Liverpool Lou

Come on, is there any country that does not impose import tax on (luxury) items imported? It's about the tax that is due, it is not just "about the money".

Welcome to a country, just like every other country, that imposes import tax on imported items!

Where, specifically, did it state that "he was placed at the scene of the attack"? Wasn't his vehicle just seen in the area?

But it is not 'in isolation' is it? There is evidence placing him at the scene. If he has confessed also, that is enough to hold him while a case is developed. He can be held for 48 hrs. Your statement 'No prosecutor will ever indict based on nothing more than just a confession' cannot be supported. People have been executed based on confessions! It is in isolation. There may have been CCTV of him in the area but that is not evidence of his attacking the woman. "Your statement 'No prosecutor will ever indict based on nothing more than just a confession' cannot be supported". Sorry, but it's a fact, that you don't agree does not mean it cannot be supported. No prosecutor/AG would indict solely on an admission with no other evidence at all. "There is evidence placing him at the scene". Not exactly, there was CCTV of his vehicle being in the area, there has been no mention of his "being at the scene of the attack" specifically. There may have been other people/vehicles seen in the area also, they are not being accused of the attack, are they? My point being that someone's presence in the area is not evidence of their being the attacker. "People have been executed based on confessions!" I'm sure that you can name just one that has been indicted and executed based 100% on a confession and no other evidence whatsoever?

I'm not "supportive of the Thai police", I am supportive of justice. My feelings about this case are irrelevant, the only thing that matters to a prosecutor, or to a court, is evidence and in this case, so far the police have said that they have none. "..how you'd feel if it was your wife/daughter that was attacked". How would you feel if, say, your son/brother/father was accused of this attack and the police tried to take him to court with no evidence against him, as in this case?

Yes it is, usually the best evidence there is! Most certainly a person can be charged based on a confession. We also have evidence of the guy being there at the time of the incident. He didn't retract it.... ! A confession, in isolation, is not evidence, never mind "the best there is" as it can be retracted at any time, leaving the prosecution with no case. No prosecutor will ever indict based on nothing more than just a confession. CCTV evidence of his being in the area, and nothing more, is not evidence of his attacking her.

No, it is not and, on it's own, it is not enough evidence to indict. He can retract it!

What about his admission that he did it? What about it? With nothing else, the case wouldn't get anywhere. He could just stand up in court and say, "no, I did not do it", and with no other evidence he'd be getting a taxi home.

No, I didn't say that, either. If the police have nothing more than an initial admission in the police station, no empirical evidence against him and no testimony from the woman, then they have no case and no prosecutor would issue an indictment so there would no legal justification for the police to detain him. It does not matter what you, me or anyone "feels" about him, prosecutors need to see evidence.

Why not if the police have no evidence against the accused, as they claim in this case?

And was the video evidence of his vehicle withdrawn too? I did not hear that his confession was retracted.. did you? Set him free to perpetrate further violence on women seems to be supported here! You mean CCTV evidence of his vehicle just being in the area? That's not evidence of an attack and sure wouldn't get an indictment from the AG's office without anything else. You think that the police have evidence against him although they have stated that, without the woman's testimony, they haven't? I did not say that his admission had been retracted, I said that it could be, meaning that if he had, there would be no case against him, so far.

The Burmese on Koh Tao retracted the confession. There was little to no evidence against them. There was enough evidence initially to get an indictment, something that does not happen with no evidence as in this case, so far. And this case has not been closed.

They had a confession to this case and he admitted to previous crimes, yet still released him. You are way off track here! They can catch you for DUI here Friday and keep you locked up until Monday when the courts open! "They can catch you for DUI here Friday and keep you locked up until Monday when the courts open!" Only if they have evidence, something that has been stated as lacking in this woman's case. Confessions can be retracted!

The report also clearly stated this... " and one case of a ballot sheet being issued to a person who is ineligible to vote". "rather illegible voter". A voter with bad handwriting? What are you going on about, doc?

Would anyone notice You're referring to members of this forum?

I wouldn't worry about it! It probably would be removed for examination during the post mortem, though.

I am sure that his confession would have been enough, had they wished it to be. With no other evidence, no, it would not be, it wouldn't even be enough for the prosecutor to issue an indictment, the case would not get to court without evidence. What if he retracted his confession?

Document the termite infestation with photos and show them to the owner and ask him to sort it. I'm surprised that you didn't have anything done about the termites two years ago if you were aware of the problem then.

It would be an even bigger farce if the case went to trial with no evidence apart from his initial admission that can be retracted at any time.

So where do you get the 99.99 % from the government? And what about the ones that have been attacked that don't want to talk about it. Do you think this is really a good idea to let this guy go? "So where do you get the 99.99 % from..." I worked it out for myself based on the number of visitors Thailand gets in normal times, approximately 39,000,000. It's probably higher than 99.99% unless you think that there are 3,900+ such attacks on tourists confirmed each year! The "ones who are attacked and don't want to talk about it" are, by definition, nothing more speculation on your part. "Do you think this is really a good idea to let this guy go?" Not if there is any evidence against him, no, I do not. If there is evidence, and apparently there isn't, he cannot be held, obviously, whether anyone likes it or not.

I don't know or care, but you can find it in the article about his arrest. How is your social life, you asking me questions on many topics? "I don't know or care..." Maybe you should stop posting false information, then. How is your social life, you asking me questions on many topics? Don't worry about my social life, it's fine, thanks but the number of odd things that you so frequently claim may suggest something about yours! This is a forum, if you post comments don't be surprised if you get responses.

Gawd...another nail in that coffin that Thaivisa posters can never get closed, possibly because the numbers of visitors to Thailand are increasing every day now things are starting to get back to pre-Covid normal.

With what authority, or are you suggesting kidnap, abduction and false imprisonment to get him hospitalised? Maybe you should give up your medical career and start your own law practise!

You seem to be ignoring the fact that, at this stage, there is apparently no evidence against him, nor any testimony from the victim, yet. The case isn't closed, though.

It's never enough, on it's own, to prosecute, anywhere, unfortunately.