Bangkok Criminal Court Concludes Army Killed 14-Year-Old Boy During 2010 Violence

[nurofiend]

Well, at least he had something intelligent to say.

i guess i missed that bit but thanks for your input, real intelligent input right there.

[khunken]

Well, at least he had something intelligent to say.

i guess i missed that bit but thanks for your input, real intelligent input right there.

Yes, I just temporarily came down to your level.

[nurofiend]

May I remind you of what you wrote

"so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army."

Whether or not my posts disgust you is immaterial. You accuse me of 'blaming the parents of an innocent orphaned child'. For one if the child was orphaned he probably wouldn't have parents anymore, and two we only have gKid's say-so Kunaporn "was in the care of a children's aid group, He had no parents. The chlld was described as having learning disabilities, and was given to wandering off", but no reference to be found. At least not by me. So do you want to go on disgustingly avoiding valid questions or will you help finding more details about the victim of an unfortunate incident?

am, that was my point if he was an orphan, you can't really 'blame the parents' can you?!

as i said regardless of whether geriatrickid's info is correct or not.... ie. regardless of whether he's an orphan or not, your comments sounded sick to me.

so just take the word 'orphan' out of the part you quoted me on just there and my feeling remains the same... blaming the parents is <deleted> ridiculous.

obviously your buds think your comments were intelligent.

i don't, i think it was a disgraceful thing to say.

so go and find out if he's an orphan or not, because that will certainly make your comments and blame for everyone but the army justified.

bye now.

Edited December 21, 2012 by nurofiend

[nurofiend]

Well, at least he had something intelligent to say.

i guess i missed that bit but thanks for your input, real intelligent input right there.

Yes, I just temporarily came down to your level.

yeah, great, ok... night night.

[khunken]

Well, at least he had something intelligent to say.

i guess i missed that bit but thanks for your input, real intelligent input right there.

Yes, I just temporarily came down to your level.

yeah, great, ok... night night.

I'm not a bud of anyone FYI. In comparison to your totally inane comments, Rubi's comment was certainly intelligent. Night, night to you.

[rubl]

May I remind you of what you wrote

"so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army."

Whether or not my posts disgust you is immaterial. You accuse me of 'blaming the parents of an innocent orphaned child'. For one if the child was orphaned he probably wouldn't have parents anymore, and two we only have gKid's say-so Kunaporn "was in the care of a children's aid group, He had no parents. The chlld was described as having learning disabilities, and was given to wandering off", but no reference to be found. At least not by me. So do you want to go on disgustingly avoiding valid questions or will you help finding more details about the victim of an unfortunate incident?

am, that was my point if he was an orphan, you can't really 'blame the parents' can you?!

as i said regardless of whether geriatrickid's info is correct or not.... ie. regardless of whether he's an orphan or not, your comments sounded sick to me.

so just take the word 'orphan' out of the part you quoted me on just there and my feeling remains the same... blaming the parents is <deleted> ridiculous.

obviously your buds think your comments were intelligent.

i don't, i think it was a disgraceful thing to say.

so go and find out if he's an orphan or not, because that will certainly make your comments and blame for everyone but the army justified.

bye now.

Still zig-zagging along I see. I've been accused of blaming parents where obviously [sic] and clearly for all to see the boy didn't have any. I'm still waiting for confirmation as to whether or not he was what gKid described in his reply to me. You join the game with being disgusted without even bothering to find out the truth. Now you crawl back a bit on the 'orphan' part and still blame me for blaming anyone but the army. Tell me, where did I blame anyone, but the army'? Why would I need to blame the army? Should I blame individual soldiers instead, or maybe just shout 'Abhisit murderer' and play the infamous tape of 'kill me some'?

Did you read the 2012-07-21 remark from the DSI I posted? With "probably and unintentionally killed as they walked in the area by soldiers shooting at the van." Would it make you more happy if it had been police doing the shooting, or maybe you'd rather have seen some lob a grenade on the van? From the moment the renegade general Seh Daeng was shot all hell broke loose; grenades rained, gunbattles with 'peaceful, unarmed' protesters. Some soldiers probably pissing their pants remembering what happened to theirs on April 10th. I know the term 'colleteral damage' sounds detached, but given the situation at hand. Sure, army back to the barracks, let 'peaceful, unarmed' protesters roam the streets, intimidating all non-believers. Sure, that's the democratic way, all democratic countries do so with the police helping.

