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

[stephenterry]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

[lucky11]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

I have seen reports claiming that David was killed with the hoe or a blunt metal instrument - at no point has the use of a weaponised shark ring been mentioned as a possible cause of his death

[fab99]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

I have seen reports claiming that David was killed with the hoe or a blunt metal instrument - at no point has the use of a weaponised shark ring been mentioned as a possible cause of his death

But as you said, you haven't seen the pictures of the small consistent wounds in multiple places on David's body, so you can't really get why it is doubtful that a hoe or a blunt instrument could have been the only weapon used to kill him.

I don't get either that more importance was not given to these wounds and to the fact that David's blood wasn't on the hoe's blade.

But the pictures of David's thai autopsy and body at the crime scene weren't shown during the trial by the prosecution... so it hasn't been discussed as it could and should have been.

Edited February 23, 2016 by fab99

[lucky11]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

I have seen reports claiming that David was killed with the hoe or a blunt metal instrument - at no point has the use of a weaponised shark ring been mentioned as a possible cause of his death

But as you said, you haven't seen the pictures of the small consistent wounds in multiple places on David's body, so you can't really get why it is doubtful that a hoe or a blunt instrument could have been the only weapon used to kill him.

I don't get either that more importance was not given to these wounds and to the fact that David's blood wasn't on the hoe's blade.

But the pictures of David's thai autopsy and body at the crime scene weren't shown during the trial by the prosecution... so it hasn't been discussed as it could and should have been.

Are you saying that the defence didn't have access to them, but you, Tom, Dick and Harry did!!

Why didn't the defence query the wounds inflicted on David if it was so obvious that they were not made from the hoe?

[jayjay78]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

I have seen reports claiming that David was killed with the hoe or a blunt metal instrument - at no point has the use of a weaponised shark ring been mentioned as a possible cause of his death

But as you said, you haven't seen the pictures of the small consistent wounds in multiple places on David's body, so you can't really get why it is doubtful that a hoe or a blunt instrument could have been the only weapon used to kill him.

I don't get either that more importance was not given to these wounds and to the fact that David's blood wasn't on the hoe's blade.

But the pictures of David's thai autopsy and body at the crime scene weren't shown during the trial by the prosecution... so it hasn't been discussed as it could and should have been.

Are you saying that the defence didn't have access to them, but you, Tom, Dick and Harry did!!

Why didn't the defence query the wounds inflicted on David if it was so obvious that they were not made from the hoe?

You nailed it. No official close up crime scene photos produced in court, no budget for that said prosecution. Thai Autopsy report included 2 photos of Hannah from neck up that were produced in court. As for David I dont know but if the same as Hannah then just neck up.

Photos circulating online of Davids injuries are unofficial and taken by the rescue team who then posted them on the Koh Tao rescue facebook page, they have of course been taken down since. So basically yes every Tom Dick and Harry can see them except the court.

Same with the scattered clothes of David, the only one shown in court was of them neatly piled on a rock, the others where they were scattered everywhere on the beach were not produced, these again were taken by the rescue team.

Edited February 23, 2016 by jayjay78

[catsanddogs]

I don't know why some people on here think it would be so unbelievable that there could have been a phone found on the beach when the bodies were first discovered and the phone later 'disappeared'. If someone is capable of making the black trousers/shorts disappear from the crime scene then making a phone disappear would be a doddle.

[fab99]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

I have seen reports claiming that David was killed with the hoe or a blunt metal instrument - at no point has the use of a weaponised shark ring been mentioned as a possible cause of his death

But as you said, you haven't seen the pictures of the small consistent wounds in multiple places on David's body, so you can't really get why it is doubtful that a hoe or a blunt instrument could have been the only weapon used to kill him.

I don't get either that more importance was not given to these wounds and to the fact that David's blood wasn't on the hoe's blade.

But the pictures of David's thai autopsy and body at the crime scene weren't shown during the trial by the prosecution... so it hasn't been discussed as it could and should have been.

Are you saying that the defence didn't have access to them, but you, Tom, Dick and Harry did!!

