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

[Khun Han]

I will repeat, for those having comprehension difficulties: the phone found behind the Burmese residences (that Wei Phyo admitted to finding) does not look anything like an iphone 4s. It looks exactly like an iphone 3G. David owned an iphone 4s, and an iphone 4s was found in David's luggage.

The shills are desperate to get the discussion away from this discrepancy. That's why they're trying to start arguments about all kinds of unrelated stuff.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Khun Han

[stander]

It's been pretty much confirmed that serous discrepancies in the phone evidence have been unearthed in these recent discussions, by the sudden, sustained onslaught of misdirection by the shills, including daft attempts to provoke argument about all sorts of other things. The shills need a new team leader: their tactics are transparent. Anyway, good to have them confirm that those of us seeking truth and justice are on the right track.

You have not found anything WP & RR admitted along time ago the phone in the bag was the one they found Brit evidence could not be used so Miller family gave the evidence from Davids computer.

P.S petty name calling just shows you are losing the argument

Yes. I've noticed that the name calling is increasing as their frustration increases.

[lucky11]

It's been pretty much confirmed that serous discrepancies in the phone evidence have been unearthed in these recent discussions, by the sudden, sustained onslaught of misdirection by the shills, including daft attempts to provoke argument about all sorts of other things. The shills need a new team leader: their tactics are transparent. Anyway, good to have them confirm that those of us seeking truth and justice are on the right track.

You have not found anything WP & RR admitted along time ago the phone in the bag was the one they found Brit evidence could not be used so Miller family gave the evidence from Davids computer.

P.S petty name calling just shows you are losing the argument

Yes. I've noticed that the name calling is increasing as their frustration increases.

Funny you should mention that Stander, but it is becoming more and more obvious that we have painted them into a corner and have them rattled to the point that their posts are becoming more and more irrational and nonsensical as time goes on!!

[catsanddogs]

I will repeat, for those having comprehension difficulties: the phone found behind the Burmese residences (that Wei Phyo admitted to finding) does not look anything like an iphone 4s. It looks exactly like an iphone 3G. David owned an iphone 4s, and an iphone 4s was found in David's luggage.

The shills are desperate to get the discussion away from this discrepancy. That's why they're trying to start arguments about all kinds of unrelated stuff.

Seems so KH - let's stay on topic. The phone 'found' by the police from which the IMEI number allegedly matches the iphone 4 which belonged to David will still be in the possession of the police/prosecution. There is still plenty of time for the defence to to delve deeper into this issue.

[DiscoDan]

I will repeat, for those having comprehension difficulties: the phone found behind the Burmese residences (that Wei Phyo admitted to finding) does not look anything like an iphone 4s. It looks exactly like an iphone 3G. David owned an iphone 4s, and an iphone 4s was found in David's luggage.

The shills are desperate to get the discussion away from this discrepancy. That's why they're trying to start arguments about all kinds of unrelated stuff.

Well good luck with that I look forward to it being used as evidence in the appeal.

WP told RR at first that he found it in a bar then it changed to on the beach so why would he lie ?

They have admitted to finding a phone smashing it up and throwing it behind there lodgings because they thought it might be connected to the murders, yet you are still trying to deny it.

Even without the IMEI number it still proves they were trying to destroy evidence from a murder.

I wonder why ?

[catsanddogs]

I will repeat, for those having comprehension difficulties: the phone found behind the Burmese residences (that Wei Phyo admitted to finding) does not look anything like an iphone 4s. It looks exactly like an iphone 3G. David owned an iphone 4s, and an iphone 4s was found in David's luggage.

The shills are desperate to get the discussion away from this discrepancy. That's why they're trying to start arguments about all kinds of unrelated stuff.

Well good luck with that I look forward to it being used as evidence in the appeal.

WP told RR at first that he found it in a bar then it changed to on the beach so why would he lie ?

They have admitted to finding a phone smashing it up and throwing it behind there lodgings because they thought it might be connected to the murders, yet you are still trying to deny it.

Even without the IMEI number it still proves they were trying to destroy evidence from a murder.

I wonder why ?

The phone found by WP may have nothing to do with the murder. That's why some of us are still here discussing it and researching the abundance of phones related to the investigation.

[StealthEnergiser]

It's been pretty much confirmed that serous discrepancies in the phone evidence have been unearthed in these recent discussions, by the sudden, sustained onslaught of misdirection by the shills, including daft attempts to provoke argument about all sorts of other things. The shills need a new team leader: their tactics are transparent. Anyway, good to have them confirm that those of us seeking truth and justice are on the right track.

