Burmese enter their third year in prison for the Koh Tao murders

[DiscoDan]

30 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The autopsy started at 11am on the 17th. Can you explain to us how the mixed sample was extracted and processed? And why the date on the documents presented to trial court was 5th October?

Date wrong could be a simple clerical error and means nothing.

 

As to how they tested the DNA if the defense properly cross examined the witness they would know how they came about their findings, but they didn't.

 

Just like they did not ask for a court order for the dna documentation.

 

Just like they did.a last minute u turn on retesting the most crucial dna evidence

 

Just like they turned down two dna witnesses to take the stand.

 

Cue the excuses

[rockingrobin]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

The autopsy started at 11am on the 17th. Can you explain to us how the mixed sample was extracted and processed? And why the date on the documents presented to trial court was 5th October?

If the results were not finalised until Oct 5 , how did they clear any suspects before this date

[Khun Han]

59 minutes ago, DiscoDan said:

Date wrong could be a simple clerical error and means nothing.

 

As to how they tested the DNA if the defense properly cross examined the witness they would know how they came about their findings, but they didn't.

 

Just like they did not ask for a court order for the dna documentation.

 

Just like they did.a last minute u turn on retesting the most crucial dna evidence

 

Just like they turned down two dna witnesses to take the stand.

 

Cue the excuses

 

Sorry? A simple clerical error? Bull$hit.

 

So you have no answers then. Just a pathetic attempt at deflection toward the defence team.

[AleG]

1 hour ago, DiscoDan said:

Date wrong could be a simple clerical error and means nothing.

 

As to how they tested the DNA if the defense properly cross examined the witness they would know how they came about their findings, but they didn't.

 

Just like they did not ask for a court order for the dna documentation.

 

Just like they did.a last minute u turn on retesting the most crucial dna evidence

 

Just like they turned down two dna witnesses to take the stand.

 

Cue the excuses

There is an simple explanation why DNA results would be already available a short time after the autopsy had began, that they had already started DNA analysis on samples that did not come from the autopsy, for example from swabs taken at the crime scene.

Of course it wouldn't be necessary to speculate on that if someone, anyone, would had decided that they would commit themselves to ensure the trial would be as transparent as possible and sought help in the from of donations and media attention to do so... oh, wait a second.

OK, scratch that, what we have is the say so of people that were committed to discredit the prosecution case, that it's suspicious the DNA testing (of who knows what) would be done so fast.  Of course the same people said lots of things regarding the DNA work that were just not true, like the police lab not being accredited, that it's impossible to analyze DNA in 18 hours, that the DNA results from the examination of the murder weapon prove the B2 are innocent, etc, etc...

[DiscoDan]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

Sorry? A simple clerical error? Bull$hit.

 

So you have no answers then. Just a pathetic attempt at deflection toward the defence team.

It could be B.S. Same with ZL claiming at the time of his arrest he came to Thailand legally 3 yrs ago but then telling Charlie Campbell from Time.com that he was brought to Thailand by a broker 2yrs before the crime.

 

The fact the only error that you have any proof of concerning the dna is a wrong date just shows you are clutching at straws.

 

[jimmybkk]

8 hours ago, AleG said:

There is an simple explanation why DNA results would be already available a short time after the autopsy had began, that they had already started DNA analysis on samples that did not come from the autopsy, for example from swabs taken at the crime scene.

Of course it wouldn't be necessary to speculate on that if someone, anyone, would had decided that they would commit themselves to ensure the trial would be as transparent as possible and sought help in the from of donations and media attention to do so... oh, wait a second.

OK, scratch that, what we have is the say so of people that were committed to discredit the prosecution case, that it's suspicious the DNA testing (of who knows what) would be done so fast.  Of course the same people said lots of things regarding the DNA work that were just not true, like the police lab not being accredited, that it's impossible to analyze DNA in 18 hours, that the DNA results from the examination of the murder weapon prove the B2 are innocent, etc, etc...

