Myanmar men appeal against death sentences over British murders in Thailand

[JLCrab]

Why take the chance they would have some epiphany get some high level protection and be scooted out in the dead of night? Why take the chance some eyewitness might have a change of heart?

But all presumes that there are such eyewitnesses or that the B2 have anything that could sink the powers that be.

... and a case isn't 'final' until all the available appeals have been completed.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[transam]

7 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Why take the chance they would have some epiphany get some high level protection and be scooted out in the dead of night? Why take the chance some eyewitness might have a change of heart?

But all presumes that there are such eyewitnesses or that the B2 have anything that could sink the powers that be.

... and a case isn't 'final' until all the available appeals have been completed.

Lets hope your input here has not been taken into consideration eh...

[JLCrab]

The best defense for an eyewitness is not to exist.

[transam]

11 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

The best defense for an eyewitness is not to exist.

Depends what country you reside.....

[JLCrab]

There are two possible reasons why no eyewitnesses that might exonerate the B2 have come forward: There are eyewitnesses but they think as outlined a few posts above or that they don't exist.

Take your pick.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[transam]

6 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

There are two possible reasons why no eyewitnesses that might exonerate the B2 have come forward: There are eyewitnesses but they think as outlined a few posts above or that they don't exist.

Take your pick.

Wonder if I am the only one that feels a little bit sorry for you.....?

[JLCrab]

That's OK You guys remind me of the last line of the old saw (Wilde, Churchill, Shaw?)

We've already established what you are -- we're just trying now to set a price.

[transam]

1 minute ago, JLCrab said:

That's OK You guys remind me of the last line of the old saw (Wilde, Churchill, Shaw?)

We've already established what you are -- we're just trying now to set a price.

Oh well, crack on chap........

[jing jing]

6 hours ago, JLCrab said:

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.

Hearsay at best.  The DNA was there but chain of custody was (intentionally) not maintained so there was (conveniently) nothing for the defense to test.

 

Notwithstanding the opinions of a bloodthirsty few, the RTP's word ought not to be sufficient evidence to convict and sentence two young men to death by.

[jing jing]

Crab, your arguments are as pointless as they are repetitive.  One can only assume you take some perverse pleasure in winding folks up.

 

Yes, you are a master baiter ... there, are you happy now?

 

:-p

[JLCrab]

Eyewitness is not hearsay. Hearsay is somebody told you what happened.

[jing jing]

1 minute ago, JLCrab said:

Eyewitness is not hearsay. Hearsay is somebody told you what happened.

Somebody told you there was an eyewitness.  I call that hearsay.

[Rimmer]

A troll post has been removed

[JLCrab]

i have never said that there are eyewitnesses. All I have ever said is that if there are eyewitnesses who haven't come forward or there were in fact no eyewitnesses, how could you tell the difference?

But as long as you guys like hypotheticals, I think of what it must be like to be the two Burmese sitting on death row knowing that there are people out there who could potentially exonerate them but they choose to do nothing.

[jing jing]

1 minute ago, JLCrab said:

i have never said that there are eyewitnesses. All I have ever said is that if there are eyewitnesses who haven't come forward or there were in fact no eyewitnesses, how could you tell the difference?

But as long as you guys like hypotheticals, I think of what it must be like to be the two Burmese sitting on death row knowing that there are people out there who could potentially exonerate them but they choose to do nothing.

Why are you so obsessed with these non-existent eyewitnesses?  Is it a voyeuristic thing or what?

[JLCrab]

Because if the detailed scenario that has been posted on here in this very topic is true, someone must have observed that someone who was not by some accounts really there was actually there ... unless they weren't there.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[jing jing]

13 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Because if the detailed scenario that has been posted on here in this very topic is true, someone must have observed that someone who was not by some accounts really there was actually there ... unless they weren't there.

And your point is.....?

[JLCrab]

That the late Ms. Witheridge arrived Koh Tao 12 SEP so for the 3 whole days she was with fellow travels from UK and elsewhere and not one person even since returning home has reported that they saw anybody hassling or confronting their friend.

