connects with the outside world through social networks from prison

The case of Daniel Sancho sentenced to life imprisonment in Thailand for the murder and dismemberment of the Colombian surgeon Edwin Arrieta, awakening unusual media interest. Beyond the legal and moral implications of a crime that shocked public opinion, a new element has captured attention: recent activity on Sancho’s Instagram account, which raises questions about the role of social networks in his strategy from prison.

Daniel Sancho who has already spent the year from Thailand, as he is serving a sentence in Surat Thani prison, has seen how his previously private Instagram account has become a public profile accessible to any user. This change, which has surprised many, may have been managed by someone close to him, because except for special permits, Thai prison rules prohibit access to mobile devices for inmates. In the profile, you can see four publications apparently taken before the crime: two photographs of his dog, one image in which he plays with the animal and another where he appears cooking, an activity that always stood out in his previous life as a chef. In addition, the featured stories refer to his career in gastronomy, reinforcing his identity prior to the crime.

An image-washing strategy?

The openness of the profile and the nature of the posts have sparked speculation as to whether this activity could form part of a deliberate strategy to improve public perception of Daniel Sancho. With an appeal scheduled for January 2025, some experts suggest that these actions seek to humanize his figure and divert attention from the brutal murder that led him to prison.

The use of images related to his daily life, especially those that highlight facets such as caring for an animal or his passion for cooking, seem designed to soften the public’s perception and present Sancho as someone other than the perpetrator of a violent act. . This strategy, if it is really intended, would not be new. In high-impact media cases, it is common for the people involved to try to shape the narrative around their figure, seeking empathy or understanding from the public. In a hyperconnected world, social networks have become an extension of the media courts. Cases like that of Daniel Sancho are not only judged in the legal field, but also in the arena of public opinion, where every detail is analyzed and debated. Experts in criminology and communication emphasize that platforms like Instagram allow people involved in high-profile crimes to maintain their presence in public discourse, shaping their image according to the strategic interests of their environment. In Sancho’s case, his profile acts as a window into his life prior to the crime, a narrative that could be interpreted as an attempt to separate his current identity from the events for which he was convicted. However, these types of movements are not without controversy, as many question the ethics of trying to influence public perception from a situation of confinement.

The legal and social implications

Recent activity on Daniel Sancho’s Instagram profile also raises questions about prison regulations in Thailand. Although insiders are not supposed to have direct access to mobile devices, the fact that your account is active suggests that someone external is managing it. This gap in the regulations can generate debates about the limits of privacy and digital influence in contexts as delicate as that of a person convicted of murder. The public’s fascination with cases like this reflects the impact of media culture on the perception of crime. The mixture of morbidity, curiosity and moral analysis turns these cases into viral phenomena that transcend the judicial sphere, becoming part of a collective narrative that, at times, tends to romanticize or distort the facts. The case of Daniel Sancho is an example of how media crimes not only take place in the courts, but also in the digital sphere. The activity on his Instagram account, although limited and carefully selected, reignites the debate about the use of social media as a tool to shape public opinion.

With his appeal pending next year, Movements around his public image could influence how his figure is perceived, both inside and outside of the courts. Meanwhile, the public’s interest in this case only confirms the complex relationship between justice, communication and narrative in the age of social media.