Scotland Yard appears to have backed the Thai police investigation into the murders of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller on the island of Koh Tao, it is being reported today.

And the families of Hannah, 23, from Great Yarmouth and David Miller from Jersey have issued a statement expressing confidence in the investigation.

The statements are a blow to the defence.

Statement from the family of Hannah Witheridge

UK detectives travelled to Thailand last month to observe and review the murder case of our precious daughter Hannah, and also that of David Miller. We would like to thank the officers who travelled to Thailand to review the case and the Royal Thai Police for facilitating their visit. 

Since their return we have been able to meet with these officers together with our family liaison officers to learn about the investigation. There is a great deal of detail and vast areas of investigative work which has been shared with us. We respect the need for such detail not to be shared publically before Royal Thai Police start their trial process. 

We would like to stress that as a family we are confident in the work that has been carried out into these atrocious crimes and want to remind both press and public that they do not have the full facts to report and make comment on at this stage. Current news reporting is causing undue distress to our family. 

We ask as a family, as we have throughout, that we are afforded privacy and that Hannah and David are afforded their dignity during this time of immense pain and difficulty. 

Our thoughts, as always, are with the Miller family. Together we stand united and focused on seeing a fair and transparent trial process to bring about justice for our beautiful children.

Statement from the family of David Miller.

We would like to express our relief that progress is being made in Thailand and this case is finally coming to court. 

We would like to reiterate our gratitude to the UK Metropolitan Police, who received the co-operation of the Royal Thai Police in undertaking an independent review into the investigation. 

The evidence collected by the Royal Thai police will be presented at court and we hope the suspects are granted a fair and transparent trial. We are thankful of the over-sight of pressure groups such as Reprieve and Amnesty. 

In the meantime however, we ask that the speculative theories circulating on social media are not taken as fact. These interpretations are based on incomplete evidence and substantial conjecture. 

The increasing sensationalism of this story in the media is emotionally hurtful to us and appears to be wide of the mark. 

The support for the Myanmar suspects has been strong and vocal, but please do not jump to conclusions until you have considered the evidence from both sides in full. 

From what we have seen, the suspects have a difficult case to answer. The evidence against them appears to be powerful and convincing. They must respond to these charges, and their arguments must be considered with the same scrutiny as those of the prosecution.
Please remember that this is above all a story of two wonderful young people, David and Hannah, killed in the prime of their lives in a senseless and brutal way.

Further speculation should be put aside until all the evidence is made public and appropriate conclusions can be drawn. 

We remain united with the Witheridge family in our shared grief.
Ian Sue and Michael Miller

CSI LA campaign

In Thailand there has been widespread disbelief in the Thai police version of events and a Facebook site CSI La has been the most vociferous in saying that the two Burmese 21-year-old migrant workers now facing trial for the murders and rape of Hannah are ‘scapegoats’ for Thais.

Although the families have so far not entered a joint prosecution this is a major blow to the defence who had asked the British families for assistance and put out an appeal for witnesses.
Scotland Yard have made no statement, but it is expected that officers will testify at Hannah’s inquest in January.

Publicity surrounding the case has revealed Koh Tao as not quite the paradise island it has been depicted with local families holding great power both politically and locally.

And it has fixed a glaring spotlight on the Samui Archipelago about which foreign governments, Britain included, have had to revise their ‘travel advisories’ in harsher detail.


  1. The timing of their announcement is evidently deliberate. Quite why they chose to do this remains to be seen but one must assume the Metropolitan Police were satisfied that what they were told and shown during their visit established the evidence was gathered in accordance with good practice and was sufficiently strong to justify prosecution.
    One just hopes they had got their 'eye in' before they began to assess the case but, frankly, I don't think they did.
    The Burmese have had their chips well and truly fried and before the "trial" has even started.
    Whoever orchestrated this in the UK, well done!

    1. Social media shouldn't play a role whatsoever in the judicial system
      Apart from prejudgment on actors involved, a dangerous environment is created in this case, as dangerous as the actual killings…namely……that the culprits walk free due to a public outcry instead of being judged by facts, evidence in a court of law.
      Again everyone has his/her story to tell, but most are spillovers from a bandwagon of scapegoats theory.
      Journalism indeed,should follow the trail…unfortunately even AD couldn't resist fueling an already out of social media controlled fire!
      BTW….they are yet to appear in court!

    2. Having covered a whole series of murders of British people in Thailand Jerrold in two of which police tried to set up Burmese and in all they accused foreigners I have made it no secret that I am very sceptical of these Thai police investigations – and this one is no exception. They have appeared many times in court btw.

  2. Lest there are those who may be in some doubt, it is manifestly clear that the pronouncements made by the families of the deceased have been orchestrated by the Foreign Office and, given the timing which Andrew has stated to be only days before the trial begins, one must assume that it has been done so as a diplomatic favour to the Thai. I wonder if if it has at all dawned on the families that they have been used.

  3. Political decision most likely ss in the case of Schappelle Corby. Sandy Mitchelle, and many others held prisoner with no Government help due to arms deals or Government debt. How much does UK owe Thailand? Why ruin relations when the easy option is there for everyone. Job done. Thailand breathes again. If Britain cant help their own citizens locked up innocent in a Saudi prison so not to upset the Saudi Government, how can we expect them to help two Burmese when Britain is in so much debt to Thailand

  4. I respect the families call for media restraint. Perhaps they should also have some sympathy for the Burmese who may have been wrongly accused. It may also have been better for them not to have released what Scotland Yard "told" them until after the trial is over. As with the families, I don't go along with speculation or conspiracy theories, but there are genuine factual reasons to dispute the Burmeses guilt. The Coroner anyway may take a different view if he can publicise the evidence laid before him.

    And George, I don't assume the Met was satisfied at all. What they think and what they have to say are two entirely different things.

  5. To keep good relations between countries and ensure investor confidence did come to my mind!
    Who cares for a few poor Burmese if there is so money and reputation at stake…..
    Sadly, very few really care for those poor souls!

    1. Sadly you are 100% correct and even sadder is the fact that these parents have been used NOW, two corrupt Governments. How can anyone even mention the words Fair Trial.
      Its disgusting and dont be surprised if the death penalty is carried out because their guilty verdict has just been signed by brainwashed parents

  6. Thanks, "leave Thailand…"

    At last someone is picking up on my previous comments on the government debt as the real reason for this diplomatically contrived unfairness

    And Jerrold, AD is absolutely right to bring cases like this into the open. He has a track record of exposing rather a lot of what is gong on in Thailand. He is not pre-judging, Jerrold, he is reporting what he sees. Nothing wrong with that sort of professional journalism when we have a free press.

  7. I see a lot from the defence case,but how did sperm from the two of them get inside the woman? were they rendered unconscious and had it removed?. DNA might be easily transplanted ,but sperm ? Then the case of boiling water being used as a torture method,lets us see some scarring,for sure it does leave considerable scar tissue.

    1. We only have the police to tell us the samples collected from both the victim and the accused are valid. And remember the head of forensics , Dr Porntip has stated the scene was not administered properly and one ( former ) suspect was even photographed tromping about on the site the morning of the discovery.
      From what I read in the BBC report the family is thanking the UK team, and simply asking for speculation to stop, not that they are convinced of the Myanmar mens' guilt.

      Claims of boiling water was from friends treated as witnesses, and was documented with pics.
      The accused only state coercion, threats of death presumably- ( allegedly OK , AD ? )

  8. Correct – pictures were taken of the Burmese scald marks. But the accused the police of physical assault and NHRC examined the claims and believed there was sufficient evidence to call several different police departments in all. I do not understand Teddy's point of DNA, Of course sperm can be transferred but nobody has suggested that has happened as police did in the Kirsty case.

  9. Now I am no Sherlock Holmes,but the murdered guy was no small character,he was big and strong looking at pics,the only way these two could have managed to render him incapable of defending himself was to have been battered from behind by that wooden stick that was found nearby.The site of the murder now hardly matters,the evidence is with the body of the woman,DNA and sperm. DNA can be transferred merely by a tissue wipe,one subject to the next. Sperm will be the difficult one to explain

Comments are closed.