitar (as they were)... yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?"

"WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage" I think what you mean is that as far as you are aware it has never been reported that they mentioned being detained at that early stage. I'd suggest you raise that with the reporters covering the case. It certainly does not mean it never happened.

"...yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?" No need for them to come forward to clear anything up if, as is clear from the article to all but the most obtuse, they were brought in for questioning and DNA testing at that time, and then subsequently cleared.

Hmmmm... JD left you here to hold the fort AleG and it doesn't seem that you're doing such a good job of it now. Could be time to call for back up...

[AleG]

You quoted isolated paragraphs in your first post, out of context this:

"The three men seen drinking near the crime scene were believed to be the prime suspects in the murders of Miller and Witheridge."

Reads as what the police was saying since very early on, that three men seen drinking, playing a guitar and singing while sitting in a log near the crime scene were prime suspects.

And yes, if an article in one paragraph says that six men were not together on that night and then on the next talks about three of them being together that article is poorly written.

Obviously the full article talks about another group of three men men drinking in that area on that night since WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage; what they all have testified (even after they recanted their confession) was that they were on the location were those "prime suspects" were seen sitting on a log on the beach (as they were), drinking (as they were) and playing a guitar (as they were)... yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?

Again, the only thing you have demonstrated by bringing up that article is that the police were not out simply to grab Burmese scapegoats, if there was no evidence they let them go.

Nope - nothing out of context in what I quoted. I copied and pasted as it was printed, but from 2 different web pages. The first was from an educational page, the second was from the same publication's weekly synopsis of events.

It seems that as the wheels are now falling off your argument you're getting a bit confused here son - what you initially decided was a poorly written article that needed some "adjustment" in order for it to match more closely with your preferred version of events was from a totally different article and a totally different publication than the one which mentions the three men seen drinking near the crime scene, but don't let that stop you. I guess anything published that doesn't reinforce your propagandist agenda should be considered poorly written and in need of a bit of a "touch up"...

In your previous post you were proudly declaring that WP, ZW and MM had admitted to being the three men seen drinking near the crime scene, but when it shown that those three men were DNA tested, interviewed and released you're now suggesting that those were 3 different men... but they also had smashed iphones... and were drinking on the beach near the crime scene... Damn! It sure was busy down there... and all these smashed iphones too... you'd better let Lucky know about this. He's gonna find it hard to believe...

"Obviously the full article talks about another group of three men men drinking in that area on that night since WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage; what they all have testified (even after they recanted their confession) was that they were on the location were those "prime suspects" were seen sitting on a log on the beach (as they were), drinking (as they were) and playing a guitar (as they were)... yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?"

"WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage" I think what you mean is that as far as you are aware it has never been reported that they mentioned being detained at that early stage. I'd suggest you raise that with the reporters covering the case. It certainly does not mean it never happened.

"...yet they never came forward to clear things up, nothing suspicious about that, right?" No need for them to come forward to clear anything up if, as is clear from the article to all but the most obtuse, they were brought in for questioning and DNA testing at that time, and then subsequently cleared.

Hmmmm... JD left you here to hold the fort AleG and it doesn't seem that you're doing such a good job of it now. Could be time to call for back up...

You are talking drivel, I don't have a preferred version of events, I let the events and facts dictate things; unlike you who can't go on without creating imaginary scenarios like the notion that the WP, ZW,and MM were detained, interrogated, DNA tested and let go on the 18th of September.

""WP, ZW and MM have never mentioned being detained at that early stage" I think what you mean is that as far as you are aware it has never been reported that they mentioned being detained at that early stage. I'd suggest you raise that with the reporters covering the case. It certainly does not mean it never happened."

No, you should contact the Burmese or their lawyers, since they seem to have forgotten that piffling detail during the course of the trial or at any point during the past year and a half.

[IslandLover]

boomerangutang, on 19 Feb 2016 - 14:06, said:

greenchair, on 19 Feb 2016 - 05:52, said:

KunMatt, on 18 Feb 2016 - 15:49, said:

greenchair, on 18 Feb 2016 - 15:45, said:

Finally Khun Han, a slight admission to the truth. All I want is for posters to acknowledge facts that can longer be refuted. That it is possible and probable that the phone was taken from the scene.

