'Clear' Evidence Thai Troops Killed Japanese Cameraman

[AleG]

There's people that dispute the Earth is spherical, I've posted a video of the man in question looking away from the army line and receiving a shot to the front of the head; I'm not a ballistics expert, but bullets don't do U-Turns in mid air.

I would suggest to watch films of executions by head shot see how in which direction the victims fall.

I would also wait and see until the the forensic investigations will be publicized, and where the entry and the exit wounds of the bullet were located.

As pointed in the video, entry on the front, exit on the back. High velocity rounds have that pattern, small entry point and large gaping exit from the bullet releasing the energy as it travels through the tissue.

[hammered]

There's people that dispute the Earth is spherical, I've posted a video of the man in question looking away from the army line and receiving a shot to the front of the head; I'm not a ballistics expert, but bullets don't do U-Turns in mid air.

I would suggest to watch films of executions by head shot see how in which direction the victims fall.

I would also wait and see until the the forensic investigations will be publicized, and where the entry and the exit wounds of the bullet were located.

As pointed in the video, entry on the front, exit on the back. High velocity rounds have that pattern, small entry point and large gaping exit from the bullet releasing the energy as it travels through the tissue.

I dont think it is outrageous to suggest awaiting the forensic reports they may include far more detail

[nicknostitz]

... that were dealing with PROTESTERS.

If you're saying that they should have been expecting to be dealing with an armed militia, you can't really say that they shouldn't have been armed.

There are a lot of "should and shouldn't haves" that day, and in the period leading up to it, that were ignored.

The list is endless.

The result was a screw up of such major proportion that this one night completely altered Thai history.

[lannarebirth]

There's people that dispute the Earth is spherical, I've posted a video of the man in question looking away from the army line and receiving a shot to the front of the head; I'm not a ballistics expert, but bullets don't do U-Turns in mid air.

I would suggest to watch films of executions by head shot see how in which direction the victims fall.

I would also wait and see until the the forensic investigations will be publicized, and where the entry and the exit wounds of the bullet were located.

As pointed in the video, entry on the front, exit on the back. High velocity rounds have that pattern, small entry point and large gaping exit from the bullet releasing the energy as it travels through the tissue.

I dont think it is outrageous to suggest awaiting the forensic reports they may include far more detail

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is non-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

Edited December 3, 2011 by lannarebirth

[nicknostitz]

One thing I think we can agree on Nick, is that the Army was wholly inept in assessing the array of forces aligned against them that night and the chaos arisng from that wrongful determination cost people their lives. That is not to say lives would not have been lost anyway, probably even more lives, if they had taken a more aggressive posture to take out armed combatants and not retreated.

The army had no other option than retreat (if you can call it even retreat, as it was more or less a panicked flight leaving vehicles and equipment behind) because they were properly and devastatingly defeated on the battle ground.

[AleG]

... that were dealing with PROTESTERS.

If you're saying that they should have been expecting to be dealing with an armed militia, you can't really say that they shouldn't have been armed.

There are a lot of "should and shouldn't haves" that day, and in the period leading up to it, that were ignored.

The list is endless.

The result was a screw up of such major proportion that this one night completely altered Thai history.

Considering that the current government is a proxy of the man that Astroturfed the Red Shirt movement, got elected in large part out of the boost they received from the riots and the number of deaths that resulted from them and that it has appointed several Red Shirt leaders who may or may not be connected to the militias know as the Black Shirts in positions of power, asking to close our eyes to what evidence we have now and waiting for that same government to release their results of the investigation, yes, it is rather outrageous.

Still waiting for Chalerm's clear evidence though.

[AleG]

One thing I think we can agree on Nick, is that the Army was wholly inept in assessing the array of forces aligned against them that night and the chaos arisng from that wrongful determination cost people their lives. That is not to say lives would not have been lost anyway, probably even more lives, if they had taken a more aggressive posture to take out armed combatants and not retreated.

The army had no other option than retreat (if you can call it even retreat, as it was more or less a panicked flight leaving vehicles and equipment behind) because they were properly and devastatingly defeated on the battle ground.

Would you have preferred them to stand their ground and continue shooting back at the Black Shirts and repelling the Red Shirts attacking them?

[lannarebirth]

One thing I think we can agree on Nick, is that the Army was wholly inept in assessing the array of forces aligned against them that night and the chaos arisng from that wrongful determination cost people their lives. That is not to say lives would not have been lost anyway, probably even more lives, if they had taken a more aggressive posture to take out armed combatants and not retreated.

