[usaneisfiecup]

Does anyone know.....are all legal decisions in Thailand made by a judge or is there also a jury system for some kinds of crimes?



(I wasn't sure where to post this, because I have language questions along this theme....so why don't you follow me over to Thai for Beginners and see the continuation of my thought process!)

[DownloadMan]

I asked my wife who is an educated woman and a school teacher about the jury, she said yes they do have a jury.
So I asked her how they got the jury, are they people off the street and how are they selected?, "I didn't know,, maybe they are govt people"..

No wonder they can get by with so much corruption when no one is interested about how things in the govt. process work, how laws are made or anything else about how the country is operated..

[Knillagrarp]

Does it do any good to have knowledge of or concern oneself with such matters? Those in power will do what they do. Can you, or a small group of less wealthy and less powerful people do anything about it? All it does is get one worked up over something over which he or she has no control.

I have seen how the jury system works in the U.S. and am not impressed. Individuals have been convicted of murder with zero forensic evidence linking them to the crime and no witnesses. Jurors are ignorant of the law and driven by their gut instincts rather than logic and reliance on empirical evidence. I know that most Thais spend much less time in jail for typical crimes, with the exception of drug dealers (usually shot on site). At least if you are not guilty you will get out sooner, perhaps on the King's birthday.

[DownloadMan]

No I guess it doesn't, and it would do you no good here anyway as I just found out that they do not have a jury, it is all up to the judge after your lawyer presents his case,and the prosecution presents theirs..

sorry about the mis info, but thats what you get for asking a Thai about how the govt works.

[usaneisfiecup]

Thanks for the information. Rikker also dug up some interesting stuff on this topic in the language half of my Jury thread. http://www.thailandqa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10759

[Caursedus]

2 years ago I was conscripted into jury service for the first time. I was only a juror for 2 hours, after I was pulled in front of the court by the Judge, after I told the court I will be convicting the criminal just because of there ethnicity whether I think there innocent or guilty, he told me he was appalling by my attitude, told me I was band from being a juror for life. I got what I wanted, my civil liberties back and no conscription.

[!!Aaroncheg]

I agree with you in this one. the jury system is a mistake, it is plain stupid. we don't have it in Eastern Europe, the judge makes the decision based on the evidence presented, so the defence lawyer and the state attorney are not in for a prize in dramatic performance, but seeking for the truth and a just sentence.
my gut feeling is that ordinary, average Thai people would be very embarrassed being put in a jury and having to decide on someone else's fate. it just wouldn't work. - or does it?!

[DownloadMan]

I really don't know, But I do believe the saying "Two Heads Are Better Than One" and when the Bill Of Rights were written in the USA, there was some pretty clear thinking men in attendance.

[boltondd]

Just remember, the jury is only as good as those willing to serve, and since most people try to avoid it, you only get those who are to stupid to find an excuse or you get "wrinklies" who can't follow a conversation for more than a couple of minutes.

[DownloadMan]

you only get those who are to stupid to find an excuse or you get "wrinklies" who can't follow a conversation for more than a couple of minutes. Yes, but you also get judges that fit that catagory too. or he don't like your lawyer or the looks of you, pretty hard to get to a whole jury to "Grease the rails" but a lot easier to get to 1 judge and it has been done a lot for better findings in some cases, and you can waive a jury anytime you want and just go before the judge if that is your wish,,so in the USA, you can "have it your way" and not only at Burgerking..

[boltondd]

Yes, but you also get judges that fit that catagory too. or he don't like your lawyer or the looks of you, pretty hard to get to a whole jury to "Grease the rails" but a lot easier to get to 1 judge and it has been done a lot for better findings in some cases, and you can waive a jury anytime you want and just go before the judge if that is your wish,,so in the USA, you can "have it your way" and not only at Burgerking..

I see you have been watching to much "Rumpole of the Bailey"

[usaneisfiecup]

Just remember, the jury is only as good as those willing to serve, and since most people try to avoid it, you only get those who are to stupid to find an excuse or you get "wrinklies" who can't follow a conversation for more than a couple of minutes. Well, I just served. I didn't try to avoid it, in fact I'm pretty much a civic nerd believing in the system. Although, an educated woman who teaches diversity education for a living was not an attractive juror. After some intense grilling by the lawyers, I was dismissed.

The reason I like our Jury system is that I don't like our system for selecting judges. I can't trust partisan politics to judge individuals.

[DownloadMan]

Peter,
Whats that supposed to mean??

Does that mean that you think all judges are infallible?? As well as Thailand legal system??

Damn, I gonna agree with Pailin? Yea guess so, look like I better watch it HUH.

[Caursedus]

Conscripting people into doing Jury service, (sorry I mean Juror imprisonment), that they don't want to do is a disgusting abuse of human liberty, It is the equivalent of imprisoning a good citizen, while they let off a person with a criminal record, juror imprisonment should be band under the united nations rulings.
When is the united nations going to stand up to human rights abuse and condemn juror imprisonment.

[DownloadMan]

If you pre register with the courts as a lunatic then they will never call on you, and you should qualify.

I think there is also something about a minus number on your IQ is also a dis qual.

[boltondd]

Peter,
Whats that supposed to mean??

Rumpole is a character created by John Mortimer and was adapted for TV. They are classics and tend to point out the stupidity of all associated with the british justice system.

Check out: http://www.thrillingdetective.com/eyes/rumpole.html

[JoesBro]

Rumpole is a character created by John Mortimer and was adapted for TV. They are classics and tend to point out the stupidity of all associated with the british justice system.

Check out: http://www.thrillingdetective.com/eyes/rumpole.html

Currently re-running in the UK on Sundays on ITV3, one of the new-and free!- digital channels. Great stuff that has stood the test of time.

[DownloadMan]

I don't watch that much TV, and I don't think we get those channels on UBC anyway, also do not get much NASCAR, IRL, NFL, or anything but BBC, CNN european coverage mostly with most of that the mid east crisis.

[Caursedus]

I think there is also something about a minus number on your IQ is also a dis qual.

Well in my case I not just have a minus, but a double minus, and if you know any thing about math's, a double negative equals to a positive.

[Caursedus]

I'm an attorney, so in the unlikely event that my number is drawn to sit in the jury box, someone will bounce me out to avoid having the danger of "undue influence" in the deliberations.

Our jury system in the U.S. was inspired by the idea that citizens are more trustworthy to resolve criminal cases then government employees. Generally speaking, this is true, but there is a problem because the entire system depends on having quality advocates for both sides. In most cases, defendants cannot afford good attorneys who will spend enough time on their case to win it. Sometimes they do, of course, because defense attorneys tend to be very dedicated. But too often the attorneys' case loads prevent them from doing their best. On the other hand, celebrity defendants like OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson can afford very slick attorneys who play the prosecutors for fools. So in the end, money turns out to be too important.

One of my professors who worked in the field for a long time told us in no uncertain terms that the defendant's best chance of getting a sympathetic hearing in the criminal justice system is with the jury. I have no reason to doubt her.

As for those who do not want to serve, yes, it's true, jury duty doesn't pay. But manipulating the system to avoid it, leaving the dirty work to others, shows a lack of commitment to democracy.