[rubl]

The truth will set you free, so to be fair:

I retract my post #3 about 'parential guidance'. New information has come to me with many thanks to a traveller.

"Kunakorn was raised by the Bangkok-based International Islamic Relief Organization. Organization official Suchada Satangdee said the victim usually disappeared from the care centre and she did not know how he turned up at the scene of violent street protests.

She said Kunakorn was a child with disabilities and suffered from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder."

http://www.mcot.net/...99#.UNSW2Xcf1nU

I do feel sorry for the boy who was at the wrong place at the wrong moment. I feel less sorry for the red-shirt taxi driver who run out of the house to see who was shooting, not because he was a red-shirt, but because being an adult and red-shirt he should have known to be careful in that area at night.

[yoshiwara]

May I remind you of what you wrote

"so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army."

Whether or not my posts disgust you is immaterial. You accuse me of 'blaming the parents of an innocent orphaned child'. For one if the child was orphaned he probably wouldn't have parents anymore, and two we only have gKid's say-so Kunaporn "was in the care of a children's aid group, He had no parents. The chlld was described as having learning disabilities, and was given to wandering off", but no reference to be found. At least not by me. So do you want to go on disgustingly avoiding valid questions or will you help finding more details about the victim of an unfortunate incident?

am, that was my point if he was an orphan, you can't really 'blame the parents' can you?!

as i said regardless of whether geriatrickid's info is correct or not.... ie. regardless of whether he's an orphan or not, your comments sounded sick to me.

so just take the word 'orphan' out of the part you quoted me on just there and my feeling remains the same... blaming the parents is <deleted> ridiculous.

obviously your buds think your comments were intelligent.

i don't, i think it was a disgraceful thing to say.

so go and find out if he's an orphan or not, because that will certainly make your comments and blame for everyone but the army justified.

bye now.

One assumes that everyone might include Arisman for setting the tone of incitement to violence, the armed men in black, the grenade launchers, the red idiot waving his kid on the barricades and putting his life in danger and Thaksin for bankrolling the exercise.

[Ricardo]

Slowly, but surely, the chickens are coming home to roost.

Dream on, Sunshine. Just how long have you been in Thailand, I wonder?

For a number of lives, I suspect.

[Moruya]

<b>rubl, on 2012-12-21 22:30:30, said:</b><br /><br />No need to announce yourself, dear fiend. Now do us all a favour, crawl back or post some meaningful stuff.<br />

<br />i'm simply mirroring one of your comrades idiotic comments, so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army.

I believe the present participle of the verb "to parrot" would be more appropriate

[Moruya]

The truth will set you free, so to be fair:

I retract my post #3 about 'parential guidance'. New information has come to me with many thanks to a traveller.

"Kunakorn was raised by the Bangkok-based International Islamic Relief Organization. Organization official Suchada Satangdee said the victim usually disappeared from the care centre and she did not know how he turned up at the scene of violent street protests.

She said Kunakorn was a child with disabilities and suffered from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder."

http://www.mcot.net/...99#.UNSW2Xcf1nU

I do feel sorry for the boy who was at the wrong place at the wrong moment. I feel less sorry for the red-shirt taxi driver who run out of the house to see who was shooting, not because he was a red-shirt, but because being an adult and red-shirt he should have known to be careful in that area at night.

The taxi driver's parents shouldn't have allowed him to hang out with that mob

[smutcakes]

The truth will set you free, so to be fair:

I retract my post #3 about 'parential guidance'. New information has come to me with many thanks to a traveller.

"Kunakorn was raised by the Bangkok-based International Islamic Relief Organization. Organization official Suchada Satangdee said the victim usually disappeared from the care centre and she did not know how he turned up at the scene of violent street protests.

She said Kunakorn was a child with disabilities and suffered from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder."

http://www.mcot.net/...99#.UNSW2Xcf1nU

I do feel sorry for the boy who was at the wrong place at the wrong moment. I feel less sorry for the red-shirt taxi driver who run out of the house to see who was shooting, not because he was a red-shirt, but because being an adult and red-shirt he should have known to be careful in that area at night.

The taxi driver's parents shouldn't have allowed him to hang out with that mob

What??

[Thait Spot]

The truth will set you free, so to be fair:

I retract my post #3 about 'parential guidance'. New information has come to me with many thanks to a traveller.

