Abhisit, Suthep Face More Murder Charges Over 2010 Strife

[webfact]

Abhisit, Suthep face more murder charges over 2010 strife
Opas Boonlom
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and his party MP Suthep Thaugsuban are likely to face additional murder and attempted murder charges in connection with deaths and injuries sustained by red-shirt protesters during the political unrest in April and May 2010.

On May 14, the Department of Special Investigation will summon the former PM Abhisit and his then-deputy Suthep, who was in charge of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Resolution (CRES), to acknowledge charges of authorising the "murder" of Kunakorn Srisuwan, then 14 years old, and the "attempted murder" of Samorn Maithong, a van driver who was wounded.

Both Abhisit and Suthep are likely to face similar scenarios as prosecutors have filed 18 cases with the court related to 91 deaths during the political chaos three years ago. A conviction for authorising killing of others is punishable by death.

Abhisit and Suthep were summoned on December 13 last year to hear charges of authorising the killing of Pan Kamkong, a taxi driver who was a member of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship. Both denied guilt.

Military bullet ruling

The Criminal Court on Sept 17 ruled that Pan was shot dead by a military bullet while security officers did crowd control work at the order of Abhisit near Ratchaprarop station on May 15, 2010.

The court said security officers sprayed bullets at a van driven by Samorn, which was parked outside a condominium.

A stray bullet hit Pan when he ran out of the condominium to see what was happening.

The Criminal Court on December 20 ruled that Kunakorn was shot dead by an M16 bullet as a result of security officials conducted a crowd-control operation at the order of the CRES.

Kunakorn's body was found near the body of Pan. Samorn was seriously hurt during the military operation.

DSI wrapped the investigation into the deaths of Pan, Kunakorn and injured Samorn into one case.

The Criminal Court has ruled that four people were killed by military bullets - Pan, Channarong Polsrila, Chatchai Chalao and Kunakorn. The court ruled that two more people were killed by an unknown group of people. Bunmee Rermsuk, who joined the red-shirt rally, was shot dead in Bon Kai, while Mana Are-charan, was shot dead while working at Dusit Zoo.

Recent rulings

Sept 17, 2012: Cabdriver Pan Kamkong was shot by a military bullet.

Nov 26: Taxi driver Channarong Polsrila was shot by a military bullet.

Dec 19: Chatchai Chalao was shot by a military bullet.

Jan 16, 2013: Bunmee Rermsuk shot dead by an unknown attacker.

Feb 21: Mana Are-charan, an employee, was shot dead at Dusit Zoo by an unknown assailant.

March 27: Thanuthat Assawasiri-mankong died from an illness, not from being shot by security officials.

April 30: Narongrit Sala, a soldier, was shot dead by a military bullet fired from officials carrying out their duty.


-- The Nation 2013-05-06

[rametindallas]

Mark and Suthep say, "Bring it"; "we won't trade freedom from prosecution for whitewash of Thaksin".

[tominbkk]

War is hell. If the reds had acted more like human and less like animals during the protests, this would not have happened.

[LuckyLew]

IMO Thaksins revenge

[NongKhaiKid]

IMO Thaksins revenge

So far about the only thing the DSI hasn't accused the Democrats of is causing all the deaths and injuries over Songkran

[Locationthailand]

"Murders' by persons unknown, no shooters found or charged, death resulting from civil unrest (read terrorism) and the executive being charged? What sort of Kangaroo Courts system/lawlessness is this? So bring it on and whilst at it, charge Thaksin, for paying the mercenaries and giving the order to shoot, and burn Bangkok over the deaths of the soldiers and other collateral damage. That is no different to any terrorist organisation. DSI should be emptied out of these peasant-politically-motivated management and real people put there. What a complete mockery of actual justice.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Locationthailand

[whybother]

Does the police chief, the police minister or the PM get charged with authorising "murder" when ever a policeman kills someone?

Sent from my Phone.

[ratcatcher]

Stand by folks, the apologists and Red Shirt fans will arrive soon.

