POLITICAL CRISIS
Soldier killed by friendly fire, court concludes

A Criminal Court inquest concluded Tuesday that friendly fire killed an Army private during a clash with red-shirt protesters in front of the National Memorial in April 2010.

The court said that Private Narongrit Sala from the Second Battalion of the Ninth Infantry Division in Kanchanaburi was killed by a high-velocity bullet fired from one of the troops operating in the area.

Narongrit was attached to the fast-mobile patrol unit deployed to control the situation in front of the National Memorial in Don Mueang district on April 28, 2010. Police and troops were involved in a clash with redshirt protesters in the area at the time.

Narongrit was gunned down at 3pm on the outbound Vibhavadi Rangsit Roa. A high-velocity bullet entered his left elbow, travelled through to the skull and destroyed brain tissue, according to the inquest. The court concluded that the bullet was fired by a soldier operating in the area.

This marked the eighth inquest on killings related to 2010 political violence to be concluded by the Criminal Court so far.

Public prosecutors and relatives of Narongrit did not turn out to hear the inquest's result.




-- The Nation 2013-04-30

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

thai logic says

if the red shirts werent there then this never would have happened

thai logic says

if the red shirts werent there then this never would have happened

Thats about as strong as we will get in defense of the army. Who gave the orders to shoot, using snipers

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

One question that won't go away is who actually gained from 'innocent protestors' being shot during the red shirt siege that was being carried out in full international view....?

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

One question that won't go away is who actually gained from 'innocent protestors' being shot during the red shirt siege that was being carried out in full international view....?

One question that won't go away is why was a Thai soldier firing High Velocity rounds at inocent protesters.

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

One question that won't go away is who actually gained from 'innocent protestors' being shot during the red shirt siege that was being carried out in full international view....?

It was not to gain anything. It was a piece in the jigsaw that, in their own minds, justified the slaughter of over 90 people. Add the 'men in black', throwing grenades into the public, showing arms cache to the world media etc..It was setting up the end game

Very quiet on this topic, perhaps it is not to the taste of many of the Thai Visa members as it places responsibility for the death of a soldier on another soldier. If that old American favourite "Friendly Fire" is responsible for this death then maybe it was responsible for the few other deaths of soldiers during the attacks on the protesters in Bangkok.

Hey lads...play the game. I am working my butt off to keep this at the top of the 'new content page'. Is it tactical you dont want to respond. team orders maybe

Hey lads...play the game. I am working my butt off to keep this at the top of the 'new content page'. Is it tactical you dont want to respond. team orders maybe

Maybe 'the afternoon shift' has not turned in today

Hey lads...play the game. I am working my butt off to keep this at the top of the 'new content page'. Is it tactical you dont want to respond. team orders maybe

Maybe 'the afternoon shift' has not turned in today

shift changeover

Very quiet on this topic, perhaps it is not to the taste of many of the Thai Visa members as it places responsibility for the death of a soldier on another soldier. If that old American favourite "Friendly Fire" is responsible for this death then maybe it was responsible for the few other deaths of soldiers during the attacks on the protesters in Bangkok.

That could well be the case............

Accept the courts decision and very unfortunate that should ever have happened.

However had it not been necessary to return fire against an armed mob who had already killed army personal it would never have happened.

RIP soldier, you died serving your country.

Lets hope the reds never take up arms again.

I hope I'm allowed to chip in and "play the game".

The govt at the time announced the live fire zone 14 May I think? So, yes, this happened before the live fire zones were announced.

But, remember, the live fire zone was basically a clearance operation with shoot-on-sight orders. It was condemned by HRW & Amnesty International, vilified on CNN & BCC but, funnily enough, not many Rajprasong residents objected to it.

This 28 April operation was something completely different. The Queen's Regiment were called out from their Don Meuang barracks after Kwanchai Praiphana (the same one whose fire-bombing of the army's 1st Infantry barracks pre-empted the 10 April clearance operation) was leading a lot of protesters to break 6 prisoners out of Pathum Thani. These protesters were told to stop and turn back but instead there was a firefight with bullets coming from both sides.