No Khun Han, it does not prove murder. It does prove, they are lying to cover up. Even now, they could reveal the truth. But no, they choose to remain silent. I do not believe they acted alone, they may not have held the weapon even. But they were there. So unless they want to fess up, they are just as guilty as anyone else that was there. The law in thailand says, if you stand and watch a crime and do nothing to assist, you are just as guilty as the person doing the action.

We can remember the jody foster movie.

Finally you've gone off script and said something reasonable for a change, yes the scenario that they were only accomplices or witnesses to the murder is a very real one. If you believe that they were only involved but may not have held the murder weapon then why have you stated so many times that you are glad that they will be executed asap?

I have never said I would be glad anybody would be executed.

I have said only, I am glad they were Brought to trial and convicted. It does not mean, I agree with the death sentence.

Also, I complain because with all that evidence that the defense had to dispute, they in fact did not dispute and wasted the whole trial going on about gait analyse and human rights.

I feel that with their young age, they were very poorly advised. Had they stayed with the guilty plea, they would have received a half sentence and been out in around 15 years.

The people to blame were the defense for encouraging these young lads to defend what looks to me to be undefendable.

The court simply followed the laws of this country.

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

It's the same as when Michael Miller said during his post-conviction speech that the B2 had shown no remorse. Why should they, if they are not guilty? Many hardened criminals may refuse to admit their guilt and show no remorse for their crimes, but the B2 are not that devious.

[greenchair]

At the end of the day, the brit police were quite within their rights to confirm the phone issue.

[frank83628]

Finally Khun Han, a slight admission to the truth. All I want is for posters to acknowledge facts that can longer be refuted. That it is possible and probable that the phone was taken from the scene.

No Khun Han, it does not prove murder. It does prove, they are lying to cover up. Even now, they could reveal the truth. But no, they choose to remain silent. I do not believe they acted alone, they may not have held the weapon even. But they were there. So unless they want to fess up, they are just as guilty as anyone else that was there. The law in thailand says, if you stand and watch a crime and do nothing to assist, you are just as guilty as the person doing the action.

We can remember the jody foster movie.

Finally you've gone off script and said something reasonable for a change, yes the scenario that they were only accomplices or witnesses to the murder is a very real one. If you believe that they were only involved but may not have held the murder weapon then why have you stated so many times that you are glad that they will be executed asap?

I have never said I would be glad anybody would be executed.

I have said only, I am glad they were Brought to trial and convicted. It does not mean, I agree with the death sentence.

Also, I complain because with all that evidence that the defense had to dispute, they in fact did not dispute and wasted the whole trial going on about gait analyse and human rights.

I feel that with their young age, they were very poorly advised. Had they stayed with the guilty plea, they would have received a half sentence and been out in around 15 years.

The people to blame were the defense for encouraging these young lads to defend what looks to me to be undefendable.

The court simply followed the laws of this country.

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

[boomerangutang]

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

Much more likely: 'the family of the guy' (your phrase) is the Headman's people, primarily Mon. Mon is the fixer who was hyper active right after the crime - trying his darndest to deflect clues from pointing at his nephew and others who quite likely did the crime. Island police (who are Mon's buddies and know a lot about drug dealing and date-rapes, which they'll never admit to) said they looked at over 60 hours of CCTV from that night. They also said they expressly didn't look at CCTV which even a retard would have known could have been crucial to solving the crime. What other video did they not look at? Of course it's just a smidgen of a long list of lies spewed forth by the cops and Mon. They looked at everything, and only released less than a minute of CCTV. So where are the other 3,599 minutes?! Oh sorry, almost forgot. We, seeking truth and justice are just regular people. Plus we're farang, so we don't account for ant poop in the opinion of Thai cops.

So, Frank thinks that Mon allowed the release of Running Man video? I think Frank is dead wrong. I think it was the one thing Mon wasn't able to squelch in time. He was soooooo busy trying to fix things to remove his nephew from scrutiny (even saying he himself was RM!) that he didn't get to and destroy RM video. I bet he sorely regrets that, because RM video clearly shows Nomsod. It's not just me and hundreds of thousands of observers who think so. It's the initial RTP investigative team. After looking at that video, they surmised it was NS and then went for 10 days looking for the punk, who was hiding. It's out there now in the public domain. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. It's yet another, in 1,000 proofs, that RTP are framing the B2 while shielding the Headman's people. It's obvious to anyone without a compulsion to echo all the BS RTP puts forth.

