Johan Beute - Thailand

February 03

Latest News:

On 19 September 2008 the long awaiting judgement of the Supreme Court of Thailand led to Johan’s immediate release from prison. He has since returned to the Netherlands

Latest News:

On the 18th of July 2003, quite unexpectedly, Mr Beute was found guilty and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, despite the total lack of evidence and even the prosecutor concluding that they might have arrested the wrong man. An appeal has been submitted.

Helmut Johan Beute, a 39-year old from man the Netherlands, has lived in Suratthani, Thailand since 1996. He is married to a Thai citizen and has two children. His wife and he had made a living by offering business advice, help to obtain work permits and accountancy. In June 2000, he met a fellow Dutch citizen, 64-year old Ms Martha Jansen. This lady had many problems, in particular in relation to her severe alcohol abuse; Johan tried to help her to sort out her financial and accommodation problems, assisted her with cleaning and shopping and introduced her to his family. Johan bought her car which she had been trying to sell for some time. He saw her for the last time on the afternoon of the 14th of June 2000, less than two weeks after he had met her. The next day he received several phone calls from the Thai lover of Ms Jansen, whom he only had seen vaguely once before, telling him that Ms Jansen wanted the remainder of the money, which Johan owed her from a purchase of her car. Having agreed to make two staggered payments, and surprised by this call, Johan asked to speak to Ms Jansen direct. His requests were denied, because "she would be too drunk to talk". Johan told the man that without having the opportunity to speak to Ms Jansen directly, he would give the money to Ms Jansen's lawyer with the stipulation that it only be handed to her personally. Johan made the payment the same day. Several attempts by him to catch up with Ms Jansen at her bungalow failed, as the door remained locked and she did not answer his calls.

Ms Jansen's strangulated body was found on the 17th of June 2000, after neighbours complained about the smell coming from the house. Johan was asked to come to the police station, his house and car were searched without result and after three days, he was arrested and charged with Ms Jansen's murder. He has been in prison ever since.

The trial against him is a very slow process, two witnesses have been heard so far, who said that they saw Johan with Ms Jansen in the afternoon of the 14th June 2000 outside her house, but no witness saw him since then near her property. The charge sheet numbers 8 items as evidence against Johan, six of them might have been used during the murder, like a nylon scarf, blanket and electric wire, all of them belonging to Ms Jansen and none of which had Johan's finger prints on them. The other two items are the car, which Johan had bought from Ms Jansen and a pen which allegedly belonged to him and which was found in the victim's house. It is unclear how any of these items could link Johan to the crime. On the other hand, traces of blood and skin were found under Ms Jansen's fingernails but Johan's body, which had been thoroughly looked at by police on the day the body had been found, had not a single scratch mark on it. Still neither were the traces DNA-tested nor was the autopsy report presented in court or the examining doctor called as a witness.

Main Grounds of concern regarding fair trial procedures:
* Since being formally charged Johan has not been permitted to give evidence. Even prior to this, it was difficult for him to tell the police what he knew about the victim and to tell them about his own whereabouts, because at the time he spoke only very little Thai and none of the interpreters, which the police used, a German tourist, two journalists, and a travel agent spoke his mother tongue, thus communication was seriously hampered.
* The police have shown no interest in finding the Thai lover of the victim or to pursue further investigations. It is possible that they chose to arrest Johan because he was a foreigner and in the hope of getting money. The investigating policemen did not even bother to appear in court to give evidence about their search for the murderer.
* The lawyer has not attempted a proper defence and all requests from Johan are denied with the remark "this is Thailand."
* Not a single item of the eight items of evidence, as listed in the charge sheet, was used in court as evidence. The court case was solely built up on hearsay evidence and conflicting witness statements.
* Five more court hearings are scheduled until 30th of July 2003, when Johan is expected to learn about his sentence, more than 3 years after his arrest. However, he will not be able to attend some of the hearings, in particular the ones where the police give evidence, because they will be heard at higher courts. Thus he will not be able to instruct his lawyer to cross-examine these witnesses, nor can he make sure that his lawyer challenges any of their statements.