Myanmar men appeal against death sentences over British murders in Thailand

[greenchair]

We all have our opinions.

But here we all are. At the supreme court. 

The question I have is. 

Should the defense continue with the same tactics or have a change of strategy?

If a person is guilty/not guilty, 

Should they continue to fight the system to certain death? 

Or should they take a chance of a life sentence  (10 years ) and live to tell the tail. 

The lawyers should be asking the b2 and their parents in my opinion. 

Because that is the current choice. 

[JLCrab]

Well it seems to me that all this talk about chain of custody, DNA lab not certified, crime scene not secured, evidence mishandled and other plays out of the OJ Simpson defense handbook are not working with this court.

Maybe time to try something else.

[xylophone]

2 hours ago, greenchair said:

Because that is the current choice

And it is a sad choice I'm sorry to say............. plead guilty to something that you didn't do and get perhaps 10 years in jail, or even the death sentence, or continue to fight for what is right, their innocence, and then get the death sentence.

 

 

[transam]

7 minutes ago, xylophone said:

And it is a sad choice I'm sorry to say............. plead guilty to something that you didn't do and get perhaps 10 years in jail, or even the death sentence, or continue to fight for what is right, their innocence, and then get the death sentence.

 

 

Think Deckchair has never been on jury service to see how justice actually works...

[Artisi]

2 hours ago, xylophone said:

That has to be the statement of the year.......extreme incompetance was EVIDENT in all aspescts of this case, from the pics taken at the crime scene showing people wandering over it, the lack of chain of custody process, "used up" DNA, non accredited laboratory until after the fact, Hannahs clothes going missing, no mention/testing of the blond hair found in her hand, the changing of the BIB in charge of the case after he said they had strong leads on the perpetrators, the Chief Forensic Officer publicly stating that correct evidence collecting procedures weren't followed (then she went strangely silent?), no conclusion as to who/what caused the puncture wounds in Davids head.......

 

Jeez, how can any reasonable person not see these flaws; they have been published for all to see and if you can't even admit that there is a strong element of incompetance here then you don't live in the same world that I do.

But you forget that this is Thailand and lack of evidence or conflicting evidence accounts for xxxx all, especially when the head man comments on the fact that no Thai could do this. 

Case adjudicated, found guilty so that's that, unfortunately. 

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, greenchair said:

We all have our opinions. But here we all are. At the supreme court. 

The question I have is. Should the defense continue with the same tactics or have a change of strategy? If a person is guilty/not guilty, 

Should they continue to fight the system to certain death?  Or should they take a chance of a life sentence  (10 years ) and live to tell the tail.  The lawyers should be asking the b2 and their parents in my opinion.  Because that is the current choice. 

You say 'certain death' and in a macabre way you're right.  The system is all allied against the scapegoats, and the S.Court is part of the system.  They can only vote 'guilty' because there is too much money, too many important peoples' prestige (maintaining face) riding on maintaining the frame up.  The island mafia and top brass within the Thai Police force, all the way to the top of the pyramic, Jaktip, are insisting on maintaining the pre-determined verdict.

 

I admire the scapegoats' courage, for maintaining their innocence.  I'm not sure if I would be that brave, and my leisure time is spent climbing 100 meter straight-up limestone cliffs with no safety ropes or safety gear, sometimes in the rain.

 

[rockingrobin]

11 hours ago, GOLDBUGGY said:

In Theory this would be correct, but in Practice I doubt it happens that way all the time. For example if the Accused had an Air Tight Alibi, is this not an example of the Accused proving his own innocents? 

 

On one side you have the Prosecution with Signed Confessions from both of the Accussed. Witnesses, DNA Testing of Cigarette Butts and the Accused themselves, placing them at or near the Crime Scene on the night in question and the last known suspects to be in that area during this crime. The Accused having (or had) in their possession a Cell Phone, which the Accused said they gave it to a Friend and claimed they never saw David Miller that night, which the Prosecution claim belonged to David Miller. DNA taken from the Victims Body (Hannah)  matching in a Lab the DNA taken form both of the Accused, who they both claim never saw her that night at all.

 

Now "If" (and please notice I use the word "If") you can believe that what the Prosecution have is true and accurate, then one would have to agree they would have a pretty Rock Solid Case against them. "If" on the other hand you believe the Accused that there Confessions were given under duress and torture (with no visable signs of abuse) they fund this Cell Phone on the Beach that night and did not see either of the Victims that night, and the DNA collected was flawed, then I guess you could say they have a strong Defense. 

 

So I don't think it is really a question of proof beyond reasonable doubt here. You can find that on both sides. I think it all boils down to who you beleive the most here.   

