Picture courtesy of Amarin

 

A former deputy government spokesperson has raised fresh concerns over Thailand’s forensic investigation standards after a major discrepancy in vehicle-speed calculations emerged in a high-profile accident case. The issue has intensified public scrutiny after the court ruled that foreign expert findings carried “the most weight,” highlighting significant shortcomings in domestic forensic procedures. The conflicting data have fuelled questions about accuracy, reliability and transparency in cases with national attention.

 

The case file shows two sharply opposing sets of speed estimates presented during the investigation. The first, supported by a central traffic expert with over 30 years’ experience, a court-appointed speed specialist and Dr Saiprasit, previously involved in the case, placed the vehicle at “not more than 80 km/h.” The second, calculated by Pol Col Thanisit Tangchan from the forensic division, put the speed far higher at 177–180 km/h, and this figure was initially used during the early prosecution process.

 

The extreme divergence prompted the court to call in Prof Hermann Steffan, an international accident-reconstruction specialist, to independently verify the technical evidence. Using physics-based calculations, digital reconstruction software and real-world crash testing, Steffan concluded that the actual speed was between 76–79 km/h, closely aligning with the findings of the three Thai experts. The court stated his methodology was “highly credible” and that the results were “very close to the real event.”

 

In contrast, the court ruled that the 177 km/h estimate produced by Pol Col Thanisit was so inaccurate that it was “unreliable and inadmissible.” His later recalculation of 79.22 km/h raised further concerns about how the initial numbers were produced and whether the re-examination process was sufficiently transparent. Academic specialists in justice policy say the episode exposes structural weaknesses in Thailand’s forensic system, including an overreliance on individual opinion, the absence of independent review teams and the lack of full disclosure of raw data.

 

Amarin reported that the incident adds pressure on state agencies to clarify how forensic evidence is evaluated and whether Thailand is prepared to upgrade its systems to verifiable, science-based standards. Authorities now face growing public expectations for more robust safeguards to prevent major discrepancies that could undermine confidence in high-stakes investigations. The case is likely to influence future calls for reform as stakeholders push for clearer procedures and more transparent forensic practices.

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Conflicting speed calculations in a high-profile accident case have raised concerns over Thai forensic reliability.

• A foreign expert’s findings aligned with three Thai specialists and were deemed most credible by the court.

• The episode has intensified pressure for structural reforms and greater transparency in forensic processes.

 

 

 Adapted  by  Asean Now from Amarin 2025-12-07

 

 

At 177 km/h you'd think people would notice

I don't trust forensics too in Thailand.. The RTP is known for its not willing to work and do their job, and corruption. Several cases have doubts just as the Koh Tao murders,  the Boss, red bull heir case, many suicides without decent evidence, all the brake failures, which are only in Thailand the cause of many accidents.;, and this example is another one.. probably to prevent a high sentence the evidence is adapted to make it less worse.. Any way the RTP will claim that they have a shortage of officers, but in reality it is the lack of motivation to do their work properly

If memory serves me, was this not the same in the red bull case, initial speed calculations from the RTP were below the speed limit, only to be found to be way off when the data was examined by outside experts. That was probably data manipulation rather than inaccurate calculations though.

 

fuelled questions about accuracy, reliability and transparency

 

Only to be expected 

5 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

His later recalculation of 79.22 km/h raised further concerns about how the initial numbers were produced and whether the re-examination process was sufficiently transparent.

Maybe he had an agenda? Possibly the recalculation simply copied results of others? So many questions, so little time...

Off topic posts removed

Nothing to do with forensics... it's more about corruption.

17 minutes ago, chuang said:

Nothing to do with forensics... it's more about corruption.

 

The best estimates money will buy?

There have been many mistakes with Thai Forensics over the years ,and i use

that term loosely , I suspect there  are some in prison due to  mistakes , and

some that should be in prison that got away with crimes ,due to shoddy work,

intensional or not depending on your station in life .

 

regards worgeordie

The teenagers in my forensics classes are trained to do a better job than this. A basic understanding of the physics of objects in motion colliding, is essential.

Surprise Surprise 

On 12/7/2025 at 3:17 AM, scubascuba3 said:

At 177 km/h you'd think people would notice

Money blinds some people

I always suspected that this was the case as the RTP is drastically underfunded, both in terms of equipment technology and salaries for policemen. If this nation is serious about moving forward, and being taken seriously, it's going to have to come up with trillions of baht, to modernize the RTP, and pay a decent living wage so the cops won't be compelled to turn their jobs into a franchise.

