Koh Tao DNA evidence used to condemn Burmese to death tested by an unaccredited lab

[Gang Warily]

It went to a lab in Singapore afaik.

I stop following this nonsense, can't believe a word of it.

I agree, you shouldn't believe a word of that "article".

The 29 June 2015 accreditation date is the one for the latest anual renewal of the accreditation, if you go to this link you will see that the lab (#215 in the list) first accreditation dates to 2013.

LabAccreditation.jpg

All the controversy surrounding this case is a house of cards built on unwarranted assumptions, baseless speculation and outright lies (as the one I just pointed at), now this edifice is crumbling and this "activists" can't throw each other under the bus fast enough.

U need to go further into that link to read the true accrediation under 'scope' which was as BLQS stated

The original story here was amazing. I could have written it myself - well maybe the first few paragraphs. Then it seemed to get lost. Then people began quoting the wrong texts from a government website. You needed to click further on the link to find the actual accreditation for police lab work where you get the January 29th accreditation date. Perhaps what amazes me most of all that the forum actually published this story, particularly when on the first page readers were warned about making libelous comments. Most of this story is a highly libelous rant against Andy Hall and the defence lawyers. Did TV really intend to accuse Andy Hall of fraud and the defence lawyers of demanding kickbacks? Surely not.

[Gang Warily]

There are so many different accreditation agencies - all very confusing. And we're not told which international accreditation agency Mr Suthon was referring to. Trying to search the various agencies is an exercise in frustration and futility - some require membership, while in others it's a dead end. The link AleG gives above is for the Thai Ministry of Public Health, while Mr Suthon refers to international accreditation. From a strictly legal sense, is this notable? Is the Thai accreditation acceptable in a Thai court of law, as compared to international accreditation? Or more or less acceptable?

Regardless, the way the evidence was handled and the lies that have been told (e.g., sending the DNA samples to Singapore) are wholly and completely sufficient grounds to warrant a fresh trial.

As for Andy Hall - I guess he needs to answer his critics - he's caught between a rock and a hard place and it's of his own doing, so I for one would like to hear from him. That doesn't mean I'm opposed to him - just want the facts, nothing more, when any kind of a cloud is raised -- he still remains a hero in my eyes, but he can't let this criticism go unanswered.

Why should Andy Hall answer his critics? Nobody has provided a jot of evidence against him. All purely innuendo by people with an axe to grind.

[Gang Warily]

According to Google News, just like with the "Australian Lawyer gives Hope ... " topic article in the SamuiTimes, no major media outlet in Thailand or UK is running this SamuiTiems story. I would question just how many of those who choose to visit Thailand or choose not to visit Thailand are even aware of this trial

I would also suggest that Courts anywhere are reluctant to summarily toss DNA or other evidence when there is virtually no other physical evidence in a criminal trial -- rather they would take such evidence under advisement and maybe instruct a jury that such evidence is of questionable significance as is often the case with any other evidence related to a trial.

No conspiracy there Mr Crab. No sensible media would run with this rant. And there are no juries in Thailand. The media in the UK has already covered the story about the complaint about the accreditation of the police lab. I am not sure I allowed to give a link.

[JLCrab]

According to Google News, just like with the "Australian Lawyer gives Hope ... " topic article in the SamuiTimes, no major media outlet in Thailand or UK is running this SamuiTiems story. I would question just how many of those who choose to visit Thailand or choose not to visit Thailand are even aware of this trial

I would also suggest that Courts anywhere are reluctant to summarily toss DNA or other evidence when there is virtually no other physical evidence in a criminal trial -- rather they would take such evidence under advisement and maybe instruct a jury that such evidence is of questionable significance as is often the case with any other evidence related to a trial.

No conspiracy there Mr Crab. No sensible media would run with this rant. And there are no juries in Thailand. The media in the UK has already covered the story about the complaint about the accreditation of the police lab. I am not sure I allowed to give a link.

No juries in Thailand? How about that and how many times has it been written on here that no Court anywhere would have even allowed a case like to even come to trial but that's OK.

