bkkcanuck8 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 19 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said: Change the law? Suspend the clock? Make it retrospective? Uh..ha..the ultimate form of legal chicanery..espoused by ... Yes,ladies and Gentleman..here we are in 1453...not a cloud in the sky... No, not change the law with respect to the crime itself. The statute of limitations has been or was going to be extended for political offences. I propose that there be a law passed that the statute of limitations for all crimes be suspended as soon as you leave the jurisdiction (Thailand) if you are fleeing from justice. The Statute of limitations would run normally if no warrant and you have not fled the jurisdiction. It is pretty standard to suspend the clock in many countries if you flee. And no, it would not be retroactive, it would come into force and suspend the statute of limitations clock as of the date of enactment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus123 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 2 minutes ago, bkkcanuck8 said: No, not change the law with respect to the crime itself. The statute of limitations has been or was going to be extended for political offences. I propose that there be a law passed that the statute of limitations for all crimes be suspended as soon as you leave the jurisdiction (Thailand) if you are fleeing from justice. The Statute of limitations would run normally if no warrant and you have not fled the jurisdiction. It is pretty standard to suspend the clock in many countries if you flee. And no, it would not be retroactive, it would come into force and suspend the statute of limitations clock as of the date of enactment. Okay-I see your point. However it is probably moot because,unless your destination is Laos,Cambodia or Burma-splendid democracies all-nobody will give a rodents rear end for "justice" in Cloud Cuckoo Land. Please see Aristophanes circa 420 BC for further reference to "cloud cuckoo land". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbler Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Follow your own advice: "The Extradition Act 2551 (C.E. 2008) now applies to all extradition proceedings from Thailand. This Act repeals and replaces the Extradition Act 2472 (C.E. 1929). It must be noted that the Act is subject to the provisions of any treaties concerning extradition between the government of Thailand or any other international agency." Pertinent wording: "... all extradition proceedings from Thailand." This is an act internal to the Kingdom and does not repeal existing treaties with foreign nations. "Section 4 This Act shall be enforced upon the extradition that is not contradictory to or consistent with provisions of the treaty respecting extradition between the Government of Thailand and Foreign Country or international organization." How is that egg tasting? Good try Mr Google Scholar but you are just cherry picking phrases from random documents. If you actually read any of them you'll see that offenses of a political nature would invalidate a request by the Thai government to extradite YS on the basis of mutual cooperation for criminal cases. The statements by the foreign ministry are just fluff to create an appearance that GoT is doing something to address criticism from the elites, when the truth is her flight from LOS was more than likely a very carefully choreographed charade.Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 22 minutes ago, maxcorrigan said: Why Google it, it's in the article itself, if you read it! The article states that there is a treaty, but does not give the text of it. Some misapprehensions have been voiced concerning statutes that cover Thailand's handling of extradition requests. Those statutes are specifically Thai law and do not in any way void or modify the terms of existing international treaties. That would require renegotiation and ratification on the part of both signatory nations. Of course one party could unilaterally decide to no longer abide by the terms of a treaty, but that is generally not a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxcorrigan Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 minute ago, Bill Miller said: The article states that there is a treaty, but does not give the text of it. Some misapprehensions have been voiced concerning statutes that cover Thailand's handling of extradition requests. Those statutes are specifically Thai law and do not in any way void or modify the terms of existing international treaties. That would require renegotiation and ratification on the part of both signatory nations. Of course one party could unilaterally decide to no longer abide by the terms of a treaty, but that is generally not a good move. Bill i was just quoting literally what the article says, as against posters saying there was no treaty, i am aware there is probably more to this than than the simplified text itself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Dibbler said: Good try Mr Google Scholar but you are just cherry picking phrases from random documents. If you actually read any of them you'll see that offenses of a political nature would invalidate a request by the Thai government to extradite YS on the basis of mutual cooperation for criminal cases. The statements by the foreign ministry are just fluff to create an appearance that GoT is doing something to address criticism from the elites, when the truth is her flight from LOS was more than likely a very carefully choreographed charade. Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app You are saying almost exactly the same things I did. They are not "random documents", they are the pertinent legal writings which cover the situation. I have read them in their entirety on more than one occasion, and understand them absolutely. Yes, as my analysis indicates, "The statements by the foreign ministry are just fluff...". Why you feel compelled to argue when none oppose, and then reiterate albeit in different wording, is a puzzle. BTW, "Mr Google Scholar" is treading hard on the anti ad hominem rules of the forum. Persist and I will have no qualms about reporting you. Edited January 21, 2018 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingkenny Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 39 minutes ago, Just Weird said: I'm sure that your user name is very "at", too, whatever that means. 