[boomerangutang]

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, ....

I haven't looked at CSI LA in over a year. I have, however, looked at all the evidence which an observer can look at. I've even looked at photos of David's wounds, and they don't at all coincide with what Thai forensics reported. You'll notice Ms Pontip's assignment was extremely limited in scope. The court would only allowed her to look at less than half dozen items, and disallowed her to look at dozens of other items, including the bodies of the victims. They didn't even allow her to try and ascertain who matched the 1 or 2 mystery DNA's on the hoe. Very restrictive, and we know why.

Again, on David's wounds: It's been 17 months since the crime, and Brit forensics hasn't said anything at all about David or his wounds. It wouldn't be because they don't want to counter what Thai forensics claimed, would it? Or maybe Brit forensics was told to stay hushed up, because so many top brass (PM, former chief of police, current chief of police and others) would lose massive face if the cover-up was proven. It could likely be career bombing if the truth came out.

Here's the scorecard:

2 defendants: A because they're brave enough to stick with their not-guilty plea despite the full weight of Thai officialdom - to plead guilty

RTP; F for not even doing a decent job of framing the scapegoats.

Mon: F on honesty or decency, but B for effectiveness. He effectively squelched all investigation of himself, his nephew and their weaponized-ring wearing buddies.

Brit officials: E for being pansies, not doing their jobs, and for not speaking up for what's right - due to their fear of Thai counterparts losing face.

[Luang]

For those of us who know Thailand relatively well, will be well aware of what happens to the guilty party(ies) of a crime during a murder re-enactment, right?

So, my question to those are pressing for the B2 to be executed is: during their re-enactment on the beach where the savage murders took place, why oh why was there not a murmur of hatred, passion, revenge etc. within a tight community whereby two supposedly lower migrant workers raped, murdered and mutilated two young, intelligent tourists to their island? The very people who fill their pockets and keep their economy alive?

Surely such a close knit community will know who or at least who did not do it?! I saw none of that and that speaks volumes more than the lies, and smoke and mirror shows on here and at the circus of a trial.

They are not the killers and the whole island knows it!

[smedly]

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

not correct, that video was from an independent shop and published by a senior police officer who was actually doing his job, he was removed from the investigation because he was doing some honest police work, cctv in bars was a legal requirement form a few years now and yet the place (AC Bar) where the two victims were last seen alive was withheld - we cannot show you, I'm pretty sure it was all deleted, you have to ask why, surely such video footage would have helped in solving the two murders and yet someone thought it was best to hide it..........including the police who could have legally demanded it as evidence - maybe they just didn't like what it was showing, evidence like that is either going to support your case or maybe best to hide it - in the west that would put investigators in jail

So anyway how many phones are we up to now, was it 6 or 7 smashed up or otherwise and still only 1 IMEI number and only the Thai police (in whom we trust) know which phone it belonged too..............................prove it, along with the original samples of DNA .......produce them, show the finger prints and dna from the phone.....or better not as that can be challenged, it is quite interesting that not one fingerprint was submitted as evidence - the holy grail of evidence to this day as it cannot be faked or copied and can very easily and 100% be verified............not one fingerprint from a phone that was supposed to have been handled by the accused.......for me just something else that adds to the - stitch up camp, if you handle a phone you leave fingerprints and dna......simple as that

and what about David, where are his clothes, mainly his teeshirt , it would have puncture holes similar to his arms face and neck if he had been wearing it at the time of the assault - which would blow the theory that he took it off if he was in some sort of romantic situation with Hannah (which I doubt) - I believe he heard screams from the beach on his way home and went to investigate -

did his clothes show signs of puncture wounds or dna - oh yeh that's right they seemed to have disappeared, the prosecution/police lost the clothes...........seriously they lost the victims clothes ????????

