berybert Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 confessions came through the pancake man they are not legit confessions came after they were beaten threatened with drowniir and had plastic bags put over their head even alqueda confesses when that happens when they have a lawyer all they do is confirm to the lawyer that they confessed but as soon as the pancake theater was out of the room they immediately said they were tortured confessions are as bogus as seeing those boys are involved in the murders The confessions to the police will probably not be admissible in court. The first lawyer and the HRC commissioner can be called to testify about the confessions made to them. (not the roti vendor- the lawyer and the HRC commissioner didn't use the roti vendor for translation) Hard one to answer for the lawyer and the HRC commissioner. Asked if the guys confessed to the murder they will say something along the lines of. Yes they confessed to the murders, we then asked them why they confessed. They told us they had been tortured. We then told them they now have nothing to fear as we are on their side and asked them if they still confess to murdering the two people. They then said of "course we didn't do it" So that's that confession thrown out of court. Hard wasn't it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I am not going to quote the UN UDHR above -- If you don't like the results of the trial, then you can appeal based on the UN UDHR etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianaChavarria Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 hy I think that this case has so much media attention that it'll be difficult now for the accused to be denied a fair trial.carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I am not going to quote the UN UDHR above -- If you don't like the results of the trial, then you can appeal based on the UN UDHR etc. Actually, legal appeals go to the court of appeals. If you have standing to open a complaint to the UN, feel free. Regardless of the results of the trial, I doubt that the Burmese government will be talking to the UN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 confessions came through the pancake man they are not legit confessions came after they were beaten threatened with drowniir and had plastic bags put over their head even alqueda confesses when that happens when they have a lawyer all they do is confirm to the lawyer that they confessed but as soon as the pancake theater was out of the room they immediately said they were tortured confessions are as bogus as seeing those boys are involved in the murders The confessions to the police will probably not be admissible in court. The first lawyer and the HRC commissioner can be called to testify about the confessions made to them. (not the roti vendor- the lawyer and the HRC commissioner didn't use the roti vendor for translation) Hard one to answer for the lawyer and the HRC commissioner. Asked if the guys confessed to the murder they will say something along the lines of.Yes they confessed to the murders, we then asked them why they confessed. They told us they had been tortured. We then told them they now have nothing to fear as we are on their side and asked them if they still confess to murdering the two people. They then said of "course we didn't do it" So that's that confession thrown out of court. Hard wasn't it ? Missed it by a mile. In both cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I am not going to quote the UN UDHR above -- If you don't like the results of the trial, then you can appeal based on the UN UDHR etc. Actually, legal appeals go to the court of appeals. If you have standing to open a complaint to the UN, feel free. Regardless of the results of the trial, I doubt that the Burmese government will be talking to the UN Yes -- appeal to the Appeals Court in Thailand based upon a violation of the UNUDHR, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambum Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Yet there were 2 other confessions. To the lawyer (public statements) and to the HRC commissioner. The mobile phone ties everything together. Not admitted evidence. Rumour and speculation. Hearsay. Nope - direct statements made to the press is admissible in Thailand. The HRC commissioner 's statement regarding the 2 Burmese defendants confessions also admissible. What is not admissible are claims like blunt force trauma can never cause lacerations. What about claiming that small cuts that appear to have been caused by a shark tooth ring were in fact caused by a hoe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SABloke Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The worrying thing for me is what happens if the court finds them not guilt: The police basically packed up their things after a week of perfect investigating so if these guys are innocent are the police going to go find the real culprits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The worrying thing for me is what happens if the court finds them not guilt: The police basically packed up their things after a week of perfect investigating so if these guys are innocent are the police going to go find the real culprits? The Judge can say that there was insufficient proof for conviction without saying that the 2 accused were not complicit in the crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambum Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 hy I think that this case has so much media attention that it'll be difficult now for the accused to be denied a fair trial.carry on They've already been denied a fair trial before it even starts by the court first of all allowing the defence team to review the evidence in April, and turning tail a couple of weeks ago, and saying that they will make a decision as to whether the defence team can review the evidence on the first day of the trial. Does that not raise warning flags? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 confessions came through the pancake man they are not legit confessions came after they were beaten threatened with drowniir and had plastic bags put over their head even alqueda confesses when that happens when they have a lawyer all they do is confirm to the lawyer that they confessed but as soon as the pancake theater was out of the room they immediately said they were tortured confessions are as bogus as seeing those boys are involved in the murders The confessions to the police will probably not be admissible in court. The first lawyer and the HRC commissioner can be called to testify about the confessions made to them. (not the roti vendor- the lawyer and the HRC commissioner didn't use the roti vendor for translation) Hard one to answer for the lawyer and the HRC commissioner. Asked if the guys confessed to the murder they will say something along the lines of.Yes they confessed to the murders, we then asked them why they confessed. They told us they had been tortured. We then told them they now have nothing to fear as we are on their side and asked them if they still confess to murdering the two people. They then said of "course we didn't do it" So that's that confession thrown out of court. Hard wasn't it ? Missed it by a mile. In both cases. Coming from you I'll take it as being spot on then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 hy I think that this case has so much media attention that it'll be difficult now for the accused to be denied a fair trial.carry on They've already been denied a fair trial before it even starts by the court first of all allowing the defence team to review the evidence in April, and turning tail a couple of weeks ago, and saying that they will make a decision as to whether the defence team can review the evidence on the first day of the trial. Does that not raise warning flags? As someone earlier said, this is a chat room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 confessions came through the pancake man they are not legitconfessions came after they were beaten threatened with drowniir and had plastic bags put over their head even alqueda confesses when that happens when they have a lawyer all they do is confirm to the lawyer that they confessed but as soon as the pancake theater was out of the room they immediately said they were tortured confessions are as bogus as seeing those boys are involved in the murders The confessions to the police will probably not be admissible in court. The first lawyer and the HRC commissioner can be called to testify about the confessions made to them. (not the roti vendor- the lawyer and the HRC commissioner didn't use the roti vendor for translation) Hard one to answer for the lawyer and the HRC commissioner. Asked if the guys confessed to the murder they will say something along the lines of.Yes they confessed to the murders, we then asked them why they confessed. They told us they had been tortured. We then told them they now have nothing to fear as we are on their side and asked them if they still confess to murdering the two people. They then said of "course we didn't do it" So that's that confession thrown out of court. Hard wasn't it ? Missed it by a mile. In both cases. Coming from you I'll take it as being spot on then Statements made to the lawyer and HRC commissioner were independent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well at least it's made some people look up international law....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well at least it's made some people look up international law....... International law or at least international standards in both human rights and the judicial system including police investigations particularly in this sad case is something Thailand has paid little regard to and it looks as though this will continue. The authorities have had plenty of time and opportunity to be transparent in the case and evidence, however even when faced with international criticism and a window of hope to allow independent testing of the DNA they have closed all windows. Why? And why are some people so supportive of the fact. I agree with many posters on this site and I actually think its the majority of posters that no matter whether the current 2 accused were involved in any way or not, or whether there were others involved, we will never know the whole truth and the trial is unlikely to be fair or transparent enough to reveal any real facts that can be evidence based or at least credible to international standards having been independently verified. A complete farce from beginning to end and a another sad episode and example of justice in Thailand. The victims parents deserve more as do the human rights of the 2 accused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. If you had your way these two would be locked up for life with no need to bother with a trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Finally, after 20 pages you seem to be getting an idea of what the issue actually is.... Edited June 11, 2015 by cumgranosalum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Finally, after 20 pages you seem to be getting an idea of what the issue actually is.... However last December 26, the Samui Judge decided that there was sufficient credible evidence for the 2 accused to be held for a trial starting next month. I guess most on here disagree with that issue as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScarpoFongness4U Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 What's there to dispute, Of course they are ready to put the portrait into the