Koh Tao murders: OM convinced of guilt Zaw and Win
Bangkok Post opens today with the news that the two Myanmar migrant workers suspected of murdering two British tourists in September on the holiday island of Koh Tao are being charged today in Koh Samui Provincial Court.
The OM says it has hard evidence for the rape of the woman and the murder of both, including DNA, camera images and witness statements, recorded in the police file of nine hundred pages.
The conviction of the OM is in stark contrast to that of human rights groups and the embassy of Myanmar, who believe that Zaw Lin (21) and Win Zaw Htun (21) are being abused as scapegoats.
The opening article contains little further news and mainly chews on the previous history.
The only news item concerns the visit of lead researcher Suwat Jaengyodsuk to a subcommittee of the National Human Rights Commission. And it was about time, because the police had already turned down four invitations.
Suwat strongly denied that the suspects were tortured to extract a confession (which they later retracted). All services involved in the investigation had operated professionally, he said. The interpreter who was present during the police interrogations had not mistreated them, as the two Myanmarese said. Well, that's all old news too.
(Source: bangkok mail, December 4, 2014)
John says,
* what do those “human rights groups” as well as the Embassy of Myanmar have to support their “conviction”; quote in advance see nothing here, nothing at all, except for the self-interested “credibility” of two super suspects who: 1° have confessed
2° have reconfirmed this once again with the reconstruction in the eye of hundreds of spectators, who
3° suddenly accuse the police and the interpreter of (little specified) “torture”. . . ?
* what the Public Prosecution Service has in its hands, on the other hand, is completely sufficient with:
1° semen in the body of the victim with a DNA match with those of both suspects
2° the typical refusal by these suspects of a second expertise of their DNA offered to them
Which then adds up:
3° DNA from saliva on a cigarette butt of the brand “LM” discarded on site
4° video images of one of the suspects who bought cigarettes of the brand “LM” in a local mini-market the same evening
The only thing that could be maintained, strictly theoretically but scientifically, is guilt in the rape, but innocence in the murder!
But who is going to believe something like that? . . . especially that a person must then be present who was present at that time of night and in that deserted place. . . and, moreover, would have a motive to bash the skulls of both victims. .
Criticism of the police and Thai authorities is unfounded and even misplaced because they did wonderful and quick work (compare this with the French police in the comparable Caroline Dickinson case).
Moderator: Comment on the article and not on each other that is chatting.
Point 2 the suspects didn't even know the exact location?
The police had to show them the place for the reconstruction?
Thai police did not want to hand over DNA to Scotland yard why?
A few days have passed between the murders and then with a cigarette butt full of DNA, find it fantastic but little credible?
The lady had already had sexual contact with whom hours before?
Everything indicates they had to find scapegoats so as not to harm tourism, but if you read the newspapers
reads abroad no one believes anything from the Thai police (who are said to be completely corrupt)
according to research and movements and arrests of top police officers that have just come to light
then it is difficult to believe what they claim to be the truth, isn't it?
My opinion is irrelevant, everyone has to decide for themselves what is possible, maybe it's the truth?
But, not just the Public Prosecution Service:. . . everyone is convinced of the guilt of the two Burmese suspects!
From the moment semen is found that matches a person's DNA, it cannot be disputed either scientifically or legally that sexual intercourse has taken place; The only objection to an accusation of “rape” would be that the intercourse took place with full consent. Confessing or denying sexual intercourse itself is therefore completely legally irrelevant. As such, in this case, any motive for the Thai police to torture a suspect in order to obtain (completely unnecessary!) confessions from him lapses. In the Koh Tao drama, DNA material was found in the vagina of both suspects: they now deny both the sexual intercourse (say, the rape) and the murder. A worse case for their defense can hardly be imagined and it is time that the smear campaign against the Thai police, media and social media, stops now.
Coral