"Kunakorn was raised by the Bangkok-based International Islamic Relief Organization. Organization official Suchada Satangdee said the victim usually disappeared from the care centre and she did not know how he turned up at the scene of violent street protests.

She said Kunakorn was a child with disabilities and suffered from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder."

http://www.mcot.net/...99#.UNSW2Xcf1nU

I do feel sorry for the boy who was at the wrong place at the wrong moment. I feel less sorry for the red-shirt taxi driver who run out of the house to see who was shooting, not because he was a red-shirt, but because being an adult and red-shirt he should have known to be careful in that area at night.

The taxi driver's parents shouldn't have allowed him to hang out with that mob

What??

Haha!

Read post 3

Edited December 22, 2012 by Thait Spot

[cup-O-coffee]

Most people on this forum cannot reason anymore when it comes to this matter or the Thaksin subject in general.

Most of the comments, blindly supporting the yellows, Abhisit or the army, seem irrational...

Some people might say that these comments are just written by people who do not have the intellectual capabilities to analyze and comment on complex subjects... Could it be?

Even when a boy was shot in the back by the army, members on this forum will still find countless ways to put the blame on the reds, on the boy himself or his (inexistent) family, on Thaksin, on fate, on the stupidity of the demontrators ("This boy obviously run into the army's bullets while he knew very well he should have been at school"), ... T

They will always find an excuse to convince us that the army and the Abhisit government did a great job in dispersing these demonstrators, and that 90 deaths was totally reasonable taking into account the situation, ... and that, ... , euh, ... well if you don't agree, just shut up, ok?

If they could, they would even try to link the death of that boy (and all the others) to Chalerm or Yingluck.

They fully agree with the court decisions when it suits their version of the drama . They quickly praise the court when the reds are in trouble. They applaud the judges when the verdict is in favor of the yellows. But then, they come up with all sorts of speculation when the court favors the Thaksin camp and the reds. They, of course, close their eyes when the court is lenient in the yellow cases that started it all...

In this case, there were people injured and killed on both sides...

The funny thing is that as soon as the court will say that one soldier lost his nail while performing his duty to protect the citizens and restore order, most people here will say that Thaksin should be held responsible and thrown in jail for the rest of his life (together with his sister if possible).

gerry1011, I enjoyed reading your line of reasoning, but was disappointed that you did not provide your view on the situation and perhaps why it occurred and what you think the factors might be that contributed to this outcome. Could it be that in scorning everything thus far you removed any possible explanations that might give you a view and to be able to avoid your own scorn? Is there some other possibility that we are not aware of? Just curious, because I would like to hear it. Good post.

[backtonormal]

rip Kunakorn Srisuwan

do they have the bullets that caused his death and if so can they prove 100% that they where fired from an army weapon and can say who fired the weapon using forensics if not they dont have a case . just having bullets from a similar weapon proves nothing and could have been discharched by anyone from anywhere in the vacinity .

Proving the bullets came from an army weapon doesn't mean too much since most of those style weapons have been stolen from the army in the first place. The army are in the enviable position of either denying or confirming that the weapon was or was not previously stolen - as they wish probably without question. It is strange that a 14 year old boy was wandering around a war zone though. And how are they able to determine that the boy was or was not red or yellow ? what reporting !

Red or Yellow For Xxxxx sake its a 14 year old kid who was murdered

Edited December 29, 2012 by metisdead

[backtonormal]

Personally, I don't know if this little boy lived in the area or not. However, one has to ask why the army were in the area. Was it for ceremonial duties? Was it to help flooding as happened in 2011? Were they training for some future event? Such as crowd control? Surely that would be a police function. It sure is in my country.

Or were they there to move a rabble from the streets, a gang of armed idiots who had already cause deaths, destruction and fear? And who were intent on going much further in their efforts to achieve their aims. Aims which originally included a demand for new elections, to which Abhisit said OK. Flushed with success, they decided that this wasn't enough, and set about the dismantling of any vestige of normality in Bangkok.

Getting back to the little boy. If he lived in the area, then the red shirts brought their plague to his location and are thus responsible. If he came with the red shirts, they are equally responsible for his death. Let us look for the root causes of his untimely, sad demise, not only at the unhappy ending

Absolute, shameless nonsense.

The people who shot him are entirely responsible for their actions and ALL ( all the way up through the chain of command ) should be brought to court and have their day.