Why didn't the defence query the wounds inflicted on David if it was so obvious that they were not made from the hoe?

I am going to pass on your first provocative remark.

AS for the second one, I don't know why the defense didn't push more this topic and others, but I guess this is how it is done in Thailand, you can't make anybody lose face certainly not the RTP or everyone that said the investigation was perfect...

[lucky11]

Did the defence not have a few hundred Baht to lend them? Surely, they could have arranged to have the photos shown to the court if they thought they were relevant - you are not trying to tell me that this was impossible to organise, are you? It seems to me that the defence didn't really have any particular desire/want to have these photos shown (for whatever reason they held).

[jayjay78]

Did the defence not have a few hundred Baht to lend them? Surely, they could have arranged to have the photos shown to the court if they thought they were relevant - you are not trying to tell me that this was impossible to organise, are you? It seems to me that the defence didn't really have any particular desire/want to have these photos shown (for whatever reason they held).

Of course its the defenses fault that the prosecution did not produce them, silly me.

[fab99]

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?/topic/897293-Kho-Tao-'Interpreter'---Dead,-apparent-poisoning#entry10454329

Anyone seen anything in the Thai news?

I'd certainly like to know more about that, maybe it is just a rumor, we'll see... probably tomorrow.

[lucky11]

I'm sure the defence must have been extremely worried about the RTP losing face - I mean it's just not Thai for this to happen, how can you give this as a reason for not pushing the court to allow the photos to be shown, I mean, its a court case for Christ's sake, not a PR event!!

[fab99]

Did the defence not have a few hundred Baht to lend them? Surely, they could have arranged to have the photos shown to the court if they thought they were relevant - you are not trying to tell me that this was impossible to organise, are you? It seems to me that the defence didn't really have any particular desire/want to have these photos shown (for whatever reason they held).

This is purely written to provoke...

Manage ignore prefs > add a new user to my list > lucky11

[lucky11]

Did the defence not have a few hundred Baht to lend them? Surely, they could have arranged to have the photos shown to the court if they thought they were relevant - you are not trying to tell me that this was impossible to organise, are you? It seems to me that the defence didn't really have any particular desire/want to have these photos shown (for whatever reason they held).

Of course its the defenses fault that the prosecution did not produce them, silly me.

At least you admit this!!

[boomerangutang]

Calling it 'my fascination' is an odd use of words. A better word would be 'my concern', because wounds to David's neck and torso were likely caused by a stubby sharp weapon like a shark's tooth ring. David's body wounds (leaving aside top of head wound) were not caused by a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. We had these discussions months ago, maybe Lucky11 is not aware of these things. Thai forensics was dead wrong on assessing David's wounds, and that's probably the main reason Brit forensics haven't published anything regarding David. Brit forensics don't want to expose Thai forensics as being wrong, because it would affect British-Thai relations (it would anger Thai PM and top brass), particularly in relation to tourism and mutual biz interests. Same reason Brits didn't do their jobs regarding autopsy of fellow Brit Kirsty Jones who was raped/murdered in Chiang Mai years ago.

Just as important as Thai forensics misdiagnosing David's wounds, is the fact that some of the island men who should be suspects, have been shown to proudly sport shark tooth rings. Two that come to mind (there may be others) are: Stingray Man and the cop caught in the photo harassing Sean. Both are bosom buddies with Mon. That's another reason Thai cops have lost or destroyed 60 hours of CCTV from that night - they didn't want anyone seeing Mon or his friends prancing around the clubs with their shark-tooth rings.

Any of those guys who were shown in Facebook photos, prior to the crime, wearing weaponized rings have certainly trashed their rings after the crime. Indeed, every friend or family member of Mon who could have had any involvement with the crime quickly pulled down their Facebook pages immediately after the crime. You can bet they all erased their mobile phone histories also - and possibly got new sim cards.