The army had no other option than retreat (if you can call it even retreat, as it was more or less a panicked flight leaving vehicles and equipment behind) because they were properly and devastatingly defeated on the battle ground.

What I meant to say, but merely implied Nick, is that IF their intelligence had been better, they would not have been postured as they were in a crowd clearing, rubber bullet firing mode. They'd have had live bullets in every weapon, there would have been a considerably larger force and an even greater battle might have occured. We'll never know that.

[whybother]

... that were dealing with PROTESTERS.

If you're saying that they should have been expecting to be dealing with an armed militia, you can't really say that they shouldn't have been armed.

There are a lot of "should and shouldn't haves" that day, and in the period leading up to it, that were ignored.

The list is endless.

The result was a screw up of such major proportion that this one night completely altered Thai history.

So those suggesting that the army shouldn't have been armed that day should think again, given the clear expectation that the red shirts were armed.

[phiphidon]

No, the commanding officers at the time of the grenade attack at Dinso were not asleep at a tent, but standing together close to the front lines taking about a possible retreat. This was way too late, and the next fatal incident of incompetence, as such a meeting has to be held in proper distance to the front line, to avoid having taken out the whole command staff in one go, what more or less happened.

The hypothesis that Red Shirt militants shot their own has been pushed by the then government, but there is no evidence or witness whatsoever. Vasan, the flagman, whose upper part of the head was taken off by a bullet, was not the first Red Shirt dead, and the by then government pushed theory that a bullet hit him from the Red Shirt lines is more than disputed. The government at the time has issued many such wrong statements over forensic evidence, such as Suthep's statements that the victims at Wat Pathum supposedly had gunpowder residue at their hands. Even Dr Pornthip, who has been accused of whitewashing certain facts, has been quite clear at the relevant public hearing of the National Reconciliation Commission that there was no gunpowder residue found at the hands of the victims.

...

There's people that dispute the Earth is spherical, I've posted a video of the man in question looking away from the army line and receiving a shot to the front of the head; I'm not a ballistics expert, but bullets don't do U-Turns in mid air.

At the risk of fuelling more Yes it is, No it's not discussions here is a link to a clearer video. At the point of being shot (00:13 in the video) the man is just off the edge of the frame but you can see he was turning his head beforehand. You can also see just before that a man in a grey/greenish top shoulder to shoulder with the victim. I personally think that this would rule out a shot from someone at street level as presumably the man in the grey/green top (and possibly others off frame) would have been hit too - no evidence (from the video) of this. You may also agree with me that the victim falls roughly in parallel with the pedestrian crossing running at right angles to the buildings opposite him with no apparent spinning/turning of his body. If you can stomach looking at the video at 00:44 a close-up of the victim confirms the body position. It also appears to show that the front of his face is unmarked. The top of his head is a different matter. I am no forensics expert or anything of the sort but I tend towards the theory that he was shot from a high position probably from the direction of the building in front of him at the time (due to no spinning of the body, just a collapse backwards). The question is who was in those high positions at the time - if you go along with my thoughts that is.

Edit: For some reason I cannot get the video added so I'll just supply the link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpIol2xBPQQ&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fclean.f2bbs.com%2Fbbs%2Fshow_topic%2F237536

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpIol2xBPQQ&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fclean.f2bbs.com%2Fbbs%2Fshow_topic%2F237536

Edited December 3, 2011 by phiphidon

[hammered]

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is non-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

Not every body was taken as you seem to intimate. In fact most of those killed were not. It really only undermines your arguement to make sweeping statements that can be so easily be countered by fact.

And forensic evidence also is only ever part of a plethora of evidence that helps build a picture often by confirming or contradicting witness statement. And in this case there is clearly going to be forensic evidence

And according to some foreign reports there are witness statements from within the army that could be interesting too.

[nicknostitz]

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is no-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

There is also ample evidence that authorities in past events have fiddled with the chain of evidence, or made bodies disappear, so that the Red Shirts had their own reasons for getting the bodies out of the hospitals. This night was chaos and mayhem, and a war zone.

Your "suspicions" bases on your political preference are premature. That is why i am suggesting to first wait and see what comes out in court cases, which will quite possibly rule over the validity of forensic evidence.