 

You are aware that the main reason that there is debate over the validity of the DNA is mostly down to the fact that accepted procedures were not followed and protocols were not adhered to by those who decided not to involve Khunying Porntip and her team when the bodies were first discovered... right? And you are aware that this decision not to involve Khunying Porntip's division of the Department of Justice (which is a completely separate entity from the RTP forensic division, and which could be considered a 3rd party capable of conducting independent forensic analysis of the crime scene and independent collection and testing of any DNA samples taken) was a decision made by the RTP, and not by any members of the defence... right? In other words, the accusers of the B2 were the ones who decided how any crime scene evidence should be collected, who would collect it and how it should be examined, stored and analyzed. They also decided that there was no need to involve a forensic pathologist... for some reason... despite there being a forensic pathologist under the government's employ ready to leap into action for just such an occasion as this...

 

This is akin to a casino having a policy that for all cash games of poker played in the casino the dealer must be independent and unrelated to the casino where the game is being played... Except this time the casino decides to ignore this policy and instead uses their in-house dealer to deal the game... And sure enough, on the very first hand one of the "house players" gets dealt a straight flush...

 

Naturally, this creates a controversy and so now a bunch of experts get involved and give their opinions and analysis regarding the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt in a hand of poker... Which is a great distraction, but anyone who stands back and takes a look at the whole scenario can see that analysis of the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt is simply a straw man argument, intended to distract and misdirect... which ought to  be ignored....

 

So... whilst you are questioning the analysis of the DNA and the credentials of those conducting the analysis, how it was presented in court etc... the real question is: How and why was the in-house dealer allowed to deal the game in the first place, and when the cards that were dealt favoured the house, how to prove to the other players and all the spectators that everything was legit & above board, when all the signs point towards some illicit activities...?

 

The answer is that without good quality video footage of events it's impossible to prove that everything was above board, and the integrity of the hand that was dealt will always be in question. The only equitable solution is for the hand to be re-dealt using a different, unbiased dealer, a new and untampered-with deck of cards, and an independent 3rd party adjudicator overseeing all proceedings. And In any event, the non-house players should be free to get up and leave the room based on the shocking and dishonest behaviour of the house.

 

[smedly]

1 hour ago, jimmybkk said:

 

You are aware that the main reason that there is debate over the validity of the DNA is mostly down to the fact that accepted procedures were not followed and protocols were not adhered to by those who decided not to involve Khunying Porntip and her team when the bodies were first discovered... right? And you are aware that this decision not to involve Khunying Porntip's division of the Department of Justice (which is a completely separate entity from the RTP forensic division, and which could be considered a 3rd party capable of conducting independent forensic analysis of the crime scene and independent collection and testing of any DNA samples taken) was a decision made by the RTP, and not by any members of the defence... right? In other words, the accusers of the B2 were the ones who decided how any crime scene evidence should be collected, who would collect it and how it should be examined, stored and analyzed. They also decided that there was no need to involve a forensic pathologist... for some reason... despite there being a forensic pathologist under the government's employ ready to leap into action for just such an occasion as this...

 

This is akin to a casino having a policy that for all cash games of poker played in the casino the dealer must be independent and unrelated to the casino where the game is being played... Except this time the casino decides to ignore this policy and instead uses their in-house dealer to deal the game... And sure enough, on the very first hand one of the "house players" gets dealt a straight flush...

 

Naturally, this creates a controversy and so now a bunch of experts get involved and give their opinions and analysis regarding the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt in a hand of poker... Which is a great distraction, but anyone who stands back and takes a look at the whole scenario can see that analysis of the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt is simply a straw man argument, intended to distract and misdirect... which ought to  be ignored....

 

So... whilst you are questioning the analysis of the DNA and the credentials of those conducting the analysis, how it was presented in court etc... the real question is: How and why was the in-house dealer allowed to deal the game in the first place, and when the cards that were dealt favoured the house, how to prove to the other players and all the spectators that everything was legit & above board, when all the signs point towards some illicit activities...?

