Norwegian Stein Dokset Accused Of Murder Refuses To Give Testimony: Phuket

[MissChris]

Good point, lemoncake.

The other issue about having an interpreter is that it is extraordinarily difficult to get the story even if the interpreter is very skilled. They need to be able to interpret the actual words said. Interpretation can be hampered by accents in one or both languages they are using. The person making decisions based on what is said may miss some of the nuances.

I've seen a Chinese person in court, unrepresented, with an interpreter. It was actually the Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal, where you would expect the judges to have some brains about it. However, there were comments that the applicant appeared to understand some of what was said and they felt that he was being manipulative by requiring an interpreter! The interpreter herself clearly had little experience with the legal system, making it even more confusing. Certainly, there might be a bit of an advantage in being able to collect one's thoughts while there is interpretation happening. It's a small thing amongst the huge disadvantages.

I have also done a practice interview about a legal matter with a Chinese person using a trainee Chinese interpreter. The whole class were quite dismayed at how little information we could glean from the 'client'. In fact, it was almost impossible to work out what they were trying to convey.

This is not a reflection on interpreters. It's a philosophical comment on the difficulty with the concept that one can do direct interpretation from one language to another and that there is an equivalence.

I don't blame Dokset for refusing to go ahead without a proper interpreter. I am told that, under pressure, newly acquired language simply dissolves. Shame the case has been put back another 5 months. Must be almost unendurable.

[ALFREDO]

There will never be any physical evidence to prove it one way or the other so there is reasonable doubt, isn't there?

So, his wrongdoing, hiding the body, lying about all and not inform the authorities, servers him now well,

if the circumstances of the death had not been so innocent as he is stating?

So you're suggesting that he should be convicted by default - because of what he did with the body?

You put a conclusion in my statement, I did not make!

You write - "There will never be any physical evidence to prove it one way or the other, so there is reasonable doubt!"

I present only the fact, that the -evidence- is missing, because the body is so rotten that no conclusions can be made from the skin, flesh,

from the

blood stains at the "scene of the accident or crime" because of Doksets actions.

So, if it was an accident or most part an accident, than he should have called the authorities, no reason to hide something!

But, if he was more involved in that deadly outcome, than it surfs him now well, that there, same you write,

"will never be any physical evidence to prove it one way or the other, so there is reasonable doubt!"

At least, the prosecutor, can think about that fact, which is at least suspicious.

Also, I remember, that there should be a piece of skull which shows, signs of a hit? with something? Or from the fall?

We will see.

[tropo]

Please stop with the nonsense of pretending this forum is a court of law or that because people have opinions of the guy's guilt that it means they don't believe people are entitled to a trial.

As I said, a number of you are becoming far too emotional about this. I'm entitled to my opinion on here just as much as you or anyone else is. There's no need to flame someone's opinion that you don't agree with. Labelling other members' opinions as "nonsense" is flaming. Please give that a break and stay calm.

I also have my own ideas of why he did what he did, but I'll keep them to myself. It would be nice if you could do that too.

Edited March 9, 2013 by tropo

[ALFREDO]

Mr. Dokset is still looking very well nourished after nine months in the slammer.

They must be feeding him more than rice and maggots.

That is an old photo from the arrest.

that are the new ones, the weight went down ! He looks older !

Brother, family

Edited March 9, 2013 by ALFREDO

[tropo]

There will never be any physical evidence to prove it one way or the other so there is reasonable doubt, isn't there?

So, his wrongdoing, hiding the body, lying about all and not inform the authorities, servers him now well,

if the circumstances of the death had not been so innocent as he is stating?

So you're suggesting that he should be convicted by default - because of what he did with the body?

You put a conclusion in my statement, I did not make!

No I didn't. I used a question mark at the end of that sentence because it seemed that you might be.

There's no point going over and over how stupid the guy was for doing what he did with the body and what he should have done. People make bad choices - there's nothing unusual about that. We can't always figure out why people do stuff.

Edited March 9, 2013 by tropo

[ALFREDO]

Hastings, the ''part'' body discovery was in ONE of there habitats. SUDDENLY, the BiB raid this residence after 3 years and find ''part'' of a body. Why not all of it ? DID the bin belong to the house ? Was soil found with the ''part'' body from another area. Said all this before with no response:( .

