I've been following two news stories on TV.

1 about a guy named Paton Crispin

The other about the Farang killing in Pie

In both of them the posts are obviously so biased and based upon personal feelings, preconceived notions and predjudices. NOT ON FACTS BUT JUST RUMORS

Anyway am thankful in Thailand there are no trials by jury. Also optional in US so defendant can elect to have a trial by jury or by judge. If I were ever charged with a crime there is no way I would want a trial by jury. My God just look at you people!!

I've served on a Grand jury once and several petit juries in the US.

My decision about jury trial was made up after serving on juries.Seeing the posts from the two cases I've been following just reenforces my decision about jury trials.

I think many attorneys would agree with me, if there are any in the crowd.

Deja vu. Almost exactly the same thread started at about the same time at 'that other place'. If your thread fires up with some responses, it will be interesting to contrast the viewpoints of the two forums. It is a very interesting topic that seems to get people rather polarised (but don't most threads?) The only problem, despite your ingenuity in introducing it in a Thai context, is that the connection with Thailand is likely to be rather tenuous in the responses (because you are really looking for a 'merits of the jury system' debate, which will draw upon experiences from common law countries). Still, let's hope it's allowed to run its course.

I've been following two news stories on TV.

1 about a guy named Paton Crispin

The other about the Farang killing in Pie

In both of them the posts are obviously so biased and based upon personal feelings, preconceived notions and predjudices. NOT ON FACTS BUT JUST RUMORS

Anyway am thankful in Thailand there are no trials by jury. Also optional in US so defendant can elect to have a trial by jury or by judge. If I were ever charged with a crime there is no way I would want a trial by jury. My God just look at you people!!

I've served on a Grand jury once and several petit juries in the US.

My decision about jury trial was made up after serving on juries.Seeing the posts from the two cases I've been following just reenforces my decision about jury trials.

I think many attorneys would agree with me, if there are any in the crowd.

I want to remind this "Court Jester" that O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake probably do not share your opinions regarding the option of the jury trail. It is regrettable that someone with your outlook can even get near a jury box. There is no IQ test and most of us know common sense is not all that common. Your sentence structure reveals a mind with very little training and/or independent thought. One must realize that in an open forum like TV there are going to be varied opinions and people are using this as a vehicle to vent or express their feelings. These opinions are valuable as they provide food for thought and even enlighten others in some cases. These people are not on a jury and have not been sworn to be fair and unbiased. Your somewhat baffling posting causes me to recommend that you avoid jury pools at all cost for the good of your fellow countrymen.

OK, Thailand context, when I think trial I remember the charming Yoobamrung progeny who was accused of murdering a policeman in a crowded disco, ran off to Cambodia, came back for the trial of the decade and was let go because the witnesses "couldn't remember".

far more important than a jury should be forensic evidence... something that khunying pornthip would tell you is seriously (and conveniently!) neglected in thailand.

I agree with the OP. But that is the way it is. No system is perfect.

I've been following two news stories on TV.

Your sentence structure reveals a mind with very little training and/or independent thought.

Quite, its unintelligable

I want to remind this "Court Jester" that O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake probably do not share your opinions regarding the option of the jury trail. It is regrettable that someone with your outlook can even get near a jury box. There is no IQ test and most of us know common sense is not all that common. Your sentence structure reveals a mind with very little training and/or independent thought. One must realize that in an open forum like TV there are going to be varied opinions and people are using this as a vehicle to vent or express their feelings. These opinions are valuable as they provide food for thought and even enlighten others in some cases. These people are not on a jury and have not been sworn to be fair and unbiased. Your somewhat baffling posting causes me to recommend that you avoid jury pools at all cost for the good of your fellow countrymen.

OK grantbkk(John Arnone?), Opinions are like ass holes, every body has one

I want to remind this "Court Jester" that O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake probably do not share your opinions regarding the option of the jury trail. It is regrettable that someone with your outlook can even get near a jury box. There is no IQ test and most of us know common sense is not all that common. Your sentence structure reveals a mind with very little training and/or independent thought. One must realize that in an open forum like TV there are going to be varied opinions and people are using this as a vehicle to vent or express their feelings. These opinions are valuable as they provide food for thought and even enlighten others in some cases. These people are not on a jury and have not been sworn to be fair and unbiased. Your somewhat baffling posting causes me to recommend that you avoid jury pools at all cost for the good of your fellow countrymen.

OK grantbkk(John Arnone?), Opinions are like ass holes, every body has one

Excellent retort! If you review my former posts you will find that I am firmly anti-Arnone. Everyone has opinions but when conveyed to others expect not all will share your personal view. It would help your view if you prepare your written thoughts in a clear and concise format.

Cheers!

It's interesting that two posters could not understand the message that you are trying to convey, cm-happy. I agree with the view that clarity of expression is an important element for successful communication, however I found your message to be sufficiently clear. To his credit, one of the posters who criticised your expression at least addressed the issue (however, the other did not). Topics of this nature can easily degenerate into personal attacks. When that happens, the thread gets closed and everyone loses. Can we at least try to respect each other when we give our opposing opinons - so that we are all winners?

Well said Ping, and thank your for expressing it

The OP is clear enough. But we're talking about the justice system in Thailand, about the media reports of heinous crimes, and the varied opinions of farang and Thais. It's not the justice system of the West; the media here is probably even worse than the Murdockerous rantings of the current western media, and opinions are like noses; everybody has one and it makes them think the other guy stinks worse.

Agreed PB - what I am looking for is the reasons as to why people have their opinons; to get a perspective. This has the potential to be an excellent thread if people play fairly. Unfortunately, I suspect it's going to wither on the vine (been up 2 days already).

OK, Thailand context, when I think trial I remember the charming Yoobamrung progeny who was accused of murdering a policeman in a crowded disco, ran off to Cambodia, came back for the trial of the decade and was let go because the witnesses "couldn't remember".

At a cost of a few million baht to dear old Daddy, who incidentally is the proposed next Interior Minister