Thai Court Acquits Two Red Shirts Of Torching Central World Mall

[webfact]

Thai court acquits two Red Shirts of torching mall

BANGKOK, March 25, 2013 (AFP) - Two supporters of Thailand's "Red Shirt" protest movement were acquitted Monday of setting fire to a huge shopping mall during mass anti-government rallies that rocked Bangkok in 2010.

A court in Bangkok freed the pair because there were no witnesses to the arson attack on Central World, Thailand's biggest shopping mall which was gutted by the blaze.

Saichon Paebua -- one of the Red Shirts' own security guards -- and co-defendant Pinit Chanarong both denied the charges.

Central World was one of dozens of buildings torched after a crackdown by armed troops firing live rounds and backed by armoured vehicles brought an end to the two months of demonstrations on May 19, 2010.

The Red Shirts -- who are broadly loyal to fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra -- have always denied responsibility for the fire.

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World," said one of their leaders, Weng Tojirakarn.

The two defendants were freed as they have already served jail terms for violating an emergency decree imposed by the authorities to deal with the protests, which paralysed parts of Bangkok.

Two teenagers were cleared of involvement in the arson attack by a juvenile court in December due to a lack of witnesses.

About 90 people were killed and nearly 1,900 were wounded in a series of street clashes between demonstrators and security forces during the rallies.

The trial of 24 Red Shirt leaders on terrorism charges began in December but five of them enjoy immunity as they are now lawmakers, so the case is expected to take years to complete during breaks in the parliamentary session.

Abhisit Vejjajiva, who was prime minister at the time, was charged with murder in December along with his then-deputy Suthep Thaugsuban over the death of a taxi driver shot by soldiers during the violence.

The Red Shirts were demanding immediate elections, accusing Abhisit's government of coming to power unfairly in 2008 through a parliamentary vote after a court stripped Thaksin's allies of power.

Thaksin was ousted by royalist generals in a coup in 2006. He now lives in Dubai to avoid a jail sentence for corruption that he contends is politically motivated. In 2011 his sister Yingluck Shinawatra was elected as premier.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2013-03-25

[pedro01]

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World,"

well - that's a bit of a stretch!

[waza]

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World," said one of their leaders, Weng Tojirakarn.

I guess that means that the redshirt leadership cant be force to pay for the arson damage. Hopefully like the yellowshirt leaders they will be required to compensate for the loss of business.

The nation's Civil Court found that the group "illegally interfered" in the operation of Bangkok's two main airports during the protest, which left more than 300,000 travellers stranded and caused major damage to Thailand's economy.

It instructed the key Yellow Shirts to pay a total of 522.1 million baht (US$17.3 million) to national operator Airports of Thailand, plus interest of 7.5 per cent a year since December 3, 2008, when the protest came to an end. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/1118805/1/.html

Edited March 25, 2013 by waza

[Mosha]

It must have been spontaneous combustion

[ZhouZhou]

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World," said one of their leaders, Weng Tojirakarn.

I guess that means that the redshirt leadership cant be force to pay for the arson damage. Hopefully like the yellowshirt leaders they will be required to compensate for the loss of business.

...

the yellow shirt is probably another issue.

but i guess it means the courts will also find nobody that they could declare guilty or responsible for the all those deaths. whoever the defendants might be the outcome will be - not enough evidence.

[whybother]

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World," said one of their leaders, Weng Tojirakarn.

No. It just proves that there are no witnesses to these two burning down Central World.

[webfact]

Red Shirt pair set free after acquittal from CentralWorld arson
By Digital Media



BANGKOK, Mar 25 – The Bangkok South Criminal Court today acquitted two suspects of charges of arson at the CentralWorld shopping complex during the May 2010 political upheaval in the Thai capital.

The two activists, Saichon Paebua and Pinit Channarong, were accused by the attorney general of setting fire to a storeroom inside CentralWorld which spread to the main commercial complex and killed an employee, identified as Kitipong Somsuk.

Mr Saichon and Mr Pinit were members of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) and were simultaneously charged with breaching the Emergency Decree which was enforced during the political crisis.

