This Wednesday there are key hours in the Samui Court, where the prosecutor’s interrogation attempts to dismantle yesterday’s statement by Daniel Sancho, accused of murder. The two Thai lawyers for the prosecution have contributed their own questions with the intention of pointing out the contradictions in the latest version of Sancho, the confessed dismemberer of Colombian surgeon Edwin Arrieta, on August 2 on the neighboring island of Phangan.
The prosecution’s lawyer, Metapon Suwancharern, said before the session that his intention is to confront Sancho’s account of the events with the material evidence that has been provided and with the statements of witnesses from the preceding weeks. On paper, the prosecutor, Jeerawat Sawatdichai, and the prosecution still aim to prove that there was premeditated murder. In practice, there are signs that a compromise solution has been crystallizing in the feeling of the room.
In fact, Daniel Sancho’s defense – who in Thailand depends on a court-appointed lawyer who does not speak any foreign language – is far from giving everything. Its initial list of twenty-eight witnesses has been reduced to seven. Although it is not clear that the last three, a forensic expert and a psychologist who arrived from Spain, as well as an alleged protected Colombian witness, will be admitted by the judge, especially the latter for whom the defense requests anonymity (or at most , provide your initials).
It should be said that Edwin Arrieta, who came out of the working class, ended his life rubbing shoulders with the high society of latifundista Colombia, thanks to his clinic in the opulent Recreo neighborhood, in Montería, also the historical epicenter of paramilitary groups. For this reason, and because of the deceased’s powerful friends – among whom were senators – Sancho’s defense insists that, for security reasons, no one will dare to expose his dark side if his anonymity is not guaranteed.
To the despair of his lawyers – and a few journalists – attempts to learn more about his life in Colombia – and even in the wealthy Las Condes neighborhood of Santiago de Chile – have only garnered praise. Or a wall of silence.
The possible Spanish witnesses are the forensic doctor Manuel Carrillo and the forensic psychologist Pedro Mateo. The first will try to explain that Edwin Arrieta’s occipital fracture is compatible with an accidental blow. The second will reason the state of alienation into which this circumstance could have plunged his friend Daniel, triggering the desecration and concealment of the body.
The start of the session was delayed this Wednesday due to new problems with the room’s air conditioning. However, the van that was transporting Daniel Sancho from prison entered the court this morning at full speed, endangering the safety of the photographers, who yesterday managed to take the first image of the accused since the start of the trial upon arrival. .
This continues today, despite the date, as Thailand is one of the few countries in the world where the public sector does not celebrate May Day. However, the weekend for the magistrates – and the rest of those involved in the process – could be very close, even before the May 3 initially scheduled for the trial to be heard for sentencing.
Among the lawyers, on both benches, the expressions are much more relaxed as of today. The end of the trial could be imminent. When it is seen for sentencing, the judge will announce the publication date of this, probably between the end of May and mid-June.
However, that does not have to be the end of the case. The pro bono lawyer for the victim’s family, Juan Gonzalo Ospina, told this correspondent that “if there is no justice for the Arrieta family, we are going to appeal, we are willing to go all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary and let this drag on.” the years it has to last”.
Daniel Sancho is using both Spanish and English in his answers, which are then translated into Thai. His lawyer, Apirchat Srinual, still asked him some questions today. In substance, Sancho’s statement is now over.
Apirchat believes he has convinced the two magistrates that there was no premeditation. That is the difference, in Thailand, between a heavy sentence and the death sentence, although in reality, this was applied for the last time, with lethal injection, six years ago.