There is no such thing as an air tight aibi, it is possible to be thousands of mile away from a crime and stil be guilty,

 

The court judgement acknowledges that dna did not match the defendents

The caims of torture was supported by an independent witness at the time

The cell phone argument is implausible, why would somebody after commiting rape and double murder, stealing a phone from the victims, casually give it away knowing it would implicate them.

[rockingrobin]

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

 

Debunking the prosecution's case requires one to believe there has been extreme incompetence/collusion/corruption throughout all branches of the legal system involved and top to bottom. 

 

The allegations of torture seem to have been corroberated by the accusations of others who seemingly have the marks to prove it. 

 

But it all really rests with the forensic evidence since all else is circumstantial.  If you believe it has been corrupted or introduced later then of course you will believe in their innocence.  The judges clearly thought otherwise.

The onus is on the prosecution to prove its case, 

The debunking does not require one to believe that there as been extreme incompetence, etc. It requires the notion of reasonabe doubt, coud there be another explanation

[JLCrab]

You are right -- a guilty verdict in this case requires that the prosecution provide proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the Court in this case and its appeal have decided that the Prosecution provided proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

That is the ruling of a Court in Thailand -- it makes no difference how a Court in some other country or under a different judicial process might have ruled. At least in Thailand there is a chance for a Royal Pardon should the Supreme Court not be of any help to the 2 convicted. And it may be that the Rules for submitting a Petition for a Royal Pardon provide for the submitting of evidence that was not allowed under the procedures of the 3 levels of the Thai Court.

Edited August 25, 2017 by JLCrab

[rockingrobin]

2 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

You are right -- a guilty verdict in this case requires that the prosecution provide proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the the Court in this case and its appeal have decided that the Prosecution provided proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

That is the ruling of a Court in Thailand -- it makes no difference how a Court in some other country or under a different judicial process might have ruled. At least in Thailand there is a chance for a Royal Pardon should the Supreme Court not be of any help to the 2 convicted.

I cannot disagree

However the courts purpose is to serve the people of its jurisdiction. If it convicts when doubt exist then it as failed its duties. If innocent people are convicted then this places the population at risk because it leaves a criminal free to reign

[JLCrab]

I cannot disagree either. But that at least for now isn't going to change anything.

[lkv]

14 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

You are right -- a guilty verdict in this case requires that the prosecution provide proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the the Court in this case and its appeal have decided that the Prosecution provided proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

That is the ruling of a Court in Thailand -- it makes no difference how a Court in some other country or under a different judicial process might have ruled. At least in Thailand there is a chance for a Royal Pardon should the Supreme Court not be of any help to the 2 convicted.

 

You are right in the sense that it makes no sense to compare Thailand's justice system with other developed economies although on many other things they like to compare themselves with these countries.

 

With that in mind, it should be noted that in countries like Thailand justice also functions a bit different that in other Western countries, everything coming down to how much one pays.

 

That guy / his family paid a hefty amount for things to happen the way they did.

 

Guilty/not guilty is only relevant in developed countries, Thailand is special in that respect.

 

Whoever disagrees does not really understand Thainess.

Edited August 25, 2017 by lkv

[JLCrab]

"That guy / his family paid a hefty amount for things to happen the way they did."

And just how do you know that?

[lkv]

3 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

"That guy / his family paid a hefty amount for things to happen the way they did."

And just how do you know that?

The same way you know that them being declared guilty was based on impartial judges, non-corrupt police and solid DNA evidence.

[JLCrab]

I know -- because everybody knows it and how could it not be true if everybody knows it.

But I guess what you are maybe saying is that how could the Judges at the trial, the appeal, and if it is the same decision at the Supreme Court, come to that decision if they weren't being bought off? Maybe.

But if there is a Petition for a Royal Pardon, some tangible evidence to that effect could maybe be submitted as well as maybe the testimony of first-hand observers of the events leading up to the crime and the crime itself.

Edited August 25, 2017 by JLCrab

[sambum]

5 hours ago, xylophone said:

That has to be the statement of the year.......extreme incompetance was EVIDENT in all aspescts of this case, from the pics taken at the crime scene showing people wandering over it, the lack of chain of custody process, "used up" DNA, non accredited laboratory until after the fact, Hannahs clothes going missing, no mention/testing of the blond hair found in her hand, the changing of the BIB in charge of the case after he said they had strong leads on the perpetrators, the Chief Forensic Officer publicly stating that correct evidence collecting procedures weren't followed (then she went strangely silent?), no conclusion as to who/what caused the puncture wounds in Davids head.......

