Lawyers Council to appeal Koh Tao convicts’ death sentence

[JLCrab]

<snip>

Thai justices are already allowing murderers to roam free. That should answer your question.

Koh Tao is per Wikipedia abut 21 sq. km -- not much room to roam.

Where is Nomsod? If he's the easily-offended quick-to-violence person, he could just as easily do harm in Bangkok or anywhere else. < snip >

So you're maybe suggesting now that if, the kid wanted to do harm in Bangkok, the big-cheese would have the money and clout to pay-off everyone to keep quiet in Bangkok and have some other migrant worker fixed-up for the kid's dirty work?

[Khun Han]

^ Theoretically, yes. Chalerm managed to do it for his son a few years back, though I don't recall any scapegoats being fitted up on that one (but, then again, that was a Thai-on-Thai murder with no international attention).

[JLCrab]

^ Theoretically, yes. Chalerm managed to do it for his son a few years back, though I don't recall any scapegoats being fitted up on that one (but, then again, that was a Thai-on-Thai murder with no international attention).

A theoretical murder. That's good.

[Khun Han]

^ Eh??? You asked a theoretical question, and I gave you a theoretical answer (using a real life example of such an occurrence).

[JLCrab]

^ Eh??? You asked a theoretical question, and I gave you a theoretical answer (using a real life example of such an occurrence).

Yes -- and that all presumes theoretically that the person in question has already committed murders in the first place on Koh Tao.

Edited January 31, 2016 by JLCrab

[Khun Han]

But, surely, the point you were trying to make was that a large scale cover up of a murder in Bangkok would be a far-fetched scenario? And I pointed out that such an occurrence has already happened. Anyway, we're getting miles off centre (maybe that's the idea?). Enough of this little detour for me.

[JLCrab]

But, surely, the point you were trying to make was that a large scale cover up of a murder in Bangkok would be a far-fetched scenario? And I pointed out that such an occurrence has already happened. Anyway, we're getting miles off centre (maybe that's the idea?). Enough of this little detour for me.

What a (now) former Deputy-PM can do in Bangkok and what one of five controlling families on Koh Tao can do in Bangkok is not much of a comparison. But again, going back to the 'murderers allowed to roam free' post to which I originally responded, all I originally said was that Koh Tao is not really a big place on which to roam as in

"Oh give me a home, where the buffalo roam ..."

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/889746-lawyers-council-to-appeal-koh-tao-convicts-death-sentence/?p=10370410

Edited January 31, 2016 by JLCrab

[Basil B]

If the Lawyers Council were really interested in justice the they would be appealing the guilty verdict.

I thought they were, otherwise what's the point of an appeal?

I understand it to be as post #2...

I hope you all have noticed, they will appeal the death penalty.

It does not say they will appeal the verdict of guilty.

That speaks volumes.

GreenChair has 30 well deserved likes for that post.

And your understanding is mistaken Basil:

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1453808903&section=12&typecate=06

"Nakhon said his team is still working on their case to appeal the Dec. 24 verdict. The court had agreed to extend the time for submitting the appeal from Jan. 24 to Feb. 24, Nakhon said."

It's one of ThaiVisa's great mysteries as to why anyone takes anything from the poster of post #2 seriously. I suppose some people are paying more attention than others.

I do hope you are right...

I read post #1 and came to the same conclusion as GC... that they were appealing the severity of the case... not the conviction.

Maybe "Lawyers Council to appeal Koh Tao's B2 Convictions" would have been a more appropriate headline...

[JLCrab]

Well well, knew it wouldn't be long before one of the 'Blind Justice' group starting having a stab at Ian Yarword defaming him for his work behind the scenes on the appeal.

<snip>

Solicitor Yarwood's and Ms. Taupin's pro bono work is noted. However, had you ever heard of Mr. Yarwood or Ms. Taupin before this trial?

[Khun Han]

But, surely, the point you were trying to make was that a large scale cover up of a murder in Bangkok would be a far-fetched scenario? And I pointed out that such an occurrence has already happened. Anyway, we're getting miles off centre (maybe that's the idea?). Enough of this little detour for me.

What a (now) former Deputy-PM can do in Bangkok and what one of five controlling families on Koh Tao can do in Bangkok is not much of a comparison. But again, going back to the 'murderers allowed to roam free' post to which I originally responded, all I originally said was that Koh Tao is not really a big place on which to roam as in

"Oh give me a home, where the buffalo roam ..."