[Gang Warily]

Well its most likely true this would not have passed committal proceedings in say the UK or a Grand Jury in the US but that's something quite different. I was puzzled about your reference to juries..not that a jury would be much more use in Thailand/

[JLCrab]

Well its most likely true this would not have passed committal proceedings in say the UK or a Grand Jury in the US but that's something quite different. I was puzzled about your reference to juries..not that a jury would be much more use in Thailand/

Again, thanks for pointing out that Thailand does not have juries -- in other countries, juries often receive written instructions from the judge as to how and by what means they can interpret the evidence presented at trial. In Thailand, the judges decide for themselves.

[denkiblue555]

And then if they showed you any and all receipts, transactions, etc. and there was nothing there, you would likely say: Where are you hiding the ones we REALLY want to see?

If they showed you 10 hours of CCTV video and there was nothing there, you would say: Of course -- all the incriminating stuff is in the 11th hour.

The Watergate burglars were arrested with $100 bills which were traced. That was the money they followed. There actually WAS money. Here there is just supposition which you've written about for almost 2 years.

Ok, how about a simple analysis of the 48 hours prior to the murder for the 2 victims and those initially accused?

Who went where and did what with whom?

Sure -- but still, if nothing there, how do you know that isn't 60 hours with 12 hours edited out. Everyone says he edited the tapes in Bangkok anyway.

Don't know what you mean? - I just mean the 'normal' 48 hours prior..... and 48 hours after may be helpful too.

Why would it be so hard to get CCTV and unedited information?

Of course there would be something there - 2 people were brutally murdered.

[JLCrab]

And then if they showed you any and all receipts, transactions, etc. and there was nothing there, you would likely say: Where are you hiding the ones we REALLY want to see?

If they showed you 10 hours of CCTV video and there was nothing there, you would say: Of course -- all the incriminating stuff is in the 11th hour.

The Watergate burglars were arrested with $100 bills which were traced. That was the money they followed. There actually WAS money. Here there is just supposition which you've written about for almost 2 years.

Ok, how about a simple analysis of the 48 hours prior to the murder for the 2 victims and those initially accused?

Who went where and did what with whom?

Sure -- but still, if nothing there, how do you know that isn't 60 hours with 12 hours edited out. Everyone says he edited the tapes in Bangkok anyway.

Don't know what you mean? - I just mean the 'normal' 48 hours prior..... and 48 hours after may be helpful too.

Why would it be so hard to get CCTV and unedited information?

Of course there would be something there - 2 people were brutally murdered.

There would not of course be something there -- if there was nothing there then one could say, as I believe someone did, that the person of interest knew where the cameras are and studiously stayed out of any range. Your assumption I guess is that the only reason video has not been released is that there must be incriminating evidence on the tape so if there isn't then there must be some underhanded reason why there is nothing on those tapes to incriminate the person you want to see incriminated.

[IslandLover]

Does anyone really believe the Thai lawyers acting for the B2 would EVER have sent a letter of complaint to the BLQS? They have already had several months to do so. The Australian lawyer who drafted the original letter of complaint in English, which has allegedly been plagiarized by Ian Yarwood, is not officially part of the defence team, he is merely an adviser. The onus has always been on the Thai lawyers to make a formal complaint to the BLQS. All we have seen from them is total inaction in this regard. Apparently they are short of funds too. Cash is needed for translations from English into Thai. The defence team has already said that the submitted Appeal cannot be translated from Thai into English because they do not have the money for it. All they have produced is a brief summary. Not all their work is pro bono.

I'm not saying Ian Yarwood was right to do what he did but the situation had reached an impasse.

[AleG]

The 29 June 2015 accreditation date is the one for the latest anual renewal of the accreditation, if you go to this link you will see that the lab (#215 in the list) first accreditation dates to 2013.

LabAccreditation.jpg

Could you explain what this image is, please (preferably giving a link)?

Does it refer to international accreditation, or to local accreditation (e.g. Thailand's Bureau of Laboratory Quality Standards)?

The original article specifically says that the laboratory was "not internationally accredited". (Italics mine.)

The 29 June 2015 accreditation date is the one for the latest anual renewal of the accreditation, if you go to this link you will see that the lab (#215 in the list) first accreditation dates to 2013.

LabAccreditation.jpg

Could you explain what this image is, please (preferably giving a link)?

Does it refer to international accreditation, or to local accreditation (e.g. Thailand's Bureau of Laboratory Quality Standards)?

The original article specifically says that the laboratory was "not internationally accredited". (Italics mine.)

