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

[BOS2BKK]

I'm just happy that there are some high class gents as BOS2BKK to share a spot of tea with, away from you loud obnoxious louts and yanks. I'm sure we could share some simply scintillating banter.

Enough crap about that pompus yank. If he cannot be extradited to Thailand I hope the US then proceed to try to extradite him, if only to tie him up in jail longer. I understand innocent until proven but there is just too much evidence here.

Someone has to civilize you people.

[metisdead]

English is not always the first language of our members so don't waste space correcting other members' grammar and spelling where it isn't necessary. One post removed.

[Hermes100]

Does the UK have the death penalty? If so, than all 3 countries have the death penalty. This cowardly murder should warrant death, regardless where it occurred. Next time you got your arrogant butt kick by a combat hardened US Marine, and as embarrassing as it may be, just go home.

Or not as in this case! You mean ex marine do you not?

No doubt the" combat hardened marine"( such childish macho word's) wished that was one battle he had missed because look what happened. Embarrassed? Who? Thugs like to "win" at any cost that why this man may of done what he did. He went home alive. He was not a combat vet. I like the brit's, but the hooligans will be hailing this as victory not as an embarrassment at all.

They will point out that rambo's skills did not do him much good at all and surely an intelligent soldier would avoid trouble.

I do feel sorry for any loss of life and I have a great deal of respect for the American troop's and serviceman. And I am sure that they would agree that it's always better, like in this case perhaps to avoid a fight or problem than to use brute strength.

Nobody win's a fight, nor a battle.In war and conflict there are no winner's only survivor's. The boy you decide to have fun and " kick someones butts" rather than walk away the more chances you have of ending up crossing the wrong sort who does not give any credence to your macho history and sends you home just like any other mortal in a body bag. Like in this case.

I hope he RIP and my heart goes out to the family friend's.

I would like to add that I hope to see less silly remarks like this because as much as I love the USA ( and I do deeply for some reason) I would like it's great people to slow down on the gung-ho. We are not in the wild west anymore . The sort of macho attitude of " I can kick you butt because I am ....( whatever) often shown by some people in the US and in other western nation's sends the wrong sort of message.

This message can result in all sort's of thing's .

I think it is macho nonsense like this that lead to another sort of cowardly entity sneaking up and making a mess. 9-11. And that is why its best to be careful what one says and does and always avoid.

To the marine RIP.

[Hermes100]

If the murderer had been Thai, he would have been tried, judged, and sentenced (along with the 70 million other Thais) on this forum days ago. The fact that he is British somehow puts doubts into people's minds?

Who 'The' murderer is is yet to be proven in a court of law, so there is no 'fact' regarding their nationality.

Some people use the phrase 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Not Americans though, it seems.

You're right. The murderer was probably a cowardly Thai guy. The valiant British kick boxer probably tried to save him, to no avail.

I guess the deceased was just quietly minding his own business, extolling the virtues of the good lord to all those nasty brits drinking in that bar, trying to steer them on the straight and narrow. Oh no, wait, he was involved in a bar brawl, added to a second knife found at he scene etc, he was not an innocent party in this.

he may have won the battle, but he certainly lost the war.

now this thread should be about the extradition, is is not about innocence or guilt of the alleged killer, lets discuss whether he will be extradited or not, my guess is that he will not be extradited to Thailand, and then america can go all gung ho and invade britain, we can call it the new 'battle of the bulge', the fat yanks attacking Europes fattest country,a real heavyweight tussle

i am British, and like I say the posturing by the yanks in this thread is embarrassing to say the least

Yes, I agree, it is childish and they seem to forget who went home dead. It was their combat hardened rambo. Sorry- I mean ex combat hardened marine rambo.

its a tragic loss of life( and I really should not joke about it) but do they not see how in the brit's and I am guessing the other euro's eye there was only one clear 'winner" and how it looks when the winner was a not a rambo.And worse still, some are saying such silly things like " bet he wished he never did it"

Do they mean rambo or the man still alive ?

I doubt he was even a boy scout and yet in his and others eye, he clearly " won" ( does not give one much confidence in American combat troops some could say )he went home alive and I very much doubt will be sent back here. They are only going through the motions.

Lighten up everyone!

[SteeleJoe]

Or not as in this case! You mean ex marine do you not?

No doubt the" combat hardened marine"( such childish macho word's) wished that was one battle he had missed because look what happened. Embarrassed? Who? Thugs like to "win" at any cost that why this man may of done what he did. He went home alive. He was not a combat vet. I like the brit's, but the hooligans will be hailing this as victory not as an embarrassment at all.