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/889746-lawyers-council-to-appeal-koh-tao-convicts-death-sentence/?p=10370410

Which brings us nicely back on topic Crab: A Koh Tao family (the Tuvichiens) that was a major business partner of the national police chief (Somyot) would be in as good a position as anybody to influence any criminal investigation anywhere in the country. And who personally took over this particular investigation, after Panya first implicated the Tuvichiens and was shortly thereafter kicked upstairs? Why, Somyot of course. And who took centre stage (in uniform) at Warot Tuvichien's private voluntary (but shown on national media) DNA test pantomine? Why, Somyot of course. And who threatened social media users discussing Tuvichien involvement in the murders with prosecution? Why, Somyot of course.

And that's without bringing the strong Suthep connection into it. Fact is, the Tuvichiens are rather more connected than the 'pick one from five country bumpkin families with a bit of money' scenario that you would wish us to believe.

[JLCrab]

Right -- so if the kid decided to murder a couple of young foreign tourists in Bangkok, 'twould be no problem for the family to again put the fix in.

[Khun Han]

If the Lawyers Council were really interested in justice the they would be appealing the guilty verdict.

I thought they were, otherwise what's the point of an appeal?

I understand it to be as post #2...

I hope you all have noticed, they will appeal the death penalty.

It does not say they will appeal the verdict of guilty.

That speaks volumes.

GreenChair has 30 well deserved likes for that post.

And your understanding is mistaken Basil:

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1453808903&section=12&typecate=06

"Nakhon said his team is still working on their case to appeal the Dec. 24 verdict. The court had agreed to extend the time for submitting the appeal from Jan. 24 to Feb. 24, Nakhon said."

It's one of ThaiVisa's great mysteries as to why anyone takes anything from the poster of post #2 seriously. I suppose some people are paying more attention than others.

I do hope you are right...

I read post #1 and came to the same conclusion as GC... that they were appealing the severity of the case... not the conviction.

Maybe "Lawyers Council to appeal Koh Tao's B2 Convictions" would have been a more appropriate headline...

It was easy to take the OP headline at face value, but I deduced that the challenging of five key points in the trial made it obvious that the verdict was being challenged and the headline was a journalism mistake, as I stated in my first post in this thread. It also seemed obvious that one particular poster had siezed on that journalism mistake to use in an attempt to permanently change the direction of the forum discussions on the subject.

[berybert]

^^ And the misinformation never stops. The judges were presented with a copy of the UK pathologist's report, but refused to accept it as evidence.

The court reviewed the report and found it consistent with the Thai one:

"Police Colonel Dr Pawut, M.D, testified that there was a tear to the Second Deceased’s vulva, which is consistent with the report of the second victim’s autopsy in the United Kingdom in Document Lor. 31 (page 21), submitted by the defendants, indicating that there was a tear at the vulva. This fact supports credibility to Police Colonel Dr Pawut, M.D,’s testimony is made in a straightforward manner."

Reality doesn't fit your narrative.

square-peg-round-hole.jpg

You've done it again. Quoting this Thai policeman. Has this document ever been seen by anyone other than the bent copper ?

Does it even exist. Or like most of your evidence is it just someone saying something and you believe it ?

One thing I have noticed is that most/all DNA experts have said the DNA evidence in this case holds no water. Yet those who need the Burmese to be guilty are more than happy to accept the words of non experts who wouldn't know DNA from DAN.

This time next week 8th Feb Hannah's inquest is being heard. I guess we will then get the answer to my question.

Are you 100% sure you are sticking to the official line.

[Khun Han]

Yes, hopefully, the autopsy issues will be clarified next week.

My mistake re the judges' use of the British report, by the way: They used bits of it that seemed to support the prosucution case, but rejected the parts that didn't.

[IslandLover]

Basil B, on 31 Jan 2016 - 19:24, said:

IslandLover, on 31 Jan 2016 - 16:05, said:

Basil B, on 31 Jan 2016 - 10:34, said:Basil B, on 31 Jan 2016 - 10:34, said:

Just a smoke screen...

Thailand trying to save face... Why is "Lawyers Council" doing this?

Are they really interested in justice? or this pointless exercise is hoping all the critics of the sham trial will shut up if they get the sentences reduced to life in prison???

This is a pointless exercise as Thailand has only executed 2 people in the last 10 years yet there are hundreds on death row, my guess is in the near future Thailand will abolish the death penalty and all prisoners awaiting execution will have their sentences commuted to life in prison.

If the Lawyers Council were really interested in justice the they would be appealing the guilty verdict.

If the Lawyers Council were really interested in justice the they would be appealing the guilty verdict.

I thought they were, otherwise what's the point of an appeal?

I understand it to be as post #2...

greenchair, on 26 Jan 2016 - 08:03, said:

I hope you all have noticed, they will appeal the death penalty.