[ballpoint]

These charges serve two purposes; Firstly they are an attempt at making the Democrats react more favourably towards the amnesty bill - which says more about Thaksin's cowardice and personal thinking that everyone will run or take his own weasel's option of going for amnesty while not ackowledging that any wrong was done. The second, and probably greater, benefit he'll get from it is the propaganda. The upcountry supporters will see this news in between their soap operas and it will confirm the red propaganda that is shoved down their throats, leading to more protests whenever the Democrats try to campaign in the north and northeast. Demonising the opposition through falsehoods and dirty tricks is an extremely effective way of controlling an uneducated populace.

[nicknostitz]

"Murders' by persons unknown, no shooters found or charged, death resulting from civil unrest (read terrorism) and the executive being charged? What sort of Kangaroo Courts system/lawlessness is this? So bring it on and whilst at it, charge Thaksin, for paying the mercenaries and giving the order to shoot, and burn Bangkok over the deaths of the soldiers and other collateral damage. That is no different to any terrorist organisation. DSI should be emptied out of these peasant-politically-motivated management and real people put there. What a complete mockery of actual justice.

Before leveling such accusations against the court system, i would suggest to go into the details of the individual cases for which the military was ruled having fired the bullets.

1) in the case of Pan Kumkong (and the of the 14 year old boy and the cabdriver - same incident) the prosecution has, in addition to witness and forensic evidence, presented to the court a video which has shown how the soldiers have shot at the van. There just was no other ruling possible

2) In the case of Channarong Ponsrila there were many eye witnesses, including foreign journalists and Thai journalists, forensic evidence, photos and videos of the incident from several angles, one which has shown bullets fired from the military side hitting a wall behind which protesters, and several journalists including me were taking cover. The argumentation of the military - that a shooter from Samliem Dindaeng has shot Channarong - would have made it necessary, from the position of Channarong and the angle of the entry wound, that the bullet made a sharp curve in midair, just before entering his stomach. Which is quite impossible.

3) Chatchai Chalao was shot a in front of at least a dozen journalists (including me) who accompanied a group of maybe 60 Red Shirts protesters walking towards a military line at Rama IV road. None of the protesters was armed and/or shot a firearm at the soldiers.It was more than clear that the only bullets fired were fired from the military lines 100 or so meters away.

4) in the case of Narongrit Sala, who was shot and died in front of me, the prosecutors have also presented a video which has shown a soldier firing bursts of automatic fire from his rifle at protesters (who were throwing stones and bottles at security forces on the street below) on the tollway an hour or so before the death of Narongrit (which injured one man who was shot in the head but survived. This video has quite clearly proven how careless and undisciplined the soldiers acted that day.

5) in the case of Thanuthat Assawasiri-mankong the court ruled that he died from an illness, but he was paralyzed after having been shot by soldiers. I have visited him in late 2010 or early 2011 in his apartment in Bon Gai. I have interviewed him and several witnesses of the incident.

In the two cases the courts ruled the cause of death as inconclusive, but did not explicitly absolve the military. It could simply not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the military fired the bullets that killed the people.

The court rulings may go against your and others believe system and political convictions, but this is about proof and evidence. Just because the cases were not highlighted much, and investigations were slowed down until after the change of government a new investigation commission was set up does not make the judgements political. What was 'political' was the pressure to finally bring the cases to court, after such a long time.

But they were judged according to the evidence, or in the inconclusive cases by lack of evidence. Which should also make it quite clear that the judgements were not political, as if that were to be true, all cases would have been ruled against the military. Which they weren't.

The only thing that is political here in this discussion is to attack how the courts have ruled in these cases.

Edited May 6, 2013 by nicknostitz

[JetsetBkk]

Stand by folks, the apologists and Red Shirt fans will arrive soon.

No chance. This is a "Yellow zone" only.

[rubl]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

[nicknostitz]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

Edited May 6, 2013 by nicknostitz

[rubl]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

The description in English language articles varies, but in Thai the court has only stated that in a few cases the evidence presented seems to give a (very) clear indication that a killing shot was fired by Army personel. In none of the inquest rulings have they clearly stated "the army did this".

I'm not questioning the court's ruling, I'm just questioning the DSI charging Abhisit/Suthep with murder.