You have not found anything WP & RR admitted along time ago the phone in the bag was the one they found Brit evidence could not be used so Miller family gave the evidence from Davids computer.

P.S petty name calling just shows you are losing the argument

Yes. I've noticed that the name calling is increasing as their frustration increases.

I have seen no signs frustration only a group people about 99.9 percent who want to see the truth.

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

[jayjay78]

Another lie that was told was the blonde hair was never tested.

Robert Holmes confirmed it was tested but it was a fallen hair to get a dna sample it has to be pulled out, and as Hannah's UK autopsy showed no sign of resistance this would of confirmed it was unlikely someone pulled it out in the attack.

Seems you've been having lots of little chats with R.H. You mentioned you have screen shots, can you prove the above claim?

You see to talk to R.H through facebook as you say then you would need to reveal your true identity to him and I somehow doubt you did that.

The only other easy source would be through twitter and indeed R.H. has been speaking to a user on twitter https://twitter.com/samui_csi/with_replies who has obviously been spaming Robert with questions. This user also has the same terms in many of their posts 'truthers' always on about Andy Hall etc etc. Is this you?

I've looked at all Roberts tweets and see nothing about your claim about the blonde hair, but please prove me wrong, the reason this intersts me is that this blonde hair was never brought to court, was never given to Dr Pornthip to test and one of the RTP lied about even talking about it in meetings. In reports before the trial it said it was attached to a root, so perfectly possible to get DNA from.

Here's all R.H.'s tweets to check but unless you show a screenshot, you said you have many then it remains hearsay on your part. https://twitter.com/riverview810/with_replies

From looking at R.H.'s last tweets it appears he's finished your little conversations, surprise surprise

Edited February 21, 2016 by jayjay78

[DiscoDan]

Why wasn't the B2's DNA on the murder weapon that ONE person died from........Why is there no mention of Dave's injuries which had nothing to do with the hoe....?

It seems there are three folk here that have the answers......Pray tell....

No fingerprints or dna on hoe also no fingerprints found on the phone they smashed and dumped, coincidence ?

[DiscoDan]

A phone btw that was handled by at least 3 people

[lucky11]

It's been pretty much confirmed that serous discrepancies in the phone evidence have been unearthed in these recent discussions, by the sudden, sustained onslaught of misdirection by the shills, including daft attempts to provoke argument about all sorts of other things. The shills need a new team leader: their tactics are transparent. Anyway, good to have them confirm that those of us seeking truth and justice are on the right track.

You have not found anything WP & RR admitted along time ago the phone in the bag was the one they found Brit evidence could not be used so Miller family gave the evidence from Davids computer.

P.S petty name calling just shows you are losing the argument

Yes. I've noticed that the name calling is increasing as their frustration increases.

I have seen no signs frustration only a group people about 99.9 percent who want to see the truth.

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

OK, so you spout that 99.9% want to see the truth. Well, we are giving it to you and it is this that is clearly the root of your frustration (we understand your predicament)!!

You can't bear the fact that we have shown your arguments to be futile and plain wrong and we are providing the real (fact based) evidence and posing questions that you can't answer.

[StealthEnergiser]

Lucky11

Are you having problems reading?

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

[lucky11]

Lucky11

Are you having problems reading?

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

I'm not your man I'm afraid - I have had past problems with Twitter which inadvertently got me into trouble through my misunderstanding of the mechanics of it and I don't know how to post links, so you are out of luck as far as I'm concerned!!

I can read though, so in answer to your first question, no, I am perfectly able when it comes to reading English, but thanks for your concern on the matter.

[StealthEnergiser]

Lucky11

Are you having problems reading?

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

I'm not your man I'm afraid - I have had past problems with Twitter which inadvertently got me into trouble through my misunderstanding of the mechanics of it and I don't know how to post links, so you are out of luck as far as I'm concerned!!

I can read though, so in answer to your first question, no, I am perfectly able when it comes to reading English, but thanks for your concern on the matter.

Correct your not my man or my lady I find your answer quite weak when you say you don't know how to post a link.

So if you cannot supply that evidence how the hell can you call the B2 guilty?.

[StealthEnergiser]

you remember that post but miss this one.

I have seen no signs frustration only a group people about 99.9 percent who want to see the truth.

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

Edited February 21, 2016 by seedy
Quote hidden post

[lucky11]

Lucky11

Are you having problems reading?

