20 hours ago, sambum said:

On 10/1/2022 at 12:57 PM, Liverpool Lou said:

"no shame at all...."

What exactly was confirmed by the enquiry about the police chief's actions that he should have been ashamed about?

Thought you'd be along sooner than later! Fighting for the "underdog" as per usual!

It's a forum, don't forget, one consensus of Thai-bashing opinion is not demanded by the rules.  Neither are accurate observations outlawed here.   

Perhaps you're aware of something that the enquiry condemned him for?

So still none the wiser... what was the BiG Cheese guilty of in this case of the poor woman's demise? Did she pass in Police care or in the community??

21 hours ago, Mickeymaus said:

Prayut is back. The police chief is back. Don't say that nothing changes in Thailand ????

The new land of boomerangs and you never need to chuck one ????

24 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

It's a forum, don't forget, one consensus of Thai-bashing opinion is not demanded by the rules.  Neither are accurate observations outlawed here.   

Perhaps you're aware of something that the enquiry condemned him for?

I was merely making an observation about your usual reactions to certain observations!

Regarding your question, one poster put it rather succinctly - "Inaction". In other words not what he did, but rather what he didn't do!

Edited October 2, 20223 yr by sambum

WOW that'll teach him - NOT

7 hours ago, sambum said:

one poster put it rather succinctly - "Inaction". In other words not what he did, but rather what he didn't do!

Edited 7 hours ago by sambum

Yet the investigation into the now reinstated officer said nothing about "inaction" on his part, did it?

6 hours ago, generealty said:

WOW that'll teach him - NOT

What is it he needs to be "taught"?   He was not found guilty or remiss of anything.

From what I understand being transferred to an inaction post just means he is kept away from whatever investigation is underway.

Not that he is guilty of anything they just don't want him to influence the result.

If nothing is found he can be brought back with no loss of service or rank. In England they would state that he is suspended while the facts are investigated.

1 hour ago, roger101 said:

From what I understand being transferred to an inaction post just means he is kept away from whatever investigation is underway.

Not that he is guilty of anything they just don't want him to influence the result.

If nothing is found he can be brought back with no loss of service or rank. In England they would state that he is suspended while the facts are investigated.

The difference being that in England there is a decent chance of a thorough and impartial investigation.

6 hours ago, roger101 said:

From what I understand being transferred to an inaction post just means he is kept away from whatever investigation is underway.

Not that he is guilty of anything they just don't want him to influence the result.

If nothing is found he can be brought back with no loss of service or rank. In England they would state that he is suspended while the facts are investigated.

I agree with this, but would include also the words scandal or blame. And that the result cannot impact on him....It is like saying there are suspicions he is embroiled, that would reflect badly on the force,  we will move him away until the fuss dies down. 

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Yet the investigation into the now reinstated officer said nothing about "inaction" on his part, did it?

Did it also say why he had been suspended/inactive posted in the first place?

3 hours ago, sambum said:

Did it also say why he had been suspended/inactive posted in the first place?

No idea, why not research that for yourself if you want to know?

41 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No idea, why not research that for yourself if you want to know?

I thought you might know as you seem to be defending him regardless of what he may have done/not done.

On 10/1/2022 at 2:57 AM, Liverpool Lou said:

"Yet another travesty o0f justice".

Why?  What was it decided that he had done wrong?   

 

For someone who was cleared by the enquiry wouldn't it have been a travesty of justice if he was punished?

You really don't have any understanding of how things work there do you?