1. No, he is not. 2. No, he is not. How could he be if he hasn't been charged (Vorayuth has been charged) and found guilty? "There is a difference between a criminal and a convicted criminal in only so much as one has been found guilty in a court.." No, that's a ridiculous statement as before someone has a criminal conviction that person is not a criminal, by definition, in any sense of the word. Ok, clearly I am dealing with someone with no real legal knowledge, i am happy to share my credentials via pm if required. The commtting of a criminal act makes that person a criminal, a trial would determine if that person commtted a crime should they deny it. Being deemed innocent until proven guilty in court does not mean that person has not comitted the offence, it just means it is not proven yet in court should they deny the offence. The commtting of the crime makes one a criminal. Just keep arguing black is white if that makes you feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 7 minutes ago, maxcorrigan said: Bill i was just quoting literally what the article says, as against posters saying there was no treaty, i am aware there is probably more to this than than the simplified text itself! Yes, indeed. I did not intend it as a criticism of your statement, Max! I wanted to clarify for those who seemed not to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whaleboneman Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 7 hours ago, coulson said: It's just a game of hide and seek. Your beloved green jackets let her out the back door and are still counting. Is that watch #26? I've lost count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkcanuck8 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, whaleboneman said: Is that watch #26? I've lost count. No No, it stopped at #25.... but he has said if they don't do what he wants them to do then he will release the rest of the list of watches over a period of time... which ... though I agree with... sounds very much like blackmail. I would not be surprised if he is arrested for it now Edited January 21, 2018 by bkkcanuck8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whaleboneman Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Just Weird said: I'm sure that your user name is very "at", too, whatever that means. 1. No, he is not. 2. No, he is not. How could he be if he hasn't been charged (Vorayuth has been charged) and found guilty? "There is a difference between a criminal and a convicted criminal in only so much as one has been found guilty in a court.." No, that's a ridiculous statement as before someone has a criminal conviction that person is not a criminal, by definition, in any sense of the word. crim·i·nal ˈkrim(ə)n(ə)l/ noun 1. a person who has committed a crime. "these men are dangerous criminals" synonyms: lawbreaker, offender, villain, delinquent, felon, c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlQaholic Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Good luck with getting Interpol involved, I can just see it before my eyes, "a letter received from a dictatorship at Interpol's headquarters, someone asks the boss "what are we doing with this". Boss answers "just leave it unopened and archive it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retiredandhappyhere Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, steven100 said: Can you just imagine the faces of all the TV farang nayers who said it would never happen ... I'm not saying it will .... but there will be egg on alot of members faces if it ever comes to fruition. however, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha recently said that the extradition process was “generally uneasy”. It will never happen because the Thai authorities do not want her back. If they want to stir up trouble, then get her back, jail her and then see what happens. The result would not be as pretty as Yingluck, I can assure you. However, the UK would never extradite her to a military government, particularly in view of the nature of the charges the Thai courts laid at her door. If the same criteria on which she was found guilty and sentenced to 5 years in jail, were to eventually be applied to the current Junta leaders, they would never see the light of day! Edited January 21, 2018 by Retiredandhappyhere Missing comma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus123 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 7 minutes ago, AlQaholic said: Good luck with getting Interpol involved, I can just see it before my eyes, "a letter received from a dictatorship at Interpol's headquarters, someone asks the boss "what are we doing with this". Boss answers "just leave it unopened and archive it". Yeah..these people have no legitimacy whatsoever-we know that but the poor ratz in their Skinner Box do not... Planet Thailand. "Twas bryllig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkcanuck8 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 12 minutes ago, whaleboneman said: crim·i·nal ˈkrim(ə)n(ə)l/ noun 1. a person who has committed a crime. "these men are dangerous criminals" synonyms: lawbreaker, offender, villain, delinquent, felon, c I think the english dictionary will have to suffice since there is no legal definition of criminal as far as I know. You can be convicted of a criminal offence (aka convict) You can have a criminal record You be suspected of a criminal offence You can be charged with a criminal offence You can be can plead innocent, or guilty of a criminal offence You can be found not guilting of a criminal offence But to my knowledge there is no legal state of being a criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus123 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 2 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said: It will never happen because the Thai authorities do not want her back. If they want to stir up trouble, then get her back, jail her and then see what happens. The result would not be as pretty as Yingluck, I can assure you. However, the UK would never extradite her to a military government, particularly in view of the nature of the charges the Thai courts laid at her door. If the same criteria on which she was found guilty and sentenced to 5 years in jail, were to eventually be applied to the current Junta leaders, they would never see the light of day! Chocolate Soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Smiles Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said: It will never happen because the Thai authorities do not want her back. If they want to stir up trouble, then get her back, jail her and then see what happens. The result would