Capital punishment concerns raised over Thai backpackers' murder case

[JLCrab]

Just to note from Penal Code of Thailand:

Section 177 Whoever, giving a false evidence to the Court in the judicial proceedings, if such false evidence is an essential matter in the case, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or fined not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both.

If the offence mentioned in the first paragraph is committed in the criminal proceeding, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years and fined not exceeding fourteen thousand Baht.

[jdinasia]

Would these human rights twits agree that beating their skulls in with rocks and hoes was an abuse of the human rights of the two innocent Britons?

Sorry to say but deceased people have no human rights. That is from EHRC. Have problem pasting link here but Google and ask "human rights deceased" it's a site what....com. Should be easy to difficult to find. Only took me couple minutes.

Murder is a human rights violation. So, yes, when Hannah and David were murdered their rights were violated.

Some people seem willing to gloss over that very basic fact.

Better take it up with the EHRC. With so many murders worldwide every day do you think they will agree. I doubt they will even listen. The website with the EHRC decision is a q&a site. Let us know what they say.

The murders were indeed tragic and I wish they, like all murders, never happened. In a way their human rights in trying to find the culprits is being served. What else can be done for them? The human rights of the victims living families as well as the accused are presently being taken care off.

.absolutely no need for me to go further than the UDHR article 3.. No need to discuss the fact that David and Hannah had their human rights violated when they were unlawfully killed.

[stephenterry]

Just to note from Penal Code of Thailand:

Section 177 Whoever, giving a false evidence to the Court in the judicial proceedings, if such false evidence is an essential matter in the case, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or fined not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both.

If the offence mentioned in the first paragraph is committed in the criminal proceeding, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years and fined not exceeding fourteen thousand Baht.

Are you being serious? Get real.

[stephenterry]

Murder is a human rights violation. So, yes, when Hannah and David were murdered their rights were violated.

Some people seem willing to gloss over that very basic fact.

And your point is? Oh, let me guess. Find the B2 scapegoats guilty.

Edited March 12, 2015 by stephenterry

[AleG]

The defense has arranged for translators, ...

And how will that work? Translators sitting next to people in court (one translator per person?) whispering in that person's ear while others are speaking? I doubt the judges will like that sort of noise. And that still doesn't address the 'daily summation' (or whatever it's called) by the judge (outside the court?) at the end of each day's proceedings.

Thais are fixated on not losing face. When world's press corps descends upon Samui next summer, they will report things as they see them. They won't be under orders (by the Thai PM, for example) to do things exactly like Thai officialdom wants things to be done ('observers only' for example). Thai judicial process may be setting itself up for some ridicule if the legal process is seen as lacking. Already, many news outlets can see through the smokescreen of what's been announced thus far by Thai officialdom, re; this case, and have been reporting their perceptions. It's like the H.C.Anderson story, The Emperor's New Clothes: just because officialdom dictates a certain scenario, doesn't mean the press corps or the general public won't see what's really happening.

All the rules re; legal proceedures are made by men (they're not dictated by some God in Heaven) and they can be adjusted by men. I don't presume I can affect any change on such haughty matters. Yet suggestions from the peanut gallery can sometimes trickle up to the ears of the mighty. ....and maybe effect some adjustments for the better.

....that´s one of the things they have been asking money for; if they don't provide a service to your liking you may ask to get your money refunded.

Get your thoughts together, and try posting again - something sensible, perhaps?.

Would these human rights twits agree that beating their skulls in with rocks and hoes was an abuse of the human rights of the two innocent Britons?

If it makes you feel better to call me a twit, go right ahead. I seek truth and justice and the most likely perps being (re-)designated as prime suspects. I don't see it happening in this case.

Thailand and it's justice system are in no need to accommodate to your special needs, try Thai lessons instead.

[Keesters]

Would these human rights twits agree that beating their skulls in with rocks and hoes was an abuse of the human rights of the two innocent Britons?

Sorry to say but deceased people have no human rights. That is from EHRC. Have problem pasting link here but Google and ask "human rights deceased" it's a site what....com. Should be easy to difficult to find. Only took me couple minutes.

Murder is a human rights violation. So, yes, when Hannah and David were murdered their rights were violated.

Some people seem willing to gloss over that very basic fact.

Better take it up with the EHRC. With so many murders worldwide every day do you think they will agree. I doubt they will even listen. The website with the EHRC decision is a q&a site. Let us know what they say.