The image is a screen capture from this page: http://webdb.dmsc.moph.go.th/ifc_qa/dbqa/default.asp?iID=LEFIF

It lists all laboratories in Thailand which are ISO-17025 certified, and yes that "I" in ISO stands for International and the "S" for Standard, that means that it has been found and certified to be up to International Standards. The whole point of ISO accreditation is that the members of the organization agree to a set of uniform standards for all countries, so there´s no need for every country to send people to certify organizations to every other country, an organization with an ISO certificate is "international accredited" by definition.

The scope of this one in particular is:

"ISO/IEC 17025 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories is the main ISO standard used by testing and calibration laboratories. In most major countries, ISO/IEC 17025 is the standard for which most labs must hold accreditation in order to be deemed technically competent."

Which, obviously, when applied to a forensic laboratory means that it's been deemed technically competent to do forensic lab work, i.e. DNA analysis.

Enty #215 is the police lab that carried out the DNA testing, there are three dates given, one the date of the previous certification, the date of that certification period expiry and the date of the last update of the status.

The dates are:

accredited Date 24/01/2013

Expiration Date 23/01/2015

Last updated 12/04/2016

The link to the Toxicology Sub-division and Biochemisty Sub-division Institute of Forensic Medicine, Police General Hospital, The Royal Thai Police Head Quarter has the dates for the current accreditation period: accredited, accreditation date 29/01/2015, expiration date 28/01/2517

The link named "Accredited scope of testing" points to a pdf that outlines the scope of the accreditation, in particular to DNA testing.

Do note that the accreditation period starts six days after the expiry of the previous accreditation period; this lab has been in this process of renewing annually or biannually its ISO-17025 since at least 2009, which can be seen by using a cached version of the first page I linked to: https://web.archive.org/web/20090505151327/http://webdb.dmsc.moph.go.th/ifc_qa/dbqa/default.asp?iID=LEFIF

As you can see it also provides the period in which that accreditation is valid, with an expiry date of 10/03/2012, if you go to other cached versions of that page you will see how the accreditation has been maintained over the years which shows that the dates are updated periodically, therefore just looking at the last one does not mean that last date indicates the first time the lab was accredited; furthermore every time the accreditation is renewed they receive a new accreditation number (1154/52 in 2009, the current one is 1233/56)

What all that means, at the very least, is that the title of the article at the start of this thread is completely false; and it doesn't get any better from there on.

[AleG]

It went to a lab in Singapore afaik.

I stop following this nonsense, can't believe a word of it.

I agree, you shouldn't believe a word of that "article".

The 29 June 2015 accreditation date is the one for the latest anual renewal of the accreditation, if you go to this link you will see that the lab (#215 in the list) first accreditation dates to 2013.

LabAccreditation.jpg

All the controversy surrounding this case is a house of cards built on unwarranted assumptions, baseless speculation and outright lies (as the one I just pointed at), now this edifice is crumbling and this "activists" can't throw each other under the bus fast enough.

U need to go further into that link to read the true accrediation under 'scope' which was as BLQS stated

I did, months ago; you on the other hand didn't before publishing your utterly... how should I put it?... unreliable articles. You are wrong in pretty much everything you inflict unto the public, and I don't think you care.

Now, after using Ian Yarwood and Suzanne Buchanan as sources and publishing an article basically stating the same things as the one in the OP (minus grossly defamatory allegations against Andy Hall) you appear to want to distance yourself from them, the proverbial **** hit the fan and you don't want to be seen on the wrong side because you know they'll rip you apart the instant you stop being useful for their agenda.

[gandalf12]

And of course there was no jury to hear both sides of the argument and make an informed decision. Do you really need more to explain the judgement passed down? I don't think so

[denkiblue555]

..................................

Sure -- but still, if nothing there, how do you know that isn't 60 hours with 12 hours edited out. Everyone says he edited the tapes in Bangkok anyway.

..................................

Don't know what you mean? - I just mean the 'normal' 48 hours prior..... and 48 hours after may be helpful too.

Why would it be so hard to get CCTV and unedited information?

Of course there would be something there - 2 people were brutally murdered.