 

The answer is that without good quality video footage of events it's impossible to prove that everything was above board, and the integrity of the hand that was dealt will always be in question. The only equitable solution is for the hand to be re-dealt using a different, unbiased dealer, a new and untampered-with deck of cards, and an independent 3rd party adjudicator overseeing all proceedings. And In any event, the non-house players should be free to get up and leave the room based on the shocking and dishonest behaviour of the house.

 

This is exactly why standards and procedures exist in Justice Systems and must be followed otherwise the outcomes produced when they are not strictly followed are flawed and will not be useable.

 

The Thai police know this full well, it is exactly why certain pieces of evidence and claimed evidence have been discarded or lost or never existed,  they never expected to be called out on such matters, but never the less these issues cannot be ignored - maybe Thailand Authorities are ignoring them but we certainly are not.

 

What really bothers me is the stuff that is missing or has been omitted

 

- Davids injuries are as yet unexplained - the small puncture wounds clearly visible on his body and yet they have been generally ignored, it is the primary duty of a pathologist to conclude how these may have happened and what type of instrument caused them, it is also possible that David was clothed when he was fighting for his life, his clothes will also have damage dna and blood stains and yet - where is this critical evidence - the clothing of the two victims is gone - maybe they were taken to the laundry that morning to be cleaned because they were in such a mess 

 

- we all know about the missing DNA original samples

 

- were is the iPhone found at the crime scene, who did it belong too 

 

- Police were able to show cctv images from all over the place from before the crimes took place and yet there is nothing post crime except for the leaked running man video released to the public by the original investigation team before they were suddenly removed. I suspect there was a lot more cctv footage that was quickly destroyed because it implicated other certain people as claimed by the original removed investigation team.

 

Why is there no footage of the accused leaving the crime scene ??? surely it exists if they did indeed do this, maybe there was footage but it didn't implicate B2

 

- Why were police denied access to cctv footage from the bar were the two victims were supposed to have been before they were murdered, there was also a strong belief that an altercation took place there earlier that evening involving one of the victims. 

 

 

- then there is the Hoe which was missing from the beach from a spot a considerable distance away from the crime scene and yet a certain person was able to conclude from its absence that - first of all it was missing and that it was the murder weapon!!!!!!!!! this was very early in the morning before any investigation had even started - oh and the person that removed the hoe is also now missing along with the Roti seller interpreter - go figure

 

then we see certain people in a certain bar play acting and making fun  with a makeshift hoe on facebook like it was some big joke and you'll never catch us - disgraceful

 

 

 

 

[DiscoDan]

Among the first suspects were Davids friend Chris and a group of people who witnesses saw playing guitar on a log.

 

Police interviewed Chris and cleared him after dna test and a cut on his hand could clearly been seen in a recent photo he had taken with David also what police believed to be blood on a pair of his trousers turned out to stained from earth.

 

Meanwhile the suspects who were on the log have not handed themselves in to police to clear their names.

 

Police start searching for the suspects who were playing guitar they search workers accommodation and retrieve some guitars and mobile phones one of which has been smashed and left to marinade in a plastic bag full of water.

 

Police receive tipoff about a group of 9 Burmese playing takaew when police approach them 3 of them flee the scene those 3 people later turn out to be the  

WP ZL AND Maung Maung.

 

They manage to evade arrest until WP is caught trying to flee the island by hiding on a night ferry (all migrant workers had been told they were not allowed to leave the island)

 

They confess to the killings they also confess to a member of the Burmese embassy and a Human rights worker. Eventually they withdraw their confession claiming they were nearly tortured to death yet they were filmed by media on the ferry to Samui showing no signs of any physical injuries even though they claimed they had been beaten around their heads.

 

After their confessions had been withdrawn WP still admitted to finding an Iphone on the beach, first he lies to his friend and says he found it in a bar then later he admits to finding it on the beach, his friend then becomes suspicious of his story and thinks that the phone could be implicated in the murders and decides to destroy it (even though their is no report in the media of a missing phone)

 

WP & ZL after withdrawing their confessions tell police they were playing guitar smoke and drank a bottle of beer each and were so drunk they could hardly walk and on the way home and at 2am  and WP found an Iphone.