Maybe you should go back and read the original thread.

The BiB finally raided his residence because her family claimed that the Phuket police were not interested in her sudden "disappearance". The family went to Bangkok and appealed to the Bangkok police who finally organized the raid on Dokset's house.

There was only a partial body because chemicals had been added to the wheelie-bin which dissolved most of the body.

Anything else you don't "get"?

As I read it, it seems that all the remains were not in the bin. If this was the UK l would take on board what was being said/produced, it is not, her cop husband was very quiet for three years. I wonder why.

Why should he be different?

He had nothing to gain from her, after the ending of the relationship.

He was. possibly happy, she did not show up sometimes and wanted more money for the child she had with him.

Edited March 9, 2013 by ALFREDO

[Nisa]

I also have my own ideas of why he did what he did, but I'll keep them to myself. It would be nice if you could do that too

Do realize this is a discussion forum and thread for the purpose of expressing thoughts and opinions about this subject?

If you don't want to express yourself here and your goal is simply to quiet others, whose views you don't like, then I suggest you use the ignore function (a lot) or not visit these kinds of sites. However, it might actually be more interesting and entertaining for you and others here if you shared your views of the case as opposed to trying to come up with reasons why others shouldn't share their views.

But enough about making this thread about you. I just find, based on all the reports, that I'd have to go into a fantasy world to believe at this point he is not the one responsible for her death. In other words, he is responsible for killing her. I also suspect it was cold blooded murder brought on by rage and possibly finances but understand without seeing the full medical reports, and not just knowing her head was hit so hard pieces of her skill fragmented, and not actually being part of the trial it is just an opinion.

Regardless of the findings of the court, all we will ever have is opinions of the case because we'll never see all the evidence and will be limited to what is reported ... and even if we were privy to all the info it doesn't mean we would know the level of his guilt. People all over the world and in much more developed nations are convicted of crimes they didn't do while others are deemed not guilty even though they committed the crime and these decisions are usually made by intelligent people with the best intentions.

[NamKangMan]

Hastings, the ''part'' body discovery was in ONE of there habitats. SUDDENLY, the BiB raid this residence after 3 years and find ''part'' of a body. Why not all of it ? DID the bin belong to the house ? Was soil found with the ''part'' body from another area. Said all this before with no response:( .

Maybe you should go back and read the original thread.

The BiB finally raided his residence because her family claimed that the Phuket police were not interested in her sudden "disappearance". The family went to Bangkok and appealed to the Bangkok police who finally organized the raid on Dokset's house.

There was only a partial body because chemicals had been added to the wheelie-bin which dissolved most of the body.

Anything else you don't "get"?

As I read it, it seems that all the remains were not in the bin. If this was the UK l would take on board what was being said/produced, it is not, her cop husband was very quiet for three years. I wonder why.

Why should he be different?

He had nothing to gain from her, after the ending of the relationship.

He was. possibly happy, she did not show up sometimes and wanted more money for the child she had with him.

"He had nothing to gain from her, after the ending of the relationship."

But everything to lose........................

[tropo]

Do realize this is a discussion forum and thread for the purpose of expressing thoughts and opinions about this subject?

If you don't want to express yourself here and your goal is simply to quiet others, whose views you don't like, then I suggest you use the ignore function (a lot) or not visit these kinds of sites. However, it might actually be more interesting and entertaining for you and others here if you shared your views of the case as opposed to trying to come up with reasons why others shouldn't share their views.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not going to use the ignore function. Just keep it civil.

Edited March 9, 2013 by tropo

[Nisa]

Please stop with the nonsense of pretending this forum is a court of law or that because people have opinions of the guy's guilt that it means they don't believe people are entitled to a trial.

As I said, a number of you are becoming far too emotional about this. I'm entitled to my opinion on here just as much as you or anyone else is. There's no need to flame someone's opinion that you don't agree with. Labelling other members' opinions as "nonsense" is flaming. Please give that a break and stay calm.

I also have my own ideas of why he did what he did, but I'll keep them to myself. It would be nice if you could do that too.