Most of your reply I will ignore as it doesn't seem related to the post I wrote before. Please don't say "just because you and others do not like Red Shirts", because there is nothing in my post or posts before that I don't like ordinary red-shirts. I may dislike the ones who get hyped up by manipulists, but I dislike the manipulists much more.

Edited May 6, 2013 by rubl

[nicknostitz]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

The description in English language articles varies, but in Thai the court has only stated that in a few cases the evidence presented seems to give a (very) clear indication that a killing shot was fired by Army personel. In none of the inquest rulings have they clearly stated "the army did this".

I'm not questioning the court's ruling, I'm just questioning the DSI charging Abhisit/Suthep with murder.

Most of your reply I will ignore as it doesn't seem related to the post I wrote before. Please don't say "just because you and others do not like Red Shirts", because there is nothing in my post or posts before that I don't like ordinary red-shirts. I may dislike the ones who get hyped up by manipulists, but I dislike the manipulists much more.

Oh, down to semantics: soldiers shot protesters but that doesn't mean that the army shot protesters?

Eh... what...????

So, you question that Abhisit and Suthep are charged with murder.

Who then should be charged?

Or should nobody be charged and we should just let it drop?

Which, by the way, would put you into the same bed with Chalerm as this is the idea of his amnesty proposal - nobody is charged over anything, everything back to "normal", and continue in the old tradition of impunity.

Or - we just could let the court procedure go and find out what the trials bring to light. Being charged with murder does not necessarily mean a conviction, by the way.

Edited May 6, 2013 by nicknostitz

[rubl]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

The description in English language articles varies, but in Thai the court has only stated that in a few cases the evidence presented seems to give a (very) clear indication that a killing shot was fired by Army personel. In none of the inquest rulings have they clearly stated "the army did this".

I'm not questioning the court's ruling, I'm just questioning the DSI charging Abhisit/Suthep with murder.

Most of your reply I will ignore as it doesn't seem related to the post I wrote before. Please don't say "just because you and others do not like Red Shirts", because there is nothing in my post or posts before that I don't like ordinary red-shirts. I may dislike the ones who get hyped up by manipulists, but I dislike the manipulists much more.

Oh, down to semantics: soldiers shot protesters but that doesn't mean that the army shot protesters?

Eh... what...????

So, you question that Abhisit and Suthep are charged with murder.

Who then should be charged?

Or should nobody be charged and we should just let it drop?

Which, by the way, would put you into the same bed with Chalerm as this is the idea of his amnesty proposal - nobody is charged over anything, everything back to "normal", and continue in the old tradition of impunity.

Or - we just could let the court procedure go and find out what the trials bring to light. Being charged with murder does not necessarily mean a conviction, by the way.

Semantics, most likely army personel (i.e. soldiers) fired the killing shots. The cases first handled were selected as being easy, so the 'most likely' comes as no surprise with or without your accounts which you may or may not have provided and which may or may not have been included in the DSI reports.

The question 'who if not Abhisit' seems a bit strange, but surely those with 24/7 hate speeches and a bit of grenade lobbing on the side may be good candidates. Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders come to mind. I'm all in favour for digging into the total March to May 2010 riots, but for now lean to the side of the government which was continuously provoked into actions till deaths were unavoidable. Don't hold your breath on this, it may take a few decades, no one seems willing to open up a can of worms. Reminds me of the Stasi archives.

BTW yes I'm aware that a court accepting a charge will first look at procedure and only when correct look at contents and try to relate charges to specific laws or if done by others already check it once more before really getting into details.

[Pi Sek]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

The description in English language articles varies, but in Thai the court has only stated that in a few cases the evidence presented seems to give a (very) clear indication that a killing shot was fired by Army personel. In none of the inquest rulings have they clearly stated "the army did this".

I'm not questioning the court's ruling, I'm just questioning the DSI charging Abhisit/Suthep with murder.

Most of your reply I will ignore as it doesn't seem related to the post I wrote before. Please don't say "just because you and others do not like Red Shirts", because there is nothing in my post or posts before that I don't like ordinary red-shirts. I may dislike the ones who get hyped up by manipulists, but I dislike the manipulists much more.