not be as pretty as Yingluck, I can assure you. However, the UK would never extradite her to a military government, particularly in view of the nature of the charges the Thai courts laid at her door. If the same criteria on which she was found guilty and sentenced to 5 years in jail, were to eventually be applied to the current Junta leaders, they would never see the light of day! Nature of the charges? She has been found guilty of criminal negligence and went on the run while on bail, I don't think those legal concepts are entirely alien to the UK legal system. The UK has way more to lose by supporting Yingluck, if Thailand reciprocate and stop extraditing to the UK when requested or even allow the UK's most wanted to hang out in Thailand or leave by the back door. Prayut is playing Yingluck like a Stradivarius, he doesn't want her back in Thailand but if she starts making too much noise then the red Interpol notice will be submitted? Do you not wonder why she has been so quiet as to be almost silent since leaving Thailand? Edited January 21, 2018 by Air Smiles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenny2017 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, steven100 said: How many notes have you found? https://www.interpol.int/notice/search/wanted P.S. Not all are in bed with Yingluck here. It's about Prayut, got it? Edited January 21, 2018 by jenny2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Most of the members of the constitutional court were appointed in 2008 were they not -- after the 2007 election. Many of the members are supreme court justices.... While I think there is a double standard, it looks as though in your zeal of hatred for the current junta you are in fact seem to be spreading misinformation. I don't remember them being replaced after the coup in 2013.https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Judiciary_of_Thailand.htmlRead the section about the constitutional court. Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonstarjon Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Most of the reasonably intelligent people reading this post, would be yawning instantly at this post. We don't need to be educated or lectured too by kindergarten properganderists regardless of how we side with Junta or the elected leaders elite group. Every ex leader of a country is treated level of respect by international political community unless they are thought to be prosecutable based on international. standards of law. The trial in absentia might be thought of as illegal in first case (extreme example might be Nelson Mandela who spent many years convicted in jail) by most countries. Thailand is so soaked in lies and corruption we haven't even started to see anyone since Yingluck's conviction bite into Thailand's very special cake of corruption. If we did, the primary list of corrupt people would run down from those people who had unchallenged rights to form the greatest Mafia-like network possible. We all know the corruption in Thailand extends from lowest levels of semi officialdom to the highest. That's why I pulled my family from the country a couple of years ago. I am still introducing my family to a country where people think moderately normal. I still find my wife can't get her head around fair treatment by any agent of her new country of residence. She still thinks that should can corrupt and manipulate officialdom by the usual Thai means. For example, acting with kitten like cuteness or a few dollars under the form filling or accusations against others in order to turn herself into someone's victim which she feels will see her through a process with success. It's all so embarrassing and demeaning for her and her family including me. I have now had to wash my hands of her. Even I am now bedridden and helpless with late stage cancer. The last thing I have left is my dignity. So, having escaped Thailand, I still suffer the taint of a totally corrupt Thai culture while cancer eats what's left of my bones. If Yingluck or any other PM was to try to create any policy for any reason in their duties as PM they would not have sufficient authority to implement it without approval from the true special few and their cut of proceeds. This special group would then have their own network to ensure the cream was whipped away ensuring that nothing would be seen by those outside the secret circle. Heartfelt adulation and respect for higher offices above PM level would be maintained and so life goes on for Thai "society" QED. Yingluck would have been powerless to control the result of her policy the moment it was implemented. Evidence for her demise would have already been put in place to keep her in line. Hard to believe that a serious investigation would join all the dots together to show her guilty beyond doubt in any civilised country. A good investigation might look for gaps in what she would have to control to execute this fraud and show where she lost control and who had necessary power to permit this fraud to happen at a practical level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingdoc Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 No possibility of this, where the Military Junta took over the country in a coup, and are the same people who are asking for her extradition, back to them, so they can deal with matters in their own way !! Frivolous and a waste of Interpol's and others' money and time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Smiles Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 3 minutes ago, jonstarjon said: The trial in absentia might be thought of as illegal in first case (extreme example might be Nelson Mandela who spent many years convicted in jail) by most countries. Yingluck was present at her trial, it was only the last day she didn't show up to hear the decision and went on the run. Comparing Yingluck to NM? How we laughed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coulson Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 5 hours ago, AGareth2 said: as previously stated Juntahol Not to be mixed with Alprazayuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAG Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 One reason is she owns two houses there, something we are not allowed to do here ! Many rich Thai's own property in Britain, including a lot of Generals, bolt holes for them if any heavy conflict ever started because they sure wouldn't hang around here when big portions of crap hit the fan !Surely, they will stand and fight - I mean, they are highly