Myanmar men appeal against death sentences over British murders in Thailand

[JLCrab]

By posting that picture JLCrab was trying to indicate it was a pretty crummy guitar that nobody would bother stealing.

[IslandLover]

11 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

By posting that picture JLCrab was trying to indicate it was a pretty crummy guitar that nobody would bother stealing.

Bet Sean doesn't think so.   

[JLCrab]

Who knows? But since you brought it up, do you think he was the guilty party?

[TheLobster]

On ‎24‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 5:28 PM, greenchair said:

Oh rubbish. 

I'm saying there was a lot against them. They had the victims phone. 

In order to win a case you must have reasonable rebuttal to defend. They tried that twice. It didn't work. Their best bet is to beg for mercy or die. 

That's the way it is. Complain all you like. It won't change that fact. 

There wasn't much apart from hearsay by the police

 

On ‎25‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 1:29 AM, wakeupplease said:

My friend cigarettes where not use to kill, the hoe was said to be the weapon and the DNA on that was not from the boys, so many in the know have said, so who"s DNA was on the Hoe and other locations?

Absolutely

 

On ‎25‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 1:57 AM, GOLDBUGGY said:

I am sorry, and I really don't mean to be so questionable, but what is it that makes this Hoe, if it is the weapon that was involved in these murders, so important, as to not having DNA or Fingerprints on it? It is not just you but I keep seeing this come up time and time again.

 

I mean that if I clubbed you with a Garden Hoe, or anything else like that, while I was standing next to an Ocean, would it be so hard to believe that I then threw this Hoe into the Salt Water, and one reason why there was no Fingerprints or my DNA, on this Hoe? 

 

I mean even a 10 year old knows about Fingerprints and wiping them off after use. So what is this fashionation that people keep bringing up, that DNA and Fingerprints were not found, which can easily be wiped off after use. Is it because this old news is totally new to everyone else? 

You are clearly intellectually challenged as if it was all 'wiped off' then why was David's and Hannah's DNA found on the hoe + one other?

 

On ‎25‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 3:53 AM, JLCrab said:

Well it seems to me that all this talk about chain of custody, DNA lab not certified, crime scene not secured, evidence mishandled and other plays out of the OJ Simpson defense handbook are not working with this court.
Maybe time to try something else.

It has been the same local court/judges so far so no one expected any different. The main hope has always been a judgement by honest non-locals.

 

On ‎25‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 2:25 PM, greenchair said:

Yes, the continued arguments are pointless. I believe them guilty. 

But it's my personal opinion. 

Still I would hate to see them executed. The "team" needs to change its tactic and focus on changing the death penalty. Though it may be too late now. 

Changing their plea seems to be a very popular concept for the Koh Toa protagonists, and I'm pretty sure that would be the ideal scenario for you whatever your motives may be .........

[jing jing]

On 8/23/2017 at 2:46 AM, greenchair said:

They were 19 years old and told  by a group of lawyers there was no evidence and thousands believe them to be innocent. 

They were told there was no case.

So they withdrew.  

That was before everyone found out about the victims phone, the video that was indeed them, their proximity to the crime, their belongings left at the crime. 

And they went back to the crime to clean up. 

They told the lawyers they had a beer at the beach and went back to the room at 1 o'clock. We all thought that. 

The evidence showed they were guilty. They fooled themselves and lost. 

Use your common sense.

 

They pled not guilty because they knew there was absolutely no way their DNA would match the samples taken from Ms. Witheridge.  That was the entire case.

 

What nobody on the defense accounted for was that actual, credible DNA evidence would not be required to convict them; just the word of the RTP that there was a match was deemed sufficient by the court.

 

Amazing Thailand!

[JLCrab]

5 hours ago, TheLobster said:

It has been the same local court/judges so far so no one expected any different. The main hope has always been a judgement by honest non-locals.

Well that was silly since most everyone on ThaiVisa will tell you that, when big money is involved, there is no such thing as an honest Court in Thailand. Maybe the Supreme Court will see things differently but most on here also don't see much chance in that -- you know that 'face' thing etc.

Edited August 26, 2017 by JLCrab

[Nofaithleft]

On 21/08/2017 at 1:30 PM, NCFC said:

How do you know what the British police think, other than their statements?

