Jump to content

Panthongtae Shinawatra faces legal action


webfact

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Uber ride to the airport ordered already.

Dad's chartered jet fueled and ready...

:cheesy:

Do not think he need bother with Uber, I hear the RTP provide a free limo service to a secret RTAF airfield where he will be flown to any country he wishes... (one way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Panthongtae also wrote on Facebook last week that there was a government witch hunt in the case against him, in which he said there were more than 300 financial transactions involving many people and organisations that had not been investigated.

 

This really cries for investigative journalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Panthongtae also wrote on Facebook last week that there was a government witch hunt in the case against him, in which he said there were more than 300 financial transactions involving many people and organisations that had not been investigated.

 

This really cries for investigative journalism.

He should send them a list of his dad's mates to investigate....

:cheesy:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Old Bull said:

I wonder if Taksin took his dog with him? They will be going after the dog next.

Well, Thaksin used the names of his gardener, driver and maid to hide millions of baht in back in the 1990s. The  money went in and out the accounts, presumably for buying shares using unknown names.

No doubt the dog's name would have been used too but unfortunately its paw mark was not accepted as a recognized signature.

I wonder what its name was? All of Thaksin's children's names are to do with wealth, no doubt the dog's name was too- perhaps Filthy Rich rather than Ample Rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2017 at 5:42 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

I truly have no idea if he is innocent or guilty.

 

But, the timing seems to be directly related to Yingluck doing her runner.

 

Anyone dispute that?

Read the article, he's either guilty or incredibly stupid and I doubt its the latter. Returning the illegally obtained money does not absolve one from criminal charges so the only defense would be that he's stupid and didn't realise.

 

That being said, they're probably trying to get rid of him too to avoid him becoming the next Thaksin proxy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, wprime said:

Read the article, he's either guilty or incredibly stupid and I doubt its the latter. Returning the illegally obtained money does not absolve one from criminal charges so the only defense would be that he's stupid and didn't realise.

 

That being said, they're probably trying to get rid of him too to avoid him becoming the next Thaksin proxy.

 

In regard to the case at hand, was he alone with nobody: father, mother, other family members and/or the paymasters cronies not on hand /immediately involved is watching the money etc., and explaining about this very large bundle of cash, where it had come from, what to do with it, etc.

 

IMHO there can be no doubt several people were talking to sonny about this very large bundle of cash, where it had come from, what to do with it, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

yes

but you have to prove the criminal intent

or if I'm wrong could you please quote the relevant law/statute

Do your own homework, it's your theory. Accepting a cheque, depositing it in your account, and then using the funds to buy shares shows both knowledge and intent to me. The next big test is when he returned the money; did he approach the BIB after the scandal became news, or did they come to him? My theory is a bent DSI officer cut him a deal to keep him out of jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AGareth2 said:

Theory?

We are talking about the law

Are you a lawyer

or just making it up?

I'm talking about YOUR inane theory of criminal intent. I'm not a lawyer, and it is quiet obvious neither are you, but here is a gem for you "Ignorance is no excuse under the law." This pathetic little turd got himself mixed up in one of his father's corrupt scams. He accepted the cheque, he deposited it and spent the proceeds, and unless he can show a VERY good reason why some con artist was handing him B10 million, he will pay for his part in the crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...