After rereading your entire post, I just wanted to add that there was no attempt to flame you. This is not a court of law and "Presumed Innocence" doesn't apply and it makes no sense (non-sense) to allude that it does. Also to allude that somebody saying they think somebody is guilty means it equates to them not believing in a person's right to a trial also makes no sense. That is all I was trying to say and if the choice of the word "nonsense" or how it was worded upset you, know it was not my intention.

[tropo]

Please stop with the nonsense of pretending this forum is a court of law or that because people have opinions of the guy's guilt that it means they don't believe people are entitled to a trial.

As I said, a number of you are becoming far too emotional about this. I'm entitled to my opinion on here just as much as you or anyone else is. There's no need to flame someone's opinion that you don't agree with. Labelling other members' opinions as "nonsense" is flaming. Please give that a break and stay calm.

I also have my own ideas of why he did what he did, but I'll keep them to myself. It would be nice if you could do that too.

After rereading your entire post, I just wanted to add that there was no attempt to flame you. This is not a court of law and "Presumed Innocence" doesn't apply and it makes no sense (non-sense) to allude that it does. Also to allude that somebody saying they think somebody is guilty means it equates to them not believing in a person's right to a trial also makes no sense. That is all I was trying to say and if the choice of the word "nonsense" or how it was worded upset you, know it was not my intention.

For some reason you have the impression that by using terms such as "presumed innocence" and "reasonable doubt" I'm suggesting this forum is a court of law. I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm merely emphasizing that despite all the emotional responses there is not enough evidence to send this guy to prison for the rest of his life or have him executed.

There was a Thai lawyer (post #26) who chimed in earlier on this thread, and I believe he had the case well summed up - unfortunately one member decided to flame him because his English was not perfect.

We'll have to wait until at least August to see how this turns out...

[seaeagle]

Whatever the level of crime, innocent or guilty, it's actually quite refreshing to see someone digging their heels in and not co-operating with the police and courts.

Too much here is done by smiley re-enactments, guilty pleas, financial pay-offs etc. Having to run a court case 'properly' is probably throwing the 'local system' off their stride.

How can he cooperate, when he is Norwegian but he is given an English Interpreter, its like giving Chinese Interpreter to Japanese, just because he is Asian.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

[tropo]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

It's not so "refreshing" or surprising that he's standing his ground because his life and liberty are at stake. I think the biggest travesty here is that he must wait another 5 months just because they couldn't find a suitable interpreter.

Edited March 9, 2013 by tropo

[endure]

Can you all stop bickering and stick to the subject of the topic please.

[lemoncake]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

It's not so "refreshing" or surprising that he's standing his ground because his life and liberty are at stake. I think the biggest travesty here is that he must wait another 5 months just because they couldn't find a suitable interpreter.

Some food for thought.

He may not even speak good enough English to understand what lawyers or anyone else is telling him

From what i read, they did not even try to find an interpreter, which i find really strange that his lawyers would not be on top of it, which again leads me to believe his English is not good enough to understand or express himself.

They found a reporter from the local paper, which hardly qualifies as an interpreter, to make matters worse they found an English speaking one, while he needs a Norwegian one.

And top it all up, lawyers tried to convince him to accept that.

To me it does not sound like they are acting in his best interests nor do they even try to protect his interests.

It says his "luxury" villa, so one can assume he has some money for decent legal team and perhaps some friends or family to look out for his interest but ..........

There is a possibility he is "negotiating" something behind closed doors, but the whole story stinks from start to finish.

[stevenl]

His English is excellent.

[transam]

His English is excellent.

My Thai wifes English is excellent ''until'' l try and explain something..

[stevenl]

His English is excellent.

My Thai wifes English is excellent ''until'' l try and explain something..

But if your wife is in court for murdering her husband it would be in Thai

There were some comments made her that his English is poor, which is simply not the case. I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well. But whether that would have to be Norwegian or English may be a tactical decision here, I don't know.

[lemoncake]

His English is excellent.

My Thai wifes English is excellent ''until'' l try and explain something..

But if your wife is in court for murdering her husband it would be in Thai

There were some comments made her that his English is poor, which is simply not the case. I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well. But whether that would have to be Norwegian or English may be a tactical decision here, I don't know.

So you know him well? Had conversations out of the bar on a number of issues?

Perhaps discussed some legal terminology?

Bottom line is his English might be good , however it is still not his native tongue and something as serious as this one would want to understand every single word very very clear

[Nisa]

His English is excellent.