Oh, down to semantics: soldiers shot protesters but that doesn't mean that the army shot protesters?

Eh... what...????

So, you question that Abhisit and Suthep are charged with murder.

Who then should be charged?

Or should nobody be charged and we should just let it drop?

Which, by the way, would put you into the same bed with Chalerm as this is the idea of his amnesty proposal - nobody is charged over anything, everything back to "normal", and continue in the old tradition of impunity.

Or - we just could let the court procedure go and find out what the trials bring to light. Being charged with murder does not necessarily mean a conviction, by the way.

Much as I disagree with Nick's stance on most things, the logic in this post regarding whether or not Abhisit and Suthep should be charged is undeniable. The Chalerm idea of "let's just forget about it" isn't going to fix anything.

There should be no reason that neither Abhisit nor Suthep should be charged with murder, especially given their public stance that they were always willing to answer for their actions during 2010. If the courts are neutral - and I have no reason to think they won't be - then a fair judgement can be given and the country can move on to the next accused (if not guilty) or the next issue (if guilty). Personally I think they have nothing to be worried about, their rules of engagement were clearly stated prior to any operations and if any of the soldiers were over-zealous on the triggers it was probably caused by panic. The least that all of the higher echelons of the CRES have is "plausible deniability", which is more than the UDD leaders can offer.

So, the question remains, who else should be charged (argument goes for both sides)? Of course, there should be plenty of others. Some have been charged, some haven't, and some have been charged without good reason - and that is where both the partisan nature of the Thai political divide and the lack of impartiality of the DSI under both Democrat- and Peua Thai-led governments have stifled and continue to stifle hopes for reconciliation.

[Thait Spot]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

Not political?

How would you explain Tarit's role in all this as a member of the same committee that made the decision to deploy troops as those charged?

Your having a laugh!!!!

[tominbkk]

The reds created a State of Emergency with their actions, committing countless vile acts against innocent civilians, including raiding and taking over a hospital for a short period. The fact that Abhisit waited so long to fumigate these pests out of the downtown area is what always baffled me, and many other ordinary Thai citizens.

Abhisit and his government should be commended for finally ending the illegal occupation of these terrorists. My signature quote is but one 'incendiary' utterage of one of the scumbags that infested the avenue for far too long.

Edited May 6, 2013 by tominbkk

[nicknostitz]

Semantics, most likely army personel (i.e. soldiers) fired the killing shots. The cases first handled were selected as being easy, so the 'most likely' comes as no surprise with or without your accounts which you may or may not have provided and which may or may not have been included in the DSI reports.

The question 'who if not Abhisit' seems a bit strange, but surely those with 24/7 hate speeches and a bit of grenade lobbing on the side may be good candidates. Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders come to mind. I'm all in favour for digging into the total March to May 2010 riots, but for now lean to the side of the government which was continuously provoked into actions till deaths were unavoidable. Don't hold your breath on this, it may take a few decades, no one seems willing to open up a can of worms. Reminds me of the Stasi archives.

BTW yes I'm aware that a court accepting a charge will first look at procedure and only when correct look at contents and try to relate charges to specific laws or if done by others already check it once more before really getting into details.

It has been on the record that in two of these cases i have testified at court. So, yes, my accounts and pictures were included.

What would give you the idea that the justice system does not attempt to dig "into the total..."? There are many separate trials presently going on - some dealing with the dead and injured protesters, others with alleged "men in black", some with Red Shirt leaders, and since very recently - with Abhisit and Suthep.

There is no trial though against the military, so far. That is the only real and somewhat severe lopsided part of the justice system i can detect.

If i understand you right you propose to charge the Red Shirt leaders over the death of the protesters?

How would you propose to do that?

By proving that these dead protesters were forced by the UDD leadership to get themselves killed by the soldiers who shot them?

Good luck with that...

But until then, we have so far 5 cases in which unarmed protesters were ruled to have been killed by soldiers, who, according to chain of command, were ordered to be there by the then Democrat led government, whose Prime Minister was Abhisit, and whose deputy responsible for security was Suthep. And therefore, a trial will have to find out if their orders led to the death of these protesters, and their level of culpability or if they are innocent.

