In
addition to abusive comments I am also blocking those that are either
defamatory or could be deemed to be defamatory vis a vis the Cambodian
Judiciary. Some of these are clearly designed to induce (‘trick’) me into
making a defamatory comment myself.
My
response to all those (and there are plenty) who accuse David Fletcher of ‘sour
grapes’ for not accepting the Appeal Court decision, here is the statement he
would have liked to present to the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in October and
November 2014 and on 14th September 2015.
On
each of these three occasions his request to address the court was refused:
Your Honours
I apologize that this document
is written in English but owing to my being jail it has not been possible for
me to have it translated into Khmer.
Article 44. Opening of Judicial
Investigation
“In the case
of a felony, the Prosecutor shall open a judicial investigation. The judicial
investigation shall be based upon the initial submission provided to the
investigating judge. The initial submission (to be prepared by the Prosecutor)
includes: A summary of the facts….
The initial submission shall be dated and signed.
These formalities shall be strictly complied with or the initial submission
shall be void.”
I was not provided with a signed and
dated summary of the facts before my trial?
Article 93. Interrogation Records
“For each
interrogation, a written record shall be established. The written record shall
be an accurate account of the interrogated person’s responses. The interrogated
person shall sign or affix his finger-print to each page of the written
record.”
I was not provided with copies of signed statements by Yang
Dany and her mother Kheang Sekun?
Article 124.
Introductory Submissions
“In compliance
with Article 44 (Commencement of Judicial Investigation) of this Code, a
judicial investigation is opened by the introductory submission of the Royal
Prosecutor….An investigating judge may not conduct any investigative acts in
the absence of an introductory submission.”
I was not provided with a copy of this ‘introductory submission’?
If there was no ‘introductory submission’, no investigation could have taken
place in accordance with Cambodian law.
Article 127.
Investigation of Inculpatory and Exculpatory Evidence
“An
investigating judge, in accordance with the law, performs all investigations
that he deems useful to ascertaining the truth. An investigating judge has the
obligation to collect inculpatory as well as exculpatory evidence.”
No investigating or trial judge, no policeman, no member of
the Anti-Human Trafficking unit has ever asked me to present exculpatory
evidence in support of my insistence that I am not guilty
Article 133.
Investigative Actions Requested by Charged Persons
”At any time during a judicial investigation, the charged person may
ask the investigating judge to interrogate him, question a civil party or
witness, conduct a confrontation or visit a site. The request shall be in
writing with a statement of reasons. If the investigating judge does not
grant the request, he shall issue a rejection order within one month after
receiving the request. This order shall state the reasons. The Prosecutor and
the charged person shall be notified of the order without delay.”
I have never been informed that I had a legal right to ask the
investigating judge to interrogate me. This would have been difficult, of
course because I was in jail in Thailand.
Article 143.
Notification of Placement under Judicial Investigation
“When
a charged person appears for the first time, the investigating judge shall
check his identity, inform him of the imputed act and its legal qualification,
and receive his statement after informing him of the right to remain silent.
This notification shall be mentioned in the written record of the first
appearance.”
I have never been informed of my right to remain silent? I
have never appeared before an investigating judge to answer questions?
Article 126. Placing
Suspect under Judicial Investigation
“The
investigating judge shall inform the charged person of his rights to choose a
lawyer or to have a lawyer appointed according to the Law on the Bar.”
I was never informed by an investigating judge of my right to
either choose a lawyer or have one appointed? I was not aware that a trial was
taking place until after it had been completed?
Article 145.
Presence of Lawyer during Interrogation
“When a
charged person has a lawyer, the investigating judge shall summons the lawyer
at least five days before the interrogation takes place. During that period,
the lawyer may examine the case file. A charged person can be interrogated only
in the presence of his lawyer.”
As I had no lawyer it was not possible for the investigating
judge summon him 5 days before an interrogation. No interrogation has ever
taken place.
Article 206. Statement of
Charged Persons and Reasons for Provisional Detention
“The
investigating judge who orders the provisional detention of a charged person
shall issue an order containing reasons. The investigating judge’s reasons in
the order shall be based on the provisions of Article 205 (Reasons for
Provisional Detention) of this Code. The Royal Prosecutor and the charged
person shall be immediately notified of the decision.”
I was not notified of the reasons why I was charged.
Article 247. Closing Order
“If
the judge considers that the facts constitute a felony, a misdemeanor or a
petty offense, he shall decide to indict the charged person before the trial
court. The order shall state the facts being charged and their legal
qualifications.”
I have never been provided with an order that states the facts
relating to the charges made against me.
Article 252.
Mandatory Rules
“128
(Assistance of Court Clerks) of this Code.
Proceedings shall also be null and
void if the violation of any substantial rule or procedure stated in the Code
or any provisions concerning criminal procedure affects the interests of the
concerned party. Especially, rules and procedures which intend to guarantee the
rights of the defense have a substantial nature.”
I believe that many violations of the Cambodian Code of
Criminal Procedure have occurred and that I am entitled, in accordance with
Cambodian law, to a re-trial.
• Article 305. Appearance of Accused upon Indictment
“According to
Article 249 (Provisions of Closing Orders in Relation to Provisional Detention
and Judicial Supervision) of this Code, the order to keep the accused in
provisional detention will expire after four months. If the accused has not
been brought before the court within this period, the accused shall be automatically
released. A judgment on the merits of the case shall be made within a reasonable
time period.”
