Case dismissed against four accused of launching grenades against PDRC demonstrators

[webfact]

Case dismissed against four accused of launching grenades against PDRC demonstrators

By Kesinee Tangkiaw 
The Nation

 

File photo

 

The first court on Thursday dismissed a case against four people accused of firing 40mm grenades at demonstrators from the now–defunct People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) at the Government Complex in early 2013, citing insufficient witnesses and evidence.
 

Chatchawawn Prabbamrung, 49, Taweechai Vichakham, 43, Sunthorn Piphuannok, 53, and Somsri Marit, 44, were accused of contempt of murder as well as violation of gun weapons laws.

 

They were accused of firing grenades at the protestors in the middle of the night of February 8, 2013 and again against a crowd on April 10, 2013. A small number of protestors were injured as a result.

 

However, most of the plaintiff’s witnesses were police officers who said they did not directly witness the incidents, but were told about them by other parties.

 

The injured protestors also did not see their attackers.

 

Other police officers at the scene were unable to locate the origin of the shots fired.

 

The court therefore ruled to dismiss the case due to insufficient witnesses and evidence.

 

However, the four were previously sentenced to life, reduced from an execution sentence, for firing at protestors from the same group in Ratchadamri in the same year.

 

In a separate case, another defendant, who also fired grenades at the protestors of the same group in front of the Shinawatra Tower on Vibhavadi Rangsit Road, was sentenced to 35 years and five months by the Supreme Court.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30337767

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-02-02

[AGareth2]

17 minutes ago, webfact said:

However, most of the plaintiff’s witnesses were police officers who said they did not directly witness the incidents, but were told about them by other partie

appeal all the same

must have been some reds

who cares who you get as long as they are red

[YetAnother]

easy to come away after reading this article that they have done this multiple times, gotten away with it multiple times and thus will feel empowered to do it again

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

easy to come away after reading this article that they have done this multiple times, gotten away with it multiple times and thus will feel empowered to do it again

They thankfully were convicted for times where the police could get the evidence lined up. Its actually quite hard to convict someone of a crime like this so them getting off does not mean they are innocent, just that it can't be proven. But they got them for other attacks so they will do time in jail.

 

Just shows again how nice the reds are.. do find an instance of PDCR firing grenades at the reds. The scale of violence of the 2 is just not easy to compare. The reds by far the more violent party. 

[NotUrFriend]

The PDRC threw the grenades at themselves.

[joecoolfrog]

6 hours ago, robblok said:

They thankfully were convicted for times where the police could get the evidence lined up. Its actually quite hard to convict someone of a crime like this so them getting off does not mean they are innocent, just that it can't be proven. But they got them for other attacks so they will do time in jail.

 

Just shows again how nice the reds are.. do find an instance of PDCR firing grenades at the reds. The scale of violence of the 2 is just not easy to compare. The reds by far the more violent party. 

You are probably right but is it surprising ? If all democratic avenues are controlled and manipulated by the opposition then few options are available. Such a phenomenon is hardly exclusive to Thailand , most ' revolutions ' tend to be fairly blood thirsty.

[Bob12345]

6 hours ago, robblok said:

do find an instance of PDCR firing grenades at the reds. The scale of violence of the 2 is just not easy to compare. The reds by far the more violent party. 

You first find an instance where the reds put snipers on the skytrain tracks to shoot dozens of protestors and a couple of nurses in temple compounds.

The greens are by far the most violent party (although maybe the muslims seperatists can surpass them).

 

 

p.s. we (me and many other posters) have had this discussion with you before, so i truely don't see why you have to bring up the discussion point "which side is more violent" again. It gets boring.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Bob12345

[NanLaew]

8 hours ago, robblok said:

They thankfully were convicted for times where the police could get the evidence lined up. Its actually quite hard to convict someone of a crime like this so them getting off does not mean they are innocent, just that it can't be proven. But they got them for other attacks so they will do time in jail.

 

Just shows again how nice the reds are.. do find an instance of PDCR firing grenades at the reds. The scale of violence of the 2 is just not easy to compare. The reds by far the more violent party. 

Yes. The yellows really need to up their game before the Final.

