Don't Vote For Thai Amnesty Bill, Fabio Polenghi's Sister Pleads

[Noistar]

I don't know why they bother with Inquests. There's seemingly 10 or 20 people posting here who know more about what happened than the eyewitnesses and the Judge and presumably have thoroughly researched each and every situation via the learned court of The Nation "newspaper".

How supposedly educated westerners could make such earnest apologies for a military that was out of control and actively encouraged through the supplied ROE and built in amnesty of the Emergency Decree to shoot civilians, with a known past history of outrages against their fellow citizens is beyond me. Really, you're welcome to it.

You seem to have missed my comment immediately before yours. I partly agreed with you but pointed out some assumptions that you made which don't seem to be entirely accurate. I also notice you assume that all the information has come from The Nation although some have mentioned other sources however there does seem to be a lack of links but then it's not always easy to find old stories. There does seem to be some evidence that points to others than the military in the area at the time although I've not seen this for myself.

I notice that although the shots were fired apparently by the military there has been no push to hold the military responsible by the authorities. This seems to be more of a get Abhisit and Suthep operation to me.

I wish I could see an English translation of the ROIs.

I wish could see a comprehensive list of weapons held by the aggressive Red Shirt 'participants'. Perhaps one of those was army issue. Just off to check 'The Nation' for a categoric confirmation.

[amore]

I don't know why they bother with Inquests. There's seemingly 10 or 20 people posting here who know more about what happened than the eyewitnesses and the Judge and presumably have thoroughly researched each and every situation via the learned court of The Nation "newspaper".

How supposedly educated westerners could make such earnest apologies for a military that was out of control and actively encouraged through the supplied ROE and built in amnesty of the Emergency Decree to shoot civilians, with a known past history of outrages against their fellow citizens is beyond me. Really, you're welcome to it.

You seem to have missed my comment immediately before yours. I partly agreed with you but pointed out some assumptions that you made which don't seem to be entirely accurate. I also notice you assume that all the information has come from The Nation although some have mentioned other sources however there does seem to be a lack of links but then it's not always easy to find old stories. There does seem to be some evidence that points to others than the military in the area at the time although I've not seen this for myself.

I notice that although the shots were fired apparently by the military there has been no push to hold the military responsible by the authorities. This seems to be more of a get Abhisit and Suthep operation to me.

I wish I could see an English translation of the ROIs.

If you mean ROE's, you can. Whether you take them as the truth or not is your choice. An English translation version is printed on Robert Amsterdams "Blog"

http://robertamsterdam.com/thailand/2012/12/13/letter-to-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-icc-concerning-abhisits-criminal-liability/

If you look at Appendix 2 you will find images of the two pages of the original ROE and the Six pages of the revised ROE. If you can read Thai you can match the English translation and the original Thai version together.

Of course, some on here would immediately decry the legitimacy because of the source with no real thought to the content. He is regularly decried on here. The Law Society of Upper Canada take him seriously though particularly with the way he has been treated in Thailand

As a result of attempting to carry out his professional obligations, lawyer Robert Amsterdam has been subjected to intimidation and interference by members of the Democrat Party in Thailand. In particular, he has had legal action threatened against him in his capacity as legal counsel to former Prime Minister of Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra. Despite the outcome of the July 2011 general election in Thailand, which resulted in Her Excellency Yingluck Shinawatra becoming Prime Minister, there are still concerns for the personal safety of Mr. Amsterdam.

Personally speaking, I don't think that he would have sent that letter to the Prosecutor of the ICC (link above) without being very sure about his evidence. I would say that the confidence that the DSI has in pressing charges against Suthep and Abhisit despite them, in theory, being protected by the "amnesty clause" of the Emergency Decree stems from the knowledge/possession of this evidence. Time will tell.

Of course it's far easier to pretend that the charges are just a way to pressure Abhisit to accept the so called "Thaksin Whitewash" Bill, although this is undermined extensively by the fact that the "whitewash bill" is not the one supported by the Government, but let's ignore that unfortunate fact, shall we?