The murders were indeed tragic and I wish they, like all murders, never happened. In a way their human rights in trying to find the culprits is being served. What else can be done for them? The human rights of the victims living families as well as the accused are presently being taken care off.

.absolutely no need for me to go further than the UDHR article 3.. No need to discuss the fact that David and Hannah had their human rights violated when they were unlawfully killed.

I asked "what else can be done for them". Please don't avoid it.

[jdinasia]

Murder is a human rights violation. So, yes, when Hannah and David were murdered their rights were violated.

Some people seem willing to gloss over that very basic fact.

And your point is? Oh, let me guess. Find the B2 scapegoats guilty.

You do realize that not everyone agrees that they are scapegoats, right?

[stephenterry]

Murder is a human rights violation. So, yes, when Hannah and David were murdered their rights were violated.

Some people seem willing to gloss over that very basic fact.

And your point is? Oh, let me guess. Find the B2 scapegoats guilty.

You do realize that not everyone agrees that they are scapegoats, right?

I can't answer your question because of the defamation laws, although any reasonable person following this case would have doubts about the veracity of the RTP's assertions.

I'm still waiting for, your 'point is?'

[JLCrab]

Just to note from Penal Code of Thailand:

Section 177 Whoever, giving a false evidence to the Court in the judicial proceedings, if such false evidence is an essential matter in the case, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or fined not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both.

If the offence mentioned in the first paragraph is committed in the criminal proceeding, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years and fined not exceeding fourteen thousand Baht.

Are you being serious? Get real.

So your version of real is that there will be a chorus-line of witnesses willing to offer perjured testimony?

[boomerangutang]

Agreed, it is almost laughable that people think there's a conspiracy at the level of complexity being suggested by some.

Imagine Mr X wanted a certain result in a crime investigation. Mr. X outranks everyone on the investigative team. Mr. X (perhaps with a paid assistant sworn to secrecy) alters some key evidence, then announces the skewed evidence to everyone. Every person in uniform, who is lower rank than Mr. X is obligated to go along with what's declared (DNA typing or whatever). A belief in something doesn't require every believer to be a co-conspirator.

Here's another example: Marco Polo came back from Asia and claimed there were black rocks which burn over there. Everyone in Europe only had MP's claim to go by. Is each European who believed in burning rocks (coal) a co-conspirator with Mr. Polo?

Thailand and it's justice system are in no need to accommodate to your special needs, try Thai lessons instead.

I'm just one of hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of observers. Most of those concerned observers don't speak Thai. To get news (and form an opinion about whether Thailand has a fair legal system and, more specifically whether the B2 will get a fair trial), those outsiders will have to rely upon the translated utterings of a man who is paraphrasing (perhaps one or two sentences) from hours of each day's testimony. And that's if he chooses to update the press corps. I'm just one of a large crowd AleG. If you want the world to get the impression that Thailand's legal system is hopelessly out-dated, that's your option. I'd rather there be a fair and open trial, in reality and in appearance.

[JLCrab]

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

Edited March 12, 2015 by JLCrab

[jdinasia]

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

The need to forever escalate the conspiracy theories is awesome.

All the technicians, the HRC, every witness, the lawyer, everyone on the island, the DNA lab, every police officer from the island, the province, and the country --- all willing to give false testimony?

[IslandLover]

stephenterry, on 12 Mar 2015 - 11:23, said:

Well said. Just my thoughts. The phrase - 'when they get the needle' - with the repeated use of 'needle', is obscene, and not welcome in this forum, IMO.

My thoughts exactly!

[Sheryl]

stephenterry, on 12 Mar 2015 - 11:23, said:

Well said. Just my thoughts. The phrase - 'when they get the needle' - with the repeated use of 'needle', is obscene, and not welcome in this forum, IMO.

My thoughts exactly!

The word is not obscene but I agree that the sentiment is deplorable.

[Sheryl]

A baiting post has been removed. Please keep it civil.

[greenchair]

stephenterry, on 12 Mar 2015 - 11:23, said:

Well said. Just my thoughts. The phrase - 'when they get the needle' - with the repeated use of 'needle', is obscene, and not welcome in this forum, IMO.

My thoughts exactly!

I can't find that post. Who is talking about needles?

[Mooner]

The same arguments keep getting recycled. Two opposing beliefs that will never produce a productive ending.

A minority are believe the B2 are guilty and are welcome to their beliefs.