frame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Finally, after 20 pages you seem to be getting an idea of what the issue actually is.... However last December 26, the Samui Judge decided that there was sufficient credible evidence for the 2 accused to be held for a trial starting next month. I guess most on here disagree with that issue as well. Most on here will agree that the judge had no choice to send the case to court or it would have been 4 and out. <snip> Edited June 12, 2015 by Jai Dee baiting comment deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Most on here believe the Judge had no choice whether the Judge had a choice or not. No song right now but the famous quote from the US is: "I could get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich ..." (Sol Wachtler) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Finally, after 20 pages you seem to be getting an idea of what the issue actually is.... However last December 26, the Samui Judge decided that there was sufficient credible evidence for the 2 accused to be held for a trial starting next month. I guess most on here disagree with that issue as well. ....and back to square one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well, so much for the concept of innocent until proven guilty then. Finally, after 20 pages you seem to be getting an idea of what the issue actually is.... No, I understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty from the very beginning. However I understand that it applies to everyone, unlike others that can simply declare the trial a farce before it starts, or that the police are guilty of a cover-up, or that the "real" killers are some other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 In Thailand, the Defense has no right of discovery to the Prosecution's evidence prior to trial. Some on here claim that the trial will be unfair because the Defense had no access to the Prosecution's evidence prior to trial. The international Treaty that was referenced earlier was intended that the Defense has the right to evidence during the trial as I guess in some venues even that was denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Its not just some on here that are saying the whole process appears to be unfair, it is a host of credible international experts from various charitable organizations such as Reprieve and Amnesty International, its not just some on here or just the defense team that wanted independent testing of the DNA, its was also called for by the UK FCO. Its not just some on here that are saying that this is a farce, its the collective opinion of all international media. I'll remain in that camp thank you What we do have is a very small minority on here that seem to disagree with that, up to you, carry on your little charade, I find it offense and worthless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Whatever credible organizations might say about this trial as well as posters on here, this is Thailand. Thailand has Rules of Criminal Procedure. Thailand it seems is well within its International rights to adhere to its own Rules of Criminal Procedure. That seems to be what they are doing regardless of protestations of outside NGOs and other government diplomatic representations in Thailand to which they seem to be saying: Mind your own f&^%king business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Indeed, Thailand is sticking its middle finger to the rest of the world on this. Much the same as it did with the recent Rohingya crisis even going so far as to charge 2 respected Phuket journalists for exposing some of the tragedy. Then look what happens, its gets downgraded and joins the ranks of North Korea for human trafficking! Only then does it take action when its already too late and the real truth comes out about the deaths and torture on Thai soil of these persecuted men, women and children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Indeed, Thailand is sticking its middle finger to the rest of the world on this. Much the same as it did with the recent Rohingya crisis even going so far as to charge 2 respected Phuket journalists for exposing some of the tragedy. Then look what happens, its gets downgraded and joins the ranks of North Korea for human trafficking! Only then does it take action when its already too late and the real truth comes out about the deaths and torture on Thai soil of these persecuted men, women and children. Your last sentence should maybe read " ... these men, women , and children who were so persecuted in their home countries that they felt the need to flee to Thailand, Malaysia, or elsewhere." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailandchilli Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Indeed, Thailand is sticking its middle finger to the rest of the world on this. Much the same as it did with the recent Rohingya crisis even going so far as to charge 2 respected Phuket journalists for exposing some of the tragedy. Then look what happens, its gets downgraded and joins the ranks of North Korea for human trafficking! Only then does it take action when its already too late and the real truth comes out about the deaths and torture on Thai soil of these persecuted men, women and children. Your last sentence should maybe read " ... these men, women , and children who were so persecuted in their home countries that they felt the need to flee to Thailand, Malaysia, or elsewhere." To a degree, however the reports are they were taken to Thailand against their will, it was not their intended destination, rather they were then already captive in the hands of the human traffickers, I wont expand on who these traffickers were but there's a very recent arrest of one top Thai army official. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts