Appeals Court upholds death penalty for Koh Tao murders

[evadgib]

2 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

On another thread here on TVF is a story of a Russian girl gone missing from Koh Tao. Over 15 days now and the news article only surfaced today. Seems like Koh Tao and bad publicity don't gel.

 

So, being cynical it could be that death island has struck again.  

This is what I was referring to but as yet nothing sinister has materialised. When the BP was mentioned I thought it had.

[Eligius]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

The confirmation by the Court of Appeal of the conviction and death sentence of the two Burmese men, Wai Phyo and Zaw Lin, for the murders of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller on the Thai island of Koh Tao will not have surprised many.

The fact that the appeals court ruling was read out in secret and the lawyers told about it later is, in the context of the Thai court system while barely credible, may also have raised a few eyebrows.
But neither should be great surprises in the context of the Thai judicial system.

The fact that the 200-page appeal was dismissed (*in which it was argued there was no legal DNA evidence on the killers on Hannah or David; no evidence linking a mobile phone of the victims to the Burmese, no evidence of rape, no evidence of DNA evidence of the accused on the murder weapon, a hoe, but DNA evidence of other male persons) only indicates that the Thai courts are following a predetermined course.

 

Here is a translated summary of the major points of the appeal by defence lawyer Nadthasiri Bergman LL.M.

 

A 198-page appeal on behalf of the accused Burmese defendants in the Koh Tao murder trial has been filed with the Region 8 Court of Appeals on Koh Samui, Thailand. I regret that the pro bono defence team does not have the $5,500 budget necessary to pay for a proper translation into English. 
This ground-breaking case is the first in the history of the Thai justice system where police forensic evidence was challenged by the defence and forced to be independently retested. As we feel it is vitally important the content of this public document be made known to the world at large, I have summarized and translated several of the strongest points of the defence’s arguments into English, and mention a few points of concern not addressed in the appeal as well.
Police claimed DNA collected from the scene was sent to Singapore for testing and determined the suspects were Asian. Thai police experts later stated this race determination was only revealed by testing at Prince of Songkla University hospital lab twenty days after the suspects were arrested. It was later revealed DNA samples were never sent to Singapore. Regardless, this set the stage for racial profiling of potential suspects.
The defendants were arrested on unrelated charges, questioned about the murder before having an attorney present and their statements were entered as part of the prosecution’s evidence. This is a violation of Thai law and grounds for dismissal of the case.
DNA samples from both accused were collected without consent and before they were informed of the murder charges.
During interrogation, police appointed a hostile interpreter who could not read Thai. The defendants were never properly advised of the murder charges nor their rights under Thai law.
Both accused testified they were stripped naked by police during interrogation and physically assaulted including punching, kicking, plastic bags over their heads, genital attack etc. Wound and bruise evidence of torture was confirmed by three doctors and one detainee witness.
Chain of custody of mobile phone was never provided, no photo of where it was found etc.
Fingerprints of the accused on the mobile phone identified as belonging to one of the victims were never produced as evidence, raising the question of whose fingerprints may have been found on the phone. In fact, there was no forensic evidence presented by the prosecution connecting the mobile phone to the accused.
Prosecution claims the accused motive for murder was arousal as a result of encountering the victims having sexual intercourse on the beach. The small abrasion found in the victim’s vagina during autopsy could easily have been a result of sexual intercourse between the victims.
Thai autopsy was not able to determine if intercourse had taken place before or after death. Therefore, prosecution was not able to prove rape had taken place.
Thai autopsy results for both victims was only a four page typed summary by the doctor. The legally required autopsy file documenting the procedure with step-by-step photos and point-by-point analysis was never presented.
In stark contrast, the British autopsy report fully documented and presented the entire procedure with step-by-step photos and point-by-point analysis by the forensic pathologist in charge.
The incision discovered inside the victim’s vagina was determined by British autopsy to have been caused during the Thai autopsy, not a result of sexual assault.
DNA files presented had the accused names on them rather than a proper sample reference number. This is not possible without pre-knowledge of who’s DNA the sample being tested belonged to.
Retesting of the handle of murder weapon found DNA matching the male victim, but DNA matching neither of the accused was discovered. Originally police claimed there was no DNA evidence found on the handle of the murder weapon.
After results of DNA found on the handle of the murder weapon was disclosed in court to be from the male victim, prosecution admitted they had also found DNA matching the male victim on the handle of the murder weapon, but no DNA matching the accused. This case damaging evidence had not been introduced by the prosecution and raises the question of what other potentially case damaging evidence may have been withheld such as clothes of the victims allegedly not tested for DNA and why blood in the sand at the murder scene allegedly produced no DNA results, etc.
Multiple procedures are required to meet ISO 17025 international standards in DNA testing. The chain of custody, method of testing, graph generated and case notes resulting in the analysis report produced are all required to allow an independent expert to verify the results. Only the results of the test without any required supportive documents was provided by the prosecution witness.
Police claimed a 100% DNA match with the accused from samples allegedly taken from the victim’s body. This is scientifically impossible in any forensics testing laboratory anywhere in the world. For example, swabs taken from the victim would contain a minimum of three different DNAs producing what is known as a “mixed sample”. Mixed samples can be the most difficult to interpret, and from which a 100% match is never possible.
Thai forensic scientist Dr. Porntip’s DNA testing listed the statistical probability of a match on the results report. None of the prosecution’s DNA results presented indicated a statistical probability on the results reports. The “100% match” was only delivered verbally in court by a prosecution witness.
Above are the main points argued by the defence team as to why the two accused should be found not guilty. There were other important points about the case which were not included as part of the defence’s appeal such as;
CCTV footage of the only pier with boats leaving the island in the hours immediately after the murders was allegedly not examined by police. The accused already admitted they were in the vicinity at the time of the murders, therefore this important point had nothing to do with evidence presented in court related to the accused so it was not included in the appeal;
Blond hairs found in Hannah’s hand were confirmed in court to not belong to either of the victims or the accused. Since the hair was not evidence linking the accused to the crime, it was not included as part of the appeal. While it is direct evidence linking someone else to the crime, the question of who the hair belonged to remains a mystery and an important point, but not one the defence could use in the appeal.
It is the opinion of the defence team that the prosecution’s requirement of proving guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt has clearly not been met. The defence believes this case should be dismissed and the defendants immediately released from custody.