Doesn't anyone else see that it's strange that 1 soldier died and 18 protesters were injured if the orders were "shoot-to-kill"? Are you suggesting the army decided to kill one of their own for public sympathy (honest question)? Does anyone think that armed protesters looking to commit a jail break are innocent?

No offence to anyone ,I remember when some UNI students in one particular country, being shot up by the national guard, 10cc brought out that number ,"Rubber Bullets" , so whats the difference here, they should have opened up with more than they did in my opinion, this was just a mob of thugs, hell bent on destruction , as we found out, any country that has this sort antisocial activity on this scale would have dropped them like flies.Just try this stunt in Sydney, NY ,LA ,London Tokyo, where ever, see what happens ,they where lucky it was BKK Thailand in my opinion, this doesn't help the soldier but the situation was certainly not normal.

Wow, they really came out of the wood

Hey lads...play the game. I am working my butt off to keep this at the top of the 'new content page'. Is it tactical you dont want to respond. team orders maybe

Maybe 'the afternoon shift' has not turned in today

Wow, they really came out of the woodworks on this one. Deranged conspiracy theories and everything.

That this soldier was the victim of "friendly fire" was well established since about 5 minutes after the incident happened.

works with this one, didn't they?

Wow, they really came out of the wood

Hey lads...play the game. I am working my butt off to keep this at the top of the 'new content page'. Is it tactical you dont want to respond. team orders maybe

Maybe 'the afternoon shift' has not turned in today

Wow, they really came out of the woodworks on this one. Deranged conspiracy theories and everything.

That this soldier was the victim of "friendly fire" was well established since about 5 minutes after the incident happened.

works with this one, didn't they?

There must be some reward to being a "truther" that makes up for being regarded as a moron by a majority of people.

Oh, and those "High Velocity Bullets" are the standard ammo for every "grunt". The lightweight 5.56 mm round of the "normal" assault rifle needs a high initial velocity to keep its momentum. Snipers fire "Low Velocity Bullets" like the 7.62 mm or the 12.7 mm, as their mass helps them to travel further despite lower initial speed.

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

Why say sniper? Any 5.56mm NATO round fired from an M16 is high velocity. Do you think only the Thai army have these?

There are some police in my town that carry those!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

Very quiet on this topic, perhaps it is not to the taste of many of the Thai Visa members as it places responsibility for the death of a soldier on another soldier. If that old American favourite "Friendly Fire" is responsible for this death then maybe it was responsible for the few other deaths of soldiers during the attacks on the protesters in Bangkok.

Quiet because the news is nothing new. It was pretty clear at the time it happened that it was "friendly fire".

< < Odd topic baiting comments have been removed. > >

Sent from my Phone.

Once again, the selective memory syndrome is in evidence. How about the M16's and AR-15's the men in black and self-proclaimed "Ronin" were proudly firing?

Once again, the selective memory syndrome is in evidence. How about the M16's and AR-15's the men in black and self-proclaimed "Ronin" were proudly firing?

No one has forgotten , the topic, is the court findings on how a soldier was killed , we all know, those of us that watched this disgusting episode in Thai history, perhaps the Prime Minister has the Shinawatra view on this also.

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

Why say sniper? Any 5.56mm NATO round fired from an M16 is high velocity. Do you think only the Thai army have these?

There are some police in my town that carry those!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

We must always remember in cases like these that we are not dealing with people interested in the truth.

That is unless Thaksin changes his policy, The last I heard he was still trying to intimidate Thailand in order to get Amnesty. Not much room for truth in that agenda.

I hope I'm allowed to chip in and "play the game".

The govt at the time announced the live fire zone 14 May I think? So, yes, this happened before the live fire zones were announced.

But, remember, the live fire zone was basically a clearance operation with shoot-on-sight orders. It was condemned by HRW & Amnesty International, vilified on CNN & BCC but, funnily enough, not many Rajprasong residents objected to it.

This 28 April operation was something completely different. The Queen's Regiment were called out from their Don Meuang barracks after Kwanchai Praiphana (the same one whose fire-bombing of the army's 1st Infantry barracks pre-empted the 10 April clearance operation) was leading a lot of protesters to break 6 prisoners out of Pathum Thani. These protesters were told to stop and turn back but instead there was a firefight with bullets coming from both sides.