There would not of course be something there -- if there was nothing there then one could say, as I believe someone did, that the person of interest knew where the cameras are and studiously stayed out of any range. Your assumption I guess is that the only reason video has not been released is that there must be incriminating evidence on the tape so if there isn't then there must be some underhanded reason why there is nothing on those tapes to incriminate the person you want to see incriminated.

C'mon.... the 2 victims were not ghosts.

They were both travelling with other groups of people. They went places. They did stuff.

All of this could be properly examined, including the obvious testimonies from the traveling friends of the group about the events that occurred in the 48 hours prior.

[B166ER]

....so.....um....errrr....aaaaaaaa...hmmm....an ISO 17024 International accredited forensic laboratory tendered paperwork with life or death pertinent information scribed by the ISO 17028 Internationally accredited forensic laboratory technicians to the judicial system with scribbles, crossed out references, wrong dates, coffee stains, dog teeth indentations ....ect....ect.....?

I'll have to check the ISO 17025 International accredited forensic Laboratory guidelines to access what constitutes acceptable paperwork for ISO 17027 International accredited forensic laboratory tendered paperwork from Siam....

[JLCrab]

The only video that I know of which is been considered withheld is that from the AC Bar -- if you know of other video, then sure. Go ahead and properly examine it. And so far, as far as I know, not one person in the company of the late Ms. Witheridge that evening has come forward to say that he or she saw anyone approaching or engaging Ms. Witheridge in a hostile manner. As to why that may be: Up to you.

[boomerangutang]

The only video that I know of which is been considered withheld is that from the AC Bar -- if you know of other video, then sure. Go ahead and properly examine it.

There is the video which one of the RTP chief inspectors mentioned at the trial. It purportedly showed part of the coast where boats could have come and gone. The time was purportedly soon after the crime. He said they (the RTP) didn't think there was anything useful shown, so they didn't even bother looking at it. Where is that footage? ....and other similar footage? Surely it was destroyed. Also, Crab mentions above; "The only video ....withheld is that from the AC Bar." It's naive to think there was only one video withheld. There could have been many. Mon (who allegedly withheld the video from investigators, saying it was his 'private property') is also involved with In-Touch beach bar nearby. Where are In-Touch videos? Mon withheld evidence from a crime investigation. Is that not a criminal act? I've said all along: find out what Mon knows, and the case is cracked open like a Ko Tao coconut run over by a tractor.

Police claimed they viewed 60 hours of KT video from that night. Where is it? Destroyed? RTP have proven how inept they are at spotting pertinent details. There's a photo of a glass bottle on the sand at the crime scene. Where is it? Where are Hannah's clothes? Where are phone records? There are 1,000's of missed clues in this case. The mind reels. Not only is this a blatant cover-up, but it's been very clumsily administered. Hence the thousands of posts, and hundreds of thousands of observers worldwide who want to see it properly investigated. As long as RTP hang tough and don't do their jobs, ....that's how long the RTP and Thai justice system will be seen as inept (or worse) by millions overseas.

[JLCrab]

So I am naive to think that there is only one video withheld and you are clairvoyant to know that there could be many more. It's tough to have a dialog with someone who thinks thongs exist and rationalizes how things would be if they existed even though he doesn't know they exist. Oh well. To the hundreds of thousands of observers worldwide who can follow this: Salut!

I am sty ill waiting for the first tangible appearance of 50 satang in demonstrable bribe money to occur even though some have put up into the hundreds of millions of baht (or with the Somyot stock purchases) maybe billions but the millions overseas that are paying attention here I'm sure are on the edge of their seats.

[boomerangutang]

Just how many people do you want investigated? You want people to prove they did nothing wrong -- I don't know how it got into your head that that is the way things work. You're saying people MAY have been involved in illegal activity and it's up to them to prove that they have not so been.

Answer: as many as it takes to find out what really happened that awful night on KT. .....and if there was a cover-up, who's involved. We won't find anything, if there's no investigation. If anyone is guilty of cover-up, it would be top brass police - the same people who definitely don't want any hint of investigation or whether there was a money trail or cover-up.

Suggestion: watch the movie: Serpico. He was a NYC cop who wanted an investigation of NYC police corruption. But guess what: Surprise! Top brass cops never wanted to instigate an investigation. How surprising! They didn't want to investigate whether they themselves were corrupt. Instead, they wanted to kill Serpico. It was later found that, in spite of many months of foot-dragging by top brass, that corruption went even higher than top brass police heads. It went all the way to NY governor. If you're familiar with the botched KT case, it should all sound familiar - except there has never been any adept investigation of the crime or the possibility of a cover-up possibly stretching to the highest echelons of Thai political power.