The blaze at the CentralWorld took place on May 19, 2010 as military forces were dispersing UDD Red Shirt demonstrators in Ratchaprasong – normally one of Bangkok’s busiest shopping zones.

The court said that CentralWorld security guards identified Mr Saichon and Mr Pinit as the men in the surveillance photos but it could not be confirmed that the pair carried any equipment to set fire on the building, nor did they show any behaviour of having an intention to do so.

The court acquitted both from the arson charge. Mr Saichon was however sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment for violating the Emergency Decree, but he has already served more than nine months.

He was immediately released, along with Mr Pinit, who earlier confessed to the charge of breaching the Emergency Decree. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2013-03-25

[jaidam]

So it appears that Jeff Savage is a proven psychic. He knew that the red leadership had instructed the masses to burn Central World, and the video of him saying exactly that before the spontaneous combustion occurred is on Youtube for the world to view. Uri Geller and Paul McKenna must be getting nervous.

[ZhouZhou]

So it appears that Jeff Savage is a proven psychic. He knew that the red leadership had instructed the masses to burn Central World, and the video of him saying exactly that before the spontaneous combustion occurred is on Youtube for the world to view. Uri Geller and Paul McKenna must be getting nervous.

do you think uri geller is a proven psychic?

[GazR]

Barefaced denials notwithstanding, everyone knows the man from Chieng Mai was behind the arson as it was his stooges that urged the Red Shirts to burn down the 36 buildings on their hit list.

[chainarong]

Whether it was these two or not , the fact is, Central world was set on fire, end of story , maybe I am dumb, but out of all those people there, someone saw something

[Pimay1]

This reminds me of the old Amos and Andy TV series back in the '50s where the Kingfish would break the law and his lawyer Algonquin J. Calhoun would get him off the charge every time.

[Locationthailand]

Was there ever any doubt? Pathetic.

[rubl]

Since k. Abhisit / Suthep can be charged for ordering the army to clean up and some soldiers who cannot be identified took it too literal, can we now charge the UDD leaders whose videotaped, regularly broadcasted hate speeches on "bringing bottles", "burn the city" and "it's on me" seemed to have inspired their supporters to unexpected fury and fire, without being able to identify single people of course ?

[tomross46]

1984 George Orwell. Big Brother.

[Fozfromoz]

For sale. Still in box. Best offer.

[muttley]

Since k. Abhisit / Suthep can be charged for ordering the army to clean up and some soldiers who cannot be identified took it too literal, can we now charge the UDD leaders whose videotaped, regularly broadcasted hate speeches on "bringing bottles", "burn the city" and "it's on me" seemed to have inspired their supporters to unexpected fury and fire, without being able to identify single people of course ?

Well there is a fair bit of difference between alleged "incitement" and direct orders that breached international guidelines or "clean up" as you call it in your unpleasant turn of phrase . You seem more concerned about shops and cinemas than you do human life.

Edited March 25, 2013 by muttley

[muttley]

Was there ever any doubt? Pathetic.

Evidently not with the evidence produced by the prosecution. Mind you it doesn't help if you rely on witnesses that admit they didn't read the police witness statement they had signed. The Defence tend to look down on that sort of thing.

[muttley]

Those of an open mind or genuinely curious may be interested in a paper by Jim Taylor from the University of Adelaide entitled

Larger than Life: "Central World" and its Demise and Rebirth - Red Shirts and the Creation of Urban Cultural Myth in Thailand

http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps11_150.pdf

Another viewpoint thats been well researched.

Edited March 25, 2013 by muttley

[AleG]

Those of an open mind or genuinely curious may be interested in a paper by Jim Taylor from the University of Adelaide entitled

Larger than Life: "Central World" and its Demise and Rebirth - Red Shirts and the Creation of Urban Cultural Myth in Thailand

http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps11_150.pdf

Another viewpoint thats been well researched.

Surprise surprise, a conspiracy theory by an obviously extremely biased person.

Gospel to you I guess.