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

I'm not your man I'm afraid - I have had past problems with Twitter which inadvertently got me into trouble through my misunderstanding of the mechanics of it and I don't know how to post links, so you are out of luck as far as I'm concerned!!

I can read though, so in answer to your first question, no, I am perfectly able when it comes to reading English, but thanks for your concern on the matter.

Correct your not my man or my lady I find your answer quite weak when you say you don't know how to post a link.

So if you cannot supply that evidence how the hell can you call the B2 guilty?.

I do not know know how to post links.

You may have noticed (or may not in your case) that I only copy and paste exerts from links - I challenge you to find a single occasion when I have posted a link because you won't find one. Go on, try, and if you find one then you can quite legitimately call me a liar and I will accept this without question. Not such a weak argument now, is it!!

[DiscoDan]

Another lie that was told was the blonde hair was never tested.

Robert Holmes confirmed it was tested but it was a fallen hair to get a dna sample it has to be pulled out, and as Hannah's UK autopsy showed no sign of resistance this would of confirmed it was unlikely someone pulled it out in the attack.

Seems you've been having lots of little chats with R.H. You mentioned you have screen shots, can you prove the above claim?

You see to talk to R.H through facebook as you say then you would need to reveal your true identity to him and I somehow doubt you did that.

The only other easy source would be through twitter and indeed R.H. has been speaking to a user on twitter https://twitter.com/samui_csi/with_replies who has obviously been spaming Robert with questions. This user also has the same terms in many of their posts 'truthers' always on about Andy Hall etc etc. Is this you?

I've looked at all Roberts tweets and see nothing about your claim about the blonde hair, but please prove me wrong, the reason this intersts me is that this blonde hair was never brought to court, was never given to Dr Pornthip to test and one of the RTP lied about even talking about it in meetings. In reports before the trial it said it was attached to a root, so perfectly possible to get DNA from.

Here's all R.H.'s tweets to check but unless you show a screenshot, you said you have many then it remains hearsay on your part. https://twitter.com/riverview810/with_replies

From looking at R.H.'s last tweets it appears he's finished your little conversations, surprise surprise

He posted it on Facebook Ho-lee Fock was part of convo you will have to find link by yourself.

RH is one of the Defense "experts" helping on the case, and was in the court for dna evidence,

He posts on AH facebook and Andrew Drummonds page, plenty of info there if you care to look.

And now posting twitter feeds with no mention of the hair nice one keep up the good work.

[Khun Han]

^ Here's how you do it: You copy and paste the link, the same as you copy and paste plain text. There! You know how to do it. Now provide that link.

[StealthEnergiser]

Lucky11

Are you having problems reading?

While talking about the truth can you send me a link where DNA was proven to be tested correctly for mixed contributors as I am unable to find it.

I'm not your man I'm afraid - I have had past problems with Twitter which inadvertently got me into trouble through my misunderstanding of the mechanics of it and I don't know how to post links, so you are out of luck as far as I'm concerned!!

I can read though, so in answer to your first question, no, I am perfectly able when it comes to reading English, but thanks for your concern on the matter.

Correct your not my man or my lady I find your answer quite weak when you say you don't know how to post a link.

So if you cannot supply that evidence how the hell can you call the B2 guilty?.

I do not know know how to post links.

You may have noticed (or may not in your case) that I only copy and paste exerts from links - I challenge you to find a single occasion when I have posted a link because you won't find one. Go on, try, and if you find one then you can quite legitimately call me a liar and I will accept this without question. Not such a weak argument now, is it!!

I can help you

How to copy a web page link or URL

http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000867.htm

[jayjay78]

Another lie that was told was the blonde hair was never tested.

Robert Holmes confirmed it was tested but it was a fallen hair to get a dna sample it has to be pulled out, and as Hannah's UK autopsy showed no sign of resistance this would of confirmed it was unlikely someone pulled it out in the attack.

Seems you've been having lots of little chats with R.H. You mentioned you have screen shots, can you prove the above claim?

You see to talk to R.H through facebook as you say then you would need to reveal your true identity to him and I somehow doubt you did that.

The only other easy source would be through twitter and indeed R.H. has been speaking to a user on twitter https://twitter.com/samui_csi/with_replies who has obviously been spaming Robert with questions. This user also has the same terms in many of their posts 'truthers' always on about Andy Hall etc etc. Is this you?