 

Jeez, how can any reasonable person not see these flaws; they have been published for all to see and if you can't even admit that there is a strong element of incompetance here then you don't live in the same world that I do.

Well put - and when the Prime Minister compliments the BIB on doing such a good job, blames rapes of "farangs" on them wearing bikinis, and describes (illegal?) immigrants as "bad people" while discussing the murder case, as well as "no Thai could do this", then the deck is pretty well stacked beforehand!

[sambum]

2 hours ago, transam said:

Think Deckchair has never been on jury service to see how justice actually works...

Seems to agree with any kind of "justice" that suits his agenda.

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, lkv said:

 

You are right in the sense that it makes no sense to compare Thailand's justice system with other developed economies although on many other things they like to compare themselves with these countries.

 

With that in mind, it should be noted that in countries like Thailand justice also functions a bit different that in other Western countries, everything coming down to how much one pays.

 

That guy / his family paid a hefty amount for things to happen the way they did.

 

Guilty/not guilty is only relevant in developed countries, Thailand is special in that respect.

 

Whoever disagrees does not really understand Thainess.

I disagree with the totality and extremeness of your points, although there is a degree of truth.

[Krenjai]

On 8/24/2017 at 10:17 AM, transam said:

May I add, Dave's head injuries did NOT come from the hoe....Any fool can see that...Knuckle duster, fancy ring giving a knockout blow, yes....Did the B2 have any of these or something to do the same damage...?

Forget a knife cos that would have been used in soft tissue areas...

 

 

No they did not find any push knife or something like that on the B2. What beats me, NOBODY, including the defense talked about the wounds on David during the trial.The whole thing was about the hoe (without their DNA). Its beyond crazy this case.

[JLCrab]

13 minutes ago, Krenjai said:

No they did not find any push knife or something like that on the B2. <snip>

Yes but they told the Samui Court that they went for a swim that early morning and managed to lose their clothes.

[rockingrobin]

16 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Yes but they told the Samui Court that they went for a swim that early morning and managed to lose their clothes.

One as to wonder why the guitar wasnt seized at the crimescene

[JLCrab]

9 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

One as to wonder why the guitar wasnt seized at the crimescene

No one doesn't

[sambum]

3 hours ago, lkv said:

 

You are right in the sense that it makes no sense to compare Thailand's justice system with other developed economies although on many other things they like to compare themselves with these countries.

 

With that in mind, it should be noted that in countries like Thailand justice also functions a bit different that in other Western countries, everything coming down to how much one pays.

 

That guy / his family paid a hefty amount for things to happen the way they did.

 

Guilty/not guilty is only relevant in developed countries, Thailand is special in that respect.

 

Whoever disagrees does not really understand Thainess.

"You are right in the sense that it makes no sense to compare Thailand's justice system with other developed economies although on many other things they like to compare themselves with these countries."

 

Thailand's (non) justice system is probably one of the main reasons why they will not be "accepted on the World stage" 

[rockingrobin]

20 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

No one doesn't

Basic summary of prosecution and court judgement

 

B2 playing guitar on the log

Hannah and David walk by

B2 decide to follow

B2 commit crime

 

How did the guitar end up with the Chef.

Edited August 25, 2017 by rockingrobin
error

[JLCrab]

If you are asking me about where the guitar went and where it ended up, I don't have the slightest idea. Guess this is just another chain of custody screw-up, huh?

This whole is so far past this kind of minutiae. All that to me seems important to is how these two are going to get themselves out of the capital murder sentence they have already been handed.

Edited August 25, 2017 by JLCrab

[sambum]

2 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

If you are asking me about where the guitar went and where it ended up, I don't have the slightest idea. Guess this is just another chain of custody screw-up, huh?

This whole is so far past this kind of minutiae. All that to me seems important to is how these two are going to get themselves out of the capital murder sentence they have already been handed.

Guess this is just another chain of custody screw-up, huh?

 

Correct!

[JLCrab]

... and it seems the Court could care less unless you think the Supreme Court is going to reverse the decision based on chain of custody mistakes.

[lkv]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

... and it seems the Court could care less unless you think the Supreme Court is going to reverse the decision based on chain of custody mistakes.

The Supreme Court will not reverse the decision for any reasons.

 

It would mean everybody from the bottom all the way to the top (Prayuth) would lose face, that won't happen.

Edited August 25, 2017 by lkv

[JLCrab]

[lkv]

Yeah, Royal Pardon and Courts admitting other Courts were wrong and exposing all the corruption from the bottom to the top are two different things.

Edited August 25, 2017 by lkv