They will point out that rambo's skills did not do him much good at all and surely an intelligent soldier would avoid trouble.

I do feel sorry for any loss of life and I have a great deal of respect for the American troop's and serviceman. And I am sure that they would agree that it's always better, like in this case perhaps to avoid a fight or problem than to use brute strength.

Nobody win's a fight, nor a battle.In war and conflict there are no winner's only survivor's. The boy you decide to have fun and " kick someones butts" rather than walk away the more chances you have of ending up crossing the wrong sort who does not give any credence to your macho history and sends you home just like any other mortal in a body bag. Like in this case.

I hope he RIP and my heart goes out to the family friend's.

I would like to add that I hope to see less silly remarks like this because as much as I love the USA ( and I do deeply for some reason) I would like it's great people to slow down on the gung-ho. We are not in the wild west anymore . The sort of macho attitude of " I can kick you butt because I am ....( whatever) often shown by some people in the US and in other western nation's sends the wrong sort of message.

This message can result in all sort's of thing's .

I think it is macho nonsense like this that lead to another sort of cowardly entity sneaking up and making a mess. 9-11. And that is why its best to be careful what one says and does and always avoid.

To the marine RIP.

Yes, I agree, it is childish and they seem to forget who went home dead. It was their combat hardened rambo. Sorry- I mean ex combat hardened marine rambo.

its a tragic loss of life( and I really should not joke about it) but do they not see how in the brit's and I am guessing the other euro's eye there was only one clear 'winner" and how it looks when the winner was a not a rambo.And worse still, some are saying such silly things like " bet he wished he never did it"

Do they mean rambo or the man still alive ?

I doubt he was even a boy scout and yet in his and others eye, he clearly " won" ( does not give one much confidence in American combat troops some could say )he went home alive and I very much doubt will be sent back here. They are only going through the motions.

Lighten up everyone!

1) He was not an ex-Marine. He was currently serving.

2) As far as I know, it's you who decided to call him " a rambo" -- with all that disdain and mockery that implies -- and without cause.

3) To have been in combat does generally "harden" a person and most people consider it noteworthy experience and relevant in some instances.

4) According to reports, it was not him who started the fight.

5) The fact that the guy he fought was, reportedly, later able to ambush him with knife says ZERO about the capabilities of American combat troops in a general sense.

6) Your ideas about the cause of events like 9/11 are remarkably simplistic and ill-informed.

7) You seem to have very little sense of decency.

Just sayin'.

Bye!

[Richard4849]

I don't want to be accused of Brit-bashing, so let me say that the Brits do seem to have far better senses of humor.

[Nisa]

It is my understanding he is being held in the UK for extradition to Thailand regarding this crime. Did he also commit a crime in the UK that he is being held? If not, then the time he is serving now isn't going to be credited for anything to the best of my understanding. Generally speaking the time you serve while awaiting trial counts towards any sentence you receive and in some places can count up to double the time ... in other words you spend a year in custody while going to trial, you'll get credited for 2-years.

Edit: http://www.nationmul...--30136768.html

I don't know what is happening with him now but up until a month or so ago he was being held on unrelated matters in the UK. When he serves that time then he can be extradited, if the court so orders.

Everything I have seen says he was arrested because he was wanted internationally for weeks on this crime and they caught him at the airport trying to enter the UK. What is the unrelated matter you are referring to?

[hehehoho]

I'd like to see the assertions made with regards to the death penalty being taken off the table.

I just read up on another case of attempted extradition for a case of murder here, this time it was a Canadian man who was wanted for murdering a Thai woman.

"We cannot guarantee against the death penalty," Piyaphant Udomsilpa, head of the International Affairs Department, told The Province in an interview.

A shrewd, discerning woman with a disposition that could crack a nut, she bristles at suggestions Canada has the right to demand any assurances.

"That is at the discretion of the [Thai] court," she says. "We can't interfere . . . we cannot give that assurance as the executive branch."

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/news/unwind/story.html?id=f495b483-39b7-448b-916e-72325303087a

So who in this case has given the promise that the death penalty will not be passed if the accused is extradited and found guilty of the capital offense??

Was it a judge??

A judge deciding on sentencing before a case gets to court?

Or was it a government official??

A government official making promises for what a Thai judge will do??

What government official suddenly has the authority to order a Thai judge on what sentence they will or won't pass??

Information on this promise of theirs please.

This case is an utter joke.

Edited September 6, 2011 by hehehoho

[Mario2008]

It was of course a Thai official that gave the insurences. Does it bind the judge? probably not. But it does bind the government that they will not carry out a death sentence, in essence it means that they will comute a death sentence to for example live in prison.

