British kick-boxer to be extradited to Thailand over murder of US Marine

[bubblegum]

Weird, ye guys can't help repeating all the circumstantial evidence, conjecture and speculation again. When actual hard evidence is asked for.

When there's some hard evidence of the accused being at the murder-scene can ye please post it along with it's source. (Not including the so called 'quotes' from the GF that were without doubt out of the mouth of someone else. Unless she is a native speaker.)

Thanks.

No hard evidence is needed in court, circumstantial evidence can do the same amount of damage

[Nisa]

Yes. The sooner we have trial by media and internet the better...

Why on earth are you so determined that he must have a trial in Thailand?

An earlier poster said a trial was not possible in the UK. Do any Brit lawyers out there know whether this is true? If so, I have more sympathy for your determination to see him 'tried' here.

As I have said before, I am fairly sure he is guilty - but still prefer to hear a court case in a first-world country. Justice is still not good there (money buys the best lawyers), but the defendant stands some chance of receiving a trial he can understand and defend.

If he's found guilty, then yes - send him back to Thailand to serve his sentence! I realise this is not possible, but it would be the best outcome from my POV.

I certainly never said or implied he shouldn't have a trial or that his guilt should be decided before trial and have even stated the opposite.

But yes, I do believe the trial should be here because that is where the law states it should be and that is who has jurisdiction and is where the crime was committed. One should not be allowed to commit crimes in countries and then avoid the consequences of that countries laws. Every person who travels understands (or should) that the laws of where they are apply and not the laws where they are from. The death penalty has already been taken off the table for him so it seems he is already getting special treatment than a typical person accused of murder in Thailand.

Just curious if you would be ok if he was tried in the US?

Also, what factual basis do you say he wouldn't receive a fair trial in Thailand? Why do you believe they would railroad him to being convicted if he is innocent? If anything, in Thailand (like many countries) you are more likely to get away with something if you have money or power than being convicted for something you didn't do ... though convictions of innocent people happen all over the world including first world countries.

[Nisa]

Weird, ye guys can't help repeating all the circumstantial evidence, conjecture and speculation again. When actual hard evidence is asked for.

When there's some hard evidence of the accused being at the murder-scene can ye please post it along with it's source. (Not including the so called 'quotes' from the GF that were without doubt out of the mouth of someone else. Unless she is a native speaker.)

Thanks.

No hard evidence is needed in court, circumstantial evidence can do the same amount of damage

Do you really think he is going to believe anything if he cannot even accept an eyewitness statements (that clearly have been accepted by the UK court) simply because they "may" have been translated for the English newspaper readers?

Edited September 16, 2011 by Nisa

[bubblegum]

Weird, ye guys can't help repeating all the circumstantial evidence, conjecture and speculation again. When actual hard evidence is asked for.

When there's some hard evidence of the accused being at the murder-scene can ye please post it along with it's source. (Not including the so called 'quotes' from the GF that were without doubt out of the mouth of someone else. Unless she is a native speaker.)

Thanks.

No hard evidence is needed in court, circumstantial evidence can do the same amount of damage

Do you really think he is going to believe anything if he cannot even accept an eyewitness statements (that clearly have been accepted by the UK court) simply because they "may" have been translated for the English newspaper readers?

no

[F1fanatic]

Yes. The sooner we have trial by media and internet the better...

Why on earth are you so determined that he must have a trial in Thailand?

An earlier poster said a trial was not possible in the UK. Do any Brit lawyers out there know whether this is true? If so, I have more sympathy for your determination to see him 'tried' here.

As I have said before, I am fairly sure he is guilty - but still prefer to hear a court case in a first-world country. Justice is still not good there (money buys the best lawyers), but the defendant stands some chance of receiving a trial he can understand and defend.

If he's found guilty, then yes - send him back to Thailand to serve his sentence! I realise this is not possible, but it would be the best outcome from my POV.