This is the kind of rubish this well researched viewpoint consists of:

Ex PM Thaksin Shinawatra also said that it "must be the work of (a) professional. As an ex police (officer), I can assure you that is a well planned and professionally done..." and that "it was definitely not the work of the Red Shirts"

[A_Traveller]

If it's the paper I recall [mid-'11] I was puzzled about the singular focus on just the Central World complex [or more precisely Zen]. Despite being full of bourgeois comments and the city-nation-state it oddly omitted to mention any of the other arson or violent attacks, such as the SET [which might even factor into his argument], actions outside Bangkok such as the city hall attacks [which don't] let alone the other destruction which occurred.

The other odd thing to me was the presentation of the bucolic nature of the protesters, almost as if the gentle, possibly wise, country folk feeling out of place in the urban monstrosity could not possible have had the technical or even planning skills to contemplate such an act. Even ignoring the inherent insulting nature of such a presentation [though that I suspect that was not the author's intention] the result is a patchwork of oddly out of time contemplations with little data.

The problem is there are legitimate questions about what happened and how the fire got such a hold. Not saying there are not, and ideally the time-lines and knowledge should be laid out for all to see. However, these questions do not negate the position that there is little substantive evidence at this time that shows another narrative. All that is shown are apparent inconsistencies which are highlighted without giving space for the consistencies. [this is like the actions of the 911 "truthers"]

[rubl]

Since k. Abhisit / Suthep can be charged for ordering the army to clean up and some soldiers who cannot be identified took it too literal, can we now charge the UDD leaders whose videotaped, regularly broadcasted hate speeches on "bringing bottles", "burn the city" and "it's on me" seemed to have inspired their supporters to unexpected fury and fire, without being able to identify single people of course ?

Well there is a fair bit of difference between alleged "incitement" and direct orders that breached international guidelines or "clean up" as you call it in your unpleasant turn of phrase . You seem more concerned about shops and cinemas than you do human life.

Well, there is a bit of a differencev between a PM ordering army units to cleanup with as less violence and deaths as possible against an armed insurrection by armed terrorists, or some UDD leaders shoutcasting "burn it", "let them call on me". Thanks to PTV we still have all those hate speeches, but you knew that participating in the relevant topics here. Clips with especially k. Arisman and Nattawut come to mind, but again following these topics you must have seen them.

I remember various discussions after new photo's came out with some insisting on 'obviously the army set fire to CWT as no one else could have done it'. Similar to some still insisting on peaceful protesters and like to ridicule reporters who said to have met some, armed ones that is.

BTW firefights with peaceful grenade dropping protesters requires more than an unarmed London Bobby saying "carry on folks, nothing to see here, carry on now".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8691066.stm

Edited March 25, 2013 by rubl

[Thai at Heart]

With cameras everywhere, if they couldnt identify these guys, fair enough

[A_Traveller]

There also is the odd comment I came across about apparently the police not being able to provide the arresting officer as a witness. Don't know the detail on that but in many jurisdictions such a failure, unless for the most compelling of reasons, would cause considerable damage to a case.

[AleG]

If it's the paper I recall [mid-'11] I was puzzled about the singular focus on just the Central World complex [or more precisely Zen]. Despite being full of bourgeois comments and the city-nation-state it oddly omitted to mention any of the other arson or violent attacks, such as the SET [which might even factor into his argument], actions outside Bangkok such as the city hall attacks [which don't] let alone the other destruction which occurred.

The other odd thing to me was the presentation of the bucolic nature of the protesters, almost as if the gentle, possibly wise, country folk feeling out of place in the urban monstrosity could not possible have had the technical or even planning skills to contemplate such an act. Even ignoring the inherent insulting nature of such a presentation [though that I suspect that was not the author's intention] the result is a patchwork of oddly out of time contemplations with little data.

The problem is there are legitimate questions about what happened and how the fire got such a hold. Not saying there are not, and ideally the time-lines and knowledge should be laid out for all to see. However, these questions do not negate the position that there is little substantive evidence at this time that shows another narrative. All that is shown are apparent inconsistencies which are highlighted without giving space for the consistencies. [this is like the actions of the 911 "truthers"]

The answer to the underlined part is that mentioning any of that would absolutely demolish the argument put forth by that paper, therefore it's imperative that inconvenient facts be left out of the narrative.

The "well researched" paper also forgot to mention all the arson threats (even a very specific one regarding CW the day before the fire) issued by Red Shirts and their leaders well before the actual burnings. Ooops.