There could also be a treaty between the UK and Thailand regarding extradition, in which this matter is covered.

[Nisa]

Extridition (which will never happen) would only mean there was a reasonable case to answer.

There are many reasons why no extridition will take place . 1 being that he is unlikely to get a fair trial . 2 that it is accepted that Thai prisons are brutal . They are centres of torture & abuse both mentally & physically which is well documented.

3 They also do not provide for prisoners needs ie; food ,health care & dental care. With overcrowding & 30 men to a cell ..

He will almost certainly be brought back to Thailand. The UK and Thailand have a bilateral extradition treaty that they are not going to jeopardize for this fellow. The only real way out for him would have only been if Thailand didn't agree to take the death penalty off the table. Even Canada which is probably much more critical of extraditions, sent somebody back here a couple years ago for a big bank fraud case, that happened during the financial crisis here, even though the suspect was in a wheelchair after suffering a stroke ... it took about 13-years to extradite him but he did get sent back to Thailand.

[Nisa]

I'd like to see the assertions made with regards to the death penalty being taken off the table.

A judge deciding on sentencing before a case gets to court?

It was of course a Thai official that gave the insurences. Does it bind the judge? probably not. But it does bind the government that they will not carry out a death sentence, in essence it means that they will comute a death sentence to for example live in prison.

There could also be a treaty between the UK and Thailand regarding extradition, in which this matter is covered.

The promise is made as part of the extradition motions to the court hearing the extradition matter. Basically the defendant makes a motion against extradition because he could face the death penalty and the prosecutors reply with a motion saying they will not seek the death penalty in the case. It happens fairly frequently in the US, especially with Canada.

Prosecutors have discretion as to if they will seek the death penalty and it can be based on numerous factors including everything from the suspects remorse to the need to make a promise for extradition in order to have the person tried in court. Not sure about Thailand but in the US they have to initially file their intent to seek the death penalty before the trial even starts and if they don't then the judge cannot impose a death penalty... it certainly doesn't mean the person is being convicted or sentenced before a trial.

Re: the link you shared about the Candadian/ Thai extradition ... he was extradited back to Thailand a couple years ago and this would not have happened if there was any chance of a sentence of death.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Nisa

[hehehoho]

It was of course a Thai official that gave the insurences. Does it bind the judge? probably not. But it does bind the government that they will not carry out a death sentence, in essence it means that they will comute a death sentence to for example live in prison.

So you say a government official gave the assurance. Who was it please? I'd be interested in their name and position.

What Thai legislation has been passed since the Thai Dept of International Affairs stated that they cannot promise against any such sentence as it is completely up to the Thai court, in 2007?

[Thai at Heart]

Extridition (which will never happen) would only mean there was a reasonable case to answer.

There are many reasons why no extridition will take place . 1 being that he is unlikely to get a fair trial . 2 that it is accepted that Thai prisons are brutal . They are centres of torture & abuse both mentally & physically which is well documented.

3 They also do not provide for prisoners needs ie; food ,health care & dental care. With overcrowding & 30 men to a cell ..

He will almost certainly be brought back to Thailand. The UK and Thailand have a bilateral extradition treaty that they are not going to jeopardize for this fellow. The only real way out for him would have only been if Thailand didn't agree to take the death penalty off the table. Even Canada which is probably much more critical of extraditions, sent somebody back here a couple years ago for a big bank fraud case, that happened during the financial crisis here, even though the suspect was in a wheelchair after suffering a stroke ... it took about 13-years to extradite him but he did get sent back to Thailand.

And there is a very quiet tacit agreement that the death penalty will not be applied.

[judgejohn]

Information on this promise of theirs please.

This case is a joke.

Hi , he was wanted in the UK for a breach of parole .At least that was what we was led to believe.

The new thing of the promise of no death penalty well it is just press speculation if you ask me. It has been passed to the home secretary for him to make a decission as to if he is extridited.

The home secretary knows that if he says yes then the ECHR will take up the case & over rule the home secretary . There is no chance of extridition but he could be held in custody for a long time for it all to be played out.

The case is not a joke as far as I can see . What is a joke is rants by USA wannabe big men making all the threats about he will be killed when he gets over here.

That on its owns strenghens his case that he could be harmed if extridited.

There has been nothing official released about it

[Wallaby]

It was of course a Thai official that gave the insurences. Does it bind the judge? probably not. But it does bind the government that they will not carry out a death sentence, in essence it means that they will comute a death sentence to for example live in prison.

So you say a government official gave the assurance. Who was it please? I'd be interested in their name and position.