I certainly never said or implied he shouldn't have a trial or that his guilt should be decided before trial and have even stated the opposite.

But yes, I do believe the trial should be here because that is where the law states it should be and that is who has jurisdiction and is where the crime was committed. One should not be allowed to commit crimes in countries and then avoid the consequences of that countries laws. Every person who travels understands (or should) that the laws of where they are apply and not the laws where they are from. The death penalty has already been taken off the table for him so it seems he is already getting special treatment than a typical person accused of murder in Thailand.

Just curious if you would be ok if he was tried in the US?

Also, what factual basis do you say he wouldn't receive a fair trial in Thailand? Why do you believe they would railroad him to being convicted if he is innocent? If anything, in Thailand (like many countries) you are more likely to get away with something if you have money or power than being convicted for something you didn't do ... though convictions of innocent people happen all over the world including first world countries.

I have to admit that I wouldn't 'be happy' if he were tried in the US as unfortunately Americans have a reputation as being 'patriotic' beyond understanding!

But, I would prefer it to him being tried here.

If you need to ask why anyone dare suggest justice is largely based on money here, there is no point in responding to your post about fair trials.

I suspect that he's not wealthy and will be relying on a 'public defender', but if I'm wrong and he is wealthy then again - I wouldn't want him tried here..... I'd still prefer him to be tried in the UK.

He sounds like a truly nasty 'piece of work' that needs to be put away - but that is based entirely on media coverage. He still deserves a fair trial.

You have made it VERY clear that he is 'undoubtedly' guilty.... and have no 'reasonable trial to establish guilt' perspective at all!

Edited September 16, 2011 by F1fanatic

[hehehoho]

No hard evidence is needed in court,

Just a quick yes/no question if you don't mind.

Are you qualified in Thai law?

Edited September 16, 2011 by hehehoho

[steelepulse]

No hard evidence is needed in court,

Just a quick yes/no question if you don't mind.

Are you qualified in Thai law?

Are you? Just a quick yes/no.

[hehehoho]

No.

And not being so I try to not claim facts about it.

Edited September 16, 2011 by hehehoho

[Nisa]

Yes. The sooner we have trial by media and internet the better...

Why on earth are you so determined that he must have a trial in Thailand?

An earlier poster said a trial was not possible in the UK. Do any Brit lawyers out there know whether this is true? If so, I have more sympathy for your determination to see him 'tried' here.

As I have said before, I am fairly sure he is guilty - but still prefer to hear a court case in a first-world country. Justice is still not good there (money buys the best lawyers), but the defendant stands some chance of receiving a trial he can understand and defend.

If he's found guilty, then yes - send him back to Thailand to serve his sentence! I realise this is not possible, but it would be the best outcome from my POV.

I certainly never said or implied he shouldn't have a trial or that his guilt should be decided before trial and have even stated the opposite.

But yes, I do believe the trial should be here because that is where the law states it should be and that is who has jurisdiction and is where the crime was committed. One should not be allowed to commit crimes in countries and then avoid the consequences of that countries laws. Every person who travels understands (or should) that the laws of where they are apply and not the laws where they are from. The death penalty has already been taken off the table for him so it seems he is already getting special treatment than a typical person accused of murder in Thailand.

Just curious if you would be ok if he was tried in the US?

Also, what factual basis do you say he wouldn't receive a fair trial in Thailand? Why do you believe they would railroad him to being convicted if he is innocent? If anything, in Thailand (like many countries) you are more likely to get away with something if you have money or power than being convicted for something you didn't do ... though convictions of innocent people happen all over the world including first world countries.

I have to admit that I wouldn't 'be happy' if he were tried in the US as unfortunately Americans have a reputation as being 'patriotic' beyond understanding!

But, I would prefer it to him being tried here.

If you need to ask why anyone dare suggest justice is largely based on money here, there is no point in responding to your post about fair trials.

