'Clear' Evidence Thai Troops Killed Japanese Cameraman

[lannarebirth]

Here's the thing. You delivered a message you said was from another source and then refused to name the source. Might you be imprisoned by naming the source? If so I'd have let the whole thing slide.

I believe you have been given more than enough hints. If you google anything regarding the subject matter of this ongoing 6 year conflict you will inevitably come across the site hammered mentioned. Even though one of the main moderators of that site is quite radically opposed to the Red Shirts, much of the subject matter discussed on that forum is not suitable for Thaivisa.

Therefore i would suggest to learn to read between the lines.

Both you and hammered may be surprised to learn this Nick, but even people who do not condone what the Thaksin sponsored Red Shirts have done, read an awful lot about what goes on and has gone on in this country and within its various institutions. I read it all and have opinions on most of it. I can't share all those opinions because to do so would violate Thai law. If I could, you might find that you and me share more in common than you may presently believe. That aside, naming a website is not against any law and for one to prattle on citing "foreign reports" but refusing to name them, only undermines the poster's credibility, which in this particular case is pretty shaky to begin with.

I named several websites with unflattering things to say about the status quo here in Thailand, why can't the other poster I wonder?

If you are so well-informed, why are you so disingenuous on this forum? Do you think that posters who don't take the trouble to be as informed about the realities of the Thai political arena as people such as you need to be protected from the truth? I know we have to necessarily dance around some hugely important factors, but that doesn't explain your behaviour. Look at that discussion you and I had about Newin's active involvement with Suthep and the Blue Shirt thugs. You did your level best to deflect the truth on the open forum, eventually taking the discussion to pm. Why the dishonesty?

You have mischaracterized our exchange as you did at the time. I tried to point that out then but I won't waste my time again now.

I claim no special knowledge of Thai political affairs. I assume most people read most things related to Thailand. Sometimes you miss some things. Sometimes you read things that are flat out wrong. For instance i read some report in one of these threads that the commander at the April 10 battle was asleep in his tent at the time of the grenade attack against him. Nick said that information was incorrect and since he witnessed it, I've no reason to doubt him. Actually the assertion didn't make much sense to me anyway if a conflict was about to begin.

What I found interesting about our discussion when I sent you some links was that YOU had not read any of these things before. It was all pretty common knowledge stuff.

[lannarebirth]

No armed Red Shirt militia, no street battles, no deaths during the protests; like the previous year.

Someone wanted bodies on the street, it wasn't the Abhisit government and it wasn't the army, you don't seem to like it when people connect the dots and see who benefited from the turmoil.

The previous year, 2009, were four recorded deaths - two anti- red fighters, and two Red Shirt guards who were fished out of the river with bound hands a day or two after the crackdown.

In the early morning attack on April 13 were several protesters with gunshot injuries documented, two of them permanently disabled.

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

My recollection is that two? Red Shirts died when they harassed the wrong group of market vendors.

The other way around I think. One or two market vendors (or as Nick puts it - "anti-red fighters") were killed by red shirts.

THAT's right! God, how this stuff runs together.

[Siam Simon]

My recollection is that two? Red Shirts died when they harassed the wrong group of market vendors.

The other way around I think. One or two market vendors (or as Nick puts it - "anti-red fighters") were killed by red shirts.

THAT's right! God, how this stuff runs together.

Splendid, isn't it? You get things completely ar$e about t1t, and you still think it all falls into place .

Yes, one can just imagine a group of red shirts turning up at a market and deciding to murder two of the vendors in cold blood . As Nick keeps stating, the truth will out eventually. Btw, whybother, before you try one of your minutae sidetracking debating tactics, I have to go out shortly.Solee.

[whybother]

Btw, whybother, before you try one of your minutae sidetracking debating tactics, I have to go out shortly.Solee.

[phiphidon]

The other way around I think. One or two market vendors (or as Nick puts it - "anti-red fighters") were killed by red shirts.

THAT's right! God, how this stuff runs together.

Had a dig around myself. First Stop Wiki http://en.wikipedia....st_Dictatorship

Abhisit aide Satit Wongnontaey claimed that Red-shirted protesters shot a person dead and injured two others when residents of the Nang Lerng Market came out to criticise the protesters; however, no arrests were made and there was a lack of evidence to back his claims

Tried the provided link to the Nation article - again it didn't work. Dug some more and found a Blog Link to Blog. Obviously Red biased but another interesting link to the Nation Article is provided

9h45 PM

Red-shirted protesters shot a person dead and injured two others when residents of the Nang Lerng Market came out to criticise the protesters, PM's Office Satit Wongnontaey said. (Nation)

"according to eye-witnesses who phoned Satit." (Nation).

