BBC says Thailand asks UK to extradite Yingluck

[ResandePohm]

19 hours ago, Raymonddiaz said:

UK will never extradite her because they don't believe in thai justice system. The so called justice by the people who did a bigger crime: Coup d'état. 

If the UK doesn't believe in the Thai justice system then why have an extradition treaty in place. They should revoke it. As long as the treaty is in place then the UK needs to honour it. Her crime was not political and she is not threatened by the death penalty so there is no reason not to extradite her. However, I expect her lawyers will argue that her conviction was political. Just let's hope they fail.

[Baerboxer]

19 hours ago, Raymonddiaz said:

UK will never extradite her because they don't believe in thai justice system. The so called justice by the people who did a bigger crime: Coup d'état. 

 

Wrong. As was demonstrated with the KT murder trial.

 

The UK has fairly normal relations with the current Thai government as evidenced by the various visits to each country and meetings.

 

The UK, unlike some Mickey Mouse countries, has a robust justice system which will be followed. First question being was the crime convicted of a crime under the law of England and Wales at the time of the conviction. If not then does the paragraph highlighted in the Thai Embassy letter apply. If either is 'yes" then they will proceed with the facts of the case including whether the charges were politically motivated.

 

The law of England and Wales will be applied, in consideration of the treaty.

 

 

[BobBKK]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

Wrong. As was demonstrated with the KT murder trial.

 

The UK has fairly normal relations with the current Thai government as evidenced by the various visits to each country and meetings.

 

The UK, unlike some Mickey Mouse countries, has a robust justice system which will be followed. First question being was the crime convicted of a crime under the law of England and Wales at the time of the conviction. If not then does the paragraph highlighted in the Thai Embassy letter apply. If either is 'yes" then they will proceed with the facts of the case including whether the charges were politically motivated.

 

The law of England and Wales will be applied, in consideration of the treaty.

 

 

 

We don't extradite to non-elected. military led Juntas period. 

[Baerboxer]

21 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Sure but a few conditions?  

 

1/ democracy - free and fair

2/ no political judges and courts

3/ implement a jury system

4/ arrest those that took over illegally

5/ overturn the amnesty for the Junta law breakers

6/ no unelected clowns posing as 'senators' 

 

Then we might consider it. Oh by the way... implement parliamentary privilege like every other developed country. 

 

Send in the gunboats - the old mentality lives!

[BobBKK]

3 minutes ago, ResandePohm said:

If the UK doesn't believe in the Thai justice system then why have an extradition treaty in place. They should revoke it. As long as the treaty is in place then the UK needs to honour it. Her crime was not political and she is not threatened by the death penalty so there is no reason not to extradite her. However, I expect her lawyers will argue that her conviction was political. Just let's hope they fail.

which planet were you born on? it's OBVIOUS to everyone it was political

[Baerboxer]

Just now, BobBKK said:

 

We don't extradite to non-elected. military led Juntas period. 

 

They will not say that. Their actions over the years since the coup prove they don't really care. All about business and eyeing up post Brexit deals.

[Chassa]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Send in the gunboats - the old mentality lives!

That's what the Yanks still do, if they want someone badly enough.

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

which planet were you born on? it's OBVIOUS to everyone it was political

 

The usual Shin dupe to every crime - "it's all political"

 

It's obvious there is a pecking order and a preference for which cases get progressed and which gets buried. 

 

But did she ever explain how her never attending any meetings she appointed herself to chair wasn't negligent, how her continued assurances there was no fraud wasn't, why she failed to cancel the fraudulent G2G deals after sacking the now imprisoned commerce minister? Perhaps you'd care to explain how all that was just "political"?

 

What's obvious is they're crooks. But some get prosecuted and some don't.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, Chassa said:

That's what the Yanks still do, if they want someone badly enough.

 

The Mossad were good at this.

 

But I meant the poster was suggesting Britain dictate to another country how they must change. Don't think they've done that sine the Raj!

[BobBKK]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

The usual Shin dupe to every crime - "it's all political"

 

It's obvious there is a pecking order and a preference for which cases get progressed and which gets buried. 

 

But did she ever explain how her never attending any meetings she appointed herself to chair wasn't negligent, how her continued assurances there was no fraud wasn't, why she failed to cancel the fraudulent G2G deals after sacking the now imprisoned commerce minister? Perhaps you'd care to explain how all that was just "political"?

 

What's obvious is they're crooks. But some get prosecuted and some don't.

 

Not at all. The Junta control the country with guns and you think the courts will go against that?  naive at best as if that were the case they would rule the Junta illegal.  You think all leaders attend all meetings?  nonsense. what fraud?  any charges for fraud?  how much money did she make?  don't start all that BS again. The government knew she was innocent and let her go... just walk right past all those Police guards around her house eh?  naive. 