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

p.s. we (me and many other posters) have had this discussion with you before, so i truely don't see why you have to bring up the discussion point "which side is more violent" again. It gets boring.

But since you responded again, it's over to rob.

 

...again.

[Chris Lawrence]

9 hours ago, AGareth2 said:

appeal all the same

must have been some reds

who cares who you get as long as they are red

The PDRC was a vigilante group that participated in the witch hunt against dissenters. This was after they had a hand in overthrowing an elected government.  By the way Gareth, are you an Imperial wizard?:  as comments like yours do nothing for the discussion of the topic, but deliver a ultra right ideology that defames the people of Thailand. 

[pattayaorganic]

elected government? 555. Bought 500b per vote cash on delivery...

[halloween]

11 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

You first find an instance where the reds put snipers on the skytrain tracks to shoot dozens of protestors and a couple of nurses in temple compounds.

The greens are by far the most violent party (although maybe the muslims seperatists can surpass them).

 

 

p.s. we (me and many other posters) have had this discussion with you before, so i truely don't see why you have to bring up the discussion point "which side is more violent" again. It gets boring.

You must have fun at traffic lights being unable to see the difference between yellow and green. But I can understand how an argument gets boring (for you) when the evidence is hard to refute.

[ChidlomDweller]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

You must have fun at traffic lights being unable to see the difference between yellow and green. But I can understand how an argument gets boring (for you) when the evidence is hard to refute.

They were in alliance as Suthep himself bragged about.  Political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak (at Chulalongkorn, hardly a redshirt nest) said the same again in his column BP yesterday, i.e., he observed that the military "aided and abetted" the PDRC.  Remember the Singha heiress' fancy dress party in green in poverty-ridden Thonglor days after the coup?  

 

So yes, duh, the army, judiciary, bureaucracy, Democrat Party, Election Commission, PDRC and I'm sure I'm forgetting some are different, but in alliance.  It's like saying the SS and Luftwaffe were independent entities, as if they had nothing to do with each other.

 

Why should the yellows get violent when you can get the courts to make absurd contortions on your behalf, tying the police's hands so you're allowed to flout every possible law for months, even kidnapping people and false imprisonment of police officers who had the temerity to attend their protest, and also have the military to hold the population at gunpoint  (which I saw with my own eyes).  It's in this vacuum and context you and robblok love to ignore that indeed there was very sporadic redshirt violence.  Given the scale of injustice and repression it could be a hell of lot worse.

 

Moreover, one side is stealing democracy, the other is seeing it snatched away for the third time in a decade, hardly the same justification.  

 

Foreigners who get a great start in life in a liberal democracy at home, then to become mouthpieces for an exploitative sociopath elite ...  deleted because of forum rules that we have to be respectful!

Edited February 2, 2018 by ChidlomDweller

[greenchair]

18 hours ago, robblok said:

They thankfully were convicted for times where the police could get the evidence lined up. Its actually quite hard to convict someone of a crime like this so them getting off does not mean they are innocent, just that it can't be proven. But they got them for other attacks so they will do time in jail.

 

Just shows again how nice the reds are.. do find an instance of PDCR firing grenades at the reds. The scale of violence of the 2 is just not easy to compare. The reds by far the more violent party. 

What about the poor man that was held for 5 days at the protest site. 

He was beaten and sexually abused by several men and then put in a sack and thrown off a bridge. Luckily a cruise boat saw him being thrown off and fished him out. Then there's the state sanctioned firing into the crowd in 2010 killing 99 people. Then there's the beating up and intimidation of people trying to go and vote. When voting booths had to be closed down for safety. Then there's closing down the airport costing the country billions of dollars. 

There is only one fundamental difference. 

One is fighting for an elected governmental system. 

The other has stopped every attempt at that since 2006. Because they don't know how to create policies that win. 

[Bob12345]

1 hour ago, ChidlomDweller said:

...

And for some reason I do not expect Halloween to reply on substance to this, because his hollow rhetoric is just that: hollow.