And here's the link: http://nationmultime...es_30100420.php

11.30 pm: Calls are being made for the government to do its utmost to prevent or contain civil confrontation, following incidents at the Nang Lerng Market where two men have been killed in a clash between residents and red-shirted protesters.

8.40pm: Red-shirted protesters entered Nang Lerng Market Monday evening and pushed the vendors outside. PM's Office Minister Satit Wongnongtoey tells NBT channel that three were injured and one guy named Pom aged 54 years old have died at the hospital after being shot by redshirted protesters, according to eye-witnesses who phoned Satit.

There is more interesting but non related (maybe) writing on happenings at Din Daeng. And funningly enough at the bottom of the page an link inviting discussion on the Thai Visa forum - haven't seen that before in a Nation article............

[nicknostitz]

No armed Red Shirt militia, no street battles, no deaths during the protests; like the previous year.

Someone wanted bodies on the street, it wasn't the Abhisit government and it wasn't the army, you don't seem to like it when people connect the dots and see who benefited from the turmoil.

The previous year, 2009, were four recorded deaths - two anti- red fighters, and two Red Shirt guards who were fished out of the river with bound hands a day or two after the crackdown.

In the early morning attack on April 13 were several protesters with gunshot injuries documented, two of them permanently disabled.

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

My recollection is that two? Red Shirts died when they harassed the wrong group of market vendors.

The other way around I think. One or two market vendors (or as Nick puts it - "anti-red fighters") were killed by red shirts.

At the time they were called by the then government "local residents". Which they were. But the particular area, Nang Loern, had strong affiliations with the PAD.

Yes, the two were killed in the chaotic night fights in Nang Loern by Red Shirt guards.

Two dead Red Shirt guards with bound hands were fished out of the river a day or two after the crackdown. The government publicly stated that they were not Red Shirt guards but simple security guards, and that they could not have been possibly be killed by the military as they were still alive after the morning attack. Which was not entirely true - they were Red Shirt guards.

Different areas often are associated with one or the other side, often depending on political affiliation through political networks. When the PAD still was allied with the Democrat Party, you could in many cases see that areas with strong Democrat Party affiliated god father politicians had very strong ties with the PAD, such as Nang Loeng, Yannawa, or Bangrak. You could then in early 2011 on the street see quite clearly see when the PAD and the Democrat Party separated ties when the guard contingents sent in by Democrat Party MPs were not present anymore in the PAD protests, both the ones here from Bangkok and the southern guards.

Also Klong Toey Slum, or Ban Kua. On the other side, Don Muang has strong affiliations with the Red Shirts due to Gaeng Hosakul's Puah Thai MP status.

But that is not always so, as for example in the area i live you have a strong Democrat Party godfather family dominating local politics, but you have in many of the especially lower class neighborhoods very strong Red Shirt groups, which makes local politics very sensitive.

[whybother]

At the time they were called by the then government "local residents". Which they were. But the particular area, Nang Loern, had strong affiliations with the PAD.

Yes, the two were killed in the chaotic night fights in Nang Loern by Red Shirt guards.

<snipped to below>

Different areas often are associated with one or the other side, often depending on political affiliation through political networks. When the PAD still was allied with the Democrat Party, you could in many cases see that areas with strong Democrat Party affiliated god father politicians had very strong ties with the PAD, such as Nang Loeng, Yannawa, or Bangrak. You could then in early 2011 on the street see quite clearly see when the PAD and the Democrat Party separated ties when the guard contingents sent in by Democrat Party MPs were not present anymore in the PAD protests, both the ones here from Bangkok and the southern guards.

Also Klong Toey Slum, or Ban Kua. On the other side, Don Muang has strong affiliations with the Red Shirts due to Gaeng Hosakul's Puah Thai MP status.

But that is not always so, as for example in the area i live you have a strong Democrat Party godfather family dominating local politics, but you have in many of the especially lower class neighborhoods very strong Red Shirt groups, which makes local politics very sensitive.

So they were local residents who didn't like the fact that the red shirts were rioting around their homes and making the area dangerous for their families.

And the red shirts shot them.

Why the need to label them as PAD?