Sincerely,

Nadthasiri Bergman LL.M. Esq.""

Superb post, Stephenterry.

 

The way the 'law-enforcement' and judicial authorities in this country just dismiss any and all evidence that does not suit their agenda is staggering and mind-blowing. There is a mountain of misdeeds and unprofessionalism committed by the 'police' and other seniors in this tragic case, but never mind - none of that matters at all in the eyes of the great guardians of 'Thai morality' and (to quote the new Constitution) 'the good morality of people'. The Burmese Two are still guilty - no matter that there has been one breach of legal codes and professionalism after another after another after another.

 

For all this evidence that shows that in a civilised land the Burmese Two would have no case to answer - for it all to be shoved aside at the sweep of a judicial pen - is outrageous.

 

Those of us who have lived in Thailand many years have seen this way of behaving so many times: lie, dismiss, ignore, obfuscate, laugh, lie and lie again. In Thailand - it works (if you hold the power).

 

So (in an imaginary scenario): we have very clear, high-resolution film footage of an easily recognised man robbing a bank. If it suits the Authorities, they can simply say: 'No. We don't accept that film footage'. Or: 'That film footage has been lost.' Or - just ignore it and say nothing about it - and then drag in a guy who is clearly not the perpetrator and pin the bank robbery on him. And nothing ever happens! There is no rule of law here at all. 

 

When people hold unchecked and unqualified power (as certain sectors do in this land), they can say and do the most absurd, outrageous and shocking things imaginable and get away with it. Just say: 'The court does not accept this counter-evidence'. Case closed. All done and dusted. The Authorities have spoken. They could be presented with a whole string of Ph.D. experts and Nobel Prize winners in science who tell them: 'Your prosecution evidence is a complete joke - flawed from first to last - it cannot withstand even five minutes of scrutiny'. But the Thai Authorities would still say: 'We reject such claims'. That's it! No need to rebut or disprove the experts' insistent, reasoned and logical arguments - just say 'We reject what you say.'