[NotUrFriend]

The PDRC threw the grenades at themselves. A false flag operation. They used the same tactics than the PAD to justify military intervention. "Chutinant asserted to us that PAD remained intent on a conflict that would generate at least two dozen deaths and make military intervention appear necessary and justified." https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08BANGKOK3317_a.html 

[Eric Loh]

5 hours ago, ChidlomDweller said:

They were in alliance as Suthep himself bragged about.  Political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak (at Chulalongkorn, hardly a redshirt nest) said the same again in his column BP yesterday, i.e., he observed that the military "aided and abetted" the PDRC.  Remember the Singha heiress' fancy dress party in green in poverty-ridden Thonglor days after the coup?  

 

So yes, duh, the army, judiciary, bureaucracy, Democrat Party, Election Commission, PDRC and I'm sure I'm forgetting some are different, but in alliance.  It's like saying the SS and Luftwaffe were independent entities, as if they had nothing to do with each other.

 

Why should the yellows get violent when you can get the courts to make absurd contortions on your behalf, tying the police's hands so you're allowed to flout every possible law for months, even kidnapping people and false imprisonment of police officers who had the temerity to attend their protest, and also have the military to hold the population at gunpoint  (which I saw with my own eyes).  It's in this vacuum and context you and robblok love to ignore that indeed there was very sporadic redshirt violence.  Given the scale of injustice and repression it could be a hell of lot worse.

 

Moreover, one side is stealing democracy, the other is seeing it snatched away for the third time in a decade, hardly the same justification.  

 

Foreigners who get a great start in life in a liberal democracy at home, then to become mouthpieces for an exploitative sociopath elite ...  deleted because of forum rules that we have to be respectful!

Excellent post. Those inconvenient truth not for the denials. 

[robblok]

18 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

You first find an instance where the reds put snipers on the skytrain tracks to shoot dozens of protestors and a couple of nurses in temple compounds.

The greens are by far the most violent party (although maybe the muslims seperatists can surpass them).

 

 

p.s. we (me and many other posters) have had this discussion with you before, so i truely don't see why you have to bring up the discussion point "which side is more violent" again. It gets boring.

Why i bring it up because I don't like seeing the truth. Things like these confirm it.. I mean shooting grenades at protesters and doing that at multiple sites and multiple times. That is not just an incident that is how things were, you know its true but you still are not able to see this. 

 

I understand its boring for you to see an argument backed up with facts that you can't refute. You can only try to make excuses and deflect. For me topics like this are just confirmation of what I already know. I don't see why i should keep my opinion to myself to spare you the truth.

[robblok]

5 hours ago, ChidlomDweller said:

They were in alliance as Suthep himself bragged about.  Political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak (at Chulalongkorn, hardly a redshirt nest) said the same again in his column BP yesterday, i.e., he observed that the military "aided and abetted" the PDRC.  Remember the Singha heiress' fancy dress party in green in poverty-ridden Thonglor days after the coup?  

 

So yes, duh, the army, judiciary, bureaucracy, Democrat Party, Election Commission, PDRC and I'm sure I'm forgetting some are different, but in alliance.  It's like saying the SS and Luftwaffe were independent entities, as if they had nothing to do with each other.

 

Why should the yellows get violent when you can get the courts to make absurd contortions on your behalf, tying the police's hands so you're allowed to flout every possible law for months, even kidnapping people and false imprisonment of police officers who had the temerity to attend their protest, and also have the military to hold the population at gunpoint  (which I saw with my own eyes).  It's in this vacuum and context you and robblok love to ignore that indeed there was very sporadic redshirt violence.  Given the scale of injustice and repression it could be a hell of lot worse.

 

Moreover, one side is stealing democracy, the other is seeing it snatched away for the third time in a decade, hardly the same justification.  

 

Foreigners who get a great start in life in a liberal democracy at home, then to become mouthpieces for an exploitative sociopath elite ...  deleted because of forum rules that we have to be respectful!

Yes the courts were all in the yellows favor that is why these reds came off with lack of evidence. That is why Suthep and his minions are also summoned.  Your side likes to play the victim but forget all the time the courts do rule in your favor. 

 

The reason the yellows don't get violent is that their leaders are far less violent. I guess I should put in the youtube clips in again of the burning of BKK and how the normal protesters were incited to violence and urged to bring fuel. They were told that they could drive over people and the leaders would take full responsibility. 

