Myanmar men appeal against death sentences over British murders in Thailand

[greenchair]

I thought there were 3 judge panel? 

[bannork]

25 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The trial (presiding) judge and the appeal court judge were.....er.....ahem.....one and the same.

 

greenchair gets herself endlessly confused over this case. Only last week she was claiming that the b2 had accepted their guilt and given up their appeal.

Are you sure the judge was the same for the First Court and the Appeal Court? I was told by a Thai that was impossible. What is his/her name?

[sambum]

2 hours ago, JLCrab said:

Well he offered me more money but I said not necessary because -- while there may be some people out there who could do you some damage -- no need to worry about the popinjays on ThaiVisa.

I would think that some of your flippant comments were quite amusing if they had anything to do with the topic, but I feel that while you talk about the "popinjays" on ThaiVisa, and "Headman don't pay me to follow 'Rules of Order & Decorum'."  this is your arrogant way of saying "I don't give a toss about netiquette, or being civil to people" in your posts? (Unless of course they agree with everything  you say, and you might get a "like" or even a "Ha ha").

No need for an answer on that one - you've already made it obvious by your "humourous" comment above, which I suppose we are to take tongue in cheek, while accepting your accusations and insinuations without a murmur? Or should we reply in similar vein and get our posts removed or a suspension?

Edited August 23, 2017 by sambum

[bannork]

37 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Except that there is a busload of evidence to back up the speculation, and a paucity of rather dodgy evidence to back up the conviction.

I quote, I am not talking about the topic in hand on this thread. I was replying to your off topic remark.

[greenchair]

57 minutes ago, transam said:

I thought the original judge bailed or moved on after hearing the first bit and another took over, l would of thought in cases with no jury a new trial should have taken place so one judge hears the lot, don't you...?...

But it has been going on a long time so l maybe mistaken...

 

I have had 3 cases in thai courts. 

The judge changed every time. 

In one case the judge told me to bring a document of proof the following week and the case would finish. 

When I came back the new judge had a different opinion. 

What about the poor mushroom pickers. 

But in this case. 

THEY HAD THE VICTIMS PHONE AND LIED ABOUT IT. 

There's just no explaining that away. 

[greenchair]

11 minutes ago, bannork said:

Are you sure the judge was the same for the First Court and the Appeal Court? I was told by a Thai that was impossible. What is his/her name?

I thought so too. the first judge must approve the appeal to go through to the appeal judge. 

But if he doesn't approve, you can appeal that. 

I read all of the judges reasoning on each point. I thought it was fair. 

[rockingrobin]

9 minutes ago, greenchair said:

I thought so too. the first judge must approve the appeal to go through to the appeal judge. 

But if he doesn't approve, you can appeal that. 

I read all of the judges reasoning on each point. I thought it was fair. 

The last sentence is mutually exclusive to the comments you made in post 357

Edited August 23, 2017 by rockingrobin

[Khun Han]

24 minutes ago, greenchair said:

I have had 3 cases in thai courts. 

The judge changed every time. 

In one case the judge told me to bring a document of proof the following week and the case would finish. 

When I came back the new judge had a different opinion. 

What about the poor mushroom pickers. 

But in this case. 

THEY HAD THE VICTIMS PHONE AND LIED ABOUT IT. 

There's just no explaining that away. 

 

No, they had a phone. The police had David's iPhone4s from the start. There is a photo of it, intact, on top of David's case file, which has been posted many times in these discussions.

Edited August 23, 2017 by Khun Han

[greenchair]

13 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

No, they had a phone. The police had David's iPhone4s from the start. There is a photo of it, intact, on top of David's case file, which has been posted many times in these discussions.

????

[greenchair]

22 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The last sentence is mutually exclusive to the comments you made in post 357

???

Guilty. 

Waiting for supreme acceptance. 

Then ??

??

[wakeupplease]

Fact

The first thing the BIB do is try and get you to plead guilty even though you did not do what they say you did.

 

Its only a little problem so they say

 

Then after try and hit you with more charges

 

They also try it on your lawyer and he comes out and says "just plead guilty as only a small problem if you do not you could be here for a few years and that will cost you lots of money"

 

Thais give in easy and do this so farangs should do as well they think.

 

Fight the case and they drag it out so to make you plead guilty to get away.

 

Even the women attorney at BK south office tried this on one of our friends and on court day went to his lawyer and demanded he plead guilty.

 

He had left as had enough of the lies and corruption that seems to exist in that neck of the woods.

 

The two Burmese lads probably did not get much of an education and succumbed to this, sadly it says everything about a country that is riddled with corruption .

[rockingrobin]

32 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The last sentence is mutually exclusive to the comments you made in post 357

 

8 minutes ago, greenchair said:

???

Guilty. 

Waiting for supreme acceptance. 

Then ??

??

Justice is an irrelevance , what you seek is retribution ?

[greenchair]

4 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

 

Justice is an irrelevance , what you seek is retribution ?

I really remember hanna on that beach. I wished I never looked. 

I think of her every other day. 

What she went through. 

Violated in the worst way. 

I didn't even know her. 

I can't imagine how this must be for her family. 