 

Utterly disgusting.

 

 

 

 

 

[thetruth revealer]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

The confirmation by the Court of Appeal of the conviction and death sentence of the two Burmese men, Wai Phyo and Zaw Lin, for the murders of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller on the Thai island of Koh Tao will not have surprised many.

The fact that the appeals court ruling was read out in secret and the lawyers told about it later is, in the context of the Thai court system while barely credible, may also have raised a few eyebrows.
But neither should be great surprises in the context of the Thai judicial system.

The fact that the 200-page appeal was dismissed (*in which it was argued there was no legal DNA evidence on the killers on Hannah or David; no evidence linking a mobile phone of the victims to the Burmese, no evidence of rape, no evidence of DNA evidence of the accused on the murder weapon, a hoe, but DNA evidence of other male persons) only indicates that the Thai courts are following a predetermined course.

 

Here is a translated summary of the major points of the appeal by defence lawyer Nadthasiri Bergman LL.M.

 

A 198-page appeal on behalf of the accused Burmese defendants in the Koh Tao murder trial has been filed with the Region 8 Court of Appeals on Koh Samui, Thailand. I regret that the pro bono defence team does not have the $5,500 budget necessary to pay for a proper translation into English. 
This ground-breaking case is the first in the history of the Thai justice system where police forensic evidence was challenged by the defence and forced to be independently retested. As we feel it is vitally important the content of this public document be made known to the world at large, I have summarized and translated several of the strongest points of the defence’s arguments into English, and mention a few points of concern not addressed in the appeal as well.
Police claimed DNA collected from the scene was sent to Singapore for testing and determined the suspects were Asian. Thai police experts later stated this race determination was only revealed by testing at Prince of Songkla University hospital lab twenty days after the suspects were arrested. It was later revealed DNA samples were never sent to Singapore. Regardless, this set the stage for racial profiling of potential suspects.
The defendants were arrested on unrelated charges, questioned about the murder before having an attorney present and their statements were entered as part of the prosecution’s evidence. This is a violation of Thai law and grounds for dismissal of the case.
DNA samples from both accused were collected without consent and before they were informed of the murder charges.
During interrogation, police appointed a hostile interpreter who could not read Thai. The defendants were never properly advised of the murder charges nor their rights under Thai law.
Both accused testified they were stripped naked by police during interrogation and physically assaulted including punching, kicking, plastic bags over their heads, genital attack etc. Wound and bruise evidence of torture was confirmed by three doctors and one detainee witness.
Chain of custody of mobile phone was never provided, no photo of where it was found etc.
Fingerprints of the accused on the mobile phone identified as belonging to one of the victims were never produced as evidence, raising the question of whose fingerprints may have been found on the phone. In fact, there was no forensic evidence presented by the prosecution connecting the mobile phone to the accused.
Prosecution claims the accused motive for murder was arousal as a result of encountering the victims having sexual intercourse on the beach. The small abrasion found in the victim’s vagina during autopsy could easily have been a result of sexual intercourse between the victims.
Thai autopsy was not able to determine if intercourse had taken place before or after death. Therefore, prosecution was not able to prove rape had taken place.
Thai autopsy results for both victims was only a four page typed summary by the doctor. The legally required autopsy file documenting the procedure with step-by-step photos and point-by-point analysis was never presented.
In stark contrast, the British autopsy report fully documented and presented the entire procedure with step-by-step photos and point-by-point analysis by the forensic pathologist in charge.
The incision discovered inside the victim’s vagina was determined by British autopsy to have been caused during the Thai autopsy, not a result of sexual assault.
DNA files presented had the accused names on them rather than a proper sample reference number. This is not possible without pre-knowledge of who’s DNA the sample being tested belonged to.
Retesting of the handle of murder weapon found DNA matching the male victim, but DNA matching neither of the accused was discovered. Originally police claimed there was no DNA evidence found on the handle of the murder weapon.
After results of DNA found on the handle of the murder weapon was disclosed in court to be from the male victim, prosecution admitted they had also found DNA matching the male victim on the handle of the murder weapon, but no DNA matching the accused. This case damaging evidence had not been introduced by the prosecution and raises the question of what other potentially case damaging evidence may have been withheld such as clothes of the victims allegedly not tested for DNA and why blood in the sand at the murder scene allegedly produced no DNA results, etc.
Multiple procedures are required to meet ISO 17025 international standards in DNA testing. The chain of custody, method of testing, graph generated and case notes resulting in the analysis report produced are all required to allow an independent expert to verify the results. Only the results of the test without any required supportive documents was provided by the prosecution witness.
Police claimed a 100% DNA match with the accused from samples allegedly taken from the victim’s body. This is scientifically impossible in any forensics testing laboratory anywhere in the world. For example, swabs taken from the victim would contain a minimum of three different DNAs producing what is known as a “mixed sample”. Mixed samples can be the most difficult to interpret, and from which a 100% match is never possible.
Thai forensic scientist Dr. Porntip’s DNA testing listed the statistical probability of a match on the results report. None of the prosecution’s DNA results presented indicated a statistical probability on the results reports. The “100% match” was only delivered verbally in court by a prosecution witness.
Above are the main points argued by the defence team as to why the two accused should be found not guilty. There were other important points about the case which were not included as part of the defence’s appeal such as;
CCTV footage of the only pier with boats leaving the island in the hours immediately after the murders was allegedly not examined by police. The accused already admitted they were in the vicinity at the time of the murders, therefore this important point had nothing to do with evidence presented in court related to the accused so it was not included in the appeal;
Blond hairs found in Hannah’s hand were confirmed in court to not belong to either of the victims or the accused. Since the hair was not evidence linking the accused to the crime, it was not included as part of the appeal. While it is direct evidence linking someone else to the crime, the question of who the hair belonged to remains a mystery and an important point, but not one the defence could use in the appeal.
It is the opinion of the defence team that the prosecution’s requirement of proving guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt has clearly not been met. The defence believes this case should be dismissed and the defendants immediately released from custody.