In the end though we all will have to live with the fact that most definitely much of what occurred this night will remain obscure. Forever. Regardless of your preferences, and which side you support. No speculation will change that.

Just lay off with the speculation, and your "suspicions" based on lack of evidence or naturally insufficient reporting, please.

[hammered]

There's people that dispute the Earth is spherical, I've posted a video of the man in question looking away from the army line and receiving a shot to the front of the head; I'm not a ballistics expert, but bullets don't do U-Turns in mid air.

I would suggest to watch films of executions by head shot see how in which direction the victims fall.

I would also wait and see until the the forensic investigations will be publicized, and where the entry and the exit wounds of the bullet were located.

I notice that you say wait until forensic evidence is publicized. I take it then that it exisits and maybe on court record but has not yet been reported on.

[nicknostitz]

... that were dealing with PROTESTERS.

If you're saying that they should have been expecting to be dealing with an armed militia, you can't really say that they shouldn't have been armed.

There are a lot of "should and shouldn't haves" that day, and in the period leading up to it, that were ignored.

The list is endless.

The result was a screw up of such major proportion that this one night completely altered Thai history.

So those suggesting that the army shouldn't have been armed that day should think again, given the clear expectation that the red shirts were armed.

I don't think that i have suggested that.

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.

[AleG]

I don't think that i have suggested that.

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.

Would be nice if you had the time to question the use of an armed militia and the politics behind it too.

[nicknostitz]

I notice that you say wait until forensic evidence is publicized. I take it then that it exisits and maybe on court record but has not yet been reported on.

To some extend, as far as i know, and of course not to a completely sufficient degree, still leaving many doubts - but yes.

It is only natural that not all evidence will be accessible to the public and the media before investigators decide to release it.

[whybother]

I don't think that i have suggested that.

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.

You said above that they should have expected the red shirts to be armed. Surely you don't expect the army to turn up with only riot gear with that expectation.

Why would they need to hold a meeting "at a proper distance"? Should they have expected to be taken out by grenades by protesters?

Yes, they should have, as they are supposed to be trained military officers.

[whybother]

I notice that you say wait until forensic evidence is publicized. I take it then that it exisits and maybe on court record but has not yet been reported on.

To some extend, as far as i know, and of course not to a completely sufficient degree, still leaving many doubts - but yes.

It is only natural that not all evidence will be accessible to the public and the media before investigators decide to release it.

"before investigators decide to release it."

... or politicians.

[nicknostitz]

I don't think that i have suggested that.

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.

You said above that they should have expected the red shirts to be armed. Surely you don't expect the army to turn up with only riot gear with that expectation.

Why would they need to hold a meeting "at a proper distance"? Should they have expected to be taken out by grenades by protesters?

Yes, they should have, as they are supposed to be trained military officers.

Again, have i stated that the army should only have turned up with riot gear? I don't think so.

The question is not what they have turned up with, but how their operation was completely screwed up by incompetence on all levels.

[lannarebirth]

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is non-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

Not every body was taken as you seem to intimate. In fact most of those killed were not. It really only undermines your arguement to make sweeping statements that can be so easily be countered by fact.

And forensic evidence also is only ever part of a plethora of evidence that helps build a picture often by confirming or contradicting witness statement. And in this case there is clearly going to be forensic evidence

And according to some foreign reports there are witness statements from within the army that could be interesting too.

Instead of constantly alluding to these reports, why don't you post them?

[nicknostitz]

I notice that you say wait until forensic evidence is publicized. I take it then that it exisits and maybe on court record but has not yet been reported on.

To some extend, as far as i know, and of course not to a completely sufficient degree, still leaving many doubts - but yes.

It is only natural that not all evidence will be accessible to the public and the media before investigators decide to release it.

"before investigators decide to release it."

... or politicians.

Politicians play politics. That is what they do.

Just be patient.

[hammered]

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is non-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

Not every body was taken as you seem to intimate. In fact most of those killed were not. It really only undermines your arguement to make sweeping statements that can be so easily be countered by fact.

And forensic evidence also is only ever part of a plethora of evidence that helps build a picture often by confirming or contradicting witness statement. And in this case there is clearly going to be forensic evidence

And according to some foreign reports there are witness statements from within the army that could be interesting too.

Instead of constantly alluding to these reports, why don't you post them?