 

This later changes to them being on the beach and MM telling them he is going to see his g/f at 1am they ask him to get more alcohol so he goes back home gets a bottle of wine and returns to the B2. MM swaps shirts with WP their excuse is MM is cold. MM then goes back to see g/f and the B2 continue drinking at 2am they decide to go for a swim when they finish they cannot find their guitar WP shirt which was originally MM s shirt, and WPs sandals they then return home sleep for a couple of hours WP decides to go back to look for sandals at 4am does not find sandals but funds iPhone instead.

 

The next day the guitar that they had meant to be looking for is found in the exact place they left it WP shirt and sandals are never recovered and the bottle of wine they drunk is also found at the crime scene.

 

So why do 2 people who claim to be innocent lie about their alibi and lie to their friends about the phone ? Only an idiot would think these 2 had no involvement in the murders

 

[AleG]

1 hour ago, smedly said:

This is exactly why standards and procedures exist in Justice Systems and must be followed otherwise the outcomes produced when they are not strictly followed are flawed and will not be useable.

 

The Thai police know this full well, it is exactly why certain pieces of evidence and claimed evidence have been discarded or lost or never existed,  they never expected to be called out on such matters, but never the less these issues cannot be ignored - maybe Thailand Authorities are ignoring them but we certainly are not.

 

What really bothers me is the stuff that is missing or has been omitted

 

- Davids injuries are as yet unexplained - the small puncture wounds clearly visible on his body and yet they have been generally ignored, it is the primary duty of a pathologist to conclude how these may have happened and what type of instrument caused them, it is also possible that David was clothed when he was fighting for his life, his clothes will also have damage dna and blood stains and yet - where is this critical evidence - the clothing of the two victims is gone - maybe they were taken to the laundry that morning to be cleaned because they were in such a mess 

 

- we all know about the missing DNA original samples

 

- were is the iPhone found at the crime scene, who did it belong too 

 

- Police were able to show cctv images from all over the place from before the crimes took place and yet there is nothing post crime except for the leaked running man video released to the public by the original investigation team before they were suddenly removed. I suspect there was a lot more cctv footage that was quickly destroyed because it implicated other certain people as claimed by the original removed investigation team.

 

Why is there no footage of the accused leaving the crime scene ??? surely it exists if they did indeed do this, maybe there was footage but it didn't implicate B2

 

- Why were police denied access to cctv footage from the bar were the two victims were supposed to have been before they were murdered, there was also a strong belief that an altercation took place there earlier that evening involving one of the victims. 

 

 

- then there is the Hoe which was missing from the beach from a spot a considerable distance away from the crime scene and yet a certain person was able to conclude from its absence that - first of all it was missing and that it was the murder weapon!!!!!!!!! this was very early in the morning before any investigation had even started - oh and the person that removed the hoe is also now missing along with the Roti seller interpreter - go figure

 

then we see certain people in a certain bar play acting and making fun  with a makeshift hoe on facebook like it was some big joke and you'll never catch us - disgraceful

 

 

 

 

 You have no idea what you are talking about, none.

"- Davids injuries are as yet unexplained "

Court report:

 

Jor. 39. The Institute of Forensic Medicine received the bodies of both Deceased on 16 September B.E. 2557 (2014). Pol. Col. Dr. Pawat Prateepwisarut M.D., Vice-Director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine, conducted a forensic examination of the bodies of both Deceased. On the body of the First Deceased, 2 oblique, jagged tear wounds were found on the back upper-right part of the scalp. Jagged tear wounds on both left and right temples and jagged tear wounds on the right cheekbone were also found. The cheekbones, eye socket and upper jaw were broken and deformed. Water was found in both left and right parts of the chest. The cause of death was determined as the result of head wounds caused by a blunt object together with drowning. As for the body of the Second Deceased, deep jagged tear wounds were found on the head, and left and right side of the face. The depth of the wounds reached to the brain. Forehead bones, left and right eye sockets were broken and deformed. The upper and lower jaws were broken and deformed.
 