 

I am sure you know the speeches and why else bring rabble rousers like Yatuporn up in the ranks. Its just systematical not just incidents. The violence of the reds starts at the top and goes down. 

 

The reds are related to the PTP in the same way Sinn Fein and the IRA are related. (thought your SS and Luftwaffe comparison was so good i needed to link the reds to some bad people in a way you just tried to do too) 

[Bob12345]

12 minutes ago, robblok said:

Why i bring it up because I don't like seeing the truth. Things like these confirm it.. I mean shooting grenades at protesters and doing that at multiple sites and multiple times. That is not just an incident that is how things were, you know its true but you still are not able to see this. 

 

I understand its boring for you to see an argument backed up with facts that you can't refute. You can only try to make excuses and deflect. For me topics like this are just confirmation of what I already know. I don't see why i should keep my opinion to myself to spare you the truth.

Your getting old Rob; last time we discussed this we ALL AGREED that the reds had caused more direct causalties than the yellows (cant remember which topic exactly, but there was a comparison with a soccer match red vs yellow and breaking of rules and changing rules).

We then went further giving reasons for this and discussed further how you saw this as "excusing their behavior" while we did not do that.

 

Remember it now?

 

So its gets boring because you are restarting the discussion we already reached agreement on without any new insights.

Its just repeating the same over and over again.

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Your getting old Rob; last time we discussed this we ALL AGREED that the reds had caused more direct causalties than the yellows (cant remember which topic exactly, but there was a comparison with a soccer match red vs yellow and breaking of rules and changing rules).

We then went further giving reasons for this and discussed further how you saw this as "excusing their behavior" while we did not do that.

 

Remember it now?

 

So its gets boring because you are restarting the discussion we already reached agreement on without any new insights.

Its just repeating the same over and over again.

Yes I remember it now, it still does not change this article about the violence of the reds. So I am no longer allowed to comment on things that put the reds in a bad light.

 

As for its just repeating the same over and over again.. sounds a lot like Thai politics. 

 

I just see topics like this that point out the difference in my eyes between the two sides. Things like this just show it clearly.  A group of people (organisation) accused of multiple attacks at multiple sites. Sounds a lot like an armed fraction in the reds. Then people still deny weapons caches.. like these guys got their weapons at the Big C. 

 

Reason i keep hammering on these articles is that during the protests the red people here on the site called it all false flag so i see articles like this as a vindication. I had friends in the protesters that were at risk by these red thugs. So i do take it a bit personal.

 

I am all for the freedom to protest (as long as you don't shut down a complete city), just not for violent attacks on people who have different views. 

 

[Bob12345]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

So I am no longer allowed to comment on things that put the reds in a bad light.

Sure you are allowed to, as long as you dont break forum rules.

All i would recommend is to keep your gunpowder dry till someone comments stating the opposite.

That is the moment you should jump in and blow them out of the water.

 

If you just keep adding your little chestnut to every discussion people will start to ignore you (or that part).

Just ask Steven100 by how many he is blocked already for saying the same thing in every single post about the junta... he wont change any minds anymore.

[joecoolfrog]

On 02/02/2018 at 6:26 PM, pattayaorganic said:

elected government? 555. Bought 500b per vote cash on delivery...

That old Chestnut again ! So tell me , given the opposition is supported by the families and institutions that control a huge percentage of Thailands wealth , why did they not simply offer 1000 baht per vote ?

[halloween]

22 hours ago, ChidlomDweller said:

They were in alliance as Suthep himself bragged about.  Political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak (at Chulalongkorn, hardly a redshirt nest) said the same again in his column BP yesterday, i.e., he observed that the military "aided and abetted" the PDRC.  Remember the Singha heiress' fancy dress party in green in poverty-ridden Thonglor days after the coup?  

 

So yes, duh, the army, judiciary, bureaucracy, Democrat Party, Election Commission, PDRC and I'm sure I'm forgetting some are different, but in alliance.  It's like saying the SS and Luftwaffe were independent entities, as if they had nothing to do with each other.