I've looked at all Roberts tweets and see nothing about your claim about the blonde hair, but please prove me wrong, the reason this intersts me is that this blonde hair was never brought to court, was never given to Dr Pornthip to test and one of the RTP lied about even talking about it in meetings. In reports before the trial it said it was attached to a root, so perfectly possible to get DNA from.

Here's all R.H.'s tweets to check but unless you show a screenshot, you said you have many then it remains hearsay on your part. https://twitter.com/riverview810/with_replies

From looking at R.H.'s last tweets it appears he's finished your little conversations, surprise surprise

He posted it on Facebook Ho-lee Fock was part of convo you will have to find link by yourself.

RH is one of the Defense "experts" helping on the case, and was in the court for dna evidence,

He posts on AH facebook and Andrew Drummonds page, plenty of info there if you care to look.

And now posting twitter feeds with no mention of the hair nice one keep up the good work.

Ok so much clearer now, first you say you have plenty of screenshots with RH to provide as evidence, then you make a claim on what he has said about the blonde hair and refuse to supply the relevant screenshot. Or link, perhaps you have the same problems as lucky11 providing links. No sale.

Edited February 21, 2016 by jayjay78

[lucky11]

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaah, gawd,,,,,,,,,NO JURY.............

They don't have juries in Thailand's justice system - that's why there was no jury - they do, however, have a presiding judge and in his summation he stated that from consideration of the evidence provided by both sides, it led him to place a guilty verdict on the B2 for the murder (and rape of one) of the two tourists.

Edited February 21, 2016 by seedy
Quote hidden post

[NCFC]

Why wasn't the B2's DNA on the murder weapon that ONE person died from........Why is there no mention of Dave's injuries which had nothing to do with the hoe....?

It seems there are three folk here that have the answers......Pray tell....

And presumably no DNA from nomsod on the hoe? Or Mon. Or shark-tooth man. Or any of the island mafia gang? In fact no positive, concrete evidence whatsoever has connect any of the island mafia to the murders.

If there is hard, indisputable evidence I'd likevto know what it is.

[lucky11]

Copy and paste is my game!!

Just as I had to do with this one - too many blocks...or something along those lines.

Can you resolve this issue with a link?

[smedly]

The witness admitted to smashing the phone, there has never been any denial that they put the phone in a plastic bag.

Was this under duress or without?

With legal representation or not?

I have no idea, I'm merely pointing out the ridiculousness of the posters apparent reasoning.

.........and not making a very convincing job of it!!

You cannot use the 'so called' torture aspect in your answer as the judge stated that "this carries no weight", so you should refrain from using this as part of your argument in future posts as it adds nothing to the case and takes nothing away from the judges guilty verdict!!

you are referring to a Thai judge, Thai justice system and a Thai court, most people here are referring to globally accepted international standards and procedures, something that Thailand seems to cherry pick what it wants to use and ignores the rest, one of the criticisms is just how antiquated and inept Thailand is compared to developed countries, there is no point in discussing what the Thai judge said as it is meaningless to most of the reasonable people here, the fact is that (and it has been stated many times by people that know) this case would never have got through the front gate of a court in the west and if it did it would be over in a matter of hours, these threads are in the main are questioning/challenging the Thai justice system - the Thai police and the prosecution so there is no real point in saying "the Thai judge stated that" - it is meaningless

If However the Thai Police/Prosecution had been able to offer amongst other things

- original DNA samples so they could be retested and independently verified

- a proper internationally accepted "Chain of Custody" of all evidence

- proper details of injuries on David's body and how he may have got them

- fingerprints and DNA from all the phones

- clothing properly tested and retain from the victims

- cctv footage seized from certain establishments (like the last place they were seen alive)

- cctv footage of the accused leaving the crime scene

- interviewed the suspects with proper legal council and representation present

Then I would be firmly in the guilty camp

As it stands it is impossible for me to believe that these two men can be found guilty of anything let alone be charged, prosecuted and sentenced to death, too much of this so called evidence can just be made up and that is regrettable.

[Khun Han]

Anyway, getting things back ontopic:

Phone found behind the Burmese residences. Note the thick silver frame around the front, and the curved back cover.

iphone3g. Note the same thick silver frame around the front, and the same curved back cover.

iphone 4s. Note the thin silver frame around the side, and the flat back cover.

[smedly]

Was this under duress or without?

With legal representation or not?

I have no idea, I'm merely pointing out the ridiculousness of the posters apparent reasoning.

.........and not making a very convincing job of it!!

