Army Behind Thai Protest Death: Inquest

[Lite Beer]

Army behind Thai protest death: inquest

BANGKOK, Sept 17, 2012 (AFP) - The Thai military shot and killed a taxi driver during 2010 "Red Shirt" rallies, an inquest found Monday, in the first ever ruling on deaths during the country's worst political violence in decades.

Phan Kamkong, 43, was caught in a volley of gunfire when he ran out of a central Bangkok apartment block to see what was happening after hearing soldiers open fire at a minibus that had strayed into an area under army control, a Thai criminal court found.

"He was killed by gunfire from weapons of military personnel who fired at a van which drove into a restricted area," said judge Jitakorn Patanasiri, adding the troops were on duty and following orders at the time.

The inquest was to judge the facts of the May 15 2010 incident and is not charged with apportioning criminal responsibility for the killing.

More than 90 people, mostly civilians, were killed and nearly 1,900 were wounded in street clashes and a military crackdown on the opposition rallies, which drew about 100,000 "Red Shirt" demonstrators at their peak.

The violence marked the bloody nadir of Thailand's bitter political divides that have pitted Red Shirt supporters of ousted leader Thaksin Shinawatra against the Bangkok-based elite and military.

No prosecutions have been made over the unrest, which occurred under a previous establishment-backed government that was swept from power by the Red-allied party of Thaksin's sister Yingluck.

The court heard that Phan had been staying at the apartment block with a friend, who was a security guard there, as he waited for his taxi to be repaired.

"He never attended the protest, he worked as a taxi driver," his wife Noochit Kamkong, 42, told AFP at the court.

Forensic ballistics experts told the court that the bullet that killed Phan was the same as the ones used to shoot at the van, which the army has accepted firing at.

The court acknowledged that there had been conflicts between the testimony of civilian and army witnesses to the event.

Military personnel said the van driver ignored instructions to stop and soldiers opened fire because of fears over a potential car bomb.

In his testimony to the court, the van driver said he had been dropping off guests at a hotel in the Thai capital and had got lost trying to get home.

"There is no report of a gunfight between other groups and military personnel," Jitakorn said.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2012-09-17

[Lite Beer]

Criminal Court rules taxi driver killed by troops

The Criminal Court Monday ruled that a taxi driver was shot dead by troops deployed to tighten security around Rajprasong Intesection in May 2010.

Phan Khamkong was shot dead around five minutes after midnight to 1 am of May 15.

He was shot at his left chest and the bullet pieced through his right arm.

The court ruled that troops who were carrying out the operation fired at a van driven by Samorn Maithong when it was trying to break through the security checkpoint of troops in the Rajprasong.

Phan was shot by .223 bullet, which was a type of ammunitions used by Army troops.

-- The Nation 2012-09-17

[philw]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

[Nickymaster]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

Since when does an official carrying a weapon need an order to kill if he feels threatened? You think they carry guns just to look cool?

BTW, even Chalerm's son can kill without an order.

[Nickymaster]

Mr. Philw, who gave the Red shirts an order to kill the 20 officials?

[pedro01]

So it needed an inquest to figure this out?

Guy tries to drive through a security checkpoint, gets shot at, people in van die.

Of course the army killed him. That doesn't make it murder.

[Nickymaster]

Thaksin is clearly hoping/betting that by trying to put the blame on the Dems they would eventually give in to amnesty FOR ALL.

Wrong bet. You know what all this biased investigation does? It only divides the country more and creates more hatred towards each other.

[Nickymaster]

So it needed an inquest to figure this out?

Guy tries to drive through a security checkpoint, gets shot at, people in van die.

Of course the army killed him. That doesn't make it murder.

When a Red shirts points a gun at a security force, and the security force kills him (because he feels threatened/scared) it is cold blooded murder according to the Reds.

That is the Thailand they are trying to create.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Nickymaster

[jonclark]

According to his wife - He never attended the rally and worked as a taxi driver.

So why was he in a restricted area at ratchaprasong, driving a white van? Surely he wasn't collecting a fare?

[webfact]

2010 POLITICAL VIOLENCE

Criminal Court rules taxi driver killed by troops

The Nation

2

Nittaya, daughter of Kam weeps during an interview before the court delivers the verdict.//Photo : Watcharachai Klaipong

BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court Monday ruled that a taxi driver was shot dead by troops deployed to tighten security around Rajprasong Intesection in May 2010.

Phan Khamkong was shot dead between 12.05am and 1am on May 16. He was shot in the left chest and the bullet also pierced his right arm.

The court ruled that troops who were carrying out the operation fired at a van driven by Samorn Maithong when it was trying to break through the security checkpoint of troops in the Rajprasong.

Phan was shot by .223 bullet, which was a type of ammunition used by Army troops.

The court ruled that he was killed as a result of the security keeping operations ordered by the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation.