Unless there is a blanket amnesty (which, by the way, i personally would find at this stage disastrous), such as proposed by Chalerm and other of the purely parliamentary wing of the PT, all these trials are a logical consequence of what took place in 2010.

[nicknostitz]

The reds created a State of Emergency with their actions, committing countless vile acts against innocent civilians, including raiding and taking over a hospital for a short period. The fact that Abhisit waited so long to fumigate these pests out of the downtown area is what always baffled me, and many other ordinary Thai citizens.

Abhisit and his government should be commended for finally ending the illegal occupation of these terrorists. My signature quote is but one 'incendiary' utterage of one of the scumbags that infested the avenue for far too long.

...and these cases are presently on trial.

That doesn't mean though that misconduct of the security forces and responsible government officials should not be investigated, as they are also bound by laws.

[rubl]

Semantics, most likely army personel (i.e. soldiers) fired the killing shots. The cases first handled were selected as being easy, so the 'most likely' comes as no surprise with or without your accounts which you may or may not have provided and which may or may not have been included in the DSI reports.

The question 'who if not Abhisit' seems a bit strange, but surely those with 24/7 hate speeches and a bit of grenade lobbing on the side may be good candidates. Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders come to mind. I'm all in favour for digging into the total March to May 2010 riots, but for now lean to the side of the government which was continuously provoked into actions till deaths were unavoidable. Don't hold your breath on this, it may take a few decades, no one seems willing to open up a can of worms. Reminds me of the Stasi archives.

BTW yes I'm aware that a court accepting a charge will first look at procedure and only when correct look at contents and try to relate charges to specific laws or if done by others already check it once more before really getting into details.

It has been on the record that in two of these cases i have testified at court. So, yes, my accounts and pictures were included.

What would give you the idea that the justice system does not attempt to dig "into the total..."? There are many separate trials presently going on - some dealing with the dead and injured protesters, others with alleged "men in black", some with Red Shirt leaders, and since very recently - with Abhisit and Suthep.

There is no trial though against the military, so far. That is the only real and somewhat severe lopsided part of the justice system i can detect.

If i understand you right you propose to charge the Red Shirt leaders over the death of the protesters?

How would you propose to do that?

By proving that these dead protesters were forced by the UDD leadership to get themselves killed by the soldiers who shot them?

Good luck with that...

But until then, we have so far 5 cases in which unarmed protesters were ruled to have been killed by soldiers, who, according to chain of command, were ordered to be there by the then Democrat led government, whose Prime Minister was Abhisit, and whose deputy responsible for security was Suthep. And therefore, a trial will have to find out if their orders led to the death of these protesters, and their level of culpability or if they are innocent.

Unless there is a blanket amnesty (which, by the way, i personally would find at this stage disastrous), such as proposed by Chalerm and other of the purely parliamentary wing of the PT, all these trials are a logical consequence of what took place in 2010.

We can argue here for another few days, but will not agree. What you say may seem reasonable or wrong, the same for what I say.

So, as civilized people let's agree to disagree and let's look again in six months time, one years time and five years from now. May be by then we can have more info and maybe even agree on a few things.

[nicknostitz]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

Not political?

How would you explain Tarit's role in all this as a member of the same committee that made the decision to deploy troops as those charged?

Your having a laugh!!!!

It is quite funny how the same people that applauded Tarit under the Abhisit government are now attacking Tarit under the PT government. Are you surprised that he is just doing what he has always done?

While there were quite a few most likely politically motivated or inspired decisions by Tarit, such as stalling the cases against the military under the Abhisit government, and now following backroom deals of only charging Abhisit and Suthep with murder, and letting the responsible solders off, the cases themselves are based on evidence - forensic-, witness-, video- and photo-, and are judged by the courts based on the presented evidence and *not* on politics.

If the charges against Abhisit and Suthep would be purely politically motivated, then these two will be declared innocent by the courts, and you shouldn't worry about them or the charges.

[rubl]

... ...

i understand you right you propose to charge the Red Shirt leaders over the death of the protesters?

How would you propose to do that?

By proving that these dead protesters were forced by the UDD leadership to get themselves killed by the soldiers who shot them?