I suspect that he's not wealthy and will be relying on a 'public defender', but if I'm wrong and he is wealthy then again - I wouldn't want him tried here..... I'd still prefer him to be tried in the UK.

He sounds like a truly nasty 'piece of work' that needs to be put away - but that is based entirely on media coverage. He still deserves a fair trial.

You have made it VERY clear that he is 'undoubtedly' guilty.... and have no 'reasonable trial to establish guilt' perspective at all!

I'm glad you are honest enough with yourself to admit your bias in terms of the UK court (at least the US would be unfair too) but I think you are being a bit unfair in not holding people accountable for where they are suspected of committing the crime. In Thailand it is not against the law to "possess" child porn (display, selling, buying, making & distributing is). Should a Thai in Britain possessing child porn be sent back to Thailand to face charges where they would be automatically released because there is no law here for this crime? Thais also have a bias and there is a case now where Thais are fighting extradition to Australia because they say the court would be unfair and the prisons there are 3rd World quality

I also appreciate the fact you are talking about fairness in terms of him getting off for something he may have done and not just considering unfairness against him. But, as I mentioned before, there is not too many countries in the world (UK included) where justice cannot sometimes be bought and the rich and powerful can get away with things the poor or less fortunate cannot. But in terms of HIS getting treated unfairly by the courts, you continue to say this without at all backing up this claim. Certainly there must be some public record or news reports in the last decade of their being a tendency for Thailand's courts to convict innocent people (especially farangs) more than the UK. Or, just provide a reason why they would be motivated to convict this person if he is able to prove he didn't do it. Simply to say something is so because many people say it is not the least be logical.

I have not at all made it clear he is guilty and have made it VERY clear he deserves his day in court. What I have made clear is baring any great defense and/or given the info we have so far it seems obvious at the point and time he did it.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Nisa

[bubblegum]

No.

And not being so I try to not claim facts about it.

If you quote somebody do the whole quote and not just the part you can use for your liking. also do not put words in my mouth.

[F1fanatic]

Yes. The sooner we have trial by media and internet the better...

Why on earth are you so determined that he must have a trial in Thailand?

An earlier poster said a trial was not possible in the UK. Do any Brit lawyers out there know whether this is true? If so, I have more sympathy for your determination to see him 'tried' here.

As I have said before, I am fairly sure he is guilty - but still prefer to hear a court case in a first-world country. Justice is still not good there (money buys the best lawyers), but the defendant stands some chance of receiving a trial he can understand and defend.

If he's found guilty, then yes - send him back to Thailand to serve his sentence! I realise this is not possible, but it would be the best outcome from my POV.

I certainly never said or implied he shouldn't have a trial or that his guilt should be decided before trial and have even stated the opposite.

But yes, I do believe the trial should be here because that is where the law states it should be and that is who has jurisdiction and is where the crime was committed. One should not be allowed to commit crimes in countries and then avoid the consequences of that countries laws. Every person who travels understands (or should) that the laws of where they are apply and not the laws where they are from. The death penalty has already been taken off the table for him so it seems he is already getting special treatment than a typical person accused of murder in Thailand.

Just curious if you would be ok if he was tried in the US?

Also, what factual basis do you say he wouldn't receive a fair trial in Thailand? Why do you believe they would railroad him to being convicted if he is innocent? If anything, in Thailand (like many countries) you are more likely to get away with something if you have money or power than being convicted for something you didn't do ... though convictions of innocent people happen all over the world including first world countries.

I have to admit that I wouldn't 'be happy' if he were tried in the US as unfortunately Americans have a reputation as being 'patriotic' beyond understanding!

But, I would prefer it to him being tried here.

If you need to ask why anyone dare suggest justice is largely based on money here, there is no point in responding to your post about fair trials.

I suspect that he's not wealthy and will be relying on a 'public defender', but if I'm wrong and he is wealthy then again - I wouldn't want him tried here..... I'd still prefer him to be tried in the UK.