You cannot use the 'so called' torture aspect in your answer as the judge stated that "this carries no weight", so you should refrain from using this as part of your argument in future posts as it adds nothing to the case and takes nothing away from the judges guilty verdict!!

So, if the judge says cows don't eat grass, are you going to echo that as irrefutable truth?

You can choose to quote the judge as if it's gospel, but most of the rest of us make up our own minds about what's right and wrong.

I know we should tread carefully when mentioning a Thai judge, so I'll redirect my focus on the RTP and prosecution: If Hanna's clothes are missing, we (seekers of truth and justice) will say they're missing. If authorities don't mention or comment on that, it doesn't mean that Hanna's clothes have reappeared. If prosecution doesn't mention the fact that a bottle was shown to be at the crime scene, does that mean a bottle wasn't at the crime scene?

Sometimes it's the things which are left unsaid that are as pertinent to solving the crime as things which are said. In this crime, there are hundreds of clues which were not mentioned in court. Does that mean none of those things ever existed? Does that mean none of those things are relevant to solving the case? No, it was all part of RTP's, Headman's and prosecution's plan to shield the most likely perps from any scrutiny.

A partial list of clues which were not mentioned at the trial, so we assume the judge didn't hear or know about them. . . . . .

>>> phone records,

>>> bottle, Hannah's clothes (including undies), white shorts, phone found at crime scene

>>> Nok Airways manifest/CCTV, records from phone companies re; call histories

>>> places near crime scene where laundry gets done, including sinks

>>> Mon's room, Nomsod's room (were they even checked forensically?)

>>> transfer of money or valuables from people connected to the headman - to top brass officials.

>>> recordings of transcripts of interrogations with Mon. .....with interrogations at 'safe house.'

>>> 59.9 hours of CCTV

.....the list goes on and on.....

Did the defence team bring any of this up? Surely, if these things were crucial to the case then why didn't they bring it to the attention of the judge instead of using the gait analysis fiasco that seems to prove nothing and then having to pass on their 'killer' DNA evidence mishandling aspect once they had established that it didn't help their cause because the prosecutions use of the DNA evidence 'trumped' everything else.

like I stated in the post above - I actually personally don't care what the defence team brought up or didn't .......I see what "I" see

[smedly]

Trouble is, there wasn't any DNA evidence. Oh, unless you believe the RTP's claim that there was. Hey, it was all written down on a piece of paper, with alterations and crossing outs. Must be true.

I refer you to Smedly's posts (including the rationale not acceptable by the defence) where he quite clearly states what evidence should have been presented to court to make it admissible. And had the B2 been guilty, I have no doubt the RTP would have provided such evidence that could be verified, substantiated, and validated. As it was not, I have little doubt that the B2 were not the culprits, but convenient scapegoats.

I have my own theories regarding what was not questioned by the defence, but as that goes into Thai psyche, and beyond, this is not the forum to discuss such matters.

There is evidence its in the rape kit that the defense declined to retest.

you just carry on repeating the same thing and I will keep correcting you - no need to thank me

replicated DNA that was being offered to the defense for retesting is not an original sample, there is no way to tell if this dna came from slaiva - sperm - blood etc it has already been processed and extracted, it is absolutly usless to make a confirmation match in a criminal case, a criminal case involves matching dna from a crime scene to an accused, i.e. 2 sets of dna to be compared from two sources, extracted or processed dna could be from the same sample i.e. the accused saliva

It would be like taking another saliva sample from the B2 and comparing it with a saliva sample taken earlier - absolutely useless at proving anything

This is why I keep repeating (and certain people keep ignoring)that in order to do a confirmation dna retest,

************only the original samples taken from the victim can be used************

The offer from the prosecution was a ploy and the defence obviously under advisement - declined

[catsanddogs]

Anyway, getting things back ontopic:

post-222787-0-30404400-1455972209.jpgpost-222787-0-26553800-1455973302.jpg

Phone found behind the Burmese residences. Note the thick silver frame around the front, and the curved back cover.

iphone3g-review1-3.jpg

iphone3g. Note the same thick silver frame around the front, and the same curved back cover.

black-4s-450x338.jpg

iphone 4s. Note the thin silver frame around the side, and the flat back cover.

Clearly the bagged one is not an iphone 4. Was the phone exhibited in court?

[seedy]

Troll / Flaming posts - and Quoted Replies - removed

Keep the Personal Attacks off this Forum

[DiscoDan]

Here is Mr Holmes talking about the hair