 

[wakeupplease]

8 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

 

Justice is an irrelevance , what you seek is retribution ?

Justice is an irrelevance , what you seek is a cover up

[greenchair]

6 minutes ago, wakeupplease said:

Justice is an irrelevance , what you seek is a cover up

Not me. 

I didn't convict them. 

I'm hoping they will get a pardon on the death. 

Even though they are categorically guilty as sin. 

[rockingrobin]

2 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Not me. 

I didn't convict them. 

I'm hoping they will get a pardon on the death. 

Even though they are categorically guilty as sin. 

I will ask a simple question

 

In post 357 I do not think murder was proved, was your comment, how do you square that up with the guilty as sin comment above

[greenchair]

24 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

I will ask a simple question

 

In post 357 I do not think murder was proved, was your comment, how do you square that up with the guilty as sin comment above

In my opinion, the prosecutor  proved they were there and seriously involved. 

He proved rape. 

He did not prove conclusively they held the hoe. 

However, in thai law, if you are in so many feet near to the crime and do not stop it, then you are as guilty, so maybe that's where the verdict came from. 

Who knows? 

It's over. 

[mommysboy]

26 minutes ago, greenchair said:

In my opinion, the prosecutor  proved they were there and seriously involved. 

He proved rape. 

He did not prove conclusively they held the hoe. 

However, in thai law, if you are in so many feet near to the crime and do not stop it, then you are as guilty, so maybe that's where the verdict came from. 

Who knows? 

It's over. 

 

That's pretty much how I read the situation.

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, greenchair said:

I really remember hanna on that beach. I wished I never looked. 

I think of her every other day. 

What she went through. 

Violated in the worst way. 

I didn't even know her. 

I can't imagine how this must be for her family. 

 

 

Then why do you spend so much time on the internet denying Hannah justice? Her family know who did what they did to her, and they know it wasn't the b2.

[baboon]

Were the Burmese lads guilty? Maybe, maybe not.

However I do NOT believe they have been proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt by an impartial court. First there was the Thai cop and his 'No Thai could do such a thing' statement, then the junta chief 'confirming' the police had the caught the right men. Both perverted the course of justice, grounds enough to release them in itself.

 

The Burmese lads should be at the very worst deported and blacklisted as 'undesirables'. Shame on any international diplomat, media figure or persons of influence for staying quiet and therefore complicit in their deaths.

[rockingrobin]

51 minutes ago, greenchair said:

In my opinion, the prosecutor  proved they were there and seriously involved. 

He proved rape. 

He did not prove conclusively they held the hoe. 

However, in thai law, if you are in so many feet near to the crime and do not stop it, then you are as guilty, so maybe that's where the verdict came from. 

Who knows? 

It's over. 

Seems strange to me how he could prove rape considering on sep17 2014 , after dna analysis they could not confirm the dna from the cigarette butt and semen samples were from the same persons

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

Were the Burmese lads guilty? Maybe, maybe not.

However I do NOT believe they have been proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt by an impartial court. First there was the Thai cop and his 'No Thai could do such a thing' statement, then the junta chief 'confirming' the police had the caught the right men. Both perverted the course of justice, grounds enough to release them in itself.

 

The Burmese lads should be at the very worst deported and blacklisted as 'undesirables'. Shame on any international diplomat, media figure or persons of influence for staying quiet and therefore complicit in their deaths.

It is an enlightened opinion.  In this argument innonence and grounds for conviction may not coincide.  In a western court I'd guess the conviction would be deemed unsafe.

[IslandLover]

3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

No, they had a phone. The police had David's iPhone4s from the start. There is a photo of it, intact, on top of David's case file, which has been posted many times in these discussions.

There is no "they".  Only one of them - Wai Phyo - was convicted of stealing the/a phone!  Regardless of whether or not it was David Miller's phone, it doesn't prove that the B2 murdered David Miller and Hannah Witheridge.

[baboon]

6 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

It is an enlightened opinion.  In this argument innonence and grounds for conviction may not coincide.  In a western court I'd guess the conviction would be deemed unsafe.

The conviction? The whole proceedings leading to the conviction were contaminated by such pejorative statements. 

No, even if these lads were the culprits, they deserve to walk free due to the incompetence of the prosecution and the biased statements as issued by both the police and the junta chief alone.

 

Actually, let the both of them be the ones to carry out the death sentence. Don't swan around in your limousines, kill them yourselves and dirty your own hands if you are that convinced...

[wakeupplease]

Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, who installed himself as prime minister, appeared to blame the victims, stating that tourists “think our country is beautiful and is safe so they can do whatever they want. But I ask: will they survive in Thailand if they dress in bikinis? [Only if] they are not beautiful.”

 

And when he later apologised for this remark, he made a second blunder, implying that foreign migrant workers, of which there are about 3,000 in Koh Tao, were guilty.

 

The man who knows everything about everything knows nothing about his big mouth and little brain

 

The police case was further damaged when the head of the Thai forensics institute, Porntip Rojanasunand, told judges DNA on a garden hoe found bloodied near the deceased did not match that of the defendants.

