Man Acquitted Of Killing Michael Wansley

[george]

Man acquitted of killing Australian auditor

BANGKOK: -- The Court of Appeals Wednesday upheld the lower court’s decision to acquit a man suspected of shooting dead an Australian auditor.

Michael Wansley, 58, was killed in Nakhon Sawan in 1999 for detecting corrupt practice at Namtan Kaset Thai Co Ltd, which was then undergoing a debt-restructuring process.

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

The lower court also has the same opinion.

-- The Nation 2009-09-02

[Boater]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

[LaoPo]

Man acquitted of killing Australian auditor

BANGKOK: -- The Court of Appeals Wednesday upheld the lower court’s decision to acquit a man suspected of shooting dead an Australian auditor.

Michael Wansley, 58, was killed in Nakhon Sawan in 1999 for detecting corrupt practice at Namtan Kaset Thai Co Ltd, which was then undergoing a debt-restructuring process.

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

The lower court also has the same opinion.

-- The Nation 2009-09-02

The outcome is the complete opposite of:

Death penalty for Michael Wansley's murderers

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Death-Penalt...n-s-t81955.html

LaoPo

[Wuffy]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

Better question...

Why is it only happened now? TEN YEARS after the event?

Even if the police were slow to catch him and slow courts and appeals...

ohmy.gif The outcome is the complete opposite of:

Death penalty for Michael Wansley's murderers

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Death-Penalt...n-s-t81955.html

LaoPo

Holy crud... That's... an interesting outcome then.

Edited September 2, 2009 by Wuffy

[jamesjdaly]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

The name Thaksin seems to stick to corrupt scumbags, doesn't it?

[madjbs]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

Because that is how justice works in every civilized country around the world.

A court will only convict someone of such a serious criminal offence if they are 99% sure they are guilty.

There is a saying, it is better that a 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man is sent to jail.

[EndofDays]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

Because that is how justice works in every civilized country around the world.

A court will only convict someone of such a serious criminal offence if they are 99% sure they are guilty.

There is a saying, it is better that a 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man is sent to jail.

...and it helps if there is little to no actual police-work involved to get the facts of crime...is there a special school for crime scene investigation in Thailand somewhere?

[smallprawn]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

Because that is how justice works in every civilized country around the world.

A court will only convict someone of such a serious criminal offence if they are 99% sure they are guilty.

There is a saying, it is better that a 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man is sent to jail.

And, God willing, lets hope it might stay that way.

Any court of Law can only pass a verdict based on the evidence provided.

[Krungthepian]

This verdict is not necessarily a bad one. There was some speculation that Pichet, the alleged gunman, was a "patsy" - an alleged killer set up for this 'hit' for political reasons. I believe he was charged just prior to the arrival of an Australian government delegation in Thailand. The timing of his arrest and announcement that he had been charged with for this killing may well have been related to that visit - the prosecution of Wansley's killers was a big issue for Aussie authorities and had been raised by virtually all senior people at the embassy here in previous years, because the Thai justice system was operating badly.. one of the alleged masterminds, part of the "sugar mill mafia" from Nakhon Sawan, had bribed a provincial judge, who was later disciplined for that offence, and the case had to be transferred to a court in Bangkok. But I'm not such that defendant was ever punished for paying the bribe.

Overall, the Thai police did a fair job. They appear to have got the bulk of the people behind this ugly slaying.. two got death in Sept 2006, plus several others got life. However, the greatest injustice for some who watched the outcome of this case three years ago was that the alleged kingpin, a big fat sugar mill boss called Pradit, walked free. Phone records reportedly showed that all of the offenders convicted had regularly rung a mobile number listed as belonging to the Namtal Kaset mill, but the prosecution was never able to prove that those calls went to Pradit. He got the benefit of the doubt also, but for my mind, you really wonder why all these "underlings" acted in such a concerted way .. get convicted .. yet they let a person with far greater motive free.

So, a mixed result overall. The wealthy walk free again.

I honestly believe they need major changes to the Thai justice system. This case went on for seven years with hearings every second Tuesday. That, frankly, is ludicrious. It's also quite common. If you look at the case of the Kader fire - over 100 killed I think - but 10 years before the trial ended; that was another case involving "influential" defendants. For me, justice delayed is often justice denied. I believe they really need major reforms to speed up the court process as well as a far harsher when "hi-so" are accused of serious crimes. They need to start putting some of the fat cats behind bars, to show the justice system operates without bias. The poor often never get bail, while the rich are let out and left free to do everything imaginable to keep themselves free.

The current justice minister is reportedly quite right wing. I wish he would get the senior judges together and really try to get cases processed quicker. Maybe even put some time limits on to force judges to top the bullsh-t and get the system cranked up better. Even the case involving the confiscation of Thaksin's assets is dragging out slowly, slowly - they are ludicriously overly lenient. Why do they need 30 days (not sure of the exact figure, but think it's about that) to lay out a defence that he didn't accumulate $2 billion in Thai banks via corrupt means, when they could simply be told to do it in several weeks, with hearings four to five days a week? If they can do that in the West, why can't they do it here? It smacks of lethargy.

I think they also need to remove the ban on people commenting on court verdicts, which is perhaps one of the most outrageous blocks on freedom of expression here. Even if they only allow "measured" remarks by academics or senior reporters. The media is part of the justice system in Western societies - indeed they regularly "out" magistrates and judges for their appalling verdicts or remarks. A capacity for this is greatly needed in this country, I believe.

Apologies for the rant, but I think the justice system is incredibly important and a major source of grievances by the poor (and the red shirts). If they can make it better - flood it with more funds and staff, if need be - they could greatly reduce the angst in society or swelling resentment over "injustices" by the poor.

[Losangels]

Good post and agree with your opinion Krungthepien, especially the part about eliminating the ban on comments about court verdicts

[bdenner]

No worries -- Our BiB will now reopen the case and go in hot pursuit of the real perpetrators.

Oh dear! just awoken from a nap, must have been dreaming.

[RickBradford]

If they can make it better - flood it with more funds and staff, if need be - they could greatly reduce the angst in society or swelling resentment over "injustices" by the poor.

That is probably true, but where would they find suitably qualified and educated staff?

[losworld]

The Court of Appeals yesterday said Pichet or Thaksin Kaewsamduang should receive the benefit of doubt.

and why should that be?

Because that is how justice works in every civilized country around the world.

A court will only convict someone of such a serious criminal offence if they are 99% sure they are guilty.

There is a saying, it is better that a 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man is sent to jail.

Not so sure I agree with the logic of that as these 100 men could go on to harm another 100 innocent men. The idea of beyond a reasonable doubt seriously deters conviction of guilty parties... e.g. O.J.