[jing jing]

7 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

That the late Ms. Witheridge arrived Koh Tao 12 SEP so for the 3 whole days she was with fellow travels from UK and elsewhere and not one person even since returning home has reported that they saw anybody hassling or confronting their friend.

Which leads you to what conclusion?  Either they didn't see it or didn't report it, so... what?

[JLCrab]

If you want to believe that her fellow travelers knowing what happened to their friend did not somehow report it either to officials or to the media, well up to you.

But it has been enlightening knowing all the reasons why persons might who know something that could help exonerate two persons on death row would choose not to do so.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[greenchair]

4 hours ago, bannork said:

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

I have watched that video many times. The way he roles is eyes and the long blinks are classic actions of a lier being careful not to trip over himself. 

For a moment when he talks about the murders, his eyes close for a few seconds and for a moment it looked as if he might break down. 

For myself, I believe he was there, right along with Muang Muang. 

 

[jing jing]

8 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

If you want to believe that her fellow travelers knowing what happened to there friend did not somehow report it either to officials or to the media, well up to you.

But it has been enlightening knowing all the reasons why prosper who know something that could help exonerate two persons on death row would choose not to do so.

I have never claimed to believe that anyone witnessed anything.  The accused and the perpetrators - if indeed they are not the same persons - may well be the only people alive who know for sure whether or not those two young men on death row deserve to be there.  The police know what happened to the original DNA samples but they aren't telling.

[sambum]

40 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

That the late Ms. Witheridge arrived Koh Tao 12 SEP so for the 3 whole days she was with fellow travels from UK and elsewhere and not one person even since returning home has reported that they saw anybody hassling or confronting their friend.

Hannah's sister was threatened, and her family was offered money to keep quiet -  from The Telegraph:-

 

 "Miss Witheridge claimed that she had received death threats and that her family was offered money to keep quiet after the murders. She accused the Thai authorities of “covering-up” the killings of other Western tourists on Koh Tao." 

 

Possibly, the same thing happened to her fellow travellers WHILE they were in Thailand?

 

And by the way, the above statement by Hannah's sister also makes nonsense of the statement that both families were satisfied with the investigation as was reported in an earlier post!

 

And I for one am getting fed up of going round in the same old circles - it must be obvious to anybody with an ounce of intelligence that the investigation was flawed from the moment the Crime Scene was corrupted, and subsequent blunders should have meant that the case was thrown out of court. However, it wasn't, which makes one think that it was cut and dried before it even got there (See my earlier Post No #470), and yet you keep defending the judgement in spite of all the mistakes that were made. I really wonder what your comments would be if you fell foul of the law here, and were treated the same way as the B2? 
 

Edited August 27, 2017 by sambum

[balo]

If Sean were completey innocent he would come forward or write a book about what happened on KT . His complete silence in this case , except the one interview we have seen makes you wonder. Not a word from him.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, balo said:

If Sean were completey innocent he would come forward or write a book about what happened on KT . His complete silence in this case , except the one interview we have seen makes you wonder. Not a word from him.

He has history...

[jing jing]

3 minutes ago, balo said:

If Sean were completey innocent he would come forward or write a book about what happened on KT . His complete silence in this case , except the one interview we have seen makes you wonder. Not a word from him.

If I were to speculate, I'd say he may well have some information that could put his life in jeopardy.

[JLCrab]

I have said many times that personally I do not believe that the B2's trials or appeal established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JLCrab

[sambum]

2 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I have said many times that personally I do not believe that the B2's trials or appeal established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Unbelievable!

[JLCrab]

It's on the record.

[sambum]

20 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

It's on the record.

I am completely stunned that you have the audacity to virtually agree (now that the B2 have been proven guilty and sentenced to death) that they did not have a fair trial!!!

 

Coming from you after all your previous insinuations that the B2 were as guilty as sin, your previous post can almost be construed as the work of a troll, as the current topics of disagreement seem to be almost exhausted and they have all been covered before at great length.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2017 by sambum