Sincerely,

Nadthasiri Bergman LL.M. Esq.""

What a scenario !!!

Better then any Hollywood Movie !!!!

 

 

[bannork]

So why did the defence team not call Jane Taupin, the Australian expert in DNA for forensic science, to the stand to testify about irregularities in the DNA collection?

And why did the British detectives sent to review the investigation not raise any questions about the DNA evidence too?

[evadgib]

11 minutes ago, thetruth revealer said:

What a scenario !!!

Better then any Hollywood Movie !!!!

Just a thought for all that have done it; Was the e-n-t-i-r-e quoted post necessary to make this point? Its an eyesore for everyone else to wade through...

Edited March 4, 2017 by evadgib

[stephenterry]

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

So why did the defence team not call Jane Taupin, the Australian expert in DNA for forensic science, to the stand to testify about irregularities in the DNA collection?

And why did the British detectives sent to review the investigation not raise any questions about the DNA evidence too?

I got the impression that the court (at that time) really knew sod all about DNA evidence, and that JT could have been seen as an interfering Farang who would embarrass/confound the judges, this being Thai sensitivities in play. But you'd have to ask the defence team on that.

As to the British detectives, it seemed they were spoon-fed by the RTP, and didn't carry out any investigation themselves. Again you would need to ask them that.   

[Eligius]

13 minutes ago, thetruth revealer said:

What a scenario !!!

Better then any Hollywood Movie !!!!

 

 

You are right, my friend: it is like  a piece of dreadful Hollywood fiction. Except that tragically this particular scenario is TRUE and involves REAL living persons (the Burmese Two), whose lives are now hanging in the balance ...

[evadgib]

14 minutes ago, bannork said:

And why did the British detectives sent to review the investigation not raise any questions about the DNA evidence too?

