webfact Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Court to rule today on Pojaman's appeal By The Nation The Appeals Court is set to rule today on a case involving Thaksin Shinawatra's ex-wife Pojaman na Pombejra. Pojaman was sentenced in 2008 to three years in jail. She was found guilty of evading tax payment of Bt546 million for the transfer of 4.5 million shares of Shinawatra Computer and Communications worth Bt738 million. Also found guilty were her adopted brother Bhanapot Damapong, who received the shares, and her secretary Kanjanapa Honghern. The Court sentenced Khunying Pojaman and Bhanapot to a total of three years in jail - two years for the charges relating to the conspiracy to evade tax and one year for giving falsified statements to authorities. Kanjanapa faces two years in jail. The court at the time said the three defendants had committed serious crimes and filed false statements with government agencies to avoid paying taxes. They also received a strong reprimand from the court for evading taxes despite being very rich. The court said that the prosecution evidence was solid and indisputable. The three suspects were found guilty of fraud or collaboration to evade taxes. The Appeals Court will decide on their pleas today. It will be the first major legal affair involving the Shinawatras since Yingluck rose to power. Pojaman was also a key player in Thaksin's Ratchadaphisek land case. He was found guilty and sentenced to two years' jail after giving his consent to buy a piece of state-auctioned land while he was in power. Pojaman escaped punishment in the land case. -- The Nation 2011-08-24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siampolee Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 'Twill be interesting to see how this one goes. It is indeed a case of be dammed if you do and be dammed if you don't regarding the verdict. Guilty all the PTP and Thaksin supporters will be screaming , " foul injustice a political conviction a smear campaign etc. The anti Thaksin, anti PTP supporters will be screaming, " nepotism a manipulation of the judicial system etc. Justice, is it impartial or is it about influence and money ? We shall soon see, I am still of the mind that the Democrats preferred to lose this last election as they knew what was coming internally and internationally . Economy wise on the international front and economy and judicially wise on the domestic front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) The Court sentenced Khunying Pojaman and Bhanapot to a total of three years in jail - two years for the charges relating to the conspiracy to evade tax and one year for giving falsified statements to authorities. Kanjanapa faces two years in jail. Bhanapot/Bannaphot/Bannapot (shown below when he and his sister were convicted) is also embroiled at the heart of another pending case (in the next following quote) Bannaphot, on the left alongside his sister in July 2008, when the Criminal Court found Potjaman and Bannaphot guilty of intentionally avoiding a tax payment of 546 Million Baht. Also found guilty were Potjaman's personal secretary, Kanchana Honghern, on the right. The court sentenced Potjaman and Bannaphot each to 3 years in prison and Kanchana to 2 years in prison. Supreme Court Convenes for Asset Concealment Case The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions is convening for its first hearing in the case involving a former Pheu Thai MP accused of concealing her assets and liabilities from the National Anti-Corruption Commission. The defendant claims that the anti-corruption panel is biased against her. Former Pheu Thai MP and daughter of former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat, Chinnicha Wongsawat, traveled to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions for her first hearing after the National Anti-Corruption Commission, or NACC, petitioned for her disqualification and ban from politics for five years. The NACC accused Chinnicha of concealing assets and liabilities, as well as failing to declare her debt in the documents she submitted to the NACC. The NACC earlier filed a petition asking that Chinnicha be disqualified and banned from politics earlier this year after she allegedly concealed her asset and liabilities from the NACC, particularly the 100 million baht loan from Bannapot Damapong, a step brother of Khunying Pojaman na Pombejara, after Chinnicha assumed her House seat. Edited August 24, 2011 by Buchholz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) you're being a bit harsh Bucky - I mean, anybody could forget a B100 million loan. Edited August 24, 2011 by OzMick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakseedaa Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 'Twill be interesting to see how this one goes. It is indeed a case of be dammed if you do and be dammed if you don't regarding the verdict. Guilty all the PTP and Thaksin supporters will be screaming , " foul injustice a political conviction a smear campaign etc. The anti Thaksin, anti PTP supporters will be screaming, " nepotism a manipulation of the judicial system etc. Justice, is it impartial or is it about influence and money ? We shall soon see, I am still of the mind that the Democrats preferred to lose this last election as they knew what was coming internally and internationally . Economy wise on the international front and economy and judicially wise on the domestic front. Again SP, I completely agree with you... that Abhisit is a very smart fellow.. he heard the drums sounding a long time ago... Poor Yinluck... pass her some valiums..! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rametindallas Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The Court sentenced Khunying Pojaman and Bhanapot to a total of three years in jail - two years for the charges relating to the conspiracy to evade tax and one year for giving falsified statements to authorities. Kanjanapa faces two years in jail. Bhanapot/Bannaphot/Bannapot (shown below when he and his sister were convicted) is also embroiled at the heart of another pending case (in the next following quote) Bannaphot, on the left alongside his sister in July 2008, when the Criminal Court found Potjaman and Bannaphot guilty of intentionally avoiding a tax payment of 546 Million Baht. Also found guilty were Potjaman's personal secretary, Kanchana Honghern, on the right. The court sentenced Potjaman and Bannaphot each to 3 years in prison and Kanchana to 2 years in prison. Supreme Court Convenes for Asset Concealment Case The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions is convening for its first hearing in the case involving a former Pheu Thai MP accused of