The case of Phan's death was the first of 19 deaths arising from the 2010 political violence sent to the court by public prosecutors.

Public prosecutors told the court that Phan went to rent his taxi to drive in Wat Saket area on May 14.

At 8pm on May 15, Phan called his daughter to day that he was hiding at a condominium construction site in Rajprarop. This was the last time his daughter heard from him.

The Department of Special Investigation have yet to prove whether troops in the area shot at Phan on their own or were simply carrying out an unlawful order. If carrying out an order, they would not be held responsible. Legal action would be taken against those who gave the order.

-- The Nation 2012-09-17

[philw]

An independent coroners court has now confirmed what has been consistently denied for over two years.

The RTA used live ammo and are responsible, now, for at least one death.

One wonders what the other Coroners verdicts will be.

[saltandpepper]

According to his wife - He never attended the rally and worked as a taxi driver.

So why was he in a restricted area at ratchaprasong, driving a white van? Surely he wasn't collecting a fare?

He was completely unaware that there was something going on. There were no reports and the whole things were kept secret.

[Moruya]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

I think the vast majority of sane people would support an order permitting the armed forces to fire in self defence given the violence of the protesters.

[Fozfromoz]

Am I reading this right?

I am a bit confused, but did the taxi driver go outside to see what was happening, then got clobbered?

It says that another guy was driving the white van the way I read it.

[philw]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

I think the vast majority of sane people would support an order permitting the armed forces to fire in self defence given the violence of the protesters.

Er..........self defence at an unarmed taxi driver ???

I'm not convinced the vast majority of sane people would condone that.

Edited September 17, 2012 by philw

[Nickymaster]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

I think the vast majority of sane people would support an order permitting the armed forces to fire in self defence given the violence of the protesters.

Er..........self defence at an unarmed taxi driver ???

Maybe you should learn how to read.

The court acknowledged that there had been conflicts between the testimony of civilian and army witnesses to the event.

Military personnel said the van driver ignored instructions to stop and soldiers opened fire because of fears over a potential car bomb.

In his testimony to the court, the van driver said he had been dropping off guests at a hotel in the Thai capital and had got lost trying to get home.

When he got lost he was suddenly driving into a millitary checkpoint.... during a period when there was total anarchy in bangkok and many soldiers had already been attacked and killed.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Nickymaster

[chotthee]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

On one gave the order.

The army fire it because they suspect there is a van bomb.

If he was not a busybody, he would still have live.

[AleG]

An independent coroners court has now confirmed what has been consistently denied for over two years.

The RTA used live ammo and are responsible, now, for at least one death.

One wonders what the other Coroners verdicts will be.

Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest". However you are free to prove the assertion if you can... and no, trolling posts don't count.

There is, however a consistent stream of (the same clique), denying Red Shirts did the same. You should really stop projecting what your behaviour unto other people, it's unbecoming.

[whybother]

I'm surprised it took two years to work this one out. I thought it had been stated all along that he was shot by the army when the van was speeding towards a check point.

[philw]

An independent coroners court has now confirmed what has been consistently denied for over two years.

The RTA used live ammo and are responsible, now, for at least one death.

One wonders what the other Coroners verdicts will be.

Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest". However you are free to prove the assertion if you can... and no, trolling posts don't count.

There is, however a consistent stream of (the same clique), denying Red Shirts did the same. You should really stop projecting what your behaviour unto other people, it's unbecoming.

Even though per nickymaster, i need to learn how to read, your final sentence makes little sense to me and I doubt anyone else.

Can you please point to any post or statement of mine supporting or condoning any violence from any side ?

If you cannot, please apologise for trying to put words into my mouth.

Finally, with regard to your statement, "...Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest....", sadly there are very many people who have tried to deny this starting with, AV, his deputy PM, army generals, army spokesmen and assorted folks on this forum.

It is perhaps encouraging that you now admit the army killed people..................

[473geo]

I'm surprised it took two years to work this one out. I thought it had been stated all along that he was shot by the army when the van was speeding towards a check point.

Not surprising really, many on this thread cannot seem to comprehend the man who was the subject of the inquest was not driving the van......

[AleG]

Even though per nickymaster, i need to learn how to read, your final sentence makes little sense to me and I doubt anyone else.

Can you please point to any post or statement of mine supporting or condoning any violence from any side ?

If you cannot, please apologise for trying to put words into my mouth.

Finally, with regard to your statement, "...Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest....", sadly there are very many people who have tried to deny this starting with, AV, his deputy PM, army generals, army spokesmen and assorted folks on this forum.

It is perhaps encouraging that you now admit the army killed people..................

You certainly would use some reading comprehension, I didn't say condoning, or supporting violence, I said denying deaths on the hands of "protesters".

Did the Red Shirts kill people, yes or no?

You may also provide a citation proving the people you mention deny that people died as a result of Army operations, ,as you said, for the past two years.