No I am not going to post them but they are easy enough to find and have been linked to by other English language websites in Thailand. I am sure that anyone who wants to be genuinely as well informed as possible reads the same sites that I do. There arent that many of them in Thailand that are in English

[lannarebirth]

As these bodies were stolen from hospital morgues and paraded around various Red Shirt venues. How strong do you think the "chain of evidence" is? I'll answer that for you. It is non-existant. No one could be found guilty based on the report after a usurption of the custodial chain of evidence, as was done in this case, has taken place. The theft of the bodies in more than a little bit suspicious.

Not every body was taken as you seem to intimate. In fact most of those killed were not. It really only undermines your arguement to make sweeping statements that can be so easily be countered by fact.

And forensic evidence also is only ever part of a plethora of evidence that helps build a picture often by confirming or contradicting witness statement. And in this case there is clearly going to be forensic evidence

And according to some foreign reports there are witness statements from within the army that could be interesting too.

Instead of constantly alluding to these reports, why don't you post them?

No I am not going to post them but they are easy enough to find and have been linked to by other English language websites in Thailand. I am sure that anyone who wants to be genuinely as well informed as possible reads the same sites that I do. There arent that many of them in Thailand that are in English

I think most people here have read all the Prachatai, New Mandela, Thai Political Prisoners, Bankok Pundit, The Reuters defector whose name escapes me at the moment, Wilileaks, etc. Is it something from other than those mentioned? If so please give a hint.

Edited December 3, 2011 by lannarebirth

[hammered]

I think most people here have read all the Prachatai, New Mandela, Thai Political Prisoners, Bankok Pundit, The Reuters defector whose name escapes me at the moment, Wilileaks, etc. Is it something from other than those mentioned? If so please give a hint.

No it is not one of those but one whose most outspoken poltical forum commentator is more of an extreme yellow colour who precedes any mention of anyone even vaguely connected to Thaksin with "ai" or "ee", but they do have a thoughtful and cross divide news section and some of the best if rare imho poltical analysis.

[lannarebirth]

I think most people here have read all the Prachatai, New Mandela, Thai Political Prisoners, Bankok Pundit, The Reuters defector whose name escapes me at the moment, Wilileaks, etc. Is it something from other than those mentioned? If so please give a hint.

No it is not one of those but one whose most outspoken poltical forum commentator is more of an extreme yellow colour who precedes any mention of anyone even vaguely connected to Thaksin with "ai" or "ee", but they do have a thoughtful and cross divide news section and some of the best if rare imho poltical analysis.

So it's bullshit, thanks.

[hammered]

I think most people here have read all the Prachatai, New Mandela, Thai Political Prisoners, Bankok Pundit, The Reuters defector whose name escapes me at the moment, Wilileaks, etc. Is it something from other than those mentioned? If so please give a hint.

No it is not one of those but one whose most outspoken poltical forum commentator is more of an extreme yellow colour who precedes any mention of anyone even vaguely connected to Thaksin with "ai" or "ee", but they do have a thoughtful and cross divide news section and some of the best if rare imho poltical analysis.

So it's bullshit, thanks.

Each to their own. I dpont think virtually anyone who has worked out what site I am talking about (and that should be obvious to anyone has read it) would agree with you, as it has a very good reputation. Still I notice a worrying tendency among many on this site to attack the messeenger at all time and to ignore the message or even to try and distract from the message, and even though that may be a little fun for all of us to indulge in, it is really the message that is important and not the messenger

[lannarebirth]

I am sure that anyone who wants to be genuinely as well informed as possible reads the same sites that I do.

[lannarebirth]

I think most people here have read all the Prachatai, New Mandela, Thai Political Prisoners, Bankok Pundit, The Reuters defector whose name escapes me at the moment, Wilileaks, etc. Is it something from other than those mentioned? If so please give a hint.

No it is not one of those but one whose most outspoken poltical forum commentator is more of an extreme yellow colour who precedes any mention of anyone even vaguely connected to Thaksin with "ai" or "ee", but they do have a thoughtful and cross divide news section and some of the best if rare imho poltical analysis.

So it's bullshit, thanks.

Each to their own. I dpont think virtually anyone who has worked out what site I am talking about (and that should be obvious to anyone has read it) would agree with you, as it has a very good reputation. Still I notice a worrying tendency among many on this site to attack the messeenger at all time and to ignore the message or even to try and distract from the message, and even though that may be a little fun for all of us to indulge in, it is really the message that is important and not the messenger

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.

[nicknostitz]

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.

[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?