I have been in jail for four and a half years now, unable to unable
to present a defense to the Phnom Penh Municipal court.
Article 316. Public
Nature of Trial Hearing and Confidentiality
“Trial
hearings shall be conducted in public. However, the court may order a
complete or partial in-camera hearing, if it considers that a public hearing
will cause a significant danger to the public order or morality.”
Did thePhnom Penh Municipal court order an in-camera hearing
because it believed that the facts of this case were likely to cause a
significant danger to the public order or morality?
Article 318.
Establishment of Order in Hearing
“The presiding
judge shall conduct and lead the trial hearing. The presiding judge shall
guarantee the free exercise of the right to defense.”
As I was not in court on the day of the trial I did not have
free exercise of my right to a defense.
Article 321.
Evidence Evaluation by Court
“Unless it is
provided otherwise by law, in criminal cases all evidence is admissible. The
court has to consider the value of the evidence submitted for its examination,
following the judge’s intimate conviction….The judgment of the court may be
based only on the evidence included in the case file or which has been
presented at the hearing.”
Why was evidence that had no bearing at all on the charges
that had been laid against me (rape) allowed to be introduced by NGOs?
Article 325.
Interrogation of Accused
“The presiding
judge shall inform the accused of the charges that he is accused of and conduct
the questioning of the accused. The presiding judge shall ask any questions
which he believes to be conducive to ascertaining the truth. The presiding
judge has a duty to ask the accused both inculpatory and exculpatory
questions.”
At no time did the presiding judge inform me of the charges
that had been laid against me. At no
time did the presiding judge question me. I was in jail in Thailand at the time
of the trial.
I submit to the
court that there have been sufficient breaches of the Cambodian Code of
Criminal Procedure to render the original verdict of ‘guilty’ to be null and
void.
What this sounds like now Mr. Ricketson is that you are realising that there are more people out there who believe Fletcher is guilty than innocent and you are not happy that they are adding their comments to your blog site just in case the Cambodia Courts read it and see all of the anti-YOU comments. Sorry to say but it stinks of desperate measures to keep a blog going that was totally based around hate towards several people.
ReplyDeleteHow strange your comments are. There is no evidence against Mr. Fletcher. He was not even in the area when the trumped up "crime" was apparently committed. The girl he is accused of raping is still a medically certified virgin.(Hymen intact) She has since retracted all accusations and admitted that her mother was paid a substantial amount of money to frame Mr. Fletcher. So, sorry, just don't understand where you are coming from on this.
DeleteDear Anonymous 12.34
DeleteYou do not seem to have even the most basic kindergarten understanding of the way the law works!
It does not matter if 100% of Khmer440 commentators believe Mf Fletcher to be guilty. It does not matter if the entire expatriate community in Cambodia believes him to be guilty. Or indeed 100% of the population of Cambodia.
Guilt and innocence are not determined by a popular vote but in accordance with the rules of law. These dictate that evidence be presented to the court by both the Prosecution and the Defense. This has never occurred in Mr Fletcher’s case. He has never had an opportunity to present a defense.
These rules apply, as they should, even in Khmer Rouge genocide trails in which the evidence against the accused is overwhelming.
As it happens, in Mr Fletcher’s case, the only evidence consists of a statement by Yang Dany, whose original claim (since retracted) is that Mr Fletcher raped her in Cambodia whilst he was not in Cambodia, in a location that did not exist until six months later (‘Rick’s Place) and in such a way as to leave her hymen intact. And you think that there are not sufficient reasons to entertain just a little doubt as to the safety of his conviction?
How could any sensible person think he is guilty? You have to be blind, deaf and dumb to think he is guilty. Yang Dany says he is not guilty! The medical report says he is not guilty! APLE doesn't have the facts to get guilty verdict! The trial was a secret trial while Fletcher was locked up in Thai prison! So many violations of the Cambodian Legal code have been made that I can't even count them! You must be an idiot if you think he is guilty.
ReplyDeleteAnything in the Cambodian newspapers with Neeson denying Fletcher's claims that he set him up?
ReplyDeleteNo
Deletethe people who claim that David is guilty of this crime are clearly on team neeson; perhaps their way of life is being threatened but they are being told what to say; as has been stated, no one with any understanding of the law can understand that a trial with out evidence is not a trial but a lynch mob;
ReplyDeletethe girl was not molested in a place that was not there at the time of the supposed crime; she later confessed that she was not molested by David; even David's critics cannot believe that a crime was committed; so, an innocent man lingers in prison.................I am sure they hope he dies so they can wash their hands of him and breath a little, rather than hide behind neeson who will drop them in the mud if that happens............he will no longer need them; Wes
if the passport was destroyed, what evidence do we have the fletcher was in fact out of the country at the time? you keep going on about destroyed evidence but if he had any other document such as entry and exit documents, hotel bill etc it would be more believable.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous 7.17
DeleteAs I have written elsewhere, Mr Fletcher's passport is no longer of huge relevance. Of much greater relevance is the fact that the location at which the alleged rapes took place did not exist until six months after the alleged rapes had allegedly occurred. This can be proven if ther is ever a court case. Add to this the fact that Yang Dany's hymen was intact and that she denies she was raped and I think you would have to agree that there are some ground for being doubtful that a safe verdict was arrived at at the secret trial held in 2011.
For the record, I have tried with three different immigration departments to get information about Fletcher's movements in march 2009. No joy.