decorated military men, their spirits forged by the heat of battle and the endless rigours of campaigns. When the *hit hits the fan - "Quando excretia ventaxia impactum" as the old military motto puts it, they will know no fear...Sent from my KENNY using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus123 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 minute ago, JAG said: Surely, they will stand and fight - I mean, they are highly decorated military men, their spirits forged by the heat of battle and the endless rigours of campaigns. When the *hit hits the fan - "Quando excretia ventaxia impactum" as the old military motto puts it, they will know no fear... Sent from my KENNY using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Oh gawd...oh gawd..how I laughed.! Naw..stop it now..I'm goin' to mess me Kimbies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonstarjon Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Most of the reasonably intelligent people reading this post, would be yawning instantly at this post. We don't need to be educated or lectured too by kindergarten properganderists regardless of how we side with Junta or the elected leaders elite group. Every ex leader of a country is treated level of respect by international political community unless they are thought to be prosecutable based on international. standards of law. The trial in absentia might be thought of as illegal in first case (extreme example might be Nelson Mandela who spent many years convicted in jail) by most countries. Thailand is so soaked in lies and corruption we haven't even started to see anyone since Yingluck's conviction bite into Thailand's very special cake of corruption. If we did, the primary list of corrupt people would run down from those people who had unchallenged rights to form the greatest Mafia-like network possible. We all know the corruption in Thailand extends from lowest levels of semi officialdom to the highest. That's why I pulled my family from the country a couple of years ago. I am still introducing my family to a country where people think moderately normal. I still find my wife can't get her head around fair treatment by any agent of her new country of residence. She still thinks that should can corrupt and manipulate officialdom by the usual Thai means. For example, acting with kitten like cuteness or a few dollars under the form filling or accusations against others in order to turn herself into someone's victim which she feels will see her through a process with success. It's all so embarrassing and demeaning for her and her family including me. I have now had to wash my hands of her. Even I am now bedridden and helpless with late stage cancer. The last thing I have left is my dignity. So, having escaped Thailand, I still suffer the taint of a totally corrupt Thai culture while cancer eats what's left of my bones. If Yingluck or any other PM was to try to create any policy for any reason in their duties as PM they would not have sufficient authority to implement it without approval from the true special few and their cut of proceeds. This special group would then have their own network to ensure the cream was whipped away ensuring that nothing would be seen by those outside the secret circle. Heartfelt adulation and respect for higher offices above PM level would be maintained and so life goes on for Thai "society" QED. Yingluck would have been powerless to control the result of her policy the moment it was implemented. Evidence for her demise would have already been put in place to keep her in line. Hard to believe that a serious investigation would join all the dots together to show her guilty beyond doubt in any civilised country. A good investigation might look for gaps in what she would have to control to execute this fraud and show where she lost control and who had necessary power to permit this fraud to happen at a practical level. Silly Billy me NM was just an example of someone convicted but maintained a respect in the civilised world. Not an example of connection of personal character. My main points in my post carry far more weight than this nitpick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonstarjon Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 19 minutes ago, Air Smiles said: Prayut is playing Yingluck like a Stradivarius, he doesn't want her back in Thailand but if she starts making too much noise then the red Interpol notice will be submitted? Do you not wonder why she has been so quiet as to be almost silent since leaving Thailand? It's not up to Prayut to submit a red anything it's a process that is controlled by Interpol. It would require Thailand to meet their criteria under treaties with participating countries. But yes, I essentially agree with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Smiles Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, jonstarjon said: It's not up to Prayut to submit a red anything it's a process that is controlled by Interpol. I think you'll find that Prayut can indeed request a red notice, that is generally how it works, the request comes from the country and is then processed by Interpol, it is not the case that Interpol choose the colour of the notice: Quote How is a Red Notice issued? Police in one of our member countries request a Red Notice via their National Central Bureau and provide information on the case. The INTERPOL General Secretariat publishes the Notice after a compliance check is completed. Police all around the world are alerted. https://www.interpol.int/INTERPOL-expertise/Notices Edited January 21, 2018 by Air Smiles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus123 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Prayut ain't playing Ms Yingluck for anything-...unless he thinks that he is Tubby the Tuba...which he might do, all things considered.. Good for you-.9 posts in...reinforcements are always welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambum Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 11 hours ago, steven100 said: Can you just imagine the faces of all the TV farang nayers who said it would never happen ... I'm not saying it will .... but there will be egg on alot of members faces if it ever comes to fruition. however, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha recently said that the extradition process was “generally uneasy”. Maybe it's gone in the queue along with the attempts to bring back Thaksin and the Red Bull heir? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now