For the majority who believe they are innocent I suggest discussing their ideas between each other as both sides are not going to give in and the constant bickering will only result in the thread being closed.

[boomerangutang]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

The need to forever escalate the conspiracy theories is awesome.

All the technicians, the HRC, every witness, the lawyer, everyone on the island, the DNA lab, every police officer from the island, the province, and the country --- all willing to give false testimony?

Some may think the scenario is ridiculous, because the hypothetical scenario I painted claims that the top ranked officer purposefully skews the data. Therefore everyone reading the scenario knows the data is skewed, and wonders how everyone of lower rank can go along with something they know is skewed. Here's the clincher, in that scenario: Only the top ranked officer(s) know the data is skewed. Therefore, every lower ranked person, and everyone who's told the data (the press corps and public) assumes the data is solid, because it came from the top ranks. It came from uniformed police bosses sworn to serve and protect the public - so the data/findings must be correct.

Unless a person doesn't want to see the obvious: my scenario shows that it only takes one or a very few people at the top of the pyramid to skew the data, .....and everyone on the lower ranks is obliged to believe it. It does not take a conspiracy of many people to skew the data. It only takes a very few at the top.

When Colin Powell stood before the UN, just before the 2nd Iraqi War, and asserted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction - it only needed him and a few others to float that idea. The hundreds of thousands of military personnel who acted on that info (and invaded Iraq) weren't part of the conspiracy. They were following orders. It didn't take a conspiracy of millions to go to war. It only took a few at the top.

Same dynamic, in my view, regarding the frame-up of the B2, and the claims their DNA matches. I hope the B2 defense team can do their jobs (verify or disprove the data), and are not tricked and/or thwarted by the powers-that-be.

[jdinasia]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

The need to forever escalate the conspiracy theories is awesome.

All the technicians, the HRC, every witness, the lawyer, everyone on the island, the DNA lab, every police officer from the island, the province, and the country --- all willing to give false testimony?

Some may think the scenario is ridiculous, because the hypothetical scenario I painted claims that the top ranked officer purposefully skews the data. Therefore everyone reading the scenario knows the data is skewed, and wonders how everyone of lower rank can go along with something they know is skewed. Here's the clincher, in that scenario: Only the top ranked officer(s) know the data is skewed. Therefore, every lower ranked person, and everyone who's told the data (the press corps and public) assumes the data is solid, because it came from the top ranks. It came from uniformed police bosses sworn to serve and protect the public - so the data/findings must be correct.

Unless a person doesn't want to see the obvious: my scenario shows that it only takes one or a very few people at the top of the pyramid to skew the data, .....and everyone on the lower ranks is obliged to believe it. It does not take a conspiracy of many people to skew the data. It only takes a very few at the top.

When Colin Powell stood before the UN, just before the 2nd Iraqi War, and asserted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction - it only needed him and a few others to float that idea. The hundreds of thousands of military personnel who acted on that info (and invaded Iraq) weren't part of the conspiracy. They were following orders. It didn't take a conspiracy of millions to go to war. It only took a few at the top.

Same dynamic, in my view, regarding the frame-up of the B2, and the claims their DNA matches. I hope the B2 defense team can do their jobs (verify or disprove the data), and are not tricked and/or thwarted by the powers-that-be.

Utter fantasy and ignores the DNA, the 60 prosecution witnesses, and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

[metisdead]

A post containing unsubstantiated information has been removed as rumour mongering, replies have been removed as well.

[boomerangutang]

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

The need to forever escalate the conspiracy theories is awesome.

All the technicians, the HRC, every witness, the lawyer, everyone on the island, the DNA lab, every police officer from the island, the province, and the country --- all willing to give false testimony?

You can twist the my initial statement in to a giordian knot (congratulations on your creative projections!) which has no bearing on what I originally put forth. I've made the case (for a communal belief {in a falsehood} stemming from only a very few top ranked people). If you choose to not understand it, I don't think it's because you're stupid, but rather because you're fixated on being contrarian. It doesn't take a genius to completely jumble the words that someone else writes, and then ridicule it. You could do it with the Lord's Prayer or the Gettysburg Address, if you so choose. As John Lennon might say: "living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see."

[boomerangutang]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Imagine ... that's a good one.