 True.... off the record and only when satisfied no phones were recording 

[Nofaithleft]

On 24/08/2017 at 9:17 AM, Father Fintan Stack said:

We know and have proof that the BiB have executed foreign diplomats in central Bangkok, and killed women and children to cover up their crimes.

 

We know and have proof that the BiB have executed foreign tourists, and with the help of their colleagues in the force, escaped overseas to avoid punishment. 

 

We know and have proof that the BiB have planted evidence in cases of murder of foreigners before, in order to obtain convictions of innocent people. 

 

We know and have proof that the BiB kill people in their custody.

With all this knowledge and evidence of criminal activity, you ask us to take them on their word that the DNA was all done properly, with no proof of that being the case whatsoever? Bearing in mind, further, that the DNA report was scribbled on an A4 piece of paper (unacceptable reporting in any way, shape or form), results were obtained in an impossibly short period of time, and all samples were conveniently 'used up' (destroyed or gone).

 

I know what I think. 

Despite the embalming process U.K were able to collect DNA samples from the deceased.... 

[JLCrab]

You folks can discuss DNA all you want. On this very topic there was one person who claimed to have friends in the bar that night and saw all that went down right up to the crime and another who offered what would have to be a nearly eyewitness account of the crime itself.

So good old-fashioned evidence is (presumably) out there.

[rockingrobin]

4 hours ago, JLCrab said:

 

Well that was silly since most everyone on ThaiVisa will tell you that, when big money is involved, there is no such thing as an honest Court in Thailand. Maybe the Supreme Court will see things differently but most on here also don't see much chance in that -- you know that 'face' thing etc.

 

The judgement has wider ramifications beyound this case

As the original court commented , the lack of chain of custody was irrellevant , being a matter of differing administrative procedure ,although it failed to address the issue of missing and lost evidence.

If the court had ruled that the procedures was not equivalent to the standards required, then it would leave the justice system open to numerous challenges from previous decisions that had used forensic evidence as a basis for its judgements

[greenchair]

2 hours ago, Nofaithleft said:

Despite the embalming process U.K were able to collect DNA samples from the deceased.... 

Oh really? more please 

[JLCrab]

18 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The judgement has wider ramifications beyound this case

<snip>

Well excuse me for not seeing the big picture. However, I am an old-fashioned shoe-leather kind of evidence guy and if there are eyewitnesses to refute the Prosecution's case then that overrides any DNA or mishandling of lost misplaced or un-chained evidence.

 

We've been told by parties on here and in newspaper claims by the Defense that there are witnesses. So where are the witnesses?

[JLCrab]

I don't have any kids .. and I unlike those with an angel's voice, I don't sing.

But if one of my hypothetical kids was charged with a murder he didn't commit when I knew that there were eyewitnesses who could prove that he didn't do it, I don't know how I would've dealt with the complacency that everyone seems willing to be content with on here.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[rockingrobin]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I don't have any kids .. and I unlike those with an angel's voice, I don't sing.

But if one of my hypothetical kids was charged with a murder he didn't commit when I knew that there were eyewitnesses who could prove that he didn't do it, I don't know how I would've dealt with the complacency that everyone seems willing to be content with on here.

According to Mon there was an eyewitness , was that not the reason they chased sean into the supermarket

[transam]

9 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I don't have any kids .. and I unlike those with an angel's voice, I don't sing.

But if one of my hypothetical kids was charged with a murder he didn't commit when I knew that there were eyewitnesses who could prove that he didn't do it, I don't know how I would've dealt with the complacency that everyone seems willing to be content with on here.

You still can't grasp the fact that folk that may know stuff on a small island where they try to make a living were to talk then perhaps a big problem for them...And you reckon they would talk for you if it was your kid..?......

[JLCrab]

So what you do if it were YOUR kid and you knew there were eyewitnesses who could exonerate your kid but who wouldn't come forward and YOUR kid remained on death row, HUH?

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[bannork]

I find it strange that since that day Sean McAnna  has remained silent.

[transam]

4 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

So what you do if it were YOUR kid and you knew there were eyewitnesses who could exonerate your kid but who wouldn't come forward and YOUR kid remained on death row, HUH?