[philw]

The complete failure by AV, the governemnt of the time and the military ( et al ) to get any meaningful convictions regarding a catastrophic event, at a major "asset", requiring many people to perpetrate, witnessed by hundreds, the building surrounded by troops, containing many operating cctv's and probably dozens of plain clothes cops and fire brigade access obstructed by the army...................................

A state of emergency was in effect and the military had carte blanch and ipso facto control of the area.

It does raise a question or two, doesn't it ??

They even failed to nail the two ( out of hundreds, supposedly coach loads..) alleged shoplifters........

Edited March 25, 2013 by philw

[Bluespunk]

Whether it was these two or not the red storm troopers were behind this arson attack. It is typical of their mind set. If I don't get my way then everyone suffers. Yes they and those who support them have many grievances but that does not excuse their propensity for intolerance and violent reactionary actions towards any view but that of their own.

[rubl]

The complete failure by AV, the governemnt of the time and the military ( et al ) to get any meaningful convictions regarding a catastrophic event, at a major "asset", requiring many people to perpetrate, witnessed by hundreds, the building surrounded by troops, containing many operating cctv's and probably dozens of plain clothes cops and fire brigade access obstructed by the army...................................

A state of emergency was in effect and the military had carte blanch and ipso facto control of the area.

It does raise a question or two, doesn't it ??

They even failed to nail the two ( out of hundreds, supposedly coach loads..) alleged shoplifters........

Really amazing that even now Abhisit is still blamed for what the UDD leaders and their militant members did. Many CCTVs smashed or covered, militants seen by many but ignored by protesters and their friends. Even NN wrote about his encounter with some. What did the renegade general Seh Daeng say when asked about April 10th violence? Wasn't it a non-denial "No one saw me" ?

Didn't police help red-shirts to get out of the encirclement? Didn't armed elements go in and out at will? Army still battling armed protesters and therefor had 'control over the area'? vanderGrift and some soldiers got a grenade lobbed on them, therefor that army was in control? Army stopping fire brigade? Oh, you mean they waiting for the army to have control as they didn't like to be fired upon by hidden snipers from the peaceful protesters.

Obviously Abhisit to blame. He should have really said "kill me all" rather than the "kill me some" on the 2009 doctored tape. Only then some posters here would be really happy.

BTW how's the ICC case progressing?

Edited March 25, 2013 by rubl

[AleG]

The complete failure by AV, the governemnt of the time and the military ( et al ) to get any meaningful convictions regarding a catastrophic event, at a major "asset", requiring many people to perpetrate, witnessed by hundreds, the building surrounded by troops, containing many operating cctv's and probably dozens of plain clothes cops and fire brigade access obstructed by the army...................................

A state of emergency was in effect and the military had carte blanch and ipso facto control of the area.

It does raise a question or two, doesn't it ??

They even failed to nail the two ( out of hundreds, supposedly coach loads..) alleged shoplifters........

It raises the question of the level of dishonesty or mental impairment required to support the argument that the Red Shirts were not behind this particular fire among dozens and dozens of other acts of arson committed by them on the same day because the Abhisit government wanted to discredit them.

Abhist "And now we send the stealth ninja firebombing squad to burn down Central World so we can frame the Red Shirts for arson!"

Aide "But sir, Red Shirts are already burning banks, shops, even town halls all over the place"

Abhisit "Never mind that!, off with the ninjas! MUAHAHAHAHA!"

[hellodolly]

"Today's ruling proves that Red Shirt protesters did not burn down Central World," said one of their leaders, Weng Tojirakarn.

I guess that means that the redshirt leadership cant be force to pay for the arson damage. Hopefully like the yellowshirt leaders they will be required to compensate for the loss of business.

...

the yellow shirt is probably another issue.

but i guess it means the courts will also find nobody that they could declare guilty or responsible for the all those deaths. whoever the defendants might be the outcome will be - not enough evidence.

Not true. If the charges are against the defenders they will automatically be found guilty.

A red shirt was a license to do any thing and a later government sanctioned it.

Was there ever any charges or accusations for invading a hospital?