Decade-Long Fight For Justice Costs Injured Man Deeply

[webfact]

Decade-Long Fight For Justice Costs Injured Man Deeply

By Pravit Rojanaphruk, Senior Staff Writer

 

At left, a soldier aims his rifle at Redshirt protesters on April 14, 2009, from an overpass in Bangkok. At right, a recent photo of Sawai Thongom displaying the gunshot wound that left him without use of his hand.

 

BANGKOK — Soon after Sawai Thongom recovered from a gunshot wound sutained in a 2009 protest against the government of Abhisit Vejjajiva that left one hand unusable, he began fighting for compensation. Months later, a court ruled Abhisit and the armed forces forces must pay him 1.2 million baht for the crackdown that left him handicapped.

 

Before he received a single baht, another court overturned the judgment on appeal, ruling that the bullet wounds sustained by Sawai and another injured plaintiff were caused by a type of gun not issued to soldiers. By the time the case wound through the Supreme Court two years ago, they were on the hook for over 300,000 baht in fees and damages for harming the military’s reputation.

 

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/featured/2018/09/19/decade-long-fight-for-justice-costs-injured-man-deeply/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2018-09-19

[Dave67]

The reputation for opening up on your own people with shotguns and automatic weapons ? scum

[Esso49]

3 hours ago, Dave67 said:

The reputation for opening up on your own people with shotguns and automatic weapons ? scum

And who was their General at the time ?

[ratcatcher]

11 minutes ago, Esso49 said:

And who was their General at the time ?

Anupong Paochinda

[soalbundy]

Sometimes it's better to stay silent, especially here. He went to a demonstration that turned violent. The bullet that wounded him wasn't an army bullet, wasn't that known before he sued the army? Whatever, the legal fees should have been enough,  paying damages to the army is OT with a method, the government is always right.

[Srikcir]

17 hours ago, Esso49 said:

And who was their General at the time ?

Gen. Prayuth served as commander of the First Region Army during the crackdown.

Gen. Prayuth, Gen. Anupong Paochinda, and Gen. Prawit Wongsuwan oversaw military crackdown on Redshirt protesters. http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2015/02/26/1424936726/

 

[cyberfarang]

He went to a protest against the government and got injured.

 

The man voluntarily placed himself in the front line. He must have known the army and those protesting would not be using pea shooters and water pistols. Then after placing himself in danger, gets hurt and wants compensation. Sorry, no sympathy.

[Srikcir]

38 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

He went to a protest against the government and got injured.

 

The man voluntarily placed himself in the front line. He must have known the army and those protesting would not be using pea shooters and water pistols. Then after placing himself in danger, gets hurt and wants compensation. Sorry, no sympathy.

Six unarmed people killed at a Buddhist temple during the military crackdown on anti-government protesters in Bangkok three years ago were hit by bullets fired by Thai soldiers, an inquest has found.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/06/six-killed-thai-soldiers-crackdown-protesters

Does that deserve your sympathy?

 

[connda]

On 9/19/2018 at 2:45 PM, webfact said:

By the time the case wound through the Supreme Court two years ago, they were on the hook for over 300,000 baht in fees and damages for harming the military’s reputation.

And that, boys and girls, is how you hammer the nails flush on the coffin of dissent.  Those who victoriously wield the guns are those who give birth to the commonly accepted narrative which includes describing themselves as the victims. 

[Esso49]

1 hour ago, cyberfarang said:

He went to a protest against the government and got injured.

 

The man voluntarily placed himself in the front line. He must have known the army and those protesting would not be using pea shooters and water pistols. Then after placing himself in danger, gets hurt and wants compensation. Sorry, no sympathy.

That's  rather an obtuse viewpoint to justify something that even the Supreme court has ruled in favour of the claimant.

[Artisi]

2 hours ago, Esso49 said:

That's  rather an obtuse viewpoint to justify something that even the Supreme court has ruled in favour of the claimant.

Fair comment, what has followed is normal legal gobbledygook / arse covering / denying responsibility.