And

The wounds to the head and face of the Second Deceased were all shown to be serious wounds matching the kind of injury that would be incurred by an attack with the blade and handle of the exhibited hoe, as Police Colonel Phawat
M.D. and Khunying Pornthip M.D. have testified.

Is your hero, Dr. Pornthip lying when saying that the wounds match the hoe? What are you going to do now, admit that you don't know what you are talking about or do the usual thing, put your fingers in your ears, shout LALALALA and keep repeating the same falsehoods (while at the same time calling liar to anyone who knows better)?
Add to that that neither of the UK pathologists have said nothing contradicting the fnidings regarding the wounds from the murder weapon. A but YOU know better, the echo chamber of ThailandJustice and CSI-LA doesn't need the help of actual pathologist actually examining the bodies to know what is what.

Talking about Dr. Pornthip and her institute and that you said elsewhere that the person in charge of collecting the DNA was not qualified, from the court report:

The DNA of the offenders was discovered by Police Colonel Dr. Prawut Prathepwisarut, M.D. a Medical Doctor at the Forensic Institute, who is an authorized

and competent official to conduct an autopsy and a medical examination. The examination and the autopsy was conducted before the arrest of the two

defendants, thus this evidence existed and was established and legally obtained. Therefore, the DNA test results can (legally) lead to and prove the identities

of the offenders.

 

The DNA testing comparison report between that of the offenders’ and the two defendants’ in Document Jor.12 indicates that there are 16 matching DNA

locations, of which all are DNA on Chromosomes in the locations that can accurately identify a person’s identity according to international standards. This

therefore proves that the Forensic Institute followed its protocol and used commonly accepted testing equipment.
Thus, the Court finds the testing result as credible and trustworthy, despite the fact that the plaintiff’s examination results did not present a chain of

custody document in the examination and the fact that the plaintiff did not calculate the level of coincidence in the report, with the similar manner as that of

the Ministry of Justice’s Forensic Institute’s practice, which is the two defendants’ trusted institution.

In case the meaning of this eludes you, Dr. Pornthips institute, the one you say should have done the job uses the same standards as the police laboratory.

"- we all know about the missing DNA original samples "

No, we don't all know, you don't know; what you think you know is speculation and misinformation.

"- were is the iPhone found at the crime scene, who did it belong too"

There was no iPhone found at the crime scene. You provide me a citation from any credible source that says so and I'll quit Thaivisa, how about that? Can't do it, then admit you are wrong... which of course you can't do either.

"- Police were able to show cctv images from all over the place from before the crimes took place and yet there is nothing post crime except for the leaked running man video released to the public by the original investigation team before they were suddenly removed. I suspect there was a lot more cctv footage that was quickly destroyed because it implicated other certain people as claimed by the original removed investigation team. "

You think CCTV cameras must be evenly spaced around that area? And "leaked" video, as if it was an act of insubordination... you just can't help it to have tendentious speculation taint your understanding of the events.
There's nothing post crime you say, false, again:
Court report: CCTV footage showing the area in front of Good Health Shop andIntouch Shop, which are near the crime scene, also recorded the image of a suspected topless running man, the Evidence Document marked as Jor. 46 Page 19 to 22. In close examination of the footage, the suspected running man did not run to the area in front of the AC 2 Shop, which also had a CCTV camera. Only the shadow of a man running into the shortcut which could access Mau Mau’s house was visible.

Your suspicions and speculations amount to nothing, because as I'm showing you base them in a complete lack of knowledge on the subject you are talking about.

"Why is there no footage of the accused leaving the crime scene ??? surely it exists if they did indeed do this, maybe there was footage but it didn't implicate B2"
The crime scene is on the beach, among some rocks within the tide zone, why on Earth would there be CCTV cameras there or pointing at it?  There is however footage of Wei Phyo running towards and away from it. You know, that "leaked" footage.