My Thai wifes English is excellent ''until'' l try and explain something..

But if your wife is in court for murdering her husband it would be in Thai

There were some comments made her that his English is poor, which is simply not the case. I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well. But whether that would have to be Norwegian or English may be a tactical decision here, I don't know.

So you know him well? Had conversations out of the bar on a number of issues?

Perhaps discussed some legal terminology?

Bottom line is his English might be good , however it is still not his native tongue and something as serious as this one would want to understand every single word very very clear

Where does it say he was not offered a translator in his preferred language? There is nothing in the news account to make this assumption and plenty of things to suggest this was not the issue including his 3 lawyers and all the officers of the court and his own words which indicate the problem was simply she was a reporter.

Dokset refused to accept the appointed interpreter. He explained that the Thai woman is a journalist from a a local newspaper in Phuket, which he would no accept.

[diddums]

The thing that sticks in my mind, and always has been, regardless of what he has said to minimize how it looks is, did he put ''some'' parts of the lady in the bin and was the bin his.

He admitted it putting the body in the wheelie-bin and even did a reconstruction.

As he was the only person with the keys to rooms he hid the bin in, how could it be anyone elses bin?

He had the only keys, how do you know ? How many sets of keys are there for my house ?

When the lady left the relationship do you think she had a set of keys ? I think so, why not, she lived there from time to time.

Are you saying that she did it ?

[lemoncake]

Where does it say he was not offered a translator in his preferred language? There is nothing in the news account to make this assumption and plenty of things to suggest this was not the issue including his 3 lawyers and all the officers of the court and his own words which indicate the problem was simply she was a reporter.

Dokset refused to accept the appointed interpreter. He explained that the Thai woman is a journalist from a a local newspaper in Phuket, which he would no accept.

Who and where i said he was not offered one

He was offered

1.. an unqualified person who supposedly speaks English

2. For the 10th time, he is Norwegian, what does English Interpreter has to do with him?

3. Perhaps what he said and what he meant were 2 very different things, He could have easily meant that she was not qualified.

4. Could also mean his lawyers misunderstood what he said or wanted

4. Your native tongue supposedly is English and yet you fail to understand something as simple as this, Why should he put his life into the hands of someone, who is not only qualified, not tested but also speaks different language to his native tongue?

Why his lawyers were trying to convince him to take her? why did they not bring someone not only qualified in all aspects, but also someone who he approved of? After all he is paying for his defence,

Should he not have people that he likes?

[Jimi007]

But if your wife is in court for murdering her husband it would be in Thai

There were some comments made her that his English is poor, which is simply not the case. I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well. But whether that would have to be Norwegian or English may be a tactical decision here, I don't know.

So you know him well? Had conversations out of the bar on a number of issues?

Perhaps discussed some legal terminology?

Bottom line is his English might be good , however it is still not his native tongue and something as serious as this one would want to understand every single word very very clear

Where does it say he was not offered a translator in his preferred language? There is nothing in the news account to make this assumption and plenty of things to suggest this was not the issue including his 3 lawyers and all the officers of the court and his own words which indicate the problem was simply she was a reporter.

Dokset refused to accept the appointed interpreter. He explained that the Thai woman is a journalist from a a local newspaper in Phuket, which he would no accept.

Try reading the follow up articles on this thread:

After a six-hour wait, the judge informed the court that an English-Thai translator was not available.

A Phuket reporter volunteered to be the translator, but Mr Dokset refused, saying he wanted to use the court translator.

“We have had a heavy caseload and neglected to book a translator in advance. We tried to find one this afternoon, but could not,” the judge said.

“The case is postponed to August 22, at which time the case investigators will be called in to give their statements in court again,” he added.

Source: http://www.phuketgaz...ator-20441.html

Post number 58...

Edited March 10, 2013 by Jimi007

[stevenl]

His English is excellent.

My Thai wifes English is excellent ''until'' l try and explain something..

But if your wife is in court for murdering her husband it would be in Thai

There were some comments made her that his English is poor, which is simply not the case. I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well. But whether that would have to be Norwegian or English may be a tactical decision here, I don't know.

So you know him well? Had conversations out of the bar on a number of issues?