Two dead Red Shirt guards with bound hands were fished out of the river a day or two after the crackdown. The government publicly stated that they were not Red Shirt guards but simple security guards, and that they could not have been possibly be killed by the military as they were still alive after the morning attack. Which was not entirely true - they were Red Shirt guards.

But it is true "that they could not have been possibly be killed by the military as they were still alive after the morning attack."

Edited December 4, 2011 by whybother

[nicknostitz]

At the time they were called by the then government "local residents". Which they were. But the particular area, Nang Loern, had strong affiliations with the PAD.

Yes, the two were killed in the chaotic night fights in Nang Loern by Red Shirt guards.

<snipped to below>

Different areas often are associated with one or the other side, often depending on political affiliation through political networks. When the PAD still was allied with the Democrat Party, you could in many cases see that areas with strong Democrat Party affiliated god father politicians had very strong ties with the PAD, such as Nang Loeng, Yannawa, or Bangrak. You could then in early 2011 on the street see quite clearly see when the PAD and the Democrat Party separated ties when the guard contingents sent in by Democrat Party MPs were not present anymore in the PAD protests, both the ones here from Bangkok and the southern guards.

Also Klong Toey Slum, or Ban Kua. On the other side, Don Muang has strong affiliations with the Red Shirts due to Gaeng Hosakul's Puah Thai MP status.

But that is not always so, as for example in the area i live you have a strong Democrat Party godfather family dominating local politics, but you have in many of the especially lower class neighborhoods very strong Red Shirt groups, which makes local politics very sensitive.

So they were local residents who didn't like the fact that the red shirts were rioting around their homes and making the area dangerous for their families.

And the red shirts shot them.

Two dead Red Shirt guards with bound hands were fished out of the river a day or two after the crackdown. The government publicly stated that they were not Red Shirt guards but simple security guards, and that they could not have been possibly be killed by the military as they were still alive after the morning attack. Which was not entirely true - they were Red Shirt guards.

But it is true "that they could not have been possibly be killed by the military as they were still alive after the morning attack."

It is not that simple as "local residents who didn't like the fact". I tried to explain in my post the connection between political parties and street protest groups, especially connections between local politics level and the supply of their look nong as street fighters to the protest groups - which has taken place in Nang Loerng. The violent underground in Thailand is very complex if you go and look at the details of the networks behind things.

More complex even is also the involvement of both military and police in these issues.

Unfortunately in the English language media here you get almost no coverage of those aspects of the conflict.

[philw]

[...] I have stated that that a major reason for the mess was the incompetence of the army, and i have questioned the entire operation, including the politics behind it.

So I suppose you have a solid military background and in-depth knowledge on urban warfare?

After 6 years of this Red/Yellow conflict having been in the middle of almost every single violent event here in Bangkok as a photographer and writer, i have gathered quite a bit of experience. In addition to that - for what i lack in military background, i have more than a few close friends in the military and the police, who also have been in the middle of these events, who i can ask for advice, details and information. Which i do all the time when we discuss the situation. You learn as you go, every event is a learning curve.

If you doubt me, i would suggest to google my name.

To answer your question more succinctly, Mike... apparently none on the solid military background.

.

It doesn't require military experience to recognise military incompetence, now does it ????

I suppose Bucholz that we should be grateful that we've got you to protect us.

[rubl]

begin removed ...

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

On 2011-05-07 you only wrote "As an example i would just like to cite the completely missing investigations into the “Blue Shirts”, their attacks against the Red Shirts, the known instigators and their complete impunity." By now it's 'state organised militia', surely you forwarded the "clear" evidence to the appropriate authorities, like police, local Pheu Thai MP or the like ?

The discussions here keep amazing me, especially the lack of 'clear evidence'. IMHO

Edited December 4, 2011 by rubl

[phiphidon]

begin removed ...

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

On 2011-05-07 you only wrote "As an example i would just like to cite the completely missing investigations into the "Blue Shirts", their attacks against the Red Shirts, the known instigators and their complete impunity." By now it's 'state organised militia', surely you forwarded the "clear" evidence to the appropriate authorities, like police, local Pheu Thai MP or the like ?

The discussions here keep amazing me, especially the lack of 'clear evidence'. IMHO

Just google Blue shirts, Rubl and do some digging. It may come as a suprise to you but some things in Thailand are done on the sly. If you want everything to be clear concise with certifcates to back it up it isn't going to happen. Open up a bit and you may be enlightened oh Grasshopper. Newin, Suthep, Pattaya, there's a start for you. You could also add a famous french footballer who played for newcastle (Abhisits favourite side but thats a bit of a red herring) and Spurs and 2 other teams in England. Enjoy.