I would not be saying HERE hang him, as YOU and another are....You and another are either daft or bait-ers, can't figure out which.....

[JLCrab]

I have said repeatedly going back almost 3 years that I did not think the Prosecution had a case that merited proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[transam]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I have said repeatedly going back almost 3 years that I did not think the Prosecution had a case that merited proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

So why do you and another keep inferring the B2 should be strung up...?

 

Is it because there seems to be nobody else to take revenge on....?

[JLCrab]

REDUX:

So what you do if it were YOUR kid and you knew there were eyewitnesses who could exonerate your kid but who wouldn't come forward and YOUR kid remained on death row, HUH?

[transam]

1 minute ago, JLCrab said:

REDUX:

So what you do if it were YOUR kid and you knew there were eyewitnesses who could exonerate your kid but who wouldn't come forward and YOUR kid remained on death row, HUH?

What I could, but for sure YOU and another would be getting some severe verbal as YOU would want him strung up as you have obviously shown here regarding the B2.....

[JLCrab]

I once again going back almost 3 years have said that the Prosecution has not provided a case that merits proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can find the contrary elsewhere, please do.

[stephenterry]

Let's make it clear. Had I been living on Koh Tao and an eye-witness to the murders of anyone there, if I even didn't fear for my life, I would certainly protect my family from retribution, even knowing I was morally wrong in not whistle-blowing in the knowledge that the cops cannot be trusted and the powerful families less so. Any media report would be disregarded as hear-say, just like your views, JLC. Even if I was a potential court witness, no doubt, I'd be feeding fish before the hearing. 

 

Now, is that crystal, JLC why no witnesses would come forward? So please cease bleating on ad infinitum why no witnesses have come forward. Or take it one step further - had it been you as an eye-witness with a family living on Koh Tao, what would you do?

[JLCrab]

I would tell my family that we are going to visit their grandmother in Kalamazoo Michigan never to return to Koh Tao and then sell my eye-witness story to one of the tabloids in the UK who has run multiple stories on the evils of Koh Tao however 'no one is willing to talk'.

Then at least if a Royal Pardon is in order there would be something on the record as to what an eyewitness account of the two murders would reveal.

But that's if I or anyone else would actually be a viable eyewitness. But based on what gets posted on here, if there actually were first hand witnesses out there THEY would already be fish-food including the B2.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[JLCrab]

No I won't shut up. There's a Supreme Court decision and a potential Petition for Royal Pardon in the offing. Great material.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[lkv]

Awesome! Great stuff!

Edited August 27, 2017 by lkv

[rockingrobin]

12 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I would tell my family that we are going to visit their grandmother in Kalamazoo Michigan never to return to Koh Tao and then sell my eye-witness story to one of the tabloids in the UK who has run multiple stories on the evils of Koh Tao however 'no one is willing to talk'.

Then at least if a Royal Pardon is in order there would be something on the record as to what an eyewitness account of the two murders would reveal.

But that's if I or anyone else would actually be a viable eyewitness.

It would account to no more than hearsay.

The court would not be able to guage the eyewitness credibility , as the statement would be made not under oath and without being able to be cross examined

[JLCrab]

I am talking about a Petition for a Royal Pardon in which the Rues of Procedure would not be the same as in the Judicial Courts. And if I was a first-hand observer it would not be hearsay.

The Appeals for the 3 Courts have already been submitted.

And given the threat to my family this and time and who knows for how many future times, I wouyld just get out. Maybe some can live that way. I could not.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[stephenterry]

15 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

But that's if I or anyone else would actually be a viable eyewitness. But based on what gets posted on here, if there actually were first hand witnesses out there THEY would already be fish-food including the B2.

That's not logical. An eye-witness who remains silent is not a threat, and the B2 being scapegoats, also not a threat.

 

5 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I am talking about a Petition for a Royal Pardon in which the Rues of Procedure would not be the same as in the Judicial Courts.

According to Thai law, for prisoners who are faced with death penalty, the petition for pardon shall be filed within 60 days from the date of the promulgation or rendition of the judgment. Whether the Appeal process renders the initial judgement as being 'open' is debatable.