Good luck with that...

... ...

One last comment if I may.

If k. Abhisit/Suthep can be charged because they called in the army to remove armed and unarmed protesters, I think it logical to charge UDD leaders who called in 100,000 protesters and a renegade general (who said about April 10th 'no one saw me'), a grenade lobbing group and a few armed elements who were really good at emerging in the dark (you bumped into them I remember).

Anyway, I'll leave this topic as spending this holiday with family and friends seems a bit more important

[nicknostitz]

Much as I disagree with Nick's stance on most things, the logic in this post regarding whether or not Abhisit and Suthep should be charged is undeniable. The Chalerm idea of "let's just forget about it" isn't going to fix anything.

There should be no reason that neither Abhisit nor Suthep should be charged with murder, especially given their public stance that they were always willing to answer for their actions during 2010. If the courts are neutral - and I have no reason to think they won't be - then a fair judgement can be given and the country can move on to the next accused (if not guilty) or the next issue (if guilty). Personally I think they have nothing to be worried about, their rules of engagement were clearly stated prior to any operations and if any of the soldiers were over-zealous on the triggers it was probably caused by panic. The least that all of the higher echelons of the CRES have is "plausible deniability", which is more than the UDD leaders can offer.

So, the question remains, who else should be charged (argument goes for both sides)? Of course, there should be plenty of others. Some have been charged, some haven't, and some have been charged without good reason - and that is where both the partisan nature of the Thai political divide and the lack of impartiality of the DSI under both Democrat- and Peua Thai-led governments have stifled and continue to stifle hopes for reconciliation.

There is also the question of evidence. In court things have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt based on existing laws. Just the believe that one side did something will not lead to a conviction. In many cases there simply is not enough evidence available - given the chaos of many of the incidents. This counts for both sides, naturally.

I personally believe it will be very hard to prove Abhisit's and Suthep's guilt, especially when excluding the military from charges. I cannot see either that terrorism charges against Red Shirt leaders can hold up in court, as the courts will have to prove that there is a direct link between armed militants and the UDD leadership.

Several trials that would have been conductive for terrorism charges have already collapsed, such as the Central World burning trials. I have closely followed the Saichon and Pinit case - and what was presented in court against the two was not just only thin, it was absolutely nothing (such as Saichon having been arrested based on a photo that has shown a completely different person, who held a fire extinguisher, and not even an incendiary device), begging to question why those two spent almost three years in prison, and bail requests were consistently refused.

[nicknostitz]

... ...

i understand you right you propose to charge the Red Shirt leaders over the death of the protesters?

How would you propose to do that?

By proving that these dead protesters were forced by the UDD leadership to get themselves killed by the soldiers who shot them?

Good luck with that...

... ...

One last comment if I may.

If k. Abhisit/Suthep can be charged because they called in the army to remove armed and unarmed protesters, I think it logical to charge UDD leaders who called in 100,000 protesters and a renegade general (who said about April 10th 'no one saw me'), a grenade lobbing group and a few armed elements who were really good at emerging in the dark (you bumped into them I remember).

Anyway, I'll leave this topic as spending this holiday with family and friends seems a bit more important

Well, it may be news to you - but the UDD leaders have been charged with exactly that since not long after Rajaprasong, and the trial has been going on since months already.

[brd199]

begging to question why those two spent almost three years in prison, and bail requests were consistently refused.

Because they weren't elite red shirt leaders

[Baerboxer]

"Murders' by persons unknown, no shooters found or charged, death resulting from civil unrest (read terrorism) and the executive being charged? What sort of Kangaroo Courts system/lawlessness is this? So bring it on and whilst at it, charge Thaksin, for paying the mercenaries and giving the order to shoot, and burn Bangkok over the deaths of the soldiers and other collateral damage. That is no different to any terrorist organisation. DSI should be emptied out of these peasant-politically-motivated management and real people put there. What a complete mockery of actual justice.

Before leveling such accusations against the court system, i would suggest to go into the details of the individual cases for which the military was ruled having fired the bullets.