[rubl]

begin removed ...

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

On 2011-05-07 you only wrote "As an example i would just like to cite the completely missing investigations into the "Blue Shirts", their attacks against the Red Shirts, the known instigators and their complete impunity." By now it's 'state organised militia', surely you forwarded the "clear" evidence to the appropriate authorities, like police, local Pheu Thai MP or the like ?

The discussions here keep amazing me, especially the lack of 'clear evidence'. IMHO

Just google Blue shirts, Rubl and do some digging. It may come as a suprise to you but some things in Thailand are done on the sly. If you want everything to be clear concise with certifcates to back it up it isn't going to happen. Open up a bit and you may be enlightened oh Grasshopper. Newin, Suthep, Pattaya, there's a start for you. You could also add a famous french footballer who played for newcastle (Abhisits favourite side but thats a bit of a red herring) and Spurs and 2 other teams in England. Enjoy.

If you want to convince people with 'just google', 'things done on the sly' and 'nothing clear or concise', you should add "believe me on my clear blue eyes".

Back to the OP "'Clear' evidence Thai troops killed Japanese cameraman", I guess I shouldn't hold my breath till the certificate becomes available

[Scott]

Numerous posts and replies to them have been deleted. Please do not discuss moderation in the open forum.

Please respect other posters.

[Scott]

Since there are numerous reports to be handled on this thread by posters who are more akin to kindergarten kids, I will close it, clean it up and give a few spankings.

[Scott]

This topic will be closely moderated and if you go off-topic, you will receive a warning. The topic is primarily about the Japanese journalist. It is not about all things Red or Yellow.

Excessive hitting of the report button because you don't like what someone else has said, will result in a formal warning. This is especially true if you are also guilty of violating forum rules.

It really doesn't matter what links are posted because the general tenor of the thread is to discredit anything and anybody who disagrees with some posters.

Please use your intellect and not your emotion to respond. Please ignore those that don't.

Thanks.

[animatic]

never mind, your most welcome.

Free use of functioning intellect, seems to be a premium member ship privilege.

Edited December 4, 2011 by animatic

[nicknostitz]

On 2011-05-07 you only wrote "As an example i would just like to cite the completely missing investigations into the “Blue Shirts”, their attacks against the Red Shirts, the known instigators and their complete impunity." By now it's 'state organised militia', surely you forwarded the "clear" evidence to the appropriate authorities, like police, local Pheu Thai MP or the like ?

The discussions here keep amazing me, especially the lack of 'clear evidence'. IMHO

My dear Rubl, you astonish me at times. Where do you think i do get much of my evidence and information from?

[Scott]

Although the poster meant well, a post has been deleted.

[Oberkommando]

Reuters have just agreed to release the Control Risk reports on Hiro Muramoto's death to the Thai authorities. Watch this space!

[hammered]

begin removed ...

On April 10 in Pattaya at least one protester was shot in the leg by the "Blue Shirts" - a state organized militia, which until today has not been officially investigated.

I don't appreciate it when people assume they can connect dots based on insufficient evidence.

On 2011-05-07 you only wrote "As an example i would just like to cite the completely missing investigations into the “Blue Shirts”, their attacks against the Red Shirts, the known instigators and their complete impunity." By now it's 'state organised militia', surely you forwarded the "clear" evidence to the appropriate authorities, like police, local Pheu Thai MP or the like ?

The discussions here keep amazing me, especially the lack of 'clear evidence'. IMHO

The blue shirt group were a Newin-Suthep initiative that included among others some state officials donning the blue shirts from what I hear around Chonburi where they were active. You never know with gossip but I havent heard a single other explanation locally. A lot of local people back then were angry with the red shirts and Arisaman over the hotel "invasion". The blue shirts it turned out werent popualr either. Still that was then. Sympathies have changed a real lot since those days.

Politics is mostly about perception and not evidence. Thats true for all sides in this little affair and any other political one I guess

[webfact]

Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman

The Nation

Police have received a private investigative report on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on Tuesday.

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

[hammered]

Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman

The Nation

Police have received a private investigative report on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on Tuesday.

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

Interesting that this report has been handed over just before Abhisit and Suthep are to be interviewed.

[Buchholz]

Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman

The Nation

Police have received a private investigative report on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on Tuesday.

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

Interesting that this report has been handed over just before Abhisit and Suthep are to be interviewed.