Perhaps discussed some legal terminology?

Bottom line is his English might be good , however it is still not his native tongue and something as serious as this one would want to understand every single word very very clear

As I said "I understand him wanting a officially recognised translater for his own testimony, I'd insist on that as well."

BTW, understanding or not is not the issue, it was for his testimony that this issue arose.

[smokie36]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

It's not so "refreshing" or surprising that he's standing his ground because his life and liberty are at stake. I think the biggest travesty here is that he must wait another 5 months just because they couldn't find a suitable interpreter.

Totally agree. Regardless of his innocence or guilt a proper independent interpreter should have been found.

Why a five month delay? What are his embassy saying about that?

Its a disgrace when a proper interpreter could have been flown in from Bangkok in a couple of hours.

[transam]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

It's not so "refreshing" or surprising that he's standing his ground because his life and liberty are at stake. I think the biggest travesty here is that he must wait another 5 months just because they couldn't find a suitable interpreter.

Totally agree. Regardless of his innocence or guilt a proper independent interpreter should have been found.

Why a five month delay? What are his embassy saying about that?

Its a disgrace when a proper interpreter could have been flown in from Bangkok in a couple of hours.

Yep, innocent or not the guy must have the perfect representation as a non immigrant, the consequences of folk not understanding evidence could be very detrimental to the proceedings and fate of the accused.

[smokie36]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. Irrespective of what he's alleged to have done and been charged for, I find it refreshing that he's not simply caved-in to the 'system' here and is standing his ground in an effort to get some degree of professionalism from the Thai judiciary.

It's not so "refreshing" or surprising that he's standing his ground because his life and liberty are at stake. I think the biggest travesty here is that he must wait another 5 months just because they couldn't find a suitable interpreter.

Totally agree. Regardless of his innocence or guilt a proper independent interpreter should have been found.

Why a five month delay? What are his embassy saying about that?

Its a disgrace when a proper interpreter could have been flown in from Bangkok in a couple of hours.

Yep, innocent or not the guy must have the perfect representation as a non immigrant, the consequences of folk not understanding evidence could be very detrimental to the proceedings and fate of the accused.

Time spent on remand does not come off the eventual sentence either. This is an additional punishment from the judge for not accepting the interpreter, which in my view is unjust.

[IrishIvan]

No translator eh? Where are all the expert linguists that frequent the Phuket forum? People here are never shy to tell everyone how they are an expert in the language. Its a chance to get on TV and help out a fellow thaivisa member

[smokie36]

No translator eh? Where are all the expert linguists that frequent the Phuket forum? People here are never shy to tell everyone how they are an expert in the language. Its a chance to get on TV and help out a fellow thaivisa member

I don't think he's a member any more.

[FritsSikkink]

This is not a case of if he killed her but the circumstances under which he killed her. The guy has admitted he killed his girlfriend during a fight and has admitted to hiding the body for years in his home.

Presumed innocence is simply a legal term (for the court rooms) which means a defendant shouldn't have to prove his innocence but rather the state needs to prove his guilt. Presumed innocence also only applies to those actually judging the accused including judges, all over the world, who often hold these "innocent" people in jail before and during trial.

Can you imagine telling a loved one, such a daughter that has been raped, that they have to believe their attacker is innocent unless the judge says otherwise?

I could be wrong but when people bring up presumed innocence and try to act as though it applies to people expressing opinions outside of court, such as on a discussion forum, I think they know better and for whatever reason just don't want to believe in the person's guilt but for whatever reason are incapable or unwilling to share their reasons for this desired belief. I think maybe most of us have played this card at one time or another when for whatever reason we just didn't want to believe in somebody's guilt despite overwhelming information saying differently.

I think you missed this from the OP:

"When he was arrested by the Thai federal police last year, Dokset explained that June had died accidentally during a scuffle in which she hit her head on the wall and fallen down the stairs."

There will never be any physical evidence to prove it one way or the other so there is reasonable doubt, isn't there?

So, his wrongdoing, hiding the body, lying about all and not inform the authorities, servers him now well,

if the circumstances of the death had not been so innocent as he is stating?

So you're suggesting that he should be convicted by default - because of what he did with the body?

He should at least be convicted for what he did with the body.

Whe have to wait and see if he will be convicted for murder.