I honestly wish everything the prosecution presented was authentic and could be backed up.....but it isn't, the prosecution/police case has massive holes that just would never stand up in any western justice system, and before anyone says "this is Thailand - Thai justice system" it comes down to common sense, anyone with an ounce of collective thought would know that you cannot just stand up in court and make a claim without producing evidence to support it........... yes he did it because I say so....prove me wrong - which just about sums up this whole thing, it is antiquated simplistic and a few hundreds years out of date - back in the dark ages but trying to mix in modern tech (like dna) without the standards, it is almost childish to think that sensible people are going to be fooled - although I must admit there are a few posting on TVF that are .........well and truly fooled beyond belief

good night all (I didn't proof read my post - too tired lol)

[sunnyjim5]

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

not correct, that video was from an independent shop and published by a senior police officer who was actually doing his job, he was removed from the investigation because he was doing some honest police work, cctv in bars was a legal requirement form a few years now and yet the place (AC Bar) where the two victims were last seen alive was withheld - we cannot show you, I'm pretty sure it was all deleted, you have to ask why, surely such video footage would have helped in solving the two murders and yet someone thought it was best to hide it..........including the police who could have legally demanded it as evidence - maybe they just didn't like what it was showing, evidence like that is either going to support your case or maybe best to hide it - in the west that would put investigators in jail

So anyway how many phones are we up to now, was it 6 or 7 smashed up or otherwise and still only 1 IMEI number and only the Thai police (in whom we trust) know which phone it belonged too..............................prove it, along with the original samples of DNA .......produce them, show the finger prints and dna from the phone.....or better not as that can be challenged, it is quite interesting that not one fingerprint was submitted as evidence - the holy grail of evidence to this day as it cannot be faked or copied and can very easily and 100% be verified............not one fingerprint from a phone that was supposed to have been handled by the accused.......for me just something else that adds to the - stitch up camp, if you handle a phone you leave fingerprints and dna......simple as that

and what about David, where are his clothes, mainly his teeshirt , it would have puncture holes similar to his arms face and neck if he had been wearing it at the time of the assault - which would blow the theory that he took it off if he was in some sort of romantic situation with Hannah (which I doubt) - I believe he heard screams from the beach on his way home and went to investigate -

did his clothes show signs of puncture wounds or dna - oh yeh that's right they seemed to have disappeared, the prosecution/police lost the clothes...........seriously they lost the victims clothes ????????

I honestly wish everything the prosecution presented was authentic and could be backed up.....but it isn't, the prosecution/police case has massive holes that just would never stand up in any western justice system, and before anyone says "this is Thailand - Thai justice system" it comes down to common sense, anyone with an ounce of collective thought would know that you cannot just stand up in court and make a claim without producing evidence to support it........... yes he did it because I say so....prove me wrong - which just about sums up this whole thing, it is antiquated simplistic and a few hundreds years out of date - back in the dark ages but trying to mix in modern tech (like dna) without the standards, it is almost childish to think that sensible people are going to be fooled - although I must admit there are a few posting on TVF that are .........well and truly fooled beyond belief

good night all (I didn't proof read my post - too tired lol)

Glad to learn that you are in possession of all the evidence and have the skills, knowledge and expertise to evaluate its worth.

What qualification(s) do you have exactly? ------------Are you a lawyer trained in Thai jurisprudence , a trained and qualified investigator or a forensic scientist ?

Maybe you are some other kind of "expert" if so please tell us.

[catsanddogs]

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

not correct, that video was from an independent shop and published by a senior police officer who was actually doing his job, he was removed from the investigation because he was doing some honest police work, cctv in bars was a legal requirement form a few years now and yet the place (AC Bar) where the two victims were last seen alive was withheld - we cannot show you, I'm pretty sure it was all deleted, you have to ask why, surely such video footage would have helped in solving the two murders and yet someone thought it was best to hide it..........including the police who could have legally demanded it as evidence - maybe they just didn't like what it was showing, evidence like that is either going to support your case or maybe best to hide it - in the west that would put investigators in jail