 

Few Thai media organisations reported from the court for much of the trial. One translator employed by Sky News said she was “warned off” helping journalists by the Thai “mafia” after working for them for one day.

Edited August 23, 2017 by wakeupplease

[TheLobster]

10 hours ago, greenchair said:

The withdrawal of confession started after a number of events. 

1.the boys confessed and told the police about Hannah's telephone that they had and confirmed video footage was them.

2. mwrn got in touch with them to see if they had been treated fairly.

3. Then the chaos on social media that the real murderer had left the country. 

4.b2 climbed on the social media wave ,withdrew the confession and told media the real murderer was far away  (as speculated by social media ).

5. When asked about all of their connection to the case phone, video, lies, why they were there, the answer has consistently been, I too drunk I not remember. 

I really think the courts gave them every opportunity to present a defense. But they couldn't do it. 

All the arrows kept leading back to them. I'm not quite sure I understand what you were meaning? 

You are lying (e.g. it wasn't Hannah's phone) and a truly sick person - I'm not providing examples in future comments I'm just sick to death of the crap that you are posting. 

 

10 hours ago, Krenjai said:

The outcome was decided when Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamem was replaced three years ago.

Agreed 

 

10 hours ago, transam said:

And YOU still do not understand that if one is innocent they must stand by their innocence, but folk like you think one must tell lies .......Dear oh Dear.....

Agreed

 

9 hours ago, IslandLover said:

As an expat resident of Koh Tao no doubt you have "vested interests" too.   

Agreed

 

8 hours ago, greenchair said:

The poster is flipping the fundamental principle that the prosecution proved their case with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused was not able to show any reasonable doubt. That has already been confirmed by 2 court rulings that both said they accepted the submission of both sides and found the balance well in favour of guilt. The fight is over. They were found guilty. 

You are a sad and sick individual given that you make a post such as this that the prosecution 'proved their case beyond reasonable doubt' The same court the same decision,

 

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

The trial (presiding) judge and the appeal court judge were.....er.....ahem.....one and the same.

 

greenchair gets herself endlessly confused over this case. Only last week she was claiming that the b2 had accepted their guilt and given up their appeal.

Agreed

 

5 hours ago, bannork said:

Are you sure the judge was the same for the First Court and the Appeal Court? I was told by a Thai that was impossible. What is his/her name?

Yes

 

5 hours ago, Khun Han said:

No, they had a phone. The police had David's iPhone4s from the start. There is a photo of it, intact, on top of David's case file, which has been posted many times in these discussions.

Correct but more 'evidence' was needed.

 

4 hours ago, greenchair said:

Not me. 

I didn't convict them. 

I'm hoping they will get a pardon on the death. 

Even though they are categorically guilty as sin. 

BS

 

3 hours ago, greenchair said:

In my opinion, the prosecutor  proved they were there and seriously involved. 

He proved rape. 

He did not prove conclusively they held the hoe. 

However, in thai law, if you are in so many feet near to the crime and do not stop it, then you are as guilty, so maybe that's where the verdict came from. 

Who knows? 

It's over. 

BS

[JLCrab]

On 8/22/2017 at 10:22 PM, Khun Han said:

 

It can't be easy to find high-quality people to do that kind of job, especially when the boss is a violent psychopath, and the job is to provide media cover for a serial killer. It's not really on a similar level to spamming the internet with fake approvals for a restaurant or hotel, is it?

Well every time on here that I mention that nobody who claims to have firsthand information on what happened has come forward, people come forward not to say that they have firsthand information, but people come on here say that THEY KNOW people with first hand information as to what happened but those friends of theirs are too scared and afraid for their livelihoods to come forward. So the big guy said that's a pretty quality job right there. That's just what he wants.

 

That I wrote that the one person most adamant that they know people who were right there on the scene that night, also wrote on ThaiVisa of their extended conversation with their late mother's ghost, sent him into prolonged belly laughter.

 

Heck when I even got one guy to write that, if I want to understand life on Koh Tao, I should talk to people in North Korea, he said doesn't get much better than that. He said that's just what he wants them to think.

Edited August 23, 2017 by JLCrab

[bannork]

I am still waiting for the name of the judge that, according to some posters, presided over both  the First Court and Appeal Court.

[GOLDBUGGY]

On 8/21/2017 at 0:30 PM, Artisi said:

Definitely not guilty, but the hang-em high brigade will be along soon once comfortable on their bar stools.

This should hit the post count well into the hundreds by the weeks end. 

I have followed this case from the very begining, like many other people here. I have heard countless times these guys are innocent of this crime. Claims of DNA being tampered or falsified with no proof other than them saying they wanted them as scapegoats. Young Boys are innocent becasue they look innocent. Are too small to hit some bigger guy with a hoe, even when it would be 2 against one. And so on! 

 

I have yet to see any Rock Solid Evidence, like a Good Alibi, which doesn't place them at the scene of the crime on the time and night it happened, or anything solid proof it was not them. But I have seen plenty to not only suggest but indicate with certainty, it was them! 

[AGareth2]

3 hours ago, bannork said:

I am still waiting for the name of the judge that, according to some posters, presided over both  the First Court and Appeal Court.

why?