Thread: Two Tourists Brutally Murdered on Koh Tao, One Raped: Police Spark Thailand Manhunt

It is normal procedure for prosecutors to not disclose a case until the plea of not guilty is entered, which has not occurred yet.
It would be a bit counter productive justice-wise for the accused to know exactly what evidence is against him before making a decision on a plea.

( Not defending the cops, I agree the boys are being railroaded, just trying to be balanced in criticism of this case.)

Err, how can you decide which way to plead if you don't know the evidence against you?

Or are you specifically referring to third world justice?

Originally Posted by YOrlov

It is normal procedure for prosecutors to not disclose a case until the plea of not guilty is entered, which has not occurred yet.
It would be a bit counter productive justice-wise for the accused to know exactly what evidence is against him before making a decision on a plea.

( Not defending the cops, I agree the boys are being railroaded, just trying to be balanced in criticism of this case.)

In the real world, by law the prosecution must disclose their case including witness statements not only to the court but also to the defense.
sep

Additionally, in many systems, including the UK, the prosecution are under an obligation to tender any evidence to the defence in their possession upon which they do not intend to rely at Court but was nevertheless gathered in the course of the investigation.

The point is Orlov, trials in countries with a functioning judicial system are not a game in which the prosecution get to spring surprises on the defence and score a win by sleight of hand. They are a search for the truth and an examination of all the facts which are tested according to rules of evidence before an experienced trial judge with integrity.

Samui will doubtless be an interesting experience if only to educate those currently languishing in total ignorance as to the system here.

Originally Posted by septimus

Originally Posted by YOrlov

It is normal procedure for prosecutors to not disclose a case until the plea of not guilty is entered, which has not occurred yet.
It would be a bit counter productive justice-wise for the accused to know exactly what evidence is against him before making a decision on a plea.

( Not defending the cops, I agree the boys are being railroaded, just trying to be balanced in criticism of this case.)

In the real world, by law the prosecution must disclose their case including witness statements not only to the court but also to the defense.
sep

Absolutely, just not before a plea is entered, which is scheduled to happen tomorrow Monday December 8.


As for the family statements, they thank and praise the UK authorities not the Thai police, and ask for speculation to end so the trial can commence. I don't read anything telling me they are now fully convinced the Myanmar lads did it.

I would concur the FO does not have their interests at heart and would be telling them to not make waves, be patient, etc. We could only hope they have read enough about the Kirsty Jones case to take such advise as the urgings of a government entity tasked with trade, not justice.

Originally Posted by YOrlov

It is normal procedure for prosecutors to not disclose a case until the plea of not guilty is entered, which has not occurred yet.
It would be a bit counter productive justice-wise for the accused to know exactly what evidence is against him before making a decision on a plea.

( Not defending the cops, I agree the boys are being railroaded, just trying to be balanced in criticism of this case.)

Total BS. This is not normal practice where I come from. How can you defend accusations when you have not been given aĺl the evidence against you?