He sounds like a truly nasty 'piece of work' that needs to be put away - but that is based entirely on media coverage. He still deserves a fair trial.

You have made it VERY clear that he is 'undoubtedly' guilty.... and have no 'reasonable trial to establish guilt' perspective at all!

I'm glad you are honest enough with yourself to admit your bias in terms of the UK court (at least the US would be unfair too) but I think you are being a bit unfair in not holding people accountable for where they are suspected of committing the crime. In Thailand it is not against the law to "possess" child porn (display, selling, buying & distributing is). Should a Thai in Britain possessing child porn be sent back to Thailand to face charges where they would be automatically released because there is no law here for this crime? Thais also have a bias and there is a case now where Thais are fighting extradition to Australia because they say the prisons there are sub par.

I also appreciate the fact you are talking about fairness in terms of him getting off for something he may have done and not just considering unfairness against him. But, as I mentioned before, there is not too many countries in the world (UK included) where justice cannot be bought and the rich and powerful can get away with things the poor or less fortunate cannot. But in terms of HIS getting treated unfairly by the courts, you continue to say this without at all backing up this claim. Certainly there must be some public record or news reports in the last decade of their being a tendency for Thailand's courts to convict innocent people (especially farangs) more than the UK. Or, just provide a reason why they would be motivated to convict this person if he is able to prove he didn't do it. Simply to say something is so because many people say it is not the least be logical.

I have not at all made it clear he is guilty and have made it VERY clear he deserves his day in court. What I have made clear is baring any great defense and/or given the info we have so far it seems obvious at the point and time he did it.

No. You have made it clear that you want him tried here and that he is obviously guilty.

Back in the UK a few court cases were 'obviously guilty' and convicted - some managed to prove later they were innocent.

What are the chances of that happening here?

[Nisa]

No. You have made it clear that you want him tried here and that he is obviously guilty.

Back in the UK a few court cases were 'obviously guilty' and convicted - some managed to prove later they were innocent.

What are the chances of that happening here?

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty and in fact have stated numerous time (and directly to you) that he deserves to be heard and have a trial.

And some in the UK who were obviously guilty got away with their crime do to technicalities as well as innocent people going to prison ... just like most countries in the world including Thailand. In fact, there are numerous cases from around the world (UK included) where police, courts and prosecutors have acted unfairly.

Again, I am simply asking you to back up your claim that a Thai Court will treat him unfairly. Please, educate me with some facts, links or statistics as to show Thai courts wrongfully or unfairly convict people anymore than other countries, specifically the UK.

I will agree with you that you can get away with more here as a criminal (prior to trial) but am confused by your saying he will be treated unfairly without anything to back up this claim that would also not apply to just about all other court systems. Grant it, we can debate the differences in court processes here and which is better but to state the courts here generally will not act on what is believed to be the facts and truth (being fair) to convict somebody seems like a harsh statement to make without being able to back it up.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Nisa

[F1fanatic]

No. You have made it clear that you want him tried here and that he is obviously guilty.

Back in the UK a few court cases were 'obviously guilty' and convicted - some managed to prove later they were innocent.

What are the chances of that happening here?

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty and in fact have stated numerous time (and directly to you) that he deserves to be heard and have a trial.

And some in the UK who were obviously guilty got away with their crime do to technicalities as well as innocent people going to prison ... just like most countries in the world including Thailand. In fact, there are numerous cases from around the world (UK included) where police, courts and prosecutors have acted unfairly.

Again, I am simply asking you to back up your claim that a Thai Court will treat him unfairly. Please, educate me with some facts, links or statistics as to show Thai courts wrongfully or unfairly convict people anymore than other countries, specifically the UK.