1) in the case of Pan Kumkong (and the of the 14 year old boy and the cabdriver - same incident) the prosecution has, in addition to witness and forensic evidence, presented to the court a video which has shown how the soldiers have shot at the van. There just was no other ruling possible

2) In the case of Channarong Ponsrila there were many eye witnesses, including foreign journalists and Thai journalists, forensic evidence, photos and videos of the incident from several angles, one which has shown bullets fired from the military side hitting a wall behind which protesters, and several journalists including me were taking cover. The argumentation of the military - that a shooter from Samliem Dindaeng has shot Channarong - would have made it necessary, from the position of Channarong and the angle of the entry wound, that the bullet made a sharp curve in midair, just before entering his stomach. Which is quite impossible.

3) Chatchai Chalao was shot a in front of at least a dozen journalists (including me) who accompanied a group of maybe 60 Red Shirts protesters walking towards a military line at Rama IV road. None of the protesters was armed and/or shot a firearm at the soldiers.It was more than clear that the only bullets fired were fired from the military lines 100 or so meters away.

4) in the case of Narongrit Sala, who was shot and died in front of me, the prosecutors have also presented a video which has shown a soldier firing bursts of automatic fire from his rifle at protesters (who were throwing stones and bottles at security forces on the street below) on the tollway an hour or so before the death of Narongrit (which injured one man who was shot in the head but survived. This video has quite clearly proven how careless and undisciplined the soldiers acted that day.

5) in the case of Thanuthat Assawasiri-mankong the court ruled that he died from an illness, but he was paralyzed after having been shot by soldiers. I have visited him in late 2010 or early 2011 in his apartment in Bon Gai. I have interviewed him and several witnesses of the incident.

In the two cases the courts ruled the cause of death as inconclusive, but did not explicitly absolve the military. It could simply not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the military fired the bullets that killed the people.

The court rulings may go against your and others believe system and political convictions, but this is about proof and evidence. Just because the cases were not highlighted much, and investigations were slowed down until after the change of government a new investigation commission was set up does not make the judgements political. What was 'political' was the pressure to finally bring the cases to court, after such a long time.

But they were judged according to the evidence, or in the inconclusive cases by lack of evidence. Which should also make it quite clear that the judgements were not political, as if that were to be true, all cases would have been ruled against the military. Which they weren't.

The only thing that is political here in this discussion is to attack how the courts have ruled in these cases.

Agree with you, in that the courts ruled on the evidence presented. However, how many times have the leaders of the government in another country been charged with murder based on similar scenarios? The DSI is completely poitically motivated and should be purged urgently.

If you take part in riots and acts of terrorism you do put yourself at serious risk. If you throw stones, petrol bombs, use sling shots etc you increase the risk of the situation escalating. There have been many instances of people being killed when this happens - US students prostesting against Vietnam war, Irish republican supporters on Bloody Sunday, many Palestinians in clashes with the IDF. The countries I've used as examples would all claim to be supporters of democracy, freedom and justice. Yet not one former or in office PM, President, or senior Minister has been charged with murder.

Maybe that's because they have a sworn duty to uphold the law and protect their people from attacks from criminals, terrorists, and those trying to pervert the constitution to empower themselves.

The DSI makes Thailand a laughing stock with these clearly politically motivated charges. It might have more credibility if similar charges were brought against those who financed and directed the rioters, and clearly did break laws.

[Thait Spot]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

Not political?

How would you explain Tarit's role in all this as a member of the same committee that made the decision to deploy troops as those charged?

Your having a laugh!!!!

It is quite funny how the same people that applauded Tarit under the Abhisit government are now attacking Tarit under the PT government. Are you surprised that he is just doing what he has always done?

While there were quite a few most likely politically motivated or inspired decisions by Tarit, such as stalling the cases against the military under the Abhisit government, and now following backroom deals of only charging Abhisit and Suthep with murder, and letting the responsible solders off, the cases themselves are based on evidence - forensic-, witness-, video- and photo-, and are judged by the courts based on the presented evidence and *not* on politics.

If the charges against Abhisit and Suthep would be purely politically motivated, then these two will be declared innocent by the courts, and you shouldn't worry about them or the charges.

I've never applauded Tarit in my life.