What Thai legislation has been passed since the Thai Dept of International Affairs stated that they cannot promise against any such sentence as it is completely up to the Thai court, in 2007?

I wouldn't think it had anything to do with the Dept of International Affairs. It is up to the Dept of Justice (if there is one) or the Director of Prosecutions (Thai equivalent).

It is quite a simple process and happens all the time for extradtion to countries that have the death penalty. Extraditing country just receives a letter from the prosecuting office that they won't ask for the death penalty and away you go. The court is bound by that undertaking.

[hehehoho]

With regards to the US and Canada:

Completely different legal systems. Believe the DA has a lot of powers, which include choosing the charges and agreeing possible sentencing if so decided.

As already declared by the Thai Dept. of International affairs: "We cannot guarantee against the death penalty. That is at the discretion of the [Thai] court. We can't interfere . . . we cannot give that assurance as the executive branch."

So who is giving these assurances.

Name and position please.

[Gers1873]

Currently, the following countries have extradition treaties with Thailand: the US, the UK, Canada, China, Belgium, Philippines, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, South Korea, Bangladesh, Fiji, and Australia.

Thailand therefore merely has to approach the CPS prior to the submission of a reques for extradition being heard.

Unfortunately the process can be cumbersome and slow as witnessed in the still pending case of Assange's extradition to Sweden.

Criminals hiding in Thailand have been extradited to the UK with Thai cooperation. This case should be no different given an undertaking that (unfortunately) the death penalty is off the table.

[Wallaby]

With regards to the US and Canada:

Completely different legal systems. Believe the DA has a lot of powers, which include choosing the charges and agreeing possible sentencing if so decided.

As already declared by the Thai Dept. of International affairs: "We cannot guarantee against the death penalty. That is at the discretion of the [Thai] court. We can't interfere . . . we cannot give that assurance as the executive branch."

So who is giving these assurances.

Name and position please.

Because the Thai Dept of International Affairs cannot give that guarantee, it won't. That is not it's job. All the UK need is a letter from anyone with authority, doesn't have to be a govt official. The prosecutor handling the case is sufficient because he/she will be acting on behalf of the govt.

It's not hard, it's very simple. Move on.

[judgejohn]

He will almost certainly be brought back to Thailand. The UK and Thailand have a bilateral extradition treaty that they are not going to jeopardize for this fellow. The only real way out for him would have only been if Thailand didn't agree to take the death penalty off the table. Even Canada which is probably much more critical of extraditions, sent somebody back here a couple years ago for a big bank fraud case, that happened during the financial crisis here, even though the suspect was in a wheelchair after suffering a stroke ... it took about 13-years to extradite him but he did get sent back to Thailand.

And there is a very quiet tacit agreement that the death penalty will not be applied.

So you actually think that some agreement that is almost 100 yrs old will override modern human rights laws ?

What has what canada done got to do with what the UK will do ? Do you know anything about EHRL ?

Hey, them laws protect any person of any nationality if they are on European soil.

What I find hard to understand is why Americans think all the world will break their own laws to suit them .

While I feel for the family of both these boys I can not support any extridition to Thailand.

[Wallaby]

So you actually think that some agreement that is almost 100 yrs old will override modern human rights laws ?

What has what canada done got to do with what the UK will do ? Do you know anything about EHRL ?

Hey, them laws protect any person of any nationality if they are on European soil.

What I find hard to understand is why Americans think all the world will break their own laws to suit them .

While I feel for the family of both these boys I can not support any extridition to Thailand.

Not sure what you mean by breaking their own laws.

EHRL are not the laws of the UK, different kettle of fish. UK can send him back. If he appeals to EHRL then that is up to them. But no laws being broken to do it, just due process.

The UK can extradite to Thailand if the death penalty is off the table. No breaking of laws, just following the extradition treaty. I'm sure the UK would be happy to be rid of him.

[Richard4849]

The US has nothing to do with this case, so get off your high horse.

[hehehoho]

Thai government officials cannot promise the sentences that a Thai court will or won't pass.

They also can't commute a death sentence, that it solely at the hands of the Thai King, if appealed.

http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/Thailand411-2.pdf

[hehehoho]

Because the Thai Dept of International Affairs cannot give that guarantee, it won't. That is not it's job. All the UK need is a letter from anyone with authority, doesn't have to be a govt official. The prosecutor handling the case is sufficient because he/she will be acting on behalf of the govt.

It's not hard, it's very simple. Move on.

A Thai prosecutor cannot decide (and make promises about) sentences in a Thai court. It is solely at the behest of the Thai judges.

This is not the American judicial system.

