Thailand's Justice System

[uptheos]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

[NewlyMintedThai]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

Criminal cases are not private. Anyone can go to the court and sit in. Makes for an interesting afternoon.

[soi41]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

That is YSO!

[Mosha]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

Criminal cases are not private. Anyone can go to the court and sit in. Makes for an interesting afternoon.

Friends tell me it can be like watching a B movie court drama

[soi41]

And as far as I know neither do the Scandinavian countries.

Correct!

That seems strange to me if you believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" concept. Theoretically you could sit in jail for a long time only to be found innocent.

So what you are saying, is that anyone caught with a smoking gun, should be released after police have finished their interview with the suspect ? In your line of thinking, there is no need for bail, because why should a "innocent" person accept the infringement of his civil rights. So happy days .

In Scandinavia there are very stright rules for who the police can keep in custody awaiting trial, the suspect has to appear before a judge within 24 hours and the procecutor will have to argue, why they want the suspect remained. In clearcut cases will be held for another week or so, before appearing before a judge again. Ofcourse sometimes you will have really innocent people misstreated by the system, but IMO that is a low price to pay to keep rapists and murderers of the streets. By far better than the bailsystem.

[giddyup]

And as far as I know neither do the Scandinavian countries.

Correct!

That seems strange to me if you believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" concept. Theoretically you could sit in jail for a long time only to be found innocent.

So what you are saying, is that anyone caught with a smoking gun, should be released after police have finished their interview with the suspect ? In your line of thinking, there is no need for bail, because why should a "innocent" person accept the infringement of his civil rights. So happy days .

In Scandinavia there are very stright rules for who the police can keep in custody awaiting trial, the suspect has to appear before a judge within 24 hours and the procecutor will have to argue, why they want the suspect remained. In clearcut cases will be held for another week or so, before appearing before a judge again. Ofcourse sometimes you will have really innocent people misstreated by the system, but IMO that is a low price to pay to keep rapists and murderers of the streets. By far better than the bailsystem.

Whoa! No need to get so defensive. The reason I said it was strange to me, is that my country, Australia, has a bail system. Didn't say your sytem was sh*t or that mine was better. Also, the "innocent until proven guilty" concept is the basis for the British judicial system, which is what the UK, the US and Australia all practice.

[simple1]

For those interested an overview of the Thai judicial system and the process of arrest & bail etc at:

http://chiangmai.usc...n-thailand.html

Edited September 25, 2012 by simple1

[likewise]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

I have just stated that it was a rape case, not mentioned any names so..... ?

Whatever you think man, I know what I do in court or at the police station and mind you it is NOT a job, they call me whenever they need me, if I have time I go if I don't they use someone else.

So elaborate, accept knowing that it is a rape case, you do not know where, who or when ?

[likewise]

Reason why I posted this is to get some thoughts from other nationalities where bail is allowed, I agree with the innocent till proven guilty but if one gets arrested and there is evidence I really do not see a reason why that person should be allowed bail.

As I mentioned in my first post, one of the cases I translated for, the suspects were found guilty by court of first hearing, convicted to 15 years to be exact, they appealed (which is there right) yet again they were granted bail till the appeal court decided ! IMO this is not a fair way of handling this towards the victims, after all plenty of evidence in this particular case, convicted so not innocent anymore !

@ uptheos, you might be a stonetable expert in front of 7-11 yet no need to accuse me of lying !!

[Swiss1960]

Reason why I posted this is to get some thoughts from other nationalities where bail is allowed, I agree with the innocent till proven guilty but if one gets arrested and there is evidence I really do not see a reason why that person should be allowed bail.

As I mentioned in my first post, one of the cases I translated for, the suspects were found guilty by court of first hearing, convicted to 15 years to be exact, they appealed (which is there right) yet again they were granted bail till the appeal court decided ! IMO this is not a fair way of handling this towards the victims, after all plenty of evidence in this particular case, convicted so not innocent anymore !

@ uptheos, you might be a stonetable expert in front of 7-11 yet no need to accuse me of lying !!

Well, since you are such an expert, you should at least realize and acknowledge that a guilty verdict is only then final, when all possibilities for appeals are exhausted... thus, every legal system I know sees such a person as still not guilty...

And second, if Thailand has chosen that in it's legal system, they do allow bail to be posted even in such high criminal cases like rape and / or murder, then that is a Thailand decision that we as guests and / or visitors have to accept.

[likewise]

ok, enough said, the narrow minded freaks are out ! Where did I mention being an expert ? Where did I say that not except it ? Just stating my opinion.

End of thread for me !

[rattler]

"Their answer is that EVERY suspect has the right to be released on bail,"

I dont know whats more scary that they accept this or that its the law.

[NewlyMintedThai]

"Their answer is that EVERY suspect has the right to be released on bail,"

I dont know whats more scary that they accept this or that its the law.

It's obviously not the law, as several examples where bail has been denied are given above.

[Swiss1960]

ok, enough said, the narrow minded freaks are out ! Where did I mention being an expert ? Where did I say that not except it ? Just stating my opinion.

End of thread for me !

Op: you did write in your initial post "Quite often I asked prosecutors, lawyers and a judge what the deal is here". By this sentence, you made yourself the expert for that subject within Thai laws..

You asked for opinions, I gave you mine, you don't like what I wrote... now you bail out of this thread... lucky you are in Thailand where you can

[likewise]

Because I ask a prosecutor makes me an expert ??? Strange way of thinking, so if I ask you about your job and you explain me your job I become an expert ?? is that the reason why there are so many "experts" around ?