I will agree with you that you can get away with more here as a criminal (prior to trial) but am confused by your saying he will be treated unfairly without anything to back up this claim that would also not apply to just about all other court systems. Grant it, we can debate the differences in court processes here and which is better but to state the courts here generally will not act on what is believed to be the facts and truth (being fair) to convict somebody seems like a harsh statement to make without being able to back it up.

You're right and I'm wrong. There is nothing worrying about the courts here and I've no idea why I thought that you have decided he is guilty before any trial.

Sorry.

[Richard4849]

Hoho...have you ever been in a Thai court of law?

[Nisa]

No. You have made it clear that you want him tried here and that he is obviously guilty.

Back in the UK a few court cases were 'obviously guilty' and convicted - some managed to prove later they were innocent.

What are the chances of that happening here?

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty and in fact have stated numerous time (and directly to you) that he deserves to be heard and have a trial.

And some in the UK who were obviously guilty got away with their crime do to technicalities as well as innocent people going to prison ... just like most countries in the world including Thailand. In fact, there are numerous cases from around the world (UK included) where police, courts and prosecutors have acted unfairly.

Again, I am simply asking you to back up your claim that a Thai Court will treat him unfairly. Please, educate me with some facts, links or statistics as to show Thai courts wrongfully or unfairly convict people anymore than other countries, specifically the UK.

I will agree with you that you can get away with more here as a criminal (prior to trial) but am confused by your saying he will be treated unfairly without anything to back up this claim that would also not apply to just about all other court systems. Grant it, we can debate the differences in court processes here and which is better but to state the courts here generally will not act on what is believed to be the facts and truth (being fair) to convict somebody seems like a harsh statement to make without being able to back it up.

You're right and I'm wrong. There is nothing worrying about the courts here and I've no idea why I thought that you have decided he is guilty before any trial.

Sorry.

[F1fanatic]

No. You have made it clear that you want him tried here and that he is obviously guilty.

Back in the UK a few court cases were 'obviously guilty' and convicted - some managed to prove later they were innocent.

What are the chances of that happening here?

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty and in fact have stated numerous time (and directly to you) that he deserves to be heard and have a trial.

And some in the UK who were obviously guilty got away with their crime do to technicalities as well as innocent people going to prison ... just like most countries in the world including Thailand. In fact, there are numerous cases from around the world (UK included) where police, courts and prosecutors have acted unfairly.

Again, I am simply asking you to back up your claim that a Thai Court will treat him unfairly. Please, educate me with some facts, links or statistics as to show Thai courts wrongfully or unfairly convict people anymore than other countries, specifically the UK.

I will agree with you that you can get away with more here as a criminal (prior to trial) but am confused by your saying he will be treated unfairly without anything to back up this claim that would also not apply to just about all other court systems. Grant it, we can debate the differences in court processes here and which is better but to state the courts here generally will not act on what is believed to be the facts and truth (being fair) to convict somebody seems like a harsh statement to make without being able to back it up.

You're right and I'm wrong. There is nothing worrying about the courts here and I've no idea why I thought that you have decided he is guilty before any trial.

Sorry.

Obviously American.... You really don't get irony do you.

[Nisa]

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty and in fact have stated numerous time (and directly to you) that he deserves to be heard and have a trial.

And some in the UK who were obviously guilty got away with their crime do to technicalities as well as innocent people going to prison ... just like most countries in the world including Thailand. In fact, there are numerous cases from around the world (UK included) where police, courts and prosecutors have acted unfairly.

Again, I am simply asking you to back up your claim that a Thai Court will treat him unfairly. Please, educate me with some facts, links or statistics as to show Thai courts wrongfully or unfairly convict people anymore than other countries, specifically the UK.

I will agree with you that you can get away with more here as a criminal (prior to trial) but am confused by your saying he will be treated unfairly without anything to back up this claim that would also not apply to just about all other court systems. Grant it, we can debate the differences in court processes here and which is better but to state the courts here generally will not act on what is believed to be the facts and truth (being fair) to convict somebody seems like a harsh statement to make without being able to back it up.