Early on, the PM said there was no cover-up. That's around the time when he insinuated that pretty farang ladies who wear bikinis at a beach resort are essentially asking for trouble. He also said; if the DNA matches the scapegoats, accused, then they are guilty of murder - apparently not considering that a woman can have sex on a beach with someone, and then be killed by someone else.

[balo]

It went to a lab in Singapore afaik.

I stop following this nonsense, can't believe a word of it.

I agree, you shouldn't believe a word of that "article".

The 29 June 2015 accreditation date is the one for the latest anual renewal of the accreditation, if you go to this link you will see that the lab (#215 in the list) first accreditation dates to 2013.

LabAccreditation.jpg

All the controversy surrounding this case is a house of cards built on unwarranted assumptions, baseless speculation and outright lies (as the one I just pointed at), now this edifice is crumbling and this "activists" can't throw each other under the bus fast enough.

Thank you for this link , it just shows that people are willing to make up stories to change the sentence.

[JLCrab]

Just how many people do you want investigated?

Answer: as many as it takes to find out what really happened that awful night on KT.

That's what I figured. Round 'em all up and have them bring their bank books. I know a girl who used to use her mother's ATM card -- even though her mother had been dead for 10 years. How about tracing that one?

[boomerangutang]

So I am naive to think that there is only one video withheld and you are clairvoyant to know that there could be many more. It's tough to have a dialog with someone who thinks thongs exist and rationalizes how things would be if they existed even though he doesn't know they exist. Oh well. To the hundreds of thousands of observers worldwide who can follow this: Salut!

Sorry if this dialog is tough for you. Maybe you should take a long break, to avoid things which are tough. Try this: take a stroll into a night club. Chances are; if they have one security camera, they probably have some others. If it's too tough, don't bother. Also, we're talking about at least 2 nighclubs: AC and In Touch. Any halfway decent investigation would want to try to find out what went on at the places the principles (victims, possible perps, witnesses) hung out in just prior to the crime. RTP did none of that. Zero, except a few second CCTV of David entering the AC bar. Nothing, zip, zero of that same camera showing anyone entering or leaving before or after David. It sure would be interesting to see the complete footage of that camera from 10 pm to 4 am that night, wouldn't it? Now, there's zero chance of that. So much has been destroyed. Sad for the two murder victims, and sad for the two scapegoats who are facing death for a heinous crime which others committed.

I am sty ill waiting for the first tangible appearance of 50 satang in demonstrable bribe money to occur even though some have put up into the hundreds of millions of baht (or with the Somyot stock purchases) maybe billions but the millions overseas that are paying attention here I'm sure are on the edge of their seats.

You and I will be waiting a long long time, because there won't be any investigation of bribe money. RTP are the only investigators allowed in this trial, and they're not going to investigate their bosses, are they?

[denkiblue555]

I'm not talking about video stuff.... just normal questions about the events that led up to a particular incident (in this case the horrible murders). What happened in the 48 hours prior to the murders would be useful. In the beginning all sorts of crazy things were published about a love triangle and yada yada, I am just curious as to what the two victims and their friends did during the two days prior. I mean, where did they go, who did they meet, where did they socialise?

I have just never heard of any real thorough or ongoing effort to gain any information from the 'friends', as they had left Thailand. I would think their information on what they all got up to in the 48 hours prior to the murders would be an excellent place to begin to try and piece together what happened.

[JLCrab]

So I am naive to think that there is only one video withheld and you are clairvoyant to know that there could be many more. It's tough to have a dialog with someone who thinks thongs exist and rationalizes how things would be if they existed even though he doesn't know they exist. Oh well. To the hundreds of thousands of observers worldwide who can follow this: Salut!

