Thai Army Issues Rebuttal Of Over Killing Of Taxi Driver: 2010 Political Violence

[phiphidon]

The "rebuttal" by the army on the killing of Channarong is unbelievalby wrong, and looks to me a sign of desperation.

First of all - there was no gun battle.

The bullets came from one direction only - from where the soldiers were stationed, about 80 meters away. There was physically simply no possibility that a third force could have got between the army and shot at the protesters and us. Opposite us was one soi, and from where we were we would have seen such a force. Rang Naam would have been the only other possibility, if the military would not have had their bunkers a few meters off Soi Rang Naam, and could have shot these nonexistent unidentified gunmen during the 16 minutes continous fire until the badly injured Channarong managed to get out of the little tire barricade he was stuck in (the shooting, by the way continued intermittedly over the next few hours when we were stuck in the compound behind the gas station).

There was no rescue mission, and there was no news photographer accompanying the military who was shot. Chaiwat, the Nation photographer who was shot in the incident on the opposite side the road from me, came the same way as all of us photographers there - together with the protesters from Samliem Dindaeng. He has, by the way, already testified at court.

If this would have been a rescue mission, i wonder as well why the soldier who then helped pulling Channarong out of the little pond he slipped in, screamed at him (including expletatives), that he should die.

A detailed account i wrote during the night after i managed to get home from the incident, just google my name and "in the klilling zone".

As to evidence, forensic investigations of the bullet that killed Channarong have been performed. There is more evidence, such as bullet holes, etc, with clear trajectories, videos taken from several direction during the incident, and many witnesses, including several journalists, both Thai and foreign (including me, and i have already testified at court).

There were of course so called "Men in Black" during the 2010 violence who shot at soldiers - but not during this incident.

There were "unidentified" forces other than the army that shot at Red Shirts - but again, not during this particular incident.

This is about one incident - the death of Channarong Ponsrila, and the injuries of several others, including of one clearly identifiable journalist, and the "rebuttal", which is more than liberal with facts.

i'm sure the others here know better than you though, because other people besides the army can get these guns and, and those witnesses probably weren't even there and are getting paid to lie and yadda, yadda, yadda.

you were only there like and that doesn't count.

how much were you paid to lie?

Makes it even more obvious why the army wanted this inquest to be moved to a military court - see the other paper 12th June