You're right and I'm wrong. There is nothing worrying about the courts here and I've no idea why I thought that you have decided he is guilty before any trial.

Sorry.

Obviously American.... You really don't get irony do you.

Nothing like continuing to expose your bigoted views as well as your inability to comprehend not just words but graphical icons.

[hehehoho]

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty

Oh Nisa.

When the theory that someone other than Aldhouse commited the murder:

LMAO, and this mysterious murderer waited for Aldhouse to lose a fight with the victim and go to the local 711 in a rage and steal knives before the mysterious murderer put on an Aldhouse mask (to confuse the eyewitness) before stabbing the the victim to death.

Only somebody very dishonest with themselves and others would not see this as what is a termed an 'Open and Shut Case" at this point.

Hmmm.

[Nisa]

I have not made it clear he is obvious guilty

Oh Nisa.

When the theory that someone other than Aldhouse commited the murder:

LMAO, and this mysterious murderer waited for Aldhouse to lose a fight with the victim and go to the local 711 in a rage and steal knives before the mysterious murderer put on an Aldhouse mask (to confuse the eyewitness) before stabbing the the victim to death.

Only somebody very dishonest with themselves and others would not see this as what is a termed an 'Open and Shut Case" at this point.

Hmmm.

I am missing where I said he was guilty. In fact, I have said many times here he deserves to be tried and present his side and a defense.

As I have made clear over and over again (including above), we are going on information we have at this point that overwhelming points to his doing the crime at this point but that we have not heard his side of the story. As I stated above, at this point it would appear an open and shut case but he still deserves his day in court and it certainly is possible that his lawyers will come up with some unexpected defense such as his having a twin.

But if you want to find yet another thing to believe that is contrary to fact and rational thought, please go right ahead.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Nisa

[hehehoho]

I am missing where I said he was guilty.

That wasn't what was said, perhaps read it again. You say that 'I have not made it clear he is obviously guilty.' (I corrected the spelling mistake).

You have made it perfectly clear over and over that you believe he is obviously guilty. My two above quotes being examples of such.

You laugh at and ridicule the notion that somebody else could have committed the murder, and declare anyone who doesn't find it an 'open and shut case' as being dishonest to themselves and others.

Your mind is made up, yes?

Edited September 16, 2011 by hehehoho

[katana]

If they have the murder weapon they surely will have fingerprints ?

I would agree given they fact there was a witness to the crime and the suspects emotional state that has been reported and scene on video ... I highly doubt he thought to wipe off the knife(s), and discarded the knife(s) in an easy to find place.

However, there are conflicting reports of if he stole two knives of one. There is also one report that says the knife found in the house belonged to the kitchen. If this is true, then I suspect after the victim was stabbed and ran into the house, that the victim grabbed a knife to defend himself and may have actually cut the assailant. Part of this speculation is because when the police were looking for him they stated he would likely be injured ... though they may have been talking of the initial fight.

Also the girlfriend stated after the suspect stabbed the victim in the chest twice outside that they ran in the house and she locked the door ... I haven;t read anything about her saying what happened next except her calling the police. So, I'm not even sure if the suspect made it into the house and the other knife was simply something the victim grabbed before dying to protect himself in case the suspect made it in the house.

I think we are going to have to wait for official release of info before we know actual details like this .... unless the press interviews the girlfriend/eyewitness again.

Haven't read through the whole thread so don't know if this has been posted before.

But this CCTV footage shows Aldhouse taking two knives from the 7-11.

[Richard4849]

Barefoot and in a rage. Nice.

Won't do much for whatever alibi he comes up with (insanity? 'roid rage?).

And hoho...waiting for your answer to my question: have you ever been in a Thai court of law?

[Nisa]

I am missing where I said he was guilty.

That wasn't what was said, perhaps read it again. You say that 'I have not made it clear he is obviously guilty.' (I corrected the spelling mistake).