It is nonsense to imply it's his fault for being there, in the same way that it is equally stupid for our dutch uncle to assert that the kid died because of lack of some sort parental control....

He was shot by soldiers who were, or were not,under the full control of their officers, and if they were under the full control of their officers, then the officers too are accountable.

A full enquiry is needed and it looks like it is going to happen.

A first for Thailand that should be celebrated.

I have long regarded you as a troll, an internet warrior with nothing to do except promote hatred of the Democratic party and their leaders. However, I will be fair to you as you and your sort would change sides in a heartbeat if the Dems came to power.

A little clique, a coterie if you will, has sprung up, all baying for Abhisit's blood. As a group, you have managed to deny the existence of any aggressive behaviour in the Red Shirt camp, have chosen to ignore the fact that weapons were first used by the red shirt side, have been unable to explain the inability of the Royal Thai Police to do their job in the situation which existed in 2010 in Bangkok. Compared to how they handled the recent Pitak Siam Rally, it is obvious they were under orders to stay out of the rebellion. Whose orders they were are also very apparent, but you lot chose to ignore that also.

A troll can be regarded by some as a thorn in the flesh, or maybe just a little prick. I know where I think you belong

That bit in red is pure fiction. It just goes to show the intelligence of the opposition. Dems need military aid to get back in power

Edited December 29, 2012 by backtonormal

[whybother]

Red or Yellow For Xxxxx sake its a 14 year old kid who was murdered

Actually, it's a 14 year old kid that was killed.

There is no indication it was deliberate or that what the army was doing was illegal except for the allegation that Abhisit's order to the army was illegal or was to kill red shirts.

[backtonormal]

The courts have to establish who gave the orders and on paper that must be Abhisit. In reality it goes higher up the food chain. The question may be that when it is established that the PM gave the orders will he carry the can or implicate others. By following the chain of command from the officer in charge at the scene it is going to quite easy to establish where the original orders came from.

[whybother]

The courts have to establish who gave the orders and on paper that must be Abhisit. In reality it goes higher up the food chain. The question may be that when it is established that the PM gave the orders will he carry the can or implicate others. By following the chain of command from the officer in charge at the scene it is going to quite easy to establish where the original orders came from.

The orders don't necessarily lead to the unlawful death. The courts haven't even said it was an unlawful death.

[backtonormal]

The courts have to establish who gave the orders and on paper that must be Abhisit. In reality it goes higher up the food chain. The question may be that when it is established that the PM gave the orders will he carry the can or implicate others. By following the chain of command from the officer in charge at the scene it is going to quite easy to establish where the original orders came from.

The orders don't necessarily lead to the unlawful death. The courts haven't even said it was an unlawful death.

Point taken

Somebody gave the ok to use live ammunition on people. Because of that a young boy died. That order is the sole reason for this boys death. Who gave the order. Its what happens when you fire nearly 120,000 live rounds into the public. Somebody will cop a stray un

Edited December 29, 2012 by backtonormal

[whybother]

Somebody gave the ok to use live ammunition on people. Because of that a young boy died. That order is the sole reaon for this boys death. Who gave the order. Its what happens when you fire nearly 120,000 live rounds into the public. Somebody will kop a stray un

The police have the OK to use live ammunition. Who gets charged whenever they kill someone?

When protesters are armed, how should the authorities respond? Just rollover and give in? Yay to mob rule.

[metisdead]

A post in which the quoted post had been altered has been removed as well as the replies.

[backtonormal]

Somebody gave the ok to use live ammunition on people. Because of that a young boy died. That order is the sole reaon for this boys death. Who gave the order. Its what happens when you fire nearly 120,000 live rounds into the public. Somebody will kop a stray un

The police have the OK to use live ammunition. Who gets charged whenever they kill someone?

When protesters are armed, how should the authorities respond? Just rollover and give in? Yay to mob rule.

There must be time when a police officer is allowed to discharge his weapon, not likely to get charged with unlawfully killing. When he shoots somebody unlawfully he should be charged. In this particular case none of the victims were armed. For a moment I thought you were referring to the army when you said 'mob rule' . Nearly 120,000 live rounds not returned to the armoury. That looks like a killing spree

[whybother]

Somebody gave the ok to use live ammunition on people. Because of that a young boy died. That order is the sole reaon for this boys death. Who gave the order. Its what happens when you fire nearly 120,000 live rounds into the public. Somebody will kop a stray un

The police have the OK to use live ammunition. Who gets charged whenever they kill someone?