Doesn't anyone else see that it's strange that 1 soldier died and 18 protesters were injured if the orders were "shoot-to-kill"? Are you suggesting the army decided to kill one of their own for public sympathy (honest question)? Does anyone think that armed protesters looking to commit a jail break are innocent?

Sorry, but this is a complete distortion of what took place that day.

I don't know where you read that 6 arrested Red Shirt protesters should have been freed from prison. What was announced was that a Red Shirt protest caravan was going to visit Pathum Thani Red Shirts at Dalat Thai to give them moral support for having blocked a large contingent of police officers on the way to Bangkok a few days before.

Can you please provide any article or documentation that could substantiate your claim?

I do not know where you got the idea that there was a supposed fire fight with bullets coming from both sides. I have been at the clash from the beginning until the military left the scene, on the side of the military. I have not seen any bullet coming from the Red Shirts, i have not seen a single soldier (or police officer) having been injured during the several rounds of clashes. I have seen though rubber bullets, buckshot, and rounds of automatic rifles seen fired at the protesters (and i have photographed this as well).

The killed soldier was killed about half an hour after the clashes stopped (by the rain), when Red Shirt protesters and security forces were in a distance of between 300 meters and 500 meters from each other. The soldier was killed by friendly fire in front of me, when security forces panicked and shot at the motorcycles.

Government propaganda at the time tried to link the death of the soldier with footage shot by Al Jazeera of a man within the Red Shirt protesters holding a hand gun. The footage was shot one or two hours before the death of the soldier, during the clashes, and it is not clear if the gun was even fired during the clashes.

The courts have given a fair judgement based on overwhelming evidence.

Once again, the selective memory syndrome is in evidence. How about the M16's and AR-15's the men in black and self-proclaimed "Ronin" were proudly firing?

No one has forgotten , the topic, is the court findings on how a soldier was killed , we all know, those of us that watched this disgusting episode in Thai history, perhaps the Prime Minister has the Shinawatra view on this also.

Well if she dosen't it will just be a bad phone connection.

A neat conclusion to make sure his family gets complete and full compensation.

I hope I'm allowed to chip in and "play the game".

The govt at the time announced the live fire zone 14 May I think? So, yes, this happened before the live fire zones were announced.

But, remember, the live fire zone was basically a clearance operation with shoot-on-sight orders. It was condemned by HRW & Amnesty International, vilified on CNN & BCC but, funnily enough, not many Rajprasong residents objected to it.

This 28 April operation was something completely different. The Queen's Regiment were called out from their Don Meuang barracks after Kwanchai Praiphana (the same one whose fire-bombing of the army's 1st Infantry barracks pre-empted the 10 April clearance operation) was leading a lot of protesters to break 6 prisoners out of Pathum Thani. These protesters were told to stop and turn back but instead there was a firefight with bullets coming from both sides.

Doesn't anyone else see that it's strange that 1 soldier died and 18 protesters were injured if the orders were "shoot-to-kill"? Are you suggesting the army decided to kill one of their own for public sympathy (honest question)? Does anyone think that armed protesters looking to commit a jail break are innocent?

Thank you for the information. I did not know what had happened on that day.

All though given the red shirt actions through out the whole affair it is no surprise.

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

One question that won't go away is who actually gained from 'innocent protestors' being shot during the red shirt siege that was being carried out in full international view....?

One question that won't go away is why was a Thai soldier firing High Velocity rounds at inocent protesters.

There was nothing innocent about the protesters...

A post in violation of this forum rule has been removed:

15) Not to use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

A nonsense insult post has been removed as well.

'Friendly fire' &lt;deleted&gt; who invented that dumb words ? Shooting bullets at people or animals you cannot call 'friendly'

Accept the courts decision and very unfortunate that should ever have happened.

However had it not been necessary to return fire against an armed mob who had already killed army personal it would never have happened.

RIP soldier, you died serving your country.

Lets hope the reds never take up arms again.

Let's hope that thinks eventually change so they don't have to.