You have made it perfectly clear over and over that you believe he is obviously guilty. My two above quotes being examples of such.

You laugh at and ridicule the notion that somebody else could have committed the murder, and declare anyone who doesn't find it an 'open and shut case' as being dishonest to themselves and others.

Your mind is made up, yes?

[Nisa]

Barefoot and in a rage. Nice.

Won't do much for whatever alibi he comes up with (insanity? 'roid rage?).

And hoho...waiting for your answer to my question: have you ever been in a Thai court of law?

Given what has been reported to date, I would think his only hope might be self-defense but that is going to be a very very hard concept to swallow given he was not being directly threatened when he got the knives and went to the victim's home.

Though there is a lessor charge of premeditated murder in Thailand that has to do with acts of passion (in this case rage) but again might be a hard pill to swallow given he stole those knives which would likely be seen as an act of premeditation as well as his going to the victims house but I guess he could say he only got them to go scare the victim and things got out of control. The "act of passion" defense would probably only apply in a circumstance such as the first fight if he grabbed a knife that was readily available during the fight.

I really believe given just the evidence against him we know of, that he would be crazy not to be trying to work a deal with Thai authorities, especially if his lawyers are telling him he has almost zero chance of winning the extradition case. Thailand sentencing puts a WHOLE LOT of weight into showing remorse and admitting a crime and my guess is if he is convicted then the extradition and fleeing the country is going to weigh heavily in his sentencing. In a crime like this if one admits their mistake and shows remorse then a 7 to 10 year term would not be out of place here but neither would be a 20 year to a life sentence (or even death in a standard case) if one doesn't admit guilt or cooperate.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Nisa

[RickThai]

Sure looks like he stole the knives. If these are the weapons that killed the Marine, then I can see why Thailand wants him to go to trial.

Having lived, and or visited over 43 different countries, I am always aware that if I commit a crime (knowingly or otherwise), I am subject to the laws and courts of that country, no matter what I personally think of their justice system.

I really don't understand how anyone could be (or wants to be) an apologist for the accused in this incident.

RickThai

[hehehoho]

And hoho...waiting for your answer to my question: have you ever been in a Thai court of law?

Sorry mate, didn't see your question.

Yes, I have, when a friend ran into some difficulties.

I see Nisa is ignoring the highlighting of her contradicting statements again.

[Richard4849]

And hoho...waiting for your answer to my question: have you ever been in a Thai court of law?

Sorry mate, didn't see your question.

Yes, I have, when a friend ran into some difficulties.

"Difficulties"? Is that the legal term? Care to expound? Was he dealt with fairly?

[hehehoho]

Absolutely nothing to do with this topic so not right to get into it. Treated fairly by the RTP, no, by the judicial system, not really.

To move that back onto this topic, I wonder what happened to the 500,000thb that was reportedly transferred into the accused's Thai bank account. If it's still there or he had an opportunity to withdraw some from Cambodia/Singapore. Bet the RTP are licking their lips at the thought of getting him back. Nothing like financial motivation for the RTP to begin making up evidence!

[Richard4849]

Absolutely nothing to do with this topic so not right to get into it. Treated fairly by the RTP, no, by the judicial system, not really.

Absolutely nothing to do with this topic? Your entire PREMISE in this topic is that the Thai legal system is not up to handling this case -- yet you have never produced a shred of evidence of such...not even a single personal anecdote.

I'd say it has everything to do with the topic.

So what kind of criminal buddy do you hang out with?

[Richard4849]

Everything to do with this topic eh.

Hmmmm.

Sorry to bite for your trolling, but think there was an amnesty international report on the torturing RTP a page or two back.

(Note to Richard: Must troll harder)

How rich YOU calling me a troll.

Amnesty International has a report on every country in the world...including the civilized UK (and the US).

Please support your statement that there is no way Aldhouse will get a fair trial in Thailand. Over to you.