It does not say they will appeal the verdict of guilty.

That speaks volumes.

GreenChair has 30 well deserved likes for that post.

So what? I'm not interested in "Likes" to validate what I, or anyone else says on this forum. Despite what the OP of this thread says, Khaosod English reports it differently, i.e. the appeal is against their conviction (meaning guilt AND sentence). So who is really lodging this appeal? The Lawyers Council of Thailand or the B2's own lawyers? It really is most confusing.

Edited February 1, 2016 by IslandLover

[IslandLover]

Khun Han, on 31 Jan 2016 - 20:38, said:Khun Han, on 31 Jan 2016 - 20:38, said:

Basil B, on 31 Jan 2016 - 19:24, said:Basil B, on 31 Jan 2016 - 19:24, said:

IslandLover, on 31 Jan 2016 - 16:05, said:IslandLover, on 31 Jan 2016 - 16:05, said:

If the Lawyers Council were really interested in justice the they would be appealing the guilty verdict.

I thought they were, otherwise what's the point of an appeal?

I understand it to be as post #2...

greenchair, on 26 Jan 2016 - 08:03, said:greenchair, on 26 Jan 2016 - 08:03, said:

I hope you all have noticed, they will appeal the death penalty.

It does not say they will appeal the verdict of guilty.

That speaks volumes.

GreenChair has 30 well deserved likes for that post.

And your understanding is mistaken Basil:

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1453808903&section=12&typecate=06

"Nakhon said his team is still working on their case to appeal the Dec. 24 verdict. The court had agreed to extend the time for submitting the appeal from Jan. 24 to Feb. 24, Nakhon said."

It's one of ThaiVisa's great mysteries as to why anyone takes anything from the poster of post #2 seriously. I suppose some people are paying more attention than others.

From that same Khaosod article published 26 January 2016:

Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo are forced to wear shackles and remain in their cell 24 hours a day, according to lawyer Nakhon Chompuchat, who said he will file an appeal of their conviction some time in February after being granted an extension by the court.

[boomerangutang]

The investigation is already closed , and Nomsods alibi proven.

Therefore how could he become an accomplice

'proven' right. Like if hold up a can of spinach, I've proven that I created Popeye.

Hardly a case of not dotting an I is it..

If you cannot provide a Credible Chain of Custody, Methodology, Data, and Reliable Analysis of the DNA evidence then it is worthless. Failing on any one of those requirements would render DNA worthless in any credible court system.

Falling them all is beyond the pale and only points to one thing.

Right on.

^ Theoretically, yes. Chalerm managed to do it for his son a few years back, though I don't recall any scapegoats being fitted up on that one (but, then again, that was a Thai-on-Thai murder with no international attention).

A theoretical murder. That's good.

A man with strong political connections AND heaps of money can do a lot in Thailand. Not only Chaleum with his tough-guy sons, but also the Caffeine-Drink King and his darling son. In both cases, a Thai cop was murdered in Bangkok, and in both cases the sons got off without a scratch.

[Artisi]

@ Lucky11

Please answer a question for me. If these murders happened in the UK, in your opinion, would the B2 be prosecuted for murder wit the crap evidence the police put forward, and the lack of some evidence put forward.

If yes......Why..?

If no.....Why..?

Also you stated "anal" stuff, did I not read that the UK revealed there was none...? Please let me know your knowledge on that point..

Few murders have witnesses. Almost all murder cases are based on a large accumulation of circumstantial evidences, that by themselves mean nothing. accumulated together these evidences increase the probability that this person was in the realm of possibilities to have committed the crime. Such as.....
Was person in vicinity of crime.
Did person have any belongings of victim.
Did person leave any belongings at or near crime scene.
Did person have a reasonable alibi.
Were there any suspicious reasons to doubt persons story.
Even Jane taupin said dna is useless circumstantial evidence if not supported by other evidences.
Since the b2 (or at least one of them ) would fail on each of these points. The answer to your question is yes they would have been convicted in a western court. The judge is not going to set free a brutal rapist, murderer just because a policeman in his stupidity failed to dot the i.


We hope.

No, most murders, and I have been involved in many on prosecution side, are not done on an accumulation of probability. Probability is only considered in civil matters.

Most murder cases are considered on a LOT of circumstantial evidence but only when that is backed up with provable evidence. Murder is a criminal case and will not be considered provable by cirmstantial evidence alone when there is provable other evidence available.

Therefore, if provable evidence is there but prosecution is negligent then the circumstantial evidence is nothing.

So in this case there is provable evidence such as dna and the blonde hair and the clothes. Rtp has it, prove it.

They have failed and a REAL court understands this.