 

Otherwise they will remain an institution that is not taken seriously on any level. 

On 12/7/2025 at 4:07 AM, Georgealbert said:

In contrast, the court ruled that the 177 km/h estimate produced by Pol Col Thanisit was so inaccurate that it was “unreliable and inadmissible.”

It is very good that this idiot has been made to lose an awful lot of face.  Even so, it still isn't enough lost face.

 

Is it possible that every conviction resulting from calculations from this idiot can now be quashed or at least re-opened to being re-done by people, who know what they are doing or are less corrupt?

 

And the idiot needs publicly fired and discredited immediately!

Add it to the list along with health and safety procedures, but expect nothing to happen. Accountability or responsibility tends to be avoided in Thai culture and if you have enough cash people involved in investigations or forensics are only to willing to delay, or damage evidence, for some filthy lucre. 

 

Took them this long to see it, regardless nothing is going to be d9ne🤣

On 12/7/2025 at 3:07 AM, Georgealbert said:

shortcomings in domestic forensic procedures.

 Very much so, as winessed in the Koh Tao double murder and the wrongful conviction of the 2 Burmese lads  Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun .

On 12/7/2025 at 3:17 AM, scubascuba3 said:

At 177 km/h you'd think people would notice

very briefly notice

And we are expected to trust thai forensic testing of an alledged Cambodian phone  and "newly" laid mines.... I seem to recall, some years ago  a female thai forensic "expert" and her dept were also publicly discredited... producing falsified results, to obtain the results the RTP wanted.

On 12/7/2025 at 3:07 AM, Georgealbert said:

 

Picture courtesy of Amarin

 

A former deputy government spokesperson has raised fresh concerns over Thailand’s forensic investigation standards after a major discrepancy in vehicle-speed calculations emerged in a high-profile accident case. The issue has intensified public scrutiny after the court ruled that foreign expert findings carried “the most weight,” highlighting significant shortcomings in domestic forensic procedures. The conflicting data have fuelled questions about accuracy, reliability and transparency in cases with national attention.

 

The case file shows two sharply opposing sets of speed estimates presented during the investigation. The first, supported by a central traffic expert with over 30 years’ experience, a court-appointed speed specialist and Dr Saiprasit, previously involved in the case, placed the vehicle at “not more than 80 km/h.” The second, calculated by Pol Col Thanisit Tangchan from the forensic division, put the speed far higher at 177–180 km/h, and this figure was initially used during the early prosecution process.

 

The extreme divergence prompted the court to call in Prof Hermann Steffan, an international accident-reconstruction specialist, to independently verify the technical evidence. Using physics-based calculations, digital reconstruction software and real-world crash testing, Steffan concluded that the actual speed was between 76–79 km/h, closely aligning with the findings of the three Thai experts. The court stated his methodology was “highly credible” and that the results were “very close to the real event.”

 

In contrast, the court ruled that the 177 km/h estimate produced by Pol Col Thanisit was so inaccurate that it was “unreliable and inadmissible.” His later recalculation of 79.22 km/h raised further concerns about how the initial numbers were produced and whether the re-examination process was sufficiently transparent. Academic specialists in justice policy say the episode exposes structural weaknesses in Thailand’s forensic system, including an overreliance on individual opinion, the absence of independent review teams and the lack of full disclosure of raw data.

 

Amarin reported that the incident adds pressure on state agencies to clarify how forensic evidence is evaluated and whether Thailand is prepared to upgrade its systems to verifiable, science-based standards. Authorities now face growing public expectations for more robust safeguards to prevent major discrepancies that could undermine confidence in high-stakes investigations. The case is likely to influence future calls for reform as stakeholders push for clearer procedures and more transparent forensic practices.

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Conflicting speed calculations in a high-profile accident case have raised concerns over Thai forensic reliability.

• A foreign expert’s findings aligned with three Thai specialists and were deemed most credible by the court.

• The episode has intensified pressure for structural reforms and greater transparency in forensic processes.

 

 

 Adapted  by  Asean Now from Amarin 2025-12-07

 

 

What forensics? Results are based solely on the amount of money that is handed over , or pressure from the top of the government- just look at the 2 innocent Burmese guys , who have spent 10 plus years in jail. - due to money, and a corrupt government that did want it’s tourism industry decimated by having Thai suspects charhlged and jailed, the system is a farce, and everyone know it !