"- Why were police denied access to cctv footage from the bar were the two victims were supposed to have been before they were murdered, there was also a strong belief that an altercation took place there earlier that evening involving one of the victims. "
Says who that footage was denied?
Court report (which obviously you haven't read because who needs to actually learn stuff to talk about stuff, right?):
According to the CCTV footage (you know the one you say it had been deniede), the Second Deceased was found walking into the AC Bar with her friends at 00.15 hrs, whereas the Second Deceased walked into the AC Bar at 02.08.37 hrs.
Someone who knew the place mentioned in one of the previous threads that there's no CCTV inside the bar, only outside.

"- then there is the Hoe which was missing from the beach from a spot a considerable distance away from the crime scene and yet a certain person was able to conclude from its absence that - first of all it was missing and that it was the murder weapon!!!!!!!!! this was very early in the morning before any investigation had even started - oh and the person that removed the hoe is also now missing along with the Roti seller interpreter - go figure "

Other people were at the crime scene before Mon arrived, obviously they must have notice the hoe was there and then it was gone and also knew who it's owner was, that's why he would then know that it had been removed. Too logical for you? I'm still waiting to hear an explanation from you as what is the alternative besides a half boiled thought on how he may had been rearranging the crime scene... in front of lots of people taking pictures.
As for the owner of the hoe and the interpreter missing that's again vapid online speculation.

You are a perfect example of the people in the "everybody knows" camp. Bugger all, that's what they know.

Edited October 6, 2016 by AleG

[AleG]

3 hours ago, jimmybkk said:

 

You are aware that the main reason that there is debate over the validity of the DNA is mostly down to the fact that accepted procedures were not followed and protocols were not adhered to by those who decided not to involve Khunying Porntip and her team when the bodies were first discovered... right? And you are aware that this decision not to involve Khunying Porntip's division of the Department of Justice (which is a completely separate entity from the RTP forensic division, and which could be considered a 3rd party capable of conducting independent forensic analysis of the crime scene and independent collection and testing of any DNA samples taken) was a decision made by the RTP, and not by any members of the defence... right? In other words, the accusers of the B2 were the ones who decided how any crime scene evidence should be collected, who would collect it and how it should be examined, stored and analyzed. They also decided that there was no need to involve a forensic pathologist... for some reason... despite there being a forensic pathologist under the government's employ ready to leap into action for just such an occasion as this...

 

This is akin to a casino having a policy that for all cash games of poker played in the casino the dealer must be independent and unrelated to the casino where the game is being played... Except this time the casino decides to ignore this policy and instead uses their in-house dealer to deal the game... And sure enough, on the very first hand one of the "house players" gets dealt a straight flush...

 

Naturally, this creates a controversy and so now a bunch of experts get involved and give their opinions and analysis regarding the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt in a hand of poker... Which is a great distraction, but anyone who stands back and takes a look at the whole scenario can see that analysis of the likelihood of a straight flush being dealt is simply a straw man argument, intended to distract and misdirect... which ought to  be ignored....

 

So... whilst you are questioning the analysis of the DNA and the credentials of those conducting the analysis, how it was presented in court etc... the real question is: How and why was the in-house dealer allowed to deal the game in the first place, and when the cards that were dealt favoured the house, how to prove to the other players and all the spectators that everything was legit & above board, when all the signs point towards some illicit activities...?

 

The answer is that without good quality video footage of events it's impossible to prove that everything was above board, and the integrity of the hand that was dealt will always be in question. The only equitable solution is for the hand to be re-dealt using a different, unbiased dealer, a new and untampered-with deck of cards, and an independent 3rd party adjudicator overseeing all proceedings. And In any event, the non-house players should be free to get up and leave the room based on the shocking and dishonest behaviour of the house.

 

"You are aware that the main reason that there is debate over the validity of the DNA is mostly down to the fact that..."
...the people who's job is to get those two men free (regardless of whether they are guilty or not) say so.
That's all there is to it. They balked at the chance to reexamine the evidence, they wouldn't have done that if they really thought it could be discredited.