Witnesses may be offering false testimony but they don't know it's false testimony because the powers above them who know that it's false testimony have told them that it is true testimony such when the judge offers some version of is the testimony you are now about to give true to the best of your knowledge they can say Yes! because the person who should know whether it is true or false told me that it is true but other than that person telling them it was true they have no way of knowing whether it is true or not.

The need to forever escalate the conspiracy theories is awesome.

All the technicians, the HRC, every witness, the lawyer, everyone on the island, the DNA lab, every police officer from the island, the province, and the country --- all willing to give false testimony?

Some may think the scenario is ridiculous, because the hypothetical scenario I painted claims that the top ranked officer purposefully skews the data. Therefore everyone reading the scenario knows the data is skewed, and wonders how everyone of lower rank can go along with something they know is skewed. Here's the clincher, in that scenario: Only the top ranked officer(s) know the data is skewed. Therefore, every lower ranked person, and everyone who's told the data (the press corps and public) assumes the data is solid, because it came from the top ranks. It came from uniformed police bosses sworn to serve and protect the public - so the data/findings must be correct.

Unless a person doesn't want to see the obvious: my scenario shows that it only takes one or a very few people at the top of the pyramid to skew the data, .....and everyone on the lower ranks is obliged to believe it. It does not take a conspiracy of many people to skew the data. It only takes a very few at the top.

When Colin Powell stood before the UN, just before the 2nd Iraqi War, and asserted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction - it only needed him and a few others to float that idea. The hundreds of thousands of military personnel who acted on that info (and invaded Iraq) weren't part of the conspiracy. They were following orders. It didn't take a conspiracy of millions to go to war. It only took a few at the top.

Same dynamic, in my view, regarding the frame-up of the B2, and the claims their DNA matches. I hope the B2 defense team can do their jobs (verify or disprove the data), and are not tricked and/or thwarted by the powers-that-be.

Utter fantasy and ignores the DNA, the 60 prosecution witnesses, and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

I've already articulated, in many prior posts, how easy it would be for one or a few top brass to skew the DNA - in order for it to incriminate the B2. How many people have seen the original DNA cards before the B2 were tested? You and I don't know. As for 60 prosecution witnesses, neither you nor I know what they're going to say, or whether any were paid/coerced in to saying something which isn't true. JTJ thought the original DNA typing from Hannah's body was sent out to many labs and experts. He doesn't know. The actual number may be zero.

[jdinasia]

stephenterry, on 12 Mar 2015 - 11:23, said:

Well said. Just my thoughts. The phrase - 'when they get the needle' - with the repeated use of 'needle', is obscene, and not welcome in this forum, IMO.

My thoughts exactly!

The word is not obscene but I agree that the sentiment is deplorable.

The method of execution in Thailand since 2003 is lethal injection. (contrary to people saying hanging or firing squad on these threads)

I am not opposed to the death penalty.

Hannah and David's killers, after having been found guilty and after having exhausted all appeals should pay that ultimate price.

I certainly don't think it is deplorable at all.

[boomerangutang]

.....and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

Is that a joke? RTP already said from the get-go that the crime couldn't have been done by a Thai. If you don't think the rich headman might offer to part with big chunks of money to protect his son and brother, then you forgot to take your anti-naivete pills this morning. Elaborate conspiracy? Ok, if you want to call the possible clandestine actions of one or a few top brass 'elaborate' - you can do so, but I don't think it's an appropriate adjective.

[jdinasia]

.....and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

Is that a joke? RTP already said from the get-go that the crime couldn't have been done by a Thai. If you don't think the rich headman might offer to part with big chunks of money to protect his son and brother, then you forgot to take your anti-naivete pills this morning. Elaborate conspiracy? Ok, if you want to call the possible clandestine actions of one or a few top brass 'elaborate' - you can do so, but I don't think it's an appropriate adjective.

Hmmm you mean the guy that said he'd pay 1 million thb to anyone proving any connection between his son and this crime?

But yes, elaborate conspiracy. Just because you claim DNA tests can be tampered with easily doesn't mean you are right. That absolutely everyone would have to play along with your elaborate conspiracy without exception.... Well, that beggars belief.

[boomerangutang]

.....and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

Is that a joke? RTP already said from the get-go that the crime couldn't have been done by a Thai. If you don't think the rich headman might offer to part with big chunks of money to protect his son and brother, then you forgot to take your anti-naivete pills this morning. Elaborate conspiracy? Ok, if you want to call the possible clandestine actions of one or a few top brass 'elaborate' - you can do so, but I don't think it's an appropriate adjective.