 

Why should the yellows get violent when you can get the courts to make absurd contortions on your behalf, tying the police's hands so you're allowed to flout every possible law for months, even kidnapping people and false imprisonment of police officers who had the temerity to attend their protest, and also have the military to hold the population at gunpoint  (which I saw with my own eyes).  It's in this vacuum and context you and robblok love to ignore that indeed there was very sporadic redshirt violence.  Given the scale of injustice and repression it could be a hell of lot worse.

 

Moreover, one side is stealing democracy, the other is seeing it snatched away for the third time in a decade, hardly the same justification.  

 

Foreigners who get a great start in life in a liberal democracy at home, then to become mouthpieces for an exploitative sociopath elite ...  deleted because of forum rules that we have to be respectful!

You are just another apologist for the red thugs. Why do you think so many people were allied with the common goal of removing the Shinawatras from Thai politics? IMHO because they realised that democracy had been perverted to allow criminals to buy their way into government and rape their country.

Try as you might to minimise and justify, the facts remain that the reds contain a violent faction that are quite prepared to engage in violence and intimidation against those who recognise the crimes of their owners.

[halloween]

22 hours ago, greenchair said:

What about the poor man that was held for 5 days at the protest site. 

He was beaten and sexually abused by several men and then put in a sack and thrown off a bridge. Luckily a cruise boat saw him being thrown off and fished him out. Then there's the state sanctioned firing into the crowd in 2010 killing 99 people. Then there's the beating up and intimidation of people trying to go and vote. When voting booths had to be closed down for safety. Then there's closing down the airport costing the country billions of dollars. 

There is only one fundamental difference. 

One is fighting for an elected governmental system. 

The other has stopped every attempt at that since 2006. Because they don't know how to create policies that win. 

99 is a good number, often quoted by red sycophants, ignoring that it includes those killed by the reds. But who needs accuracy?

[halloween]

21 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

And for some reason I do not expect Halloween to reply on substance to this, because his hollow rhetoric is just that: hollow.

I am working 12 hr days, which leaves me just sufficient time to scan TVF and point out glaring inaccuracies, especially those used as convenient excuses.

[Bob12345]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

I am working 12 hr days, which leaves me just sufficient time to scan TVF and point out glaring inaccuracies, especially those used as convenient excuses.

You posted 3 times in a row, but brought no content in any of those posts.

 

May i recommend you focus your efforts on just one message board, one topic, one post, so you can at least say something with content instead of going for quantity?

[greenchair]

You have avoided the essence of my post which is the violence from red, yellow, and green is about the same.

In fact, there are no exact numbers on the people killed or maimed from any group, but when making a point one does need to use a ball park figure. 

Does it matter if it were 99 or 53. The violence and law breaking has come from all sides. 

 

[brewsterbudgen]

Yes the courts were all in the yellows favor that is why these reds came off with lack of evidence. That is why Suthep and his minions are also summoned.  Your side likes to play the victim but forget all the time the courts do rule in your favor. 
 
The reason the yellows don't get violent is that their leaders are far less violent. I guess I should put in the youtube clips in again of the burning of BKK and how the normal protesters were incited to violence and urged to bring fuel. They were told that they could drive over people and the leaders would take full responsibility. 
 
I am sure you know the speeches and why else bring rabble rousers like Yatuporn up in the ranks. Its just systematical not just incidents. The violence of the reds starts at the top and goes down. 
 
The reds are related to the PTP in the same way Sinn Fein and the IRA are related. (thought your SS and Luftwaffe comparison was so good i needed to link the reds to some bad people in a way you just tried to do too) 

I hope your analogy with Northern Ireland is right, and a peace process can begin that eventually sees PTP back in government. Where are Tony Blair and Mo Mowlem?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[pattayaorganic]

4 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

That old Chestnut again ! So tell me , given the opposition is supported by the families and institutions that control a huge percentage of Thailands wealth , why did they not simply offer 1000 baht per vote ?

Maybe because one side is a profit proposition (let's steal all the rice with government money and split the bounty between us), and the other side really wants democracy. But perhaps that's too difficult for you to understand. But it's a brilliant idea. Let's just auction off the post of prime minister and MP's. Old Chestnut? You obviously know nothing about Thailand if you claim it not to be true. They don't try to hide it at all.