Edited September 6, 2011 by hehehoho

[Nisa]

Because the Thai Dept of International Affairs cannot give that guarantee, it won't. That is not it's job. All the UK need is a letter from anyone with authority, doesn't have to be a govt official. The prosecutor handling the case is sufficient because he/she will be acting on behalf of the govt.

It's not hard, it's very simple. Move on.

A Thai prosecutor cannot decide (and make promises about) sentences in a Thai court. It is solely at the behest of the Thai judges.

This is not the American judicial system.

So, is it the judge responding and filing motions regarding the extradition? Funny, because everything I read says it is the prosecutors dealing with this .... judges don't file motions, they rule on them. The prosecutors "may" have needed to seek a judges approval hear first before making such a promise.

And no, it is international dealing with an extradition treaty that Thailand also has with the US and the US also has with the UK and the US being a country that also must promise the death penalty will not be applied when extraditing suspects from numerous places including the UK and Canada.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Nisa

[judgejohn]

So you actually think that some agreement that is almost 100 yrs old will override modern human rights laws ?

What has what canada done got to do with what the UK will do ? Do you know anything about EHRL ?

Hey, them laws protect any person of any nationality if they are on European soil.

What I find hard to understand is why Americans think all the world will break their own laws to suit them .

While I feel for the family of both these boys I can not support any extridition to Thailand.

Not sure what you mean by breaking their own laws.

EHRL are not the laws of the UK, different kettle of fish. UK can send him back. If he appeals to EHRL then that is up to them. But no laws being broken to do it, just due process.

The UK can extradite to Thailand if the death penalty is off the table. No breaking of laws, just following the extradition treaty. I'm sure the UK would be happy to be rid of him.

As a British citizen he is protected by british law as to his human rights . Lets not forget that some detainees was transported to Thailand where they was tortured . In fact the military leader of the rebles in Libia was one of them . He was then sent to a Libian Prison for more of the same.

Extridition is not going to happen even if it was a Thai it just would not happen .

[hehehoho]

^^ A judge deciding on the sentencing before the evidence is even submitted at any sort of pre-trial.

There goes the right to a fair and non-biased trial.

As the process has to climb through a number of courts and a number of judges I do not believe any one judge would have the power, or legal standing to make such a promise on sentencing on a case that has yet to be heard.

As the only people with the power to do so would be the sentencing judge, the appeals court, and the King of Thailand, who is making these assurances??

I've asked for their details but people can't seem to answer?

Edited September 6, 2011 by hehehoho

[Nisa]

So you actually think that some agreement that is almost 100 yrs old will override modern human rights laws ?

What has what canada done got to do with what the UK will do ? Do you know anything about EHRL ?

Hey, them laws protect any person of any nationality if they are on European soil.

What I find hard to understand is why Americans think all the world will break their own laws to suit them .

While I feel for the family of both these boys I can not support any extridition to Thailand.

You are being a bit dramatic. Western countries have and will continue to extradite suspects to Thailand and even in this case the British Authorities are already saying there is little doubt he will be heading back ... let alone the court has already ruled in the UK he is clear to be extradited.

Thailand also has a bilateral extradition treaty with Canada and Canada also doesn't extradite to countries where a person can be executed for the particular crime. Canada actually is much much more into human rights than the UK in these matters and although it took 13-years Canada did extradite the mentioned suspect to Thailand. It only is irrelavant if you don't want to be realistic and honest about reality.

[Richard4849]

I think john-john has a reality that is all his own.

[Nisa]

It was of course a Thai official that gave the insurences. Does it bind the judge? probably not. But it does bind the government that they will not carry out a death sentence, in essence it means that they will comute a death sentence to for example live in prison.

So you say a government official gave the assurance. Who was it please? I'd be interested in their name and position.

It is done in the extradition motions. Not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp ....

1) Defendant files a motion with the court that his crime is punishable by death in the country requesting extradition (Thailand) and this is grounds to refuse extradition (in the UK many countries)

2) Prosecutors or lawyers acting on behalf of the Thai Justice System then file a motion saying they will not seek the death penalty therefore making the defendants motion moot.

It really is not a complicated thing as long as the country seeking extradition can agree internally not to seek the death penalty ... but again this is a very common process when it comes to extradition from non-capital punishment countries to ones that do impose capital punishment.

[judgejohn]

The defendent dosen't file any motion unless he is appealing . On appeal he will set his objections & reasons of appeal.

He has no need to put anything forward untill he appears in court after motions from the prosicution . Why cant you get it that the Thai prison system alone makes his extridition impossible. IT really is not hard to accept how inhumane Thai prisons are