The lack of social media updates to Joe Public is no indication that they didn't.

[MorristheRunt]

8 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I got the impression that the court (at that time) really knew sod all about DNA evidence, and that JT could have been seen as an interfering Farang who would embarrass/confound the judges, this being Thai sensitivities in play. But you'd have to ask the defence team on that.

As to the British detectives, it seemed they were spoon-fed by the RTP, and didn't carry out any investigation themselves. Again you would need to ask them that.   

Personally I thought the British Police force appearance was an utter disgrace and brought shame to the said police force and to the British Prim minister David Cameron whom sent them.

 

They never at any time had the intention to investigate or even make a public statement.

 

A total and utter waster of British tax payers money.

[MorristheRunt]

One thing I don't understand is why the British media have not got stuck into this crime/investigation?

 

The UK once upon a time had incredible investigative journalists who would have had a field day with this story.

 

 

[sanemax]

2 minutes ago, MorristheRunt said:

Personally I thought the British Police force appearance was an utter disgrace and brought shame to the said police force and to the British Prim minister David Cameron whom sent them.

 

They never at any time had the intention to investigate or even make a public statement.

 

A total and utter waster of British tax payers money.

To be fair, the British Police force only went to observe the proceedings

They were only allowed, by the Thai authorities to attend, on the condition that they only observed , didnt interfere and  didnt publicly comment about the case .

   

[Eligius]

Just now, MorristheRunt said:

One thing I don't understand is why the British media have not got stuck into this crime/investigation?

 

The UK once upon a time had incredible investigative journalists who would have had a field day with this story.

 

 

My suspicion is - and it is nothing more than a suspicion, based on the totally pointless British police visit to Koh Tao - that the British Government has put politics and trade ahead of decency and morality - and decided not to blow open this whole scandal on an international scale, as only an entire major government could do. It's very sad - indeed, appalling (if true). Thailand is not the only corrupt nation on earth (although here the blatant, shameless, in-your-face HUGE daily corruption is astonishing) ....

[bannork]

So who did the blonde hair Hannah was clutching belong to? Presumably that means not dyed, ie a Westerner.

And has no journalist tried to chase up the Scottish  guitarist with blood all over his guitar since he fled to Italy/ 

[sanemax]

26 minutes ago, bannork said:

So why did the defence team not call Jane Taupin, the Australian expert in DNA for forensic science, to the stand to testify about irregularities in the DNA collection?

And why did the British detectives sent to review the investigation not raise any questions about the DNA evidence too?

 

   The defence called Thailands top DNA expert top the stand to question irregularities

   The British detectives were not part of the investigation or the trail , they were just observers  

[MorristheRunt]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

To be fair, the British Police force only went to observe the proceedings

They were only allowed, by the Thai authorities to attend, on the condition that they only observed , didnt interfere and  didnt publicly comment about the case .

   

Agreed, but once they flew back in their luxurious tax payer funded leather business class seats, they could have made a brief statement in the UK saying they had doubts about evidence and the way the investigation was handled.

 

I am a layman, and even the day after the murders , I observed pictures of the crime scene with a chief suspect coming and going as he pleased, the bodies of the two victims still in place...that is simply outrageous and shocking.

 

[bannork]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

 

   The defence called Thailands top DNA expert top the stand to question irregularities

   The British detectives were not part of the investigation or the trail , they were just observers  

So why did they fly Jane all the way from Australia to Thailand to testify?

If the British police were forbidden from commentating or suggesting what was the point of coming?

[MorristheRunt]

The blonde hair indeed

 

How can any Police investigation have ANY CREDIBILITY when blonde hair is found in the females victims hands and has "never" been identified.  <deleted>!!!!

[Eligius]

2 minutes ago, MorristheRunt said:

...

 

I am a layman, and even the day after the murders , I observed pictures of the crime scene with a chief suspect coming and going as he pleased, the bodies of the two victims still in place...that is simply outrageous and shocking.