So anyway how many phones are we up to now, was it 6 or 7 smashed up or otherwise and still only 1 IMEI number and only the Thai police (in whom we trust) know which phone it belonged too..............................prove it, along with the original samples of DNA .......produce them, show the finger prints and dna from the phone.....or better not as that can be challenged, it is quite interesting that not one fingerprint was submitted as evidence - the holy grail of evidence to this day as it cannot be faked or copied and can very easily and 100% be verified............not one fingerprint from a phone that was supposed to have been handled by the accused.......for me just something else that adds to the - stitch up camp, if you handle a phone you leave fingerprints and dna......simple as that

and what about David, where are his clothes, mainly his teeshirt , it would have puncture holes similar to his arms face and neck if he had been wearing it at the time of the assault - which would blow the theory that he took it off if he was in some sort of romantic situation with Hannah (which I doubt) - I believe he heard screams from the beach on his way home and went to investigate -

did his clothes show signs of puncture wounds or dna - oh yeh that's right they seemed to have disappeared, the prosecution/police lost the clothes...........seriously they lost the victims clothes ????????

I honestly wish everything the prosecution presented was authentic and could be backed up.....but it isn't, the prosecution/police case has massive holes that just would never stand up in any western justice system, and before anyone says "this is Thailand - Thai justice system" it comes down to common sense, anyone with an ounce of collective thought would know that you cannot just stand up in court and make a claim without producing evidence to support it........... yes he did it because I say so....prove me wrong - which just about sums up this whole thing, it is antiquated simplistic and a few hundreds years out of date - back in the dark ages but trying to mix in modern tech (like dna) without the standards, it is almost childish to think that sensible people are going to be fooled - although I must admit there are a few posting on TVF that are .........well and truly fooled beyond belief

good night all (I didn't proof read my post - too tired lol)

Glad to learn that you are in possession of all the evidence and have the skills, knowledge and expertise to evaluate its worth.

What qualification(s) do you have exactly? ------------Are you a lawyer trained in Thai jurisprudence , a trained and qualified investigator or a forensic scientist ?

Maybe you are some other kind of "expert" if so please tell us.

You don't need to be in receipt of any qualifications or to be an expert in anything other than common sense, as Smedly puts it. Fortunately the majority of humans are blessed with this most basic of human attributes. Animals have it too but it is better described as survival instinct in their case.

[JLCrab]

Common sense would tell you that the middle line is longer but it isn't:

[Lancashireman]

How did the defense "waste the whole trial going on about gait analysis"? I don't think gait analysis was even mentioned at the trial. Or if so, just fleetingly. I would gladly welcome in-depth & professional gait analysis of the 3 Running Man videos. I think it would show, without a doubt, that RM is Nomsod. For obvious reasons, gait analysis was not done in relation to NS. RM's gait may have been compared to one of the B3, but if there was a match, RTP and prosecution would be crowing about it from the rooftops. Instead: not a peep. Oh, and there persists the recollection of that lovely honest man MON saying it was himself. Anyone who believes that, will want to buy some anti-baldness cream from me - only Bt.39,000 per 1 oz. bottle.

The reason the B2 have stuck with their not guilty plea is because they're not guilty. They knew, before during and after they made that plea that it would carry the death penalty, and a plea of guilty would spare their lives, .....yet they have the strength of character to maintain what's right and speak the truth, even though it could cause them to be killed by Thai authorities before they reach their 25th birthdays. I don't know if I would have such courage. Would you?

the video footage of running man was submitted by the family of the guy who you are trying to say is the running man!!

you may not be aware due to having no knowledge of koh tao whatsoever that that entire end of the beach is owned by the same family....do you think they would have given video footage to the police of 1 of their own??

at the end of the day all off your information comes from csi la, and his came from 3/4/5 hand gossip and hearsay from a frenzy of stories and press itching for the latest headline!

just because you guys think they don't look like butter wouldn't melt doesn't mean they didn't! why wouldn't they at point of death penalty say..enoughs enough and grass up the actual murderers??..they are looking at death either way, why not make it known to the international media and go out in a blaze of glory???