Apparently, the investigation was no longer illegal now and that company that did the investigation is ok now with releasing their confidential report.

I was given for the company’s failure to share the information was that under Thai law it had been illegal for them to commission a third-party investigation into Hiro’s death, and that when commissioning the report, their agreement with the company that handled the investigation was that it would remain confidential.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PQoVB4tSkvgJ:www.zenjournalist.com/2011/06/in-memory-of-hiro-muramoto/+andrew+marshall+investigation+report+illegal&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a

Edited December 6, 2011 by Buchholz

[Orac]

It seems odd that this thread started with their being clear evidence of who killed the cameraman but Chalerms latest statement seems to be stepping back from this assertion and clear evidence has now become suspicion:

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

Hopefully the actual information will be released or acted on soon so the political games on this specific event can be brought to an end.

[Oberkommando]

I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death

How could the previous government have a differing opinion on the cause of death when both independent and Thai Police investigations came to the same conclusions?

[hammered]

It seems odd that this thread started with their being clear evidence of who killed the cameraman but Chalerms latest statement seems to be stepping back from this assertion and clear evidence has now become suspicion:

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

Hopefully the actual information will be released or acted on soon so the political games on this specific event can be brought to an end.

The actual piece of the report that has been cited verbatim is pretty clear on which body killed the rpeorter and which calibre of bullet. However, this is all within a highly charged poltical atmosphere and positions will sway

The comments by the PAD guy on who is going to need amnesties in the piece on getting Thaksin back to to Thailandin the unmentionable news source the other day are interesting. He seemed fairly blunt in stating why the democrats would need amnesties

[phiphidon]

Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman

The Nation

Police have received a private investigative report on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on Tuesday.

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

Interesting that this report has been handed over just before Abhisit and Suthep are to be interviewed.

Apparently, the investigation was no longer illegal now and that company that did the investigation is ok now with releasing their confidential report.

I was given for the company's failure to share the information was that under Thai law it had been illegal for them to commission a third-party investigation into Hiro's death, and that when commissioning the report, their agreement with the company that handled the investigation was that it would remain confidential.

http://webcache.goog...lient=firefox-a

"Apparently, the investigation was no longer illegal now and that company that did the investigation is ok now with releasing their confidential report"

I don't suppose it's ever crossed your mind that the Democrats might have been economical with truth (they have previous) when explaining this to Reuters as a reason to suppress a report which went against their (amended once already) own version of events?

[yumidesign]

I thought the investigation before could not ascertain anything, all of a sudden the reds are in power and it has been proven that the military killed him.

Sorry but Chalerm and all his cronies need to start thinking of the people affected by the floods, and sort that out first before messing with other things, or they will have more serious problems on their hands.

They are specifically distracting from their flood and dysfunctional performances as much as possible. The best defense is turning the publics attention away from yourself ASAP.

And putting the Dems on the back foot, while trying to get Thaksin back, is necessary also, again prestidigitation, while I distract you I can do something else.

An opportunity to fulminate was provided by the Japanese Ambassador coming to talk reconstruction and how the government is going to make Japanese investors happy again.

best explanation, to prove it, was not this the man that disappeared, not within media contact, during the height of the flood crisis when feces was floating around

[hammered]

Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman

The Nation

Police have received a private investigative report on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on Tuesday.

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in the killing of Muramoto.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

Interesting that this report has been handed over just before Abhisit and Suthep are to be interviewed.

Apparently, the investigation was no longer illegal now and that company that did the investigation is ok now with releasing their confidential report.

I was given for the company's failure to share the information was that under Thai law it had been illegal for them to commission a third-party investigation into Hiro's death, and that when commissioning the report, their agreement with the company that handled the investigation was that it would remain confidential.

http://webcache.goog...lient=firefox-a

"Apparently, the investigation was no longer illegal now and that company that did the investigation is ok now with releasing their confidential report"

I don't suppose it's ever crossed your mind that the Democrats might have been economical with truth (they have previous) when explaining this to Reuters as a reason to suppress a report which went against their (amended once already) own version of events?

Journalist groups were concerned about this.

[Buchholz]

I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous government because of differing opinions on the cause of death

How could the previous government have a differing opinion on the cause of death when both independent and Thai Police investigations came to the same conclusions?

I wonder where Chalerm's "belief" on the reason for Reuters not releasing it earlier came from, because it differs so much from the reasons that Reuters gave Marshall in the earlier quote.