I have never denied the Army killed anyone, far from it, so there's nothing to admit there.

Edited September 17, 2012 by AleG

[philw]

Even though per nickymaster, i need to learn how to read, your final sentence makes little sense to me and I doubt anyone else.

Can you please point to any post or statement of mine supporting or condoning any violence from any side ?

If you cannot, please apologise for trying to put words into my mouth.

Finally, with regard to your statement, "...Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest....", sadly there are very many people who have tried to deny this starting with, AV, his deputy PM, army generals, army spokesmen and assorted folks on this forum.

It is perhaps encouraging that you now admit the army killed people..................

You certainly would use some reading comprehension, I didn't say condoning, or supporting violence, I said denying deaths on the hands of "protesters".

Did the Red Shirts kill people, yes or no?

You may also provide a citation proving the people you mention deny that people died as a result of Army operations, ,as you said, for the past two years.

I have never denied the Army killed anyone, far from it, so there's nothing to admit there.

You are kidding right ??

AV and co have denied from the beginning that "people died as a result of army operations".

That denial is the crux of the problem.

Still,at least you admit the army's responsibility for murder.

[AleG]

You are kidding right ??

AV and co have denied from the beginning that "people died as a result of army operations".

That denial is the crux of the problem.

Still,at least you admit the army's responsibility for murder.

So, no quote from those people saying the army killed nobody?

Also, were did I say the Army is responsible for murder? You really should pay more attention when reading.

[Nickymaster]

Even though per nickymaster, i need to learn how to read, your final sentence makes little sense to me and I doubt anyone else.

Can you please point to any post or statement of mine supporting or condoning any violence from any side ?

If you cannot, please apologise for trying to put words into my mouth.

Finally, with regard to your statement, "...Nobody has or is denying the Army used real bullets and killed people during the 2010 "protest....", sadly there are very many people who have tried to deny this starting with, AV, his deputy PM, army generals, army spokesmen and assorted folks on this forum.

It is perhaps encouraging that you now admit the army killed people..................

You certainly would use some reading comprehension, I didn't say condoning, or supporting violence, I said denying deaths on the hands of "protesters".

Did the Red Shirts kill people, yes or no?

You may also provide a citation proving the people you mention deny that people died as a result of Army operations, ,as you said, for the past two years.

I have never denied the Army killed anyone, far from it, so there's nothing to admit there.

You are kidding right ??

AV and co have denied from the beginning that "people died as a result of army operations".

That denial is the crux of the problem.

Still,at least you admit the army's responsibility for murder.

The red shirts killed 20 security forces and the security forces killed 70 (mainly) red shirts.

Very sad situation.

If a person carries weapons around and attacks security forces, what could happen to this person?

I already have 1 answer from a 6th grader but I am looking for more.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Nickymaster

[birdpooguava]

I wonder what this can open up ??

I suppose it's a surprisingly unsurprising verdict and it must have some serious implications for the armed forces and those who issue their orders.

I think the vast majority of sane people would support an order permitting the armed forces to fire in self defence given the violence of the protesters.

Er..........self defence at an unarmed taxi driver ???

Maybe you should learn how to read.

The court acknowledged that there had been conflicts between the testimony of civilian and army witnesses to the event.

Military personnel said the van driver ignored instructions to stop and soldiers opened fire because of fears over a potential car bomb.

In his testimony to the court, the van driver said he had been dropping off guests at a hotel in the Thai capital and had got lost trying to get home.

When he got lost he was suddenly driving into a millitary checkpoint.... during a period when there was total anarchy in bangkok and many soldiers had already been attacked and killed.

Seems like you need the reading lessons 'master'!

"Phan Kamkong, 43, was caught in a volley of gunfire when he ran out of a central Bangkok apartment block to see what was happening after hearing soldiers open fire at a minibus" Phan had not been driving the van and did nothing more incriminating than coming outside to see what was going on...if not murder definitely manslaughter!

Edited September 17, 2012 by birdpooguava

[philw]

Is PPD banned again? He must have been waiting for this news for years.

Interesting that those who do not subscribe to the dominant view get disappeared, isn't it ??

Must be another aspect of the Thaksin factor.

[Nickymaster]

Is PPD banned again? He must have been waiting for this news for years.

Interesting that those who do not subscribe to the dominant view get disappeared, isn't it ??

Must be another aspect of the Thaksin factor.

How about you?

[philw]

Is PPD banned again? He must have been waiting for this news for years.

Interesting that those who do not subscribe to the dominant view get disappeared, isn't it ??

Must be another aspect of the Thaksin factor.

How about you?

Meaning what ??

[Nickymaster]

Is PPD banned again? He must have been waiting for this news for years.

Interesting that those who do not subscribe to the dominant view get disappeared, isn't it ??

Must be another aspect of the Thaksin factor.

How about you?

Meaning what ??

Are you banned?