How could the UK forensic experts have missed that - I mean, it must be so obvious, if you can tell simply by looking at photographs that Davids injuries were clearly caused by weaponised shark tooth rings then what are they playing at. I think that they should all go for re-training (maybe have you as an adviser on weaponised shark tooth rings and the damage caused to flesh). You have impressed me, I have to admit, I bet you could tell (if you got a close up of the wounds) how old the shark is and what type of shark it was, maybe even it's sex. I won't question you again on forensics as you clearly have it 'nailed on' and should be considered an authority on the subject!!

As for the so called forensic teams from both countries, they should hang their heads in shame in attempting to cover up this crucial piece of evidence with claims that the injuries are as a result of being hit with the blade of a hoe.

Well, you're wrong again. If I was your English teacher, I'd give you an F for comprehension. I never said UK forensics missed the fact that David had multiple stab wounds on his neck and body. Instead I said that Brit forensics keeps delaying publishing anything about David. 17 months, and not a peep from Brit forensics on David.

I insinuated that Brit forensics would probably do their jobs better than Thai forensics (which isn't saying much). And went further and accused Brit forensics of not publishing autopsy report on David because it would embarrass Thai forensics. Brit experts would rather avoid Thai experts losing face, than seek truth and justice for their compatriots. They proved it with Kirsty Jones, and they're proving it again with this case. BTW, where are British finding regarding the two Brits who mysteriously died since David and Hannah? Do they deserve some official follow-up, or are they yet another two Brit backpackers who are expendable from British expert perspective? And did French experts follow-up on the young Frenchman who tightly tied his hands behind his back and was found hanged, with no knocked-over furniture nearby? The French are supposed to be pretty darned good at crime investigations. Oh, silly me, Thai police heads probably told them, "no need to investigate, we're doing a perfect job."

[lucky11]

Calling it 'my fascination' is an odd use of words. A better word would be 'my concern', because wounds to David's neck and torso were likely caused by a stubby sharp weapon like a shark's tooth ring. David's body wounds (leaving aside top of head wound) were not caused by a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. We had these discussions months ago, maybe Lucky11 is not aware of these things. Thai forensics was dead wrong on assessing David's wounds, and that's probably the main reason Brit forensics haven't published anything regarding David. Brit forensics don't want to expose Thai forensics as being wrong, because it would affect British-Thai relations (it would anger Thai PM and top brass), particularly in relation to tourism and mutual biz interests. Same reason Brits didn't do their jobs regarding autopsy of fellow Brit Kirsty Jones who was raped/murdered in Chiang Mai years ago.

Just as important as Thai forensics misdiagnosing David's wounds, is the fact that some of the island men who should be suspects, have been shown to proudly sport shark tooth rings. Two that come to mind (there may be others) are: Stingray Man and the cop caught in the photo harassing Sean. Both are bosom buddies with Mon. That's another reason Thai cops have lost or destroyed 60 hours of CCTV from that night - they didn't want anyone seeing Mon or his friends prancing around the clubs with their shark-tooth rings.

Any of those guys who were shown in Facebook photos, prior to the crime, wearing weaponized rings have certainly trashed their rings after the crime. Indeed, every friend or family member of Mon who could have had any involvement with the crime quickly pulled down their Facebook pages immediately after the crime. You can bet they all erased their mobile phone histories also - and possibly got new sim cards.

How could the UK forensic experts have missed that - I mean, it must be so obvious, if you can tell simply by looking at photographs that Davids injuries were clearly caused by weaponised shark tooth rings then what are they playing at. I think that they should all go for re-training (maybe have you as an adviser on weaponised shark tooth rings and the damage caused to flesh). You have impressed me, I have to admit, I bet you could tell (if you got a close up of the wounds) how old the shark is and what type of shark it was, maybe even it's sex. I won't question you again on forensics as you clearly have it 'nailed on' and should be considered an authority on the subject!!

As for the so called forensic teams from both countries, they should hang their heads in shame in attempting to cover up this crucial piece of evidence with claims that the injuries are as a result of being hit with the blade of a hoe.

Well, you're wrong again. If I was your English teacher, I'd give you an F for comprehension. I never said UK forensics missed the fact that David had multiple stab wounds on his neck and body. Instead I said that Brit forensics keeps delaying publishing anything about David. 17 months, and not a peep from Brit forensics on David.

I insinuated that Brit forensics would probably do their jobs better than Thai forensics (which isn't saying much). And went further and accused Brit forensics of not publishing autopsy report on David because it would embarrass Thai forensics. Brit experts would rather avoid Thai experts losing face, than seek truth and justice for their compatriots. They proved it with Kirsty Jones, and they're proving it again with this case. BTW, where are British finding regarding the two Brits who mysteriously died since David and Hannah? Do they deserve some official follow-up, or are they yet another two Brit backpackers who are expendable from British expert perspective? And did French experts follow-up on the young Frenchman who tightly tied his hands behind his back and was found hanged, with no knocked-over furniture nearby? The French are supposed to be pretty darned good at crime investigations. Oh, silly me, Thai police heads probably told them, "no need to investigate, we're doing a perfect job."

I'm amazed that the Brit's autopsy team are aware of this 'Thai loss of face' thing and hold so much store on it to withhold the report to save them embarrassment. Who are you kidding?

You are being pathetic on this and it is simply making you look stupid!!

[boomerangutang]

Just as important as Thai forensics misdiagnosing David's wounds, is the fact that some of the island men who should be suspects, have been shown to proudly sport shark tooth rings. Two that come to mind (there may be others) are: Stingray Man and the cop caught in the photo harassing Sean. Both are bosom buddies with Mon. That's another reason Thai cops have lost or destroyed 60 hours of CCTV from that night - they didn't want anyone seeing Mon or his friends prancing around the clubs with their shark-tooth rings.

Any of those guys who were shown in Facebook photos, prior to the crime, wearing weaponized rings have certainly trashed their rings after the crime. Indeed, every friend or family member of Mon who could have had any involvement with the crime quickly pulled down their Facebook pages immediately after the crime. You can bet they all erased their mobile phone histories also - and possibly got new sim cards.

They didn't have to trash their shark tooth rings -- they were probably confiscated at security before boarding their Nok Air flight.

There you go again, trying to be cute and witty. The only person we (those of us seeking truth and justice) think boarded a Monday morning Nok Air flight is, Nomsod. No one else (Crab refers to 'they'). Secondly, it has not been alleged that NS sported a shark-tooth ring. So, in one sentence, you're wrong on two counts - though it won't keep you coming back and trying to be witty, as ever.

Also, I doubt Nok Air would confiscate any types of rings from passengers entering on a domestic flight. Do you have any evidence they do?

[jayjay78]

I'm sure the defence must have been extremely worried about the RTP losing face - I mean it's just not Thai for this to happen, how can you give this as a reason for not pushing the court to allow the photos to be shown, I mean, its a court case for Christ's sake, not a PR event!!

"In highlight day 3 koh tao trial crime scene investigators confirm detailed CSI photos of bodies taken but not in case file as 'no budget'."

[greenchair]

violently raped?

what did the UK autopsy say?

I seem to remember that she had internal injuries - a tear somewhere near her anus?

Your memory is breathtakingly wrong. A tear was apparent on her vulva, wrong orifice Lucky11.

The UK autopsy confirmed no evidence of anal rape.

Rubbish, it did not.

[jayjay78]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

In case you missed it:

"On the 17th September 2014, Pol.Col. Dr. Pawat Prateepwisarut, Deputy Director of the Forensic Science Institute, performed an investigation and collected specimens from the bodies of both the deceased. Specimens from vaginal and rectal fluid and saliva from the areola of the Second Deceased were submitted to department of forensic biology, under the supervision of Pol.Col. Watee Asawutmangkub. Pol.Col. Watee tasked the DNA analysis committee to perform examination, letter of appointment Jor 22, Pol.Gen. Kewalee Chakrabandhu, The National scientific crime detection officer examined evidence of both victims’ bloodstains from the hoe found at the crime scene. According to the result, bloodstains from both victims were found on the cotton bud used to wipe from the evidence hoe."

The one peddling misinformation here is you.

Not according to this report

"Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon."

Or many other media reports, how do you know your report is the correct one? Because it comes from the unofficial translated court summary?