 

You are so right, MorristheRunt: everything about this case is 'outrageous and shocking'. I honestly cannot think of a more 'outrageous and shocking' example of evil cover-up and frame-up (from the TOP down) than we see in this case ...

[MorristheRunt]

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

So why did they fly Jane all the way from Australia to Thailand to testify?

If the British police were forbidden from commentating or suggesting what was the point of coming?

British Politics bullshit.

[MorristheRunt]

5 minutes ago, Eligius said:

You are so right, MorristheRunt: everything about this case is 'outrageous and shocking'. I honestly cannot think of a more 'outrageous and shocking' example of evil cover-up and frame-up (from the TOP down) than we see in this case ...

Unfortunately I can.

 

The young British lady murdered in Chang Mai several years ago.....Same , Same   but different.

 

If as a foreigner in Thailand , you have the grave misfortune to be murdered/attacked by a 'Elite" Thai, you will not get justice

 

KIRSTY JONES that was the young ladys name, go and read up about that case if you don't know about it....just as shocking and as sad as this one.

 

The respect I have for Kirsty mother has no bounds, she knows the investigation was a crock, and simply won't give up.

 

MR and MRS Miller take note

 

Edited March 4, 2017 by MorristheRunt

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, MorristheRunt said:

Agreed, but once they flew back in their luxurious tax payer funded leather business class seats, they could have made a brief statement in the UK saying they had doubts about evidence and the way the investigation was handled.

 

I am a layman, and even the day after the murders , I observed pictures of the crime scene with a chief suspect coming and going as he pleased, the bodies of the two victims still in place...that is simply outrageous and shocking.

 

The UK didnt want to break the "no commenting" agreement with the Thai authorities, because it would jeopardise any future co operation.

     

[bannork]

1 minute ago, MorristheRunt said:

The blonde hair indeed

 

How can any Police investigation have ANY CREDIBILITY when blonde hair is found in the females victims hands and has "never" been identified.  <deleted>!!!!

Presumably because they cannot find a match. There are unidentified DNA  and hair samples languishing in freezers all over the world because they can't find a match.

How many blonde haired tourists on Koh Tao that night? Hundreds? and probably gone on the first boat in the morning if involved.

[Eligius]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

The UK didnt want to break the "no commenting" agreement with the Thai authorities, because it would jeopardise any future co operation.

     

'Co-operation' with a bunch of Thai criminals is not worth the paper it is not written on!

[bannork]

Maybe the British police know more than anyone on this site does.

[MorristheRunt]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The UK didnt want to break the "no commenting" agreement with the Thai authorities, because it would jeopardise any future co operation.

     

Cooperation in what??

 

Backing a military junta for what gain?

 

Even more interesting!!

[MorristheRunt]

5 minutes ago, bannork said:

Presumably because they cannot find a match. There are unidentified DNA  and hair samples languishing in freezers all over the world because they can't find a match.

How many blonde haired tourists on Koh Tao that night? Hundreds? and probably gone on the first boat in the morning if involved.

Maybe because the hair MYSERIOUSLY DISSAPEARED, along with a lot of other substantial evidence.

 

[evadgib]

13 minutes ago, bannork said:

Maybe the British police know more than anyone on this site does.

The numbers expecting Entebbe- style raids never ceases to amaze. There are strict protocols to be observed re crimes abroad and they include input and cooperation from the host nation. Without it you're pretty much screwed, at least in the short term...

Edited March 4, 2017 by evadgib

[MorristheRunt]

Haircuts, hair styles and hair colours , I wonder in the RTP investigated anyone whom suddenly changed their hair style/colour after the murders?

[AGareth2]

I typed a post many moons ago

find out who the hair belongs to

and you have found one of the murderers

[MorristheRunt]

6 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

I typed a post many moons ago

find out who the hair belongs to

and you have found one of the murderers

The RTP, and more importantly Officer Mayam knew exactly who's hair that was, along with the phone found on the beach....both items then amazingly vanish into thin air and said Officer promoted and transferred before he finishes the biggest investigation of his career....No suspicion there then!!

Edited March 4, 2017 by MorristheRunt