The Court of Appeal upheld the life sentence for a young Spanish chef who murdered and dismembered a Colombian plastic surgeon, ruling that appeals from both the prosecution and defense were unfounded and dismissed the claims.
On 25 Sep 2026 GMT+7 at Koh Samui Provincial Court in Surat Thani, the 8th Regional Court of Appeal delivered its verdict in the case where the prosecutor charged Mr. Daniel Sancho Bronchalo, a Spanish chef, with murdering and dismembering Dr. Edwin Arrieta Arteaga, a Colombian plastic surgeon.
The defendant planned the murder by striking the victim’s head against the edge of a washbasin, causing severe injury leading to death. He then dismembered the body, disposing of the head, hands, and arms in the sea near Salad Beach, while discarding the rest in a municipal garbage bin in Koh Phangan Subdistrict to conceal the death and destroyed the victim’s passport.
The defendant admitted to the charge of hiding, moving, or destroying the body or body parts to conceal the death or its cause, but denied the charge of premeditated murder and the charge of damaging or destroying someone else’s documents.
The victim’s parents joined as co-plaintiffs, demanding compensation of 30 million baht.
At trial, the Koh Samui Provincial Court sentenced the defendant to death but reduced the sentence by one-third, resulting in a life sentence, and ordered him to pay 4,424,000 baht in compensation to the co-plaintiffs.
Since the court imposed a life sentence, no additional penalties could be added.
The co-plaintiffs appealed, arguing there was no justification for reducing the sentence in this premeditated murder case and requested the defendant be sentenced to death only.
Meanwhile, the defendant appealed, claiming he had no intent to kill and that the death was accidental during a fight.
The 8th Regional Court of Appeal noted the defendant testified at trial that the victim requested sex and threatened to expose secrets if refused, then tried to strangle him, leading to a fight. The victim bit the defendant’s arm and tried to bite his neck. The defendant pushed and fell on top of the victim, causing the victim’s head to strike and break the washbasin. This differed from the earlier police statement that the victim had grabbed and bitten his arm and the defendant then lifted and forcefully struck the victim’s head against the basin until unconscious. The court found the police statement more credible, noting if the defendant wished to spare the victim’s life, he could have taken him to hospital or sought hotel staff assistance but instead stayed in the room for about an hour before dismembering the body.
The circumstances suggest the defendant intended to end the victim’s life and is therefore guilty of intentional murder. The defendant had prepared knives, a saw, garbage bags, rubber gloves, and cleaning supplies in the hotel room he reserved before the victim arrived on Koh Phangan. The defendant then fetched the victim to the hotel, not the resort the victim had booked, indicating premeditation involving location choice, preparation of tools for dismemberment, collection of body parts, and cleaning up blood to cover up the crime, constituting premeditated murder.
As for the co-plaintiffs’ appeal arguing there was no reason to reduce the sentence in this premeditated murder case and requesting the death penalty only,
The 8th Regional Court of Appeal noted the incident occurred in a hotel room with no eyewitnesses. Although the defendant claimed the killing was in self-defense or due to temporary insanity, his testimony was considered beneficial to his defense.
The original verdict by the Koh Samui Provincial Court sentencing the defendant and ordering compensation to the co-plaintiffs was deemed appropriate. Appeals by both parties were dismissed, and the verdict was upheld.