[likewise]

ok, off to ask my neighbour about his offshore ROV job, will be an expert after him explaining me his job

[Swiss1960]

Because I ask a prosecutor makes me an expert ??? Strange way of thinking, so if I ask you about your job and you explain me your job I become an expert ?? is that the reason why there are so many "experts" around ?

If you talk with me (read lawyer), one of my peers (read prosecutor) and an industry expert (read judge) about one specific aspect of my job (read bail) which is specific for Switzerland (read Thailand) and you do that quite often, then I would expect you to have collected all possible information from all possible angles about that specific aspect of the job and other people without that know-how (read me) would consider you to be an expert for that area...

Edited September 25, 2012 by Swiss1960

[likewise]

IMO I'd say I might know a bit more then the average layman, but by no means an expert !

[transam]

Most people are not innocent, usually there is evidence and you will be held in custody till you appear in court and get sentenced.

Everyone is innocent until they've been to trial and been convicted.

Even a guy found with a gun in his hand is innocent till the trial eh.

[NewlyMintedThai]

Most people are not innocent, usually there is evidence and you will be held in custody till you appear in court and get sentenced.

Everyone is innocent until they've been to trial and been convicted.

Even a guy found with a gun in his hand is innocent till the trial eh.

Correct. Not so hard a concept to grasp, eh?

[rattler]

"Their answer is that EVERY suspect has the right to be released on bail,"

I dont know whats more scary that they accept this or that its the law.

It's obviously not the law, as several examples where bail has been denied are given above.

Yet many shameful people still end up on bail as the OP stated

[NewlyMintedThai]

"Their answer is that EVERY suspect has the right to be released on bail,"

I dont know whats more scary that they accept this or that its the law.

It's obviously not the law, as several examples where bail has been denied are given above.

Yet many shameful people still end up on bail as the OP stated

ALLEGEDLY shameful.

[rattler]

IMO I'd say I might know a bit more then the average layman, but by no means an expert !

Dont worry "everyones" an expert on TV

[rattler]

Most people are not innocent, usually there is evidence and you will be held in custody till you appear in court and get sentenced.

Everyone is innocent until they've been to trial and been convicted.

Even a guy found with a gun in his hand is innocent till the trial eh.

Correct. Not so hard a concept to grasp, eh?

Not hard to grasp just difficult to believe, in this case

Edited September 25, 2012 by rattler

[daveh]

Well, if your wife or daughter gets raped and she points out the suspect but trial will start in a couple of months then he will be released on bail in some countries, happy to know that in my country he will go straight to prison and won't be a threat to my wife or daughter or any other woman walking the planet.

If someone else's wife or daughter gets rape by someone who looks like you, then identifies you as the rapist. How would you feel sitting in jail awaiting your day in court. Even if DNA tests prove your innocence, you would have spent months in jail for mistaken identity.

I'm not weak on crime. I feel the punishments are too light. But I don't think it is right in a society which claims people are innocent until proven guilty to hold people without the possibility of bail.

Having said that, I don't think *everyone* should be granted bail. It should be taken on a case by case basis. And I do feel it is wrong to release people on bail who have been convicted and are awaiting appeal.

[likewise]

It is indeed possible that an innocent man ends up in jail for months, but I think that person can sue the state/country for some serious $$$ if he was indeed innocent. Agree with your post though.

[endure]

Most people are not innocent, usually there is evidence and you will be held in custody till you appear in court and get sentenced.

Everyone is innocent until they've been to trial and been convicted.

Well, if your wife or daughter gets raped and she points out the suspect but trial will start in a couple of months then he will be released on bail in some countries, happy to know that in my country he will go straight to prison and won't be a threat to my wife or daughter or any other woman walking the planet.

Your post is a fine example of why the law must remain aloof from emotion.

[endure]

I would have thought that if you really translate for the court, you would be duty bound not to disclose any information, even if the names have been omitted or anything that might give pointers to the case in question. I would also think that you are duty bound not to pass an opinion or state something like this on an open public forum.

Therefore, IMO the post is a load of <deleted>.

Criminal cases are not private. Anyone can go to the court and sit in. Makes for an interesting afternoon.

Friends tell me it can be like watching a B movie court drama

I had to watch some minor criminal trials as part of a college course. In the UK at least it's tedious beyond belief.

[endure]

Reason why I posted this is to get some thoughts from other nationalities where bail is allowed, I agree with the innocent till proven guilty but if one gets arrested and there is evidence I really do not see a reason why that person should be allowed bail.

As I mentioned in my first post, one of the cases I translated for, the suspects were found guilty by court of first hearing, convicted to 15 years to be exact, they appealed (which is there right) yet again they were granted bail till the appeal court decided ! IMO this is not a fair way of handling this towards the victims, after all plenty of evidence in this particular case, convicted so not innocent anymore !

@ uptheos, you might be a stonetable expert in front of 7-11 yet no need to accuse me of lying !!

The justice system isn't there for the victim's sake. It's there to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused and punish them if found guilty.

[rattler]

Reason why I posted this is to get some thoughts from other nationalities where bail is allowed, I agree with the innocent till proven guilty but if one gets arrested and there is evidence I really do not see a reason why that person should be allowed bail.

As I mentioned in my first post, one of the cases I translated for, the suspects were found guilty by court of first hearing, convicted to 15 years to be exact, they appealed (which is there right) yet again they were granted bail till the appeal court decided ! IMO this is not a fair way of handling this towards the victims, after all plenty of evidence in this particular case, convicted so not innocent anymore !

@ uptheos, you might be a stonetable expert in front of 7-11 yet no need to accuse me of lying !!

The justice system isn't there for the victim's sake. It's there to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused and punish them if found guilty.

But which it repeatedly fails to do so undermining the whole system