[whaleboneman]

17 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Here is a question.

 

In order to begin the process of extradition from the UK, does a foreign country ...

a) have its embassy send a request letter to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office?

b) engage a legal team to begin court proceedings?

 

My point being, is this a real attempt at extradition? Or some zany non-attempt?

c) text the request via LINE. (with a happy face)

[BobBKK]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

The Mossad were good at this.

 

But I meant the poster was suggesting Britain dictate to another country how they must change. Don't think they've done that sine the Raj!

No I suggested they follow the normal standards of developed counteries.

 

So down to brass taks : you don't believe my list is relevant?  right?  proper?   tell us what you don't agree with in it.  Britain is a developed nation with laws and a democracy we do not let tin pot nations with illegal Juntas demand we return elected PM's that were forced out with GUNS.

[Chris Lawrence]

They had a trial and everything. As she wasn't there they didn't feel it necessary to go into too much detail, but as you have a trial with real life judges everything must be seen as correct in the eyes of the Thai Government. She has to be in big trouble as it has now been written that she is in big trouble by the court.

 

What was the end result of the forensic audit of the rice debacle? Well they said it was missing. Must be true.

 

I bet 'Boss' is breathing a sigh of relief. They also have an arrest warrant out for him, but haven't got around to asking those nice English people to send him back. Or Mr T?

[Baerboxer]

Just now, BobBKK said:

 

Not at all. The Junta control the country with guns and you think the courts will go against that?  naive at best as if that were the case they would rule the Junta illegal.  You think all leaders attend all meetings?  nonsense. what fraud?  any charges for fraud?  how much money did she make?  don't start all that BS again. The government knew she was innocent and let her go... just walk right past all those Police guards around her house eh?  naive. 

 

Talk of naivety, you think someone can be a leader, appoint themselves to chair the flagship policy of their government and then never ever attend and that is not negligent? Get real. It was a poor attempt at plausible deniability - "wasn't me, I wasn't there, I didn't know" that backfired because like so many of their bright ideas it wasn't so bright. Especially as she was running around stating the she, and only she, was in charge.

 

Fraud - you mean like the G2G deals that were pure fraud for which an ex minister and several others are now serving lengthy prison sentence.

 

Cut the BS and check the actual facts. She was as negligent as hell. The G2G deal was benefiting a company owned by a close ally of her criminal brother. If you want to ignore the facts and make naive generalisations then up to you.

 

She was correctly found guilty. But as usual running off, a family trait, is permitted. Her case was selectively progressed but that doesn't make her innocent.

 

This exercise is aimed to throw the ball in the British court. They don't really want her back, probably believe Britain won't extradite her, but want to look like they tried. Then it will be those naughty British who pander to the Shin Billions and let them stat there.

 

Notice they haven't bothered asking about Thaksin even though they know he's there too.

 

Wake up - it's all smoke and mirrors.

[HHTel]

18 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

democratically elected leaders who are toppled in a coup

Yingluk was not brought down by the coup.  She was already out of office when the coup was staged.

[Baerboxer]

8 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

No I suggested they follow the normal standards of developed counteries.

 

So down to brass taks : you don't believe my list is relevant?  right?  proper?   tell us what you don't agree with in it.  Britain is a developed nation with laws and a democracy we do not let tin pot nations with illegal Juntas demand we return elected PM's that were forced out with GUNS.

 

Nothing to do with what's on your list. I don't believe that Britain will respond in the manner you clearly do to a friendly country regarding an existing treaty. 

 

We shall see.

[lincolnshire poacher]

Why would they want her back snd in jail ? She would become a martyr, just what the junta dont want.An attempted show of strength to please the yellow shirt mob. What about the Red Bull murderer, don't they want him ?

[Baerboxer]

Just now, HHTel said:

Yingluk was not brought down by the coup.  She was already out of office when the coup was staged.

 

Indeed. Removed by a Court for an illegal abuse of power.

[Baerboxer]

10 minutes ago, Chris Lawrence said:

They had a trial and everything. As she wasn't there they didn't feel it necessary to go into too much detail, but as you have a trial with real life judges everything must be seen as correct in the eyes of the Thai Government. She has to be in big trouble as it has now been written that she is in big trouble by the court.

 

What was the end result of the forensic audit of the rice debacle? Well they said it was missing. Must be true.

 

I bet 'Boss' is breathing a sigh of relief. They also have an arrest warrant out for him, but haven't got around to asking those nice English people to send him back. Or Mr T?

 

Actually she was there for most of her trial. Just legged it before the verdict.