concealing her assets and liabilities from the National Anti-Corruption Commission. The defendant claims that the anti-corruption panel is biased against her. Former Pheu Thai MP and daughter of former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat, Chinnicha Wongsawat, traveled to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions for her first hearing after the National Anti-Corruption Commission, or NACC, petitioned for her disqualification and ban from politics for five years. The NACC accused Chinnicha of concealing assets and liabilities, as well as failing to declare her debt in the documents she submitted to the NACC. The NACC earlier filed a petition asking that Chinnicha be disqualified and banned from politics earlier this year after she allegedly concealed her asset and liabilities from the NACC, particularly the 100 million baht loan from Bannapot Damapong, a step brother of Khunying Pojaman na Pombejara, after Chinnicha assumed her House seat. The authorities do sometime get a little biased when they catch you breaking the law. Never mind she will claim it is 'political' and feel vindicated in her own mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 Urgent: Appeals Court acquits Pojaman in tax evasion case. via@tulsathit Bannapot also has imprisonment sentence reduced to 2-yr suspended sentence. Pojaman's personal secretary Kanchanapa Honghern has also been acquitted. via@tulsathit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 Pojaman Acquitted by Appeals Court in Tax Evasion Case Pojaman Na Pompetch, Thaksin Shinawatra's ex-wife, has been acquitted by the Appeals Court in her tax evasion case. In 2008, the Criminal Court convicted her with a sentence of three years in jail. However, her brother Bannapoj Damapong remains guilty, according to the Appeals Court, and is sentenced to a two year jail term with a two year suspension. -- Tan Network 2011-08-24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 'Twill be interesting to see how this one goes. It is indeed a case of be dammed if you do and be dammed if you don't regarding the verdict. Guilty all the PTP and Thaksin supporters will be screaming , " foul injustice a political conviction a smear campaign etc. The anti Thaksin, anti PTP supporters will be screaming, " nepotism a manipulation of the judicial system etc. Justice, is it impartial or is it about influence and money ? We shall soon see, I am still of the mind that the Democrats preferred to lose this last election as they knew what was coming internally and internationally . Economy wise on the international front and economy and judicially wise on the domestic front. Why not try putting your theory that the Dems wanted to lose the election to any person on their side with any power or understanding of what is going on. They are utterly distraught about the election outcome is what I think you will find. Still if you want to rationalize away the Dems inability to win an election and inability to deliver for their extra-parliamentary allies as part of some clever plan, feel free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 Urgent: Appeals Court acquits Pojaman The Appeals Court Wednesday overturned the Criminal Court 's2 008 verdict against Pojaman Shinawatra, ex-wife of former prime minister Thasksin Shinawatra. The Appeals Court acquitted her and dismissed the lower court's 3-year imprisonment against her. -- The Nation 2011-08-24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? Edited August 24, 2011 by hammered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 Appeals Court acquits Pojaman By The Nation The Appeals Court Wednesday overturned the Criminal Court's 2008 guilty verdict against Pojaman Shinawatra, ex-wife of former prime minister Thasksin Shinawatra. The Appeals Court found Pojaman not guilty of evading tax payment of Bt546 million for the transfer of 4.5 million shares of Shinawatra Computer and Communications worth Bt738 million. As a result, the court dismissed the lower court's 3-year imprisonment against her. In 2008, the lower court also found her adopted brother Bhanapot Damapong, who received the shares, and her secretary Kanjanapa Honghern, guilty. The Criminal Court in 2008 sentenced Pojaman and Bhanapot to a total of three years in jail - two years for the charges relating to the conspiracy to evade tax and one year for giving falsified statements to authorities. Kanjanapa faces two years in jail. But the Appeals Court Wednesday acquitted Pojaman and Kanchanapa and reduced Bannapot's imprisonment to two-year suspended sentence. Appeals Court cited incomplete evidence in acquitting Pojaman. On reducing Bannapot's sentence, court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people. -- The Nation 2011-08-24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberkommando Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The original court ruling cited "indisputable evidence" and now the appeals court says the evidence is incomplete? On reducing Bannapot's sentence, court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people. Here was me thinking if you broke the law you should be punished. As expected, a complete farce and injustice. Thailand, please grow up, I'm getting utterly sick of your childish behaviour, time and time again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Thai media have been covering a survey on peoples confidence in the constitutional court (OK different court, but it covered confidence and why) 57% had either little or no confidence with a major reason cited as political, delays, double standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The original court ruling cited "indisputable evidence" and now the appeals court says the evidence is incomplete? On reducing Bannapot's sentence, court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people. Here was me thinking if you broke the law you should be punished. As expected, a complete farce and injustice. Thailand, please grow up, I'm getting utterly sick of your childish behaviour, time and time again". From the Book of Dylan: "False-hearted judges dying in the webs that they spin,. Only a matter of time 'til night comes steppin' in" "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/31/us-thailand-thaksin-idUSSP22379920080731 Edited August 24, 2011 by Buchholz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWalkingMan Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I figured she'd skate and not see the inside of the jug. TheWalkingMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/31/us-thailand-thaksin-idUSSP22379920080731 They now seem to be saying not enough evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.c...P22379920080731 They now seem to be saying not enough evidence. So they re-tried the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.c...P22379920080731 They now seem to be saying not enough evidence. So they re-tried the case? "incomplete evidence" is in the Nation report. I dont know the process of Thai appeals court. But Thai law is not based on English Common Law as say the UK and US system are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Will those that made grandiose statements about the need to respect the court's decision, continue to respect those statements and accept the appeal court decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberkommando Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I wonder if Suthep still sticks by his comment from a few months ago that "the Thai justice system is the best in the World?