[smedly]

1 hour ago, smedly said:

This is exactly why standards and procedures exist in Justice Systems and must be followed otherwise the outcomes produced when they are not strictly followed are flawed and will not be useable.

 

The Thai police know this full well, it is exactly why certain pieces of evidence and claimed evidence have been discarded or lost or never existed,  they never expected to be called out on such matters, but never the less these issues cannot be ignored - maybe Thailand Authorities are ignoring them but we certainly are not.

 

What really bothers me is the stuff that is missing or has been omitted

 

- Davids injuries are as yet unexplained - the small puncture wounds clearly visible on his body and yet they have been generally ignored, it is the primary duty of a pathologist to conclude how these may have happened and what type of instrument caused them, it is also possible that David was clothed when he was fighting for his life, his clothes will also have damage dna and blood stains and yet - where is this critical evidence - the clothing of the two victims is gone - maybe they were taken to the laundry that morning to be cleaned because they were in such a mess 

 

- we all know about the missing DNA original samples

 

- were is the iPhone found at the crime scene, who did it belong too 

 

- Police were able to show cctv images from all over the place from before the crimes took place and yet there is nothing post crime except for the leaked running man video released to the public by the original investigation team before they were suddenly removed. I suspect there was a lot more cctv footage that was quickly destroyed because it implicated other certain people as claimed by the original removed investigation team.

 

Why is there no footage of the accused leaving the crime scene ??? surely it exists if they did indeed do this, maybe there was footage but it didn't implicate B2

 

- Why were police denied access to cctv footage from the bar were the two victims were supposed to have been before they were murdered, there was also a strong belief that an altercation took place there earlier that evening involving one of the victims. 

 

 

- then there is the Hoe which was missing from the beach from a spot a considerable distance away from the crime scene and yet a certain person was able to conclude from its absence that - first of all it was missing and that it was the murder weapon!!!!!!!!! this was very early in the morning before any investigation had even started - oh and the person that removed the hoe is also now missing along with the Roti seller interpreter - go figure

 

then we see certain people in a certain bar play acting and making fun  with a makeshift hoe on facebook like it was some big joke and you'll never catch us - disgraceful

 

 

 

 

Think about this for a moment

 

Murders are reported at around 6am - 7am, at this point all that is known is there are two bodies on the beach behind some rocks and police have not arrived on scene

 

The person who discovered the bodies (the beach cleaner) reports the finding to the resort owner Mon (brother of the village headman)

 

Mon arrives a short time later and notices the hoe (the murder weapon) missing from a spot some 50-60m from the bodies

 

That raises a very serious and obvious question

 

How on earth did he know that a missing hoe was the murder weapon ......... seriously ?

and also where it was supposed to have been left on the beach after the murders because he ordered the beach cleaner to return to where he found it earlier

 

[AleG]

21 minutes ago, DiscoDan said:

Among the first suspects were Davids friend Chris and a group of people who witnesses saw playing guitar on a log.

 

Police interviewed Chris and cleared him after dna test and a cut on his hand could clearly been seen in a recent photo he had taken with David also what police believed to be blood on a pair of his trousers turned out to stained from earth.

 

Meanwhile the suspects who were on the log have not handed themselves in to police to clear their names.

 

Police start searching for the suspects who were playing guitar they search workers accommodation and retrieve some guitars and mobile phones one of which has been smashed and left to marinade in a plastic bag full of water.

 

Police receive tipoff about a group of 9 Burmese playing takaew when police approach them 3 of them flee the scene those 3 people later turn out to be the  

WP ZL AND Maung Maung.

 

They manage to evade arrest until WP is caught trying to flee the island by hiding on a night ferry (all migrant workers had been told they were not allowed to leave the island)

 

They confess to the killings they also confess to a member of the Burmese embassy and a Human rights worker. Eventually they withdraw their confession claiming they were nearly tortured to death yet they were filmed by media on the ferry to Samui showing no signs of any physical injuries even though they claimed they had been beaten around their heads.