If they RTP failed, then why are they still behind bars?

Maybe there is no rule of law

Probably the most telling understatement in this entire thread.....

[Artisi]

Maybe, they had it right, just saying!!

Maybe they didnt, just saying.

And the actual evidence proves they didnt have it right, just saying.

Unless you can indicate what actual proof there is, beyond reasonable doubt, just asking.

Sorry, my mistake, I was convinced that the judge found them guilty.

Judges, plural, 3...

The fact that that two were replaced half way through the trial...

One must ask why???

And would it be acceptable to in a civilised country were trials have juries, to replace 8 members of of a 12 man jury half way through a trial???

Why were they replaced halfway thru' the trial, now that is a very leading question to which the likes of us, the plebs, will never be advised. Of course it could never be anything like they weren't toeing-the-line to ensure a preconceived outcome, Nah! that could never ever be a consideration, could it?

[AleG]

Yes 007.

But this one in particular, has been shot down so many times I've lost count.

And, all of the Thai in the courtroom suffered from a sudden case of "mistranslation" syndrome...

Again comes forth that tired old warhorse claim of: "the defense got their chance to retest? They chickened out."

"Nakhon Chomphuchat intimated that control of the re-testing procedure was the issue, as the results would not be directly returned to the defense, but to the police and then the court."

“But if they retest it we have no control over that testing process.”

Debunked. Once again.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/defence_team_reverse_demands_to_retest_dna_found_on_body_of_hannah_witheridge_1_4204183

Yes, they chickened out when they saw that the results of the retest would have to be submitted to the court, that is the part they didn't like; they couldn't bury them like they did with the results of the retest of the Burmese DNA, the one they insisted the samples being taken in the court itself as a PR stunt.

They had no problems following the same procedure when they retested the hoe and other items, the people doing the retest in both cases would had been the CIFS, under their "star" witness Dr. Pornthip. The excuse that they wouldn't have control over the testing is pathetic, firstly because they whined for months about getting an independent retest, then they complain it wouldn't be under their biased control? Pull the other one. Secondly the test would had been done under the CIFS, the same one they had no problem whatsoever in doing the retest of the hoe... and then proceeding to misrepresent the findings six ways to Sunday.

Their bluff was called and they back pedaled, that tells that they know the evidence against the Burmese is conclusive so they don't want it to be verified.

[boomerangutang]

AleG, you should write stories for Thai soap operas, given your abilities to dramatize things.

The defense wanted to re-test key items for DNA. On April 30, a judge said, 'yes', then soon after said, 'not sure. Will let you know first day of trial. On 3rd day of trial, judge (was it the same one?) said ok, but he very tightly restricted what could be tested. Some of the most crucial items (Hannah's clothes, hair, the phone and bottle found at crime site, etc.....)' were not allowed to be looked at. Two months later, when defense found that the paltry few items purportedly allowed for re-test would be handled prior by RTP and prosecution, the defense wisely denied wanting to do so. By that time it was evident to all (except chief of police Somyot) that the most important items (except the hoe) were either lost, used up, or destroyed. Somyot was the only person on the planet who kept saying, "No DNA evidence has been lost or destroyed." He should get a job as the Wizard of Oz - he can stand behind the curtain and shout, "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. The great and venerable Oz has spoken."

[jayjay78]

Well well, knew it wouldn't be long before one of the 'Blind Justice' group starting having a stab at Ian Yarword defaming him for his work behind the scenes on the appeal.

<snip>

Solicitor Yarwood's and Ms. Taupin's pro bono work is noted. However, had you ever heard of Mr. Yarwood or Ms. Taupin before this trial?

What an inane question. If I was in the forensic science community or legal field in Perth then maybe I would but seeing as I'm not then no.

Jane Taupin is well known in her field however, from the Diplomat

Widely known in the forensic science world for her expertise on DNA evaluation

[JLCrab]

Well well, knew it wouldn't be long before one of the 'Blind Justice' group starting having a stab at Ian Yarword defaming him for his work behind the scenes on the appeal.

<snip>

Solicitor Yarwood's and Ms. Taupin's pro bono work is noted. However, had you ever heard of Mr. Yarwood or Ms. Taupin before this trial?

What an inane question. If I was in the forensic science community or legal field in Perth then maybe I would but seeing as I'm not then no.

Jane Taupin is well known in her field however, from the Diplomat

Widely known in the forensic science world for her expertise on DNA evaluation

Sure -- but more widely known now.

[JLCrab]

<snip>

Right on.

^ Theoretically, yes. Chalerm managed to do it for his son a few years back, though I don't recall any scapegoats being fitted up on that one (but, then again, that was a Thai-on-Thai murder with no international attention).