And if authorising live fire in self defence is murder then I'm a monkey's uncle.

I've yet to see any evidence that proves beyond doubt that the army killed anyone. The evidence points that way for sure but is purely circumstantial.

Tarit has a massive conflict of interest here too.

[Baerboxer]

As the DSI seems to do the charging, speaking against it is not speaking against the court. The court may or may not accept the charges, and even when accepting them may still rule to drop the charges or really get into it.

With the courts at the moment only concluding inquests on what the DSI called the easy cases, the results should not be surprising. The 'clean up' action got less proper with the almost daily attacks with grenades and the 'unknowns' appearing by nightfall.

The only political part here is the translation of 'military bullet' into 'charge Abhisit/Suthep for murder'.

The courts have ruled these inquests in who fired the bullets that killed those people. The cases are now back at the DSI, which will investigate further, and then hand them to the prosecution which will decide (together with the DSI) if additional charges will be made. What here may be somewhat political is that only the two responsible people in government - Suthep and Abhisit - are charged - while the responsible soldiers are allowed to slip through a loophole in the law and are not charged.

Culpability, etc, are then decided by the courts. I would suggest to wait and see what the courts rule in those cases before judging them.

Right now though these rulings in the inquests now are heavily attacked by some people here, under complete disregard of the evidence that was presented at court, and on which those rulings were based upon.

But the courts have to rule over the cases of the deaths of these people. Or are you suggesting here that the courts should not get involved in these cases, or completely ignore evidence, just because you and others do not like Red Shirts?

As already 5 cases were ruled against the military, what do you suggest to do? Don't file additional charges against the people who at the time issued orders for the soldiers to crack down on the Red Shirts because you agree politically with them and don't like the Red Shirts?

Do you have any proof that those cases were misjudged and the soldiers did not fire the bullets that killed these people - a fact that over the past three years many posters on Thaivisa have disputed?

The judgements stand, regardless of some of you people are left with egg in your faces given your relentless defense of the indefensible, and constant attacks and attempts of character assassination against anyone who dared to differ with your version of the events.

The description in English language articles varies, but in Thai the court has only stated that in a few cases the evidence presented seems to give a (very) clear indication that a killing shot was fired by Army personel. In none of the inquest rulings have they clearly stated "the army did this".

I'm not questioning the court's ruling, I'm just questioning the DSI charging Abhisit/Suthep with murder.

Most of your reply I will ignore as it doesn't seem related to the post I wrote before. Please don't say "just because you and others do not like Red Shirts", because there is nothing in my post or posts before that I don't like ordinary red-shirts. I may dislike the ones who get hyped up by manipulists, but I dislike the manipulists much more.

Oh, down to semantics: soldiers shot protesters but that doesn't mean that the army shot protesters?

Eh... what...????

So, you question that Abhisit and Suthep are charged with murder.

Who then should be charged?

Or should nobody be charged and we should just let it drop?

Which, by the way, would put you into the same bed with Chalerm as this is the idea of his amnesty proposal - nobody is charged over anything, everything back to "normal", and continue in the old tradition of impunity.

Or - we just could let the court procedure go and find out what the trials bring to light. Being charged with murder does not necessarily mean a conviction, by the way.

Quite frankly, based on reading more of your posts, you need to grow up. It's awful that anybody gets killed like this. But, those breaking the law i.e the red shirts are just as guilty as any slodier who looses dicipline and fires indesrimanantly. However, the soldiers have a right to protect themselves and the rioting criminals were given warnings of the consequences of their actions.

Wasn't the DSI leader part of the emergency management team? Don't see any charges against him. Perhaps he's above the law, like his no found political friends.

The PM's speech in Mongolia is an attempt to re-write history and present a one sided view. These DSI actions add to the message - disagree with us at your peril. Intimadation, threat, supression, via rent a thugs or quasi so called departments of justice are the methods of many former political parties - communist and facist. The one thing they share is a thirst for power at any cost, dictatorial power and the ability to write history as they see it.

Unbiased journalists are few and far between and again we can see that here. I don't support any colour shirts (apart from sports) but I do comment about blatant misuse of power in the name of justice, and clear political propoganda.