Thaksin’s son accuses Prayut of witchhunt

[rixalex]

41 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

Well thank you for replying for dear Baerboxer but Yingluck did not have the absolute power of Section 44, you conveniently forget, and did not have the power to 'make up' laws as she went along. You cannot compare an elected government with a Military Junta (although you may try).

Why would anyone would need to make up laws to prosecute the policeman killer?

[LannaGuy]

5 hours ago, halloween said:

But you can compare a corrupt politician to a policeman's killer, if you think it helps your agenda. Or at least deflect the thread from the subject, another corrupt Shinawatra.

 

The thread is not what you say and this is YOUR deflection. Where in the OP does it say 'another corrupt Shinawatra'?  you are MAKING IT UP AGAIN    

 

The tread is about him complaining about Prayut

[halloween]

On 9/10/2017 at 8:54 AM, rooster59 said:

Panthongtae was earlier named as the person who recieved a Bt10-million cheque from Rachada Krisadathanont of real estate developer Krisada Mahanakorn Group, which was one of the key defendants in the Krungthai Bank fraud case.

Right there.

[LannaGuy]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

Right there.

[ovi1kanobi]

6 hours ago, halloween said:

But you can compare a corrupt politician to a policeman's killer, if you think it helps your agenda. Or at least deflect the thread from the subject, another corrupt Shinawatra.

 Yingluck is a serial killer. The other only killed one policeman. Many farmers commited suicide, Because of what Thaksin and Yingluck did.

Edited September 11, 2017 by ovi1kanobi

[AGareth2]

4 minutes ago, ovi1kanobi said:

 Yingluck is a serial killer

are you competing with the PM for crazy comments?

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, AGareth2 said:

are you competing with the PM for crazy comments?

Ignore this crazy troll.

[Khun Han]

21 hours ago, halloween said:

I addressed both issues , TYVM. I directed those interested, obviously not you, to the BP article which went into detail about the decision was made. I also mentioned that the Shinawatras were known to bribe their way to influence, and as the DSI officer was removed for failing to do his job as directed, that may well be the case.

As  for family persecution, Mafia members often claim the same. This family has been heavily involved in crime for many years, one member and another's stooges are the subject of this case. Their claims of persecution might carry more weight with evidence of innocence, seriously lacking here.

 

So.....I went through the entire thread up to the point of this reply by the poster in question, and found absolutely zilch by him which addressed the allegation that a DSI official has been taken off the case because he drew the conclusion that there is no case to answer. All I could find by Halloween were multiple attempts to take the thread offtopic through using the background info from the OP article to turn the thread into a one-sided political rant. Pathetic!!!

[Siripon]

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

So.....I went through the entire thread up to the point of this reply by the poster in question, and found absolutely zilch by him which addressed the allegation that a DSI official has been taken off the case because he drew the conclusion that there is no case to answer. All I could find by Halloween were multiple attempts to take the thread offtopic through using the background info from the OP article to turn the thread into a one-sided political rant. Pathetic!!!

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30306440

 

The statute of limitations runs out in one year so whether Pol Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit was transferred because he could find no evidence or because he would not find any evidence is something we don't know.

Oak had been quite happy to receive a 9 million baht cheque from the bank but when asked to explain why, he first of all tried to send only his lawyer. When that failed he postponed the date of meeting the DSI. Finally he met the DSI  in secret two days before the appointed date- a move which might have created suspicion that favours were being extended.

Perhaps that explains the transfer of Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit.

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by Siripon

[Khun Han]

30 minutes ago, Siripon said:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30306440

 

The statute of limitations runs out in one year so whether Pol Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit was transferred because he could find no evidence or because he would not find any evidence is something we don't know.

Oak had been quite happy to receive a 9 million baht cheque from the bank but when asked to explain why, he first of all tried to send only his lawyer. When that failed he postponed the date of meeting the DSI. Finally he met the DSI  in secret two days before the appointed date- a move which might have created suspicion that favours were being extended.

Perhaps that explains the transfer of Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit.

 

 

As if Oak trying to deal with a blatantly hostile prosecution implies any kind of guilt. Love your casual swipe-away of the transfer of the DSI official by the way. You're not politically biased, no, not at all .

[Siripon]

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

As if Oak trying to deal with a blatantly hostile prosecution implies any kind of guilt. Love your casual swipe-away of the transfer of the DSI official by the way. You're not politically biased, no, not at all .

There was nothing hostile about letting him delay testimony, letting him give testimony in secret before the official date.

They have treated the boy with kid gloves so far.

 

[halloween]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

So.....I went through the entire thread up to the point of this reply by the poster in question, and found absolutely zilch by him which addressed the allegation that a DSI official has been taken off the case because he drew the conclusion that there is no case to answer. All I could find by Halloween were multiple attempts to take the thread offtopic through using the background info from the OP article to turn the thread into a one-sided political rant. Pathetic!!!

Well I'm sorry if I didn't address the aspect of the issue that concerns you, though the subject of the merit of the case was looked at.

 

Do you have something to say on the matter, or is the extent of your posting a complaint that I didn't?

[LannaGuy]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

Well I'm sorry if I didn't address the aspect of the issue that concerns you, though the subject of the merit of the case was looked at.

 

Do you have something to say on the matter, or is the extent of your posting a complaint that I didn't?

 

Pol Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit was transferred because he could find no evidence or because he would not find any evidence is something we don't know

 

It's a fair point he 'should have' found something as that's what his role is.

 

As Beria said "Show Me The Man, And I'll Show You The Crime"  and that's where we are right?   

 

"Show Me The Person opposed to the Junta, And I'll Show You The Crime" 

 

 

[halloween]

9 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

 

Pol Lt-Colonel Somboon Sarasit was transferred because he could find no evidence or because he would not find any evidence is something we don't know

 

It's a fair point he 'should have' found something as that's what his role is.

 

As Beria said "Show Me The Man, And I'll Show You The Crime"  and that's where we are right?   

 

"Show Me The Person opposed to the Junta, And I'll Show You The Crime" 

 

 

Would it be highly unusual to find RTP/DSI unwilling to prosecute the wealthy, and in particular the Shinawatras, despite there being clear evidence a crime has been committed? I fully expect that he may appear in his own news report as being found to possess "inexplicable wealth," much like others with a similar disposition.

BTW the BP article I referred to several times mentioned that a DSI panel looked at whether a crime has been committed, the first step in the decision to proceed. The answer was unanimous that was the case.

[LannaGuy]

5 hours ago, halloween said:

Would it be highly unusual to find RTP/DSI unwilling to prosecute the wealthy, and in particular the Shinawatras, despite there being clear evidence a crime has been committed? I fully expect that he may appear in his own news report as being found to possess "inexplicable wealth," much like others with a similar disposition.

BTW the BP article I referred to several times mentioned that a DSI panel looked at whether a crime has been committed, the first step in the decision to proceed. The answer was unanimous that was the case.

PC? proceed

[maeab101]

They are gonna prosecute him. great news. LOL.