not correct, that video was from an independent shop and published by a senior police officer who was actually doing his job, he was removed from the investigation because he was doing some honest police work, cctv in bars was a legal requirement form a few years now and yet the place (AC Bar) where the two victims were last seen alive was withheld - we cannot show you, I'm pretty sure it was all deleted, you have to ask why, surely such video footage would have helped in solving the two murders and yet someone thought it was best to hide it..........including the police who could have legally demanded it as evidence - maybe they just didn't like what it was showing, evidence like that is either going to support your case or maybe best to hide it - in the west that would put investigators in jail

So anyway how many phones are we up to now, was it 6 or 7 smashed up or otherwise and still only 1 IMEI number and only the Thai police (in whom we trust) know which phone it belonged too..............................prove it, along with the original samples of DNA .......produce them, show the finger prints and dna from the phone.....or better not as that can be challenged, it is quite interesting that not one fingerprint was submitted as evidence - the holy grail of evidence to this day as it cannot be faked or copied and can very easily and 100% be verified............not one fingerprint from a phone that was supposed to have been handled by the accused.......for me just something else that adds to the - stitch up camp, if you handle a phone you leave fingerprints and dna......simple as that

and what about David, where are his clothes, mainly his teeshirt , it would have puncture holes similar to his arms face and neck if he had been wearing it at the time of the assault - which would blow the theory that he took it off if he was in some sort of romantic situation with Hannah (which I doubt) - I believe he heard screams from the beach on his way home and went to investigate -

did his clothes show signs of puncture wounds or dna - oh yeh that's right they seemed to have disappeared, the prosecution/police lost the clothes...........seriously they lost the victims clothes ????????

I honestly wish everything the prosecution presented was authentic and could be backed up.....but it isn't, the prosecution/police case has massive holes that just would never stand up in any western justice system, and before anyone says "this is Thailand - Thai justice system" it comes down to common sense, anyone with an ounce of collective thought would know that you cannot just stand up in court and make a claim without producing evidence to support it........... yes he did it because I say so....prove me wrong - which just about sums up this whole thing, it is antiquated simplistic and a few hundreds years out of date - back in the dark ages but trying to mix in modern tech (like dna) without the standards, it is almost childish to think that sensible people are going to be fooled - although I must admit there are a few posting on TVF that are .........well and truly fooled beyond belief

good night all (I didn't proof read my post - too tired lol)

Glad to learn that you are in possession of all the evidence and have the skills, knowledge and expertise to evaluate its worth.

What qualification(s) do you have exactly? ------------Are you a lawyer trained in Thai jurisprudence , a trained and qualified investigator or a forensic scientist ?

Maybe you are some other kind of "expert" if so please tell us.

You don't need to be in receipt of any qualifications or to be an expert in anything other than common sense, as Smedly puts it. Fortunately the majority of humans are blessed with this most basic of human attributes. Animals have it too but it is better described as survival instinct in their case.

[greenchair]

The prosecution presented this evidence.

1.dna evidence that was tested 2 or 3 different laboratories.

2. Dna experts to explain it.

3. A fair rebuttal to the media claim the dna was planted.

4.video footage of b3 nearthe scene throughout the night.

5.burmese witnesses to back up video footage. And explain the events of the night.

6.the possession of the victims belongings by the burmese group of friends.

7. Testimony to back up where the phone came from.

8.medical reports and autopsy of both victims.

9.testimony by doctors and pathologists about the injuries.

The defense presented.

1. 1 dna expert that found a 25 percent match to Wei Phyo, that did not exclude nor include wp.

2.no reasonable arguments as to how the dna came to be there.

3.a human rights activist to give an expert opinion on gait analysis, which the prosecution could not cross examine, because of that reason.

4.the b2 as witnesses, that confirmed the video footage.

Confirmed all of the prosecution accusations they were at the beach. Confirmed they had the victims phone. Confirmed they were not tucked up in their beds sleeping as the media would have us believe.

5.no comments about who the phone belonged to.

6.no comments of where the phone came from.

7.no expert witnesses to talk about the phone I'd.

8.no medical expert to challenge the injuries.

8.a human rights activist to discuss an autopsy report and give his opinion of its meaning.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know there were only 2 witnesses to present dna analysis, medical reports, video analysis, and alibi for b2.

1 pornthip (that would have been a better prosecution witness ).

2.a human rights activist.

Maybe they should have called a few thai visa experts to give their case some meat.