[spidermike007]

Thailand does not want her, or her brother extradited. This has been clear since the very beginning. It is nothing but trouble for Tiny P., if either of them return. He is hugely unpopular, and they are hugely popular, to this day. No effort whatsoever is being made to have them returned. And even if Thailand requested that either the UK government or Interpol returned them, their request would be met with scorn, laughs and turned down in total. This administration, and Tiny P., simply have no credibility to the outside world.

[peter48]

 

 

18 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

When the UK authority hear the charges are for policy negligence, they must be scratching their heads. Tony Blair will be bemused. 

Tony Blair won three elections against the dreaded Tories, because he rebuilt the health service, eradicated Cancer waits, built new hospitals, new schools, brought in minimum wages, EU job rights, part-timers pay up, increased pensions, heating allowance, free bus passes for over 60s, free eye tests, expanded university places, got working class schools with better passes, got economic growth higher, got jobless down, reduced crime and strikes, looked after Scotland & Wales, won peace for N. Ireland , got the Olympics, expanded our creative, technology, financial , scientific, pharmaceuticals , IT sectors....I could go on. The 13 years of New Labour were an exemplar of how you deliver a country from the Thatcherite Neo-Liberalism that was so divisive  before 1997.   

[Robbess]

19 hours ago, stud858 said:

I guess the case is clear cut. 

Julian Assange committed an offence by publishing secure government documents. Even he pleaded guilty to the publishing. UK will arrest him. 

Yingluck has no hard evidence against her for an offence so UK will not arrest her  or extradite. 

Predictable outcomes.

 

 

 

 

If Julian Assange committed a crime then so did the Jew York Times, The BBC, The Washington Post, and Fox News. Yingluck’s case is so far removed from that political nonesense, why bring it up?

[Robbess]

3 minutes ago, peter48 said:

 

 

Tony Blair won three elections against the dreaded Tories, because he rebuilt the health service, eradicated Cancer waits, built new hospitals, new schools, brought in minimum wages, EU job rights, part-timers pay up, increased pensions, heating allowance, free bus passes for over 60s, free eye tests, expanded university places, got working class schools with better passes, got economic growth higher, got jobless down, reduced crime and strikes, looked after Scotland & Wales, won peace for N. Ireland , got the Olympics, expanded our creative, technology, financial , scientific, pharmaceuticals , IT sectors....I could go on. The 13 years of New Labour were an exemplar of how you deliver a country from the Thatcherite Neo-Liberalism that was so divisive  before 1997.   

You have your nose so far up the war criminal’s bum we can’t tell where he ends and you begin.

[JAG]

27 minutes ago, HHTel said:

Yingluk was not brought down by the coup.  She was already out of office when the coup was staged.

However, we must remember that the coup (and the previous one funnily enough) were staged to forestall an entirely constitutional election, in which a Shinawatra, either Thaksin himself or Yingluck, was standing, and an election which it was rather likely a Shinawatra led party would win.

 

Of course, that may just be a coincidence, but I always try to mention it because it seems to be so often forgotten by those who excuse the coup(s)...

Edited August 1, 2018 by JAG

[peter48]

 

Robbess

 

I was referring to his social and economic policies. Your knee jerk reaction is typical of those indifferent to the sufferings of people under the extreme dictators of Saddam Hussein  or the current problems of Assad in Syria. The UK/Americans/Allies were worried  he had dangerous weapons already and he had already had wars against his neighbors and gassed many Kurds and others. He was a real dictator who imprisoned anyone critical of the ruling party. Citizens welcomed the soldiers who liberated Baghdad. Things fell apart later especially when sectarianism began.  

Edited August 1, 2018 by peter48

[dutchbull]

They Will never send her back to a militair regime

[HHTel]

Her Thai passports have been revoked.  It's reported that she has a passport from a European country.  Thaksin told the BBC that she was offered passports by numerous countries.

 

As far as extradition goes, if the request is accepted by the UK government, then Yingluk would have to agree with the extradition, which of course she won't.  It would then go to an 'extradition hearing'.  The bones of which are:

 

Quote

The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK, and minimum levels of severity of punishment)

 

As far as her 'visa' goes.  The Foreign Office will neither confirm nor deny the issuance of one as is their policy.  The visa report was issued by the BBC quoting sources close to the Shinawatre's.

[ujayujay]

GB seems to be a good hide for Thai criminals: Red Bull Policeman Killer, Yingluck....whos next

[Neeranam]

20 hours ago, grego49 said:

If this the case what the red bull clown.

Nowhere near the same magnitude.

 

Hopefully she will serve time.

[Neeranam]

8 minutes ago, ujayujay said:

GB seems to be a good hide for Thai criminals: Red Bull Policeman Killer, Yingluck....whos next

A lot more UK criminals hiding here, the difference being that getting a visa is so easy here.