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DP25 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 On reducing Bannapot's sentence, court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people. That is why the rich in this country feel no need to pay their taxes. It's great Thailand finally has a party for the common man in power. Now the man on the street can have what he's been fighting for all these years, tax exemptions and loop holes for billionaires and tax cuts for big corporations. Noodle carts don't have to pay tax on their sales, why should the rich when they make their multi million dollar deals? No double standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) So the verdict seems to be that the seller/transferer isnt due to pay tax but the buyer/receiver is, or did I get that wrong? From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/31/us-thailand-thaksin-idUSSP22379920080731 They now seem to be saying not enough evidence. Seemed to plenty in the Criminal Court case at the time, such as the stock transfer documents which showed Potjaman originally bought the shares from her maid (in the fashion of a classical Shinawatra stockholder), then transferred the Shin shares, worth nearly a billion baht, to her brother, as the aforementioned wedding gift. They also produced evidence the wedding was held two years prior to the receipt of the wedding gift. They even showed how the check that Potjaman issued to the maid to pay for the maid's shares was later deposited in a new bank account belonging to Potjaman. . Edited August 24, 2011 by Buchholz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 From the time of her conviction, it would seem the verdict indicates they believed in the "it was a wedding gift" *incidentally, the 738 million baht "gift" was given 2 years after the wedding* defense... Ex-Thai PM Thaksin's wife guilty of tax fraud July 31, 2008 Reuters Potjaman, her brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary were charged with colluding to evade tax worth 546 million baht in the transfer in 1997 of shares in Shin Corp, the telecoms firm Thaksin founded. They had argued that the shares were a wedding gift for Bannapot and therefore tax exempt http://www.reuters.c...P22379920080731 They now seem to be saying not enough evidence. So they re-tried the case? "incomplete evidence" is in the Nation report. I dont know the process of Thai appeals court. But Thai law is not based on English Common Law as say the UK and US system are I'm still unclear on why you think that the Thaksinista's have suffered more at the hands of the Thai judiciary than their opponents. The past 5 years of trouble are from a self admitted bogus verdict in 2001. Now this. We'll see people in the streets by New Years day IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moruya Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The remaining pillar of Thai society is crumbling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorecard Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) On reducing Bannapot's sentence, court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people. That is why the rich in this country feel no need to pay their taxes. It's great Thailand finally has a party for the common man in power. Now the man on the street can have what he's been fighting for all these years, tax exemptions and loop holes for billionaires and tax cuts for big corporations. Noodle carts don't have to pay tax on their sales, why should the rich when they make their multi million dollar deals? No double standards. "... court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people." Wow, this says a lot about the quality of the judiciary. Its' well established internationally and it's part of what law students are taught very well and very deeply: - Punishment is to show people that 'you break the law you get punished'. - Punishment is a signal to all that 'you break the same law you will likely get the same punishment'. i.e. a deterrent. Another possible interpretation (of"... court says purpose of tax laws is for revenue collection, not for jailing people.") is that if someone fails to pay appropriate taxes then punishment is not relevant. Wonder if the judges names and how they voted will be published? The part about who is responsible for paying the tax - seller or buyer. A little difficult to understand but one way to interpret the press article is that the retrial made it's verdict on this point. Surely this was sorted out during the first trial. Edited August 24, 2011 by scorecard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I'm still unclear on why you think that the Thaksinista's have suffered more at the hands of the Thai judiciary than their opponents. The past 5 years of trouble are from a self admitted bogus verdict in 2001. Now this. We'll see people in the streets by New Years day IMO. Take a look at the Suan Dusit survey on confidence in the Constitutional Court. 57% say they have little to none (A few years ago over 80% had faith). It covers what you ask about. Most Thai media have looked at it. You can see an English Language summary on the pundit site. It doesnt matter what I or you think. It is a lot more important what Thai people think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 An still another layer of obfuscation. But is this the final court word? Or is one more court above this possible, since clearly points of law have been argued that have some seemingly diminished sense, other than in the political context.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaivisitorTeeVee Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Business as usual...........the Thaksins are BACK! It's about time too...well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
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