If I bought a 40 baht paper voucher at a cafeteria, and was able to hoodwink a vendor in to giving me a 50 baht meal, is that an elaborate conspiracy? It would be, if jdinasia or JLCrab were reporting the story.

If I later told a large group of people that a 50 baht plate of rice and chicken can be gotten for 40 baht, and everyone in the room believed me, .....are all those people in on the conspiracy with me?

Edited March 12, 2015 by boomerangutang

[boomerangutang]

.....and the lack of motive to create an elaborate conspiracy.

Is that a joke? RTP already said from the get-go that the crime couldn't have been done by a Thai. If you don't think the rich headman might offer to part with big chunks of money to protect his son and brother, then you forgot to take your anti-naivete pills this morning. Elaborate conspiracy? Ok, if you want to call the possible clandestine actions of one or a few top brass 'elaborate' - you can do so, but I don't think it's an appropriate adjective.

Hmmm you mean the guy that said he'd pay 1 million thb to anyone proving any connection between his son and this crime?

But yes, elaborate conspiracy. Just because you claim DNA tests can be tampered with easily doesn't mean you are right. That absolutely everyone would have to play along with your elaborate conspiracy without exception.... Well, that beggars belief.

Yes, I'm a sucker for keep taking the bait, but here goes......

Only one or a few top brass would have to be skewing the data. Everyone of lower ranks would be obligated to go along. Most would not know or care if the data was skewed. The few who might suspect it was or knew it was skewed, would have to go along with it, or risk losing their jobs ....or worse.

For the umpteenth time, it doesn't take a conspiracy for an idea to be believed. I believe Iodine is a disinfectant for cuts. Am I a conspirator about that?

I'm not saying I know for sure (about some folks intentionally skewing the DNA trail). Instead, I'm floating the possibility - and hoping there will be independent testing/verification. We (those of us seeking truth and justice) were hoping the British Coroner's Office would assist with that. However, faith in British experts - being of any assistance in this case, is near rock bottom. The Brits haven't lifted a finger to announce anything thus far, and the earliest we may hear anything from them is October, and even that's doubtful.

[NativeSon360]

Putting the topic to rest, for heaven' sake. English Composition Class -101 ~ Re: "Burmese migrant workers arrested for the crime, were tortured by Thai police to secure their confessions, which they then afterwards retracted.

Edited March 12, 2015 by NativeSon360

[NativeSon360]

stephenterry, on 12 Mar 2015 - 11:23, said:

Well said. Just my thoughts. The phrase - 'when they get the needle' - with the repeated use of 'needle', is obscene, and not welcome in this forum, IMO.

My thoughts exactly!

The word is not obscene but I agree that the sentiment is deplorable.

The method of execution in Thailand since 2003 is lethal injection. (contrary to people saying hanging or firing squad on these threads)

I am not opposed to the death penalty.

Hannah and David's killers, after having been found guilty and after having exhausted all appeals should pay that ultimate price.

I certainly don't think it is deplorable at all.

Application of the death penalty, does not stop people from killing other people. The only remedy for that behavioral penchant (affliction) is a consciousness upgrade, in the human evolutionary process .

And I say to myself, what a wonderful world

Edited March 12, 2015 by NativeSon360

[jimmybkk]

For those who are suggesting that daily events at the trial will be reported, can you point to where I can find details of the daily reporting at previous trials. I would be interested to see the actual way the events were reported rather than pure speculation based on someone's expectations of the reporting.

I couldn't find any replies to my earlier post. Not even one link to a daily report from a previous trial? I have to say I am disappointed. After the reassuring assertions of some posters that we should all just wait for the trial at which time all will be revealed... Whilst others talked about being interested to see how evidence presented would stand up to scrutiny at the trial...

It's beginning to look like some people were trying to pull the wool over other people's eyes. Can no-one find a daily report from any previous trial? Or how about a report on how some evidence presented at a trial was scrutinized?

Hmmm...

Back in the days of the Roman Empire, when Christians were being thrown to the lions at the Colosseum, I can't help but feel some posters here would have been wandering around the Christian dwellings giving false hope to those who cared about the condemned Christians by saying things like: "They still have a chance. Some of those Christians look quite big you know. Let's all just wait and see how it plays out on the day before we get too hysterical. A lot will depend on how hungry the lions are..."

And all the while wearing t-shirts that said "Go Lions!"