When protesters are armed, how should the authorities respond? Just rollover and give in? Yay to mob rule.

There must be time when a police officer is allowed to discharge his weapon, not likely to get charged with unlawfully killing. When he shoots somebody unlawfully he should be charged. In this particular case none of the victims were armed. For a moment I thought you were referring to the army when you said 'mob rule' . Nearly 120,000 live rounds not returned to the armoury. That looks like a killing spree

Similarly, there "must be time when" a soldier is allowed to discharge his weapon.

120,000 rounds. 80 or so dead from shooting. 10 weeks. Killing spree?

[DrFloyd]

The noose is slowly but surely tightening around Mark's head .

[rubl]

Slowly but surely the feeling of reconciliation and amnesty for all gets promoted. Except for k. Abhisit and Suthep of course

[muttley]

Somebody gave the ok to use live ammunition on people. Because of that a young boy died. That order is the sole reaon for this boys death. Who gave the order. Its what happens when you fire nearly 120,000 live rounds into the public. Somebody will kop a stray un

The police have the OK to use live ammunition. Who gets charged whenever they kill someone?

When protesters are armed, how should the authorities respond? Just rollover and give in? Yay to mob rule.

There must be time when a police officer is allowed to discharge his weapon, not likely to get charged with unlawfully killing. When he shoots somebody unlawfully he should be charged. In this particular case none of the victims were armed. For a moment I thought you were referring to the army when you said 'mob rule' . Nearly 120,000 live rounds not returned to the armoury. That looks like a killing spree

Similarly, there "must be time when" a soldier is allowed to discharge his weapon.

120,000 rounds. 80 or so dead from shooting. 10 weeks. Killing spree?

I just "love" the way that you react to this boys death. Actually I don't, I abhor it.

You : Murder, no its just killing.

Killed by the army.

You : Doesn't mean that they meant it. Courts haven't even said it was unlawful.

Someone gave order to use live ammo.

You : Its OK for the Police to use live ammo, Who gets charged when they kill someone.

120,000 rounds used like a killing spree

You : 120,000 rounds over 10 weeks and only 80 odd dead, Thats not a killing spree

&lt;deleted&gt;!

I swear it's constant exposure to denial posts on here that turns you and others into desensitised individuals.

Read through your replies again and take a long hard look at yourself, there really is something not quite right there.

[whybother]

I just "love" the way that you react to this boys death. Actually I don't, I abhor it.

You : Murder, no its just killing.

Killed by the army.

You : Doesn't mean that they meant it. Courts haven't even said it was unlawful.

Someone gave order to use live ammo.

You : Its OK for the Police to use live ammo, Who gets charged when they kill someone.

120,000 rounds used like a killing spree

You : 120,000 rounds over 10 weeks and only 80 odd dead, Thats not a killing spree

&lt;deleted&gt;!

I swear it's constant exposure to denial posts on here that turns you and others into desensitised individuals.

Read through your replies again and take a long hard look at yourself, there really is something not quite right there.

Just because someone died doesn't mean that you should throw common sense and logic out the window.

That just leads to lynch mobs.

[AleG]

Slowly but surely the feeling of reconciliation and amnesty for all gets promoted. Except for k. Abhisit and Suthep of course

Here's what Red Shirts think of reconciliation with Abhisit, Suthep and the Democrats.

Peaceful non violent folks, I've been told.

[Hugo6]

I just "love" the way that you react to this boys death. Actually I don't, I abhor it.

You : Murder, no its just killing.

Killed by the army.

You : Doesn't mean that they meant it. Courts haven't even said it was unlawful.

Someone gave order to use live ammo.

You : Its OK for the Police to use live ammo, Who gets charged when they kill someone.

120,000 rounds used like a killing spree

You : 120,000 rounds over 10 weeks and only 80 odd dead, Thats not a killing spree

&lt;deleted&gt;!

I swear it's constant exposure to denial posts on here that turns you and others into desensitised individuals.

Read through your replies again and take a long hard look at yourself, there really is something not quite right there.

Just because someone died doesn't mean that you should throw common sense and logic out the window.

That just leads to lynch mobs.

or snipers used for crowd control