A theoretical murder. That's good.

A man with strong political connections AND heaps of money can do a lot in Thailand. Not only Chaleum with his tough-guy sons, but also the Caffeine-Drink King and his darling son. In both cases, a Thai cop was murdered in Bangkok, and in both cases the sons got off without a scratch.

Well since you've been saying for near 16 months that the real killers are still on the loose and just waiting to strike again, if the real killers do so, and are from a politically connected and wealthy family, no matter where in Thailand they should choose to cause harm, they shouldn't have any problem getting the family to put in the fix again.

[jayjay78]

Well well, knew it wouldn't be long before one of the 'Blind Justice' group starting having a stab at Ian Yarword defaming him for his work behind the scenes on the appeal.

<snip>

Solicitor Yarwood's and Ms. Taupin's pro bono work is noted. However, had you ever heard of Mr. Yarwood or Ms. Taupin before this trial?

What an inane question. If I was in the forensic science community or legal field in Perth then maybe I would but seeing as I'm not then no.

Jane Taupin is well known in her field however, from the Diplomat

Widely known in the forensic science world for her expertise on DNA evaluation

Sure -- but more widely known now.

Much the same as the murders of Hannah and David and the ongoing appeal

[boomerangutang]

Their bluff was called and they back pedaled, that tells that they know the evidence against the Burmese is conclusive so they don't want it to be verified.

What a silly wrong-headed statement. Closer to reality: The defense knew any bits of DNA would be transferred to them by RTP - the same folks who had been skewing, losing and lying about DNA since the crime. Also, the defense figured (falsely it turned out) that the judges would look at the RTP-fabricated DNA trail for what it was: skewed, altered, obfuscated, ....and either disregard it (as any fair-minded jurists would) and/or throw the case out as having no merits.

[DM07]

@ Lucky11

Please answer a question for me. If these murders happened in the UK, in your opinion, would the B2 be prosecuted for murder wit the crap evidence the police put forward, and the lack of some evidence put forward.

If yes......Why..?

If no.....Why..?

Also you stated "anal" stuff, did I not read that the UK revealed there was none...? Please let me know your knowledge on that point..

Few murders have witnesses. Almost all murder cases are based on a large accumulation of circumstantial evidences, that by themselves mean nothing. accumulated together these evidences increase the probability that this person was in the realm of possibilities to have committed the crime. Such as.....

Was person in vicinity of crime.

Did person have any belongings of victim.

Did person leave any belongings at or near crime scene.

Did person have a reasonable alibi.

Were there any suspicious reasons to doubt persons story.

Even Jane taupin said dna is useless circumstantial evidence if not supported by other evidences.

Since the b2 (or at least one of them ) would fail on each of these points. The answer to your question is yes they would have been convicted in a western court. The judge is not going to set free a brutal rapist, murderer just because a policeman in his stupidity failed to dot the i.

We hope.

No, most murders, and I have been involved in many on prosecution side, are not done on an accumulation of probability. Probability is only considered in civil matters.

Most murder cases are considered on a LOT of circumstantial evidence but only when that is backed up with provable evidence. Murder is a criminal case and will not be considered provable by cirmstantial evidence alone when there is provable other evidence available.

Therefore, if provable evidence is there but prosecution is negligent then the circumstantial evidence is nothing.

So in this case there is provable evidence such as dna and the blonde hair and the clothes. Rtp has it, prove it.

They have failed and a REAL court understands this.

If they RTP failed, then why are they still behind bars?

Seriously, dude? Seriously?

[jayjay78]

Their bluff was called and they back pedaled, that tells that they know the evidence against the Burmese is conclusive so they don't want it to be verified.

What a silly wrong-headed statement. Closer to reality: The defense knew any bits of DNA would be transferred to them by RTP - the same folks who had been skewing, losing and lying about DNA since the crime. Also, the defense figured (falsely it turned out) that the judges would look at the RTP-fabricated DNA trail for what it was: skewed, altered, obfuscated, ....and either disregard it (as any fair-minded jurists would) and/or throw the case out as having no merits.

They put in a request to retest, then the prosecution failed even in court to provide chain of custody documents and a host of other files and notes that under international standards they should have done, the defense as a result withdrew their request.

Who in their right minds would want a retest under those conditions

[JLCrab]

To the overly-nested quote above: But they do not hire themselves as independent non-pro bono forensic consultants and maybe available for appearances on the international lecture circuit.

[Scorcher]

To the overly-nested quote above: But they do not hire themselves as independent non-pro bono forensic consultants and maybe available for appearances on the international lecture circuit.

So what?

People want to learn from the best in their field.