[boomerangutang]

Calling it 'my fascination' is an odd use of words. A better word would be 'my concern', because wounds to David's neck and torso were likely caused by a stubby sharp weapon like a shark's tooth ring. David's body wounds (leaving aside top of head wound) were not caused by a blunt cement-encrusted hoe. We had these discussions months ago, maybe Lucky11 is not aware of these things. Thai forensics was dead wrong on assessing David's wounds, and that's probably the main reason Brit forensics haven't published anything regarding David. Brit forensics don't want to expose Thai forensics as being wrong, because it would affect British-Thai relations (it would anger Thai PM and top brass), particularly in relation to tourism and mutual biz interests. Same reason Brits didn't do their jobs regarding autopsy of fellow Brit Kirsty Jones who was raped/murdered in Chiang Mai years ago.

Just as important as Thai forensics misdiagnosing David's wounds, is the fact that some of the island men who should be suspects, have been shown to proudly sport shark tooth rings. Two that come to mind (there may be others) are: Stingray Man and the cop caught in the photo harassing Sean. Both are bosom buddies with Mon. That's another reason Thai cops have lost or destroyed 60 hours of CCTV from that night - they didn't want anyone seeing Mon or his friends prancing around the clubs with their shark-tooth rings.

Any of those guys who were shown in Facebook photos, prior to the crime, wearing weaponized rings have certainly trashed their rings after the crime. Indeed, every friend or family member of Mon who could have had any involvement with the crime quickly pulled down their Facebook pages immediately after the crime. You can bet they all erased their mobile phone histories also - and possibly got new sim cards.

How could the UK forensic experts have missed that - I mean, it must be so obvious, if you can tell simply by looking at photographs that Davids injuries were clearly caused by weaponised shark tooth rings then what are they playing at. I think that they should all go for re-training (maybe have you as an adviser on weaponised shark tooth rings and the damage caused to flesh). You have impressed me, I have to admit, I bet you could tell (if you got a close up of the wounds) how old the shark is and what type of shark it was, maybe even it's sex. I won't question you again on forensics as you clearly have it 'nailed on' and should be considered an authority on the subject!!

As for the so called forensic teams from both countries, they should hang their heads in shame in attempting to cover up this crucial piece of evidence with claims that the injuries are as a result of being hit with the blade of a hoe.

Well, you're wrong again. If I was your English teacher, I'd give you an F for comprehension. I never said UK forensics missed the fact that David had multiple stab wounds on his neck and body. Instead I said that Brit forensics keeps delaying publishing anything about David. 17 months, and not a peep from Brit forensics on David.

I insinuated that Brit forensics would probably do their jobs better than Thai forensics (which isn't saying much). And went further and accused Brit forensics of not publishing autopsy report on David because it would embarrass Thai forensics. Brit experts would rather avoid Thai experts losing face, than seek truth and justice for their compatriots. They proved it with Kirsty Jones, and they're proving it again with this case. BTW, where are British finding regarding the two Brits who mysteriously died since David and Hannah? Do they deserve some official follow-up, or are they yet another two Brit backpackers who are expendable from British expert perspective? And did French experts follow-up on the young Frenchman who tightly tied his hands behind his back and was found hanged, with no knocked-over furniture nearby? The French are supposed to be pretty darned good at crime investigations. Oh, silly me, Thai police heads probably told them, "no need to investigate, we're doing a perfect job."

I'm amazed that the Brit's autopsy team are aware of this 'Thai loss of face' thing and hold so much store on it to withhold the report to save them embarrassment. Who are you kidding?

You are being pathetic on this and it is simply making you look stupid!!

Yet, you can't counter one thing I've put forth with anything factual. All you can do is be aghast. You can throw around words like pathetic and stupid, but you can't show anything which disproves what I assert. Emotion is ok for a time, but there's got to be more to the discussion. It reminds me of being married and having to deal with multi-layered emotions devoid of substance.

[lucky11]

I'm sure the defence must have been extremely worried about the RTP losing face - I mean it's just not Thai for this to happen, how can you give this as a reason for not pushing the court to allow the photos to be shown, I mean, its a court case for Christ's sake, not a PR event!!

"In highlight day 3 koh tao trial crime scene investigators confirm detailed CSI photos of bodies taken but not in case file as 'no budget'."

.........and the defence team let this go - they did an excellent job for the B2 - no wonder they lost is all I can say with, this meek, abject and spineless performance!!

I hope that they are going to stick up for themselves, stop letting themselves get manipulated and put in some effort in the rerun, otherwise it might be the full death sentence they are facing still at the end of it!!

[lucky11]

I'm married and I can honestly say that I am not aware of ever having to deal with multi-layered emotions devoid of substance - does it hurt and is it dangerous? just so I can take steps to avoid it as it doesn't sound that clever

[lucky11]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

In case you missed it:

"On the 17th September 2014, Pol.Col. Dr. Pawat Prateepwisarut, Deputy Director of the Forensic Science Institute, performed an investigation and collected specimens from the bodies of both the deceased. Specimens from vaginal and rectal fluid and saliva from the areola of the Second Deceased were submitted to department of forensic biology, under the supervision of Pol.Col. Watee Asawutmangkub. Pol.Col. Watee tasked the DNA analysis committee to perform examination, letter of appointment Jor 22, Pol.Gen. Kewalee Chakrabandhu, The National scientific crime detection officer examined evidence of both victims’ bloodstains from the hoe found at the crime scene. According to the result, bloodstains from both victims were found on the cotton bud used to wipe from the evidence hoe."

The one peddling misinformation here is you.

Not according to this report

"Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon."

Or many other media reports, how do you know your report is the correct one? Because it comes from the unofficial translated court summary?

Oh!! I get it - AleG's report must be the wrong one and yours of course is correct!! Couldn't possibly be the other way round, now could it.

[IslandLover]

lucky11, on 23 Feb 2016 - 05:15, said:

To be honest, I haven't seen any pics of David's wounds, but this shark tooth theory is pretty ridiculous and needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves!!

Try substituting "weaponized shark tooth ring" with "push knife" (as favoured by Thai thugs), then we have a better idea of how David got his wounds. And yes, I've seen the photos.

[jayjay78]

Fab99, agreed. David's DNA was not found on the hoe. AleG knows that. Another misinformation.

In case you missed it:

"On the 17th September 2014, Pol.Col. Dr. Pawat Prateepwisarut, Deputy Director of the Forensic Science Institute, performed an investigation and collected specimens from the bodies of both the deceased. Specimens from vaginal and rectal fluid and saliva from the areola of the Second Deceased were submitted to department of forensic biology, under the supervision of Pol.Col. Watee Asawutmangkub. Pol.Col. Watee tasked the DNA analysis committee to perform examination, letter of appointment Jor 22, Pol.Gen. Kewalee Chakrabandhu, The National scientific crime detection officer examined evidence of both victims’ bloodstains from the hoe found at the crime scene. According to the result, bloodstains from both victims were found on the cotton bud used to wipe from the evidence hoe."

The one peddling misinformation here is you.

Not according to this report

"Pol.Lt.Col. Kewalee, who conducted police’s original testing of the garden hoe, told the court today that only Witheridge’s blood was found on the weapon."

Or many other media reports, how do you know your report is the correct one? Because it comes from the unofficial translated court summary?

Oh!! I get it - AleG's report must be the wrong one and yours of course is correct!! Couldn't possibly be the other way round, now could it.

"The blood on the hoe was from Witheridge alone, Pol Maj Gen Kiattipong said. The other weapon was likely to be a metal object used to bludgeon Miller."

Plenty more where that came from, tell you what, you decide what you want to believe, up to you

[lucky11]

lucky11, on 23 Feb 2016 - 05:15, said:

To be honest, I haven't seen any pics of David's wounds, but this shark tooth theory is pretty ridiculous and needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves!!

Try substituting "weaponized shark tooth ring" with "push knife" (as favoured by Thai thugs), then we have a better idea of how David got his wounds. And yes, I've seen the photos.

Firstly, do you admit that one of your compatriots theory that a weaponised shark tooth ring is a bit stupid?

I fail to see how a trained autopsy doctor who is hands on in his examination is to be disbelieved whereas you have determined that it must have been a push knife that inflicted the wounds, purely from what you see from (unofficial) photographs of the body taken by the rescue team. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm sticking with the professionals on this one!!

[lucky11]

This does seem to rule out a push knife as I doubt that they used the handle of the knife to bludgeon him with when there is a blade on the other end - see I was right to discount your theory IL and go with people who know how to do autopsies!! You must be disappointed that your theory is equally stupid as the weaponised shark tooth ring, but that's the way these things go sometimes. Any other objects take your fancy? and please come up with something better next time.

[Khun Han]

AleG - I've been reading some older posts on TV regards the phone to try and make some sense of the phone situation and I came across a post you made in the thread below from July of last year -

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/838898-koh-tao-trial-opens-for-2-accused-of-killing-british-tourists/page-203

Miller had two phones, one his regular iPhone (the one allegedly taken by the men on trial) and a cheaper phone that he could actually use while in Thailand since the iPhone was blocked; that's the one found at the beach.

This has been known for a long time already.

That is most interesting and important. Please could you provide a link for the phone found on the beach?

My post is wrong, there was no phone found on the beach, you may thank Boomerangutang for tripping me into making a mistake and not adding "allegedly", like this "that's the (allegedly) one found at the beach.". The talk at the time was that one crime scene photo showed that phone on the beach next to his shorts, but it then became clear that the black rectangular object was actually the end of the belt.

David Miller reportedly had a cheap Samsung phone that he could use with a Thai SIM card. I don't know where that phone is, and I'm sure neither do you, but it's irrelevant since that not the iPhone Wei Phyo took from him.

How long did you spend poring over my posting history to find one instance of me making a mistake?

Hahaha...!!! So it was Boomer's fault, eh? He's always tripping people into missing out the "allegedly", so don't be too hard on yourself. Just out of interest, before you were tripped, where were you going to put the "allegedly" into the statement: "This has been known for a long time already"?

I can't speak for catsanddogs but personally I wouldn't have to pore over any of your posting history because I can recall quite vividly in the early days of the investigation you and your pal JD repeatedly posting as "fact" that Panya Mamen's (the then senior police officer leading the investigation) promotion had been announced and published prior to the murders taking place, which was of course a lie and a deliberate attempt to mislead and despite repeated requests to do so you were unable to name any source for such a revelation, because there isn't one.

I am assuming that seeing as how you were caught red-handed spreading such misinformation you would agree that this was, with hindsight at least, a mistake.

Speaking of Panya Mamen, perhaps now is not a bad time to remind ourselves that a lot of apparent contradictions in the details of evidence collected at or around the time of the murders that is now being dismissed by certain posters for whatever reason can be attributed to a pivotal point in the investigation, which was Panya Mamen being yanked off the case and replaced by someone "more suitable", at which point the investigation took a swift and sharp u-turn, despite the fact that Panya Mamen appeared to be doing a pretty good job and had even tracked one suspect to where he was holed up in Bangkok.

So it's perhaps no surprise to note that most of the evidence collected during Panya Mamen's time leading the investigation when the evidence was fresh and before everyone on the island had closed ranks is now being dismissed by certain posters as "a mistake", blamed on a hazy recollection of events or else simply overwritten and ignored by "new" contradictory evidence.

When a major incident occurs there are good reasons why police will rush to the scene and start taking statements from witnesses and suspects - it is because this is when the events will be freshest in the minds of those who witnessed the incident and also to prevent those who may have been involved from having time to get their stories straight. As such, witness accounts at the time of an incident and evidence collected from the crime scene should be taken very seriously, although, as displayed so beautifully by Greenchair in a recent post, some posters apparently disagree:

"There is certainly a lot of confusion about how many phones there were and who they belonged to. When there are several police putting in their own take to the media, things are bound to get mixed up. Many of the officers bleated off their mouth without thinking. That is why I always go back to the b2 own testimony and see where it matches or doesn't match with the police. After reading some of the court documents, it seems the judge did a similar thing.