Sorry if this dialog is tough for you. Maybe you should take a long break, to avoid things which are tough. Try this: take a stroll into a night club. Chances are; if they have one security camera, they probably have some others. If it's too tough, don't bother. Also, we're talking about at least 2 nighclubs: AC and In Touch. Any halfway decent investigation would want to try to find out what went on at the places the principles (victims, possible perps, witnesses) hung out in just prior to the crime. RTP did none of that. Zero, except a few second CCTV of David entering the AC bar. Nothing, zip, zero of that same camera showing anyone entering or leaving before or after David. It sure would be interesting to see the complete footage of that camera from 10 pm to 4 am that night, wouldn't it? Now, there's zero chance of that. So much has been destroyed. Sad for the two murder victims, and sad for the two scapegoats who are facing death for a heinous crime which others committed.

I am sty ill waiting for the first tangible appearance of 50 satang in demonstrable bribe money to occur even though some have put up into the hundreds of millions of baht (or with the Somyot stock purchases) maybe billions but the millions overseas that are paying attention here I'm sure are on the edge of their seats.

You and I will be waiting a long long time, because there won't be any investigation of bribe money. RTP are the only investigators allowed in this trial, and they're not going to investigate their bosses, are they?

So you are going to investigate the persons who didn't want the investigation to occur even though the investigators should be investigating those who you think should be investigated though they are able to hide anything that the investigation should reveal if any investigation were to occur. I am not waiting at all -- I'm not the one who says there should be an investigation.

But I really don't have a problem following any of the arguments above -- I can follow the arguments of The Marx Brothers, too, which make just about as much sense.

[balo]

So what does an accreditation means ?? And how did they get it ? Anyone actually knows ?

Did the lab travel outside of Thailand to learn about DNA testing ?

[Jai Dee]

One flame post has been removed from this thread.

Members making remarks directed at other members rather than the topic will have their posts removed and suffer any consequential warnings/suspensions.

[Bkk Brian]

The OP took information which I guess they considered credible from the Director of BLQS.

So on the question of the correct accreditation for the police labs some seem to have this worked out, cut and dry. But its not is it. The Thai websites appear to state that it was accredited, but then Khun Suthon Vongsheree the actual Director of The Bureau of Laboratory Quality Standards, Department of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Public Health Thailand clearly states that it was NOT accredited. How can that be explained?

​If it was accredited then that gives even more weight to the failings outlined in the complaint. If it was accredited why was there no official stamps on the document presented in court?

[B166ER]

.....why not indeed....try and have ANY paperwork in Thailand not filled out correctly (with lot's of Paper Pounding Stamping) and handed to authorities....even the DMV or Bank will hand it back to you let alone any Internationally ISO 17025 regulated Technical Lab....

[Bkk Brian]

Also now been aired on Phuket TV News @1.05 Defense says lab not accredited

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlZ6-QwuA-4

[boomerangutang]

....according to sources outside the realm of LOS. (NOT any ISO 17025 accredited accreditor by the by) Top cops assets are valued at more than US 11.5 mill and change. His mandate is " to revive trust in a graft-tainted force " Carries the hatchet for the square faced one. The thin red line uncoils from the minimalist trappings of a southern beach all the way to the upper echelons of the ivory tower in Krungthep mahanakhon amon rattanakosin mahintara ayuthaya mahadilok popnopparat ratchathani burirom udomratchaniwet mahasathan amonpiman avatansathit sakkathattiya visnukamprasit! Don't kid yourselves, money trail. Good luck exposing that one....

The two scapegoats facing death for murders they didn't do need more than luck. They need at least one crime detective in Thailand who is brave enough to do a decent job. Thus far, there's no such person.

If you're addressing the 'good luck' to me personally, you know I'm powerless to do anything in that regard. I'm a middle-aged low-income farang residing in Thailand. I don't even have any friends/connections in high places. I could no more instigate a decent investigation than win the giant slalom in the next winter Olympics. That's why there are supposed 'professionals' and specialists paid by taxes to do such jobs.

Police crime inspectors are charged with inspecting crimes. They're trusted and paid by taxpayers to do their jobs professionally. The inspectors in the KT case (and many others') didn't do their jobs remotely well. They did a little bit of detective work in the first 10 days after the crime (under Panya), but as soon as Somyot indicated he was taking over, police work went from faulty to abysmal - and it's been stuck there ever since.

[B166ER]

....if you start training now everyday for at least six hours you could have a chance at grabbing that gold....my last preamble twas my attempt at a cathartic "This above all: to thine own self be true"

I truly share your sentiments....