 

After their confessions had been withdrawn WP still admitted to finding an Iphone on the beach, first he lies to his friend and says he found it in a bar then later he admits to finding it on the beach, his friend then becomes suspicious of his story and thinks that the phone could be implicated in the murders and decides to destroy it (even though their is no report in the media of a missing phone)

 

WP & ZL after withdrawing their confessions tell police they were playing guitar smoke and drank a bottle of beer each and were so drunk they could hardly walk and on the way home and at 2am  and WP found an Iphone.

 

This later changes to them being on the beach and MM telling them he is going to see his g/f at 1am they ask him to get more alcohol so he goes back home gets a bottle of wine and returns to the B2. MM swaps shirts with WP their excuse is MM is cold. MM then goes back to see g/f and the B2 continue drinking at 2am they decide to go for a swim when they finish they cannot find their guitar WP shirt which was originally MM s shirt, and WPs sandals they then return home sleep for a couple of hours WP decides to go back to look for sandals at 4am does not find sandals but funds iPhone instead.

 

The next day the guitar that they had meant to be looking for is found in the exact place they left it WP shirt and sandals are never recovered and the bottle of wine they drunk is also found at the crime scene.

 

So why do 2 people who claim to be innocent lie about their alibi and lie to their friends about the phone ? Only an idiot would think these 2 had no involvement in the murders

 

One correction, the phone was found after their arrest, where Wei Phyo indicated. I guess some would want to believe that you can torture a phone into existence....
One addition, the hoe used as the murder weapon, the owner testified that he left it at that same log the three of them had been on that night.

[shillhater]

1 minute ago, AleG said:

"You are aware that the main reason that there is debate over the validity of the DNA is mostly down to the fact that..."
...the people who's job is to get those two men free (regardless of whether they are guilty or not) say so.
That's all there is to it. They balked at the chance to reexamine the evidence, they wouldn't have done that if they really thought it could be discredited.

 

drivel.....if the RTP had any solid evidence they would have produced it..but it all used up, lost, no money for pictures etc etc

[AleG]

1 minute ago, shillhater said:

 

drivel.....if the RTP had any solid evidence they would have produced it..but it all used up, lost, no money for pictures etc etc

 

Well, you can keep repeating that until you go blue on the face, it doesn't make it true.

For the thousandth time, it was the defense that declined to reexamine the evidence, that is a fact.

[shillhater]

Just now, AleG said:

 

Well, you can keep repeating that until you go blue on the face, it doesn't make it true.

For the thousandth time, it was the defense that declined to reexamine the evidence, that is a fact.

 what evidence?...they produced nothing...there was nothing to reexamine. 

[smedly]

3 minutes ago, shillhater said:

 what evidence?...they produced nothing...there was nothing to reexamine. 

the prosecution/police did offer up some dna evidence, it was already extracted/processed samples that could just as well have been from the saliva samples taken from the accused - in other words it is useless because it is impossible to tell were it came from

 

Only original dna samples are fit for this purpose and it no longer exists - go figure  

[shillhater]

1 minute ago, smedly said:

the prosecution/police did offer up some dna evidence, it was already extracted/processed samples that could just as well have been from the saliva samples taken from the accused - in other words it is useless because it is impossible to tell were it came from

 

Only original dna samples are fit for this purpose and it no longer exists - go figure  

as i said what evidence

 

[shillhater]

opps my bad there was one bit of evidence produced the hoe, but low and behold the accused dna was not on it..but there was dna of two other males..

[rockingrobin]

The chief prosecutor insinuated DNA had been used up

 

Thawatchai agreed, saying the BBC had misunderstood the officer and that the evidence had not been lost. However, he said, some DNA samples may have been used up in accordance with the examination process. 

"We still have specific DNA samples from the hoe," he said, without elaborating. Police had collected a hoe from a garden near the crime scene where the bodies were found and it was believed to be a murder weapon.

 

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Forensic-evidence-not-lost-police-chief-30264238.html

[samuijimmy]

This is just going around in the usual circles and going nowhere.

 

Until new information becomes available ... Topic Closed. //