The cat ate AleG's homework again.

The Mail's (I know, not easy to read in Thailand) Richard Shears reported from Koh Samui court on 24 July 2015 that Police Colonel Cherdpong Chiewpreecha had revealed in court that police had failed to confirm whether the mobile phone and sim card found on the beach belonged to David Miller.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3173235/Catalogue-police-blunders-including-failure-investigate-evidence-chase-suspects-revealed-court-judge-doubts-case-conclusive-outcome.html

Edited February 23, 2016 by Khun Han

[Khun Han]

To be honest, I haven't seen any pics of David's wounds, but this shark tooth theory is pretty ridiculous and needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves!!

It is quite convenient because if you had seen the pictures, I am quite certain you couldn't reasonably say the wounds were inflicted by the hoe (and no blood from David was found on the hoe by the way, only Hannah's).

How did David die??? It is not an irrelevant question, as the scenario used during the B2 trial is really not credible:

There were more than 1 weapon, David put up a fight (and the B2 didn't get a scratch from this fight...), the 2 victims had the hoe in their hand, it was not a surprise attack and if they were not surprised, I am highly curious to know how the B2, small as they are and probably drunk that night, could have killed the 2 victims, David particularly...

There were more than 2 people involved and more than 1 weapon, I am not sure that the B2 were not involved (I agree that the phone is suspect but I tend to believe that they wouldnt have discarded it like that if they had been the killers). And considering the reported threats to the locals, the journalists and the interpreters, I believe some Thais were involved too.

We certainly don't know the whole story yet and as long as all the culprits aren't behind bars or executed, justice hasn't been done.

And by the way, you can't say the british forensics missed the small wounds as the british autopsy on David has never been made public, for a reason that is difficult to grasp...

This case won't go away so easily...

The problem with all what you are saying is that you assume, without any basis, that all injuries were directly caused by the assault; how do you know that the smaller cuts are not the result of falling against and/or being dragged over rocks for example?

Because that's infinitely more reasonable assumption than being attacked with, of all things, a shark tooth ring...

Besides that, the court report clearly says that the fatal injuries (or at least the ones that led to his death) were consistent with the use of the hoe... which also had his blood on it.

I know one thing for sure, if the UK autopsy would have found any indication that anything but the hoe was used on Miller his family would had never endorsed the investigation and verdict as they did; apparently you all think to know better than them.

Ah yes: several identical wounds were caused by falling against or being dragged over rocks. Brilliant! The cat ate your homework again.

[DiscoDan]

Just as important as Thai forensics misdiagnosing David's wounds, is the fact that some of the island men who should be suspects, have been shown to proudly sport shark tooth rings. Two that come to mind (there may be others) are: Stingray Man and the cop caught in the photo harassing Sean. Both are bosom buddies with Mon. That's another reason Thai cops have lost or destroyed 60 hours of CCTV from that night - they didn't want anyone seeing Mon or his friends prancing around the clubs with their shark-tooth rings.

Any of those guys who were shown in Facebook photos, prior to the crime, wearing weaponized rings have certainly trashed their rings after the crime. Indeed, every friend or family member of Mon who could have had any involvement with the crime quickly pulled down their Facebook pages immediately after the crime. You can bet they all erased their mobile phone histories also - and possibly got new sim cards.

They didn't have to trash their shark tooth rings -- they were probably confiscated at security before boarding their Nok Air flight.

There you go again, trying to be cute and witty. The only person we (those of us seeking truth and justice) think boarded a Monday morning Nok Air flight is, Nomsod. No one else (Crab refers to 'they'). Secondly, it has not been alleged that NS sported a shark-tooth ring. So, in one sentence, you're wrong on two counts - though it won't keep you coming back and trying to be witty, as ever.

Also, I doubt Nok Air would confiscate any types of rings from passengers entering on a domestic flight. Do you have any evidence they do?

Nok air don't fly from Samui, Bangkok airways do & they have a strict no weaponized shark tooth ring policy.