[chuang]

It seems that many farangs like to poke their noses into thai politics which have nothing to do with them...

strange it seems that why are the western countries still pouring monies and aids into Afghanistan and Iraq and other countries where their news men and aid workers are being killed....

chuang.

Why do Thai politics have nothing to do with us?

Well for the simple reason if one is not a Thai citizen one cannot vote for what one wants....

[thaicbr]

It seems that many farangs like to poke their noses into thai politics which have nothing to do with them...

strange it seems that why are the western countries still pouring monies and aids into Afghanistan and Iraq and other countries where their news men and aid workers are being killed....

chuang.

Why do Thai politics have nothing to do with us?

Well for the simple reason if one is not a Thai citizen one cannot vote for what one wants....

True.. But as a working expat one would like to look at and discuss where ones tax money is going. And talk to and discuss it with ones Thai friends.

Is one wrong to think like this. One does not think so

[seajae]

the only way they will ever get to the bottom of this is to bring in an independant group fom overseas(US, UK or aussie) to do the required research/ballistics etc and then we would know the truth but the ptp, redshirts and thaksin would not allow it because they do not want the truth to be found out, innuendo suits them much better.

[Thai at Heart]

the only way they will ever get to the bottom of this is to bring in an independant group fom overseas(US, UK or aussie) to do the required research/ballistics etc and then we would know the truth but the ptp, redshirts and thaksin would not allow it because they do not want the truth to be found out, innuendo suits them much better.

Let pornthip loose on it. She would probably find Thaksin DNA and fingerprint and signature on the bullet.

[thaicbr]

I don't know why they bother with Inquests. There's seemingly 10 or 20 people posting here who know more about what happened than the eyewitnesses and the Judge and presumably have thoroughly researched each and every situation via the learned court of The Nation "newspaper".

How supposedly educated westerners could make such earnest apologies for a military that was out of control and actively encouraged through the supplied ROE and built in amnesty of the Emergency Decree to shoot civilians, with a known past history of outrages against their fellow citizens is beyond me. Really, you're welcome to it.

You seem to have missed my comment immediately before yours. I partly agreed with you but pointed out some assumptions that you made which don't seem to be entirely accurate. I also notice you assume that all the information has come from The Nation although some have mentioned other sources however there does seem to be a lack of links but then it's not always easy to find old stories. There does seem to be some evidence that points to others than the military in the area at the time although I've not seen this for myself.

I notice that although the shots were fired apparently by the military there has been no push to hold the military responsible by the authorities. This seems to be more of a get Abhisit and Suthep operation to me.

I wish I could see an English translation of the ROIs.

If you mean ROE's, you can. Whether you take them as the truth or not is your choice. An English translation version is printed on Robert Amsterdams "Blog"

http://robertamsterdam.com/thailand/2012/12/13/letter-to-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-icc-concerning-abhisits-criminal-liability/

If you look at Appendix 2 you will find images of the two pages of the original ROE and the Six pages of the revised ROE. If you can read Thai you can match the English translation and the original Thai version together.

Of course, some on here would immediately decry the legitimacy because of the source with no real thought to the content. He is regularly decried on here. The Law Society of Upper Canada take him seriously though particularly with the way he has been treated in Thailand

>As a result of attempting to carry out his professional obligations, lawyer Robert Amsterdam has been subjected to intimidation and interference by members of the Democrat Party in Thailand. In particular, he has had legal action threatened against him in his capacity as legal counsel to former Prime Minister of Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra. Despite the outcome of the July 2011 general election in Thailand, which resulted in Her Excellency Yingluck Shinawatra becoming Prime Minister, there are still concerns for the personal safety of Mr. Amsterdam.

Personally speaking, I don't think that he would have sent that letter to the Prosecutor of the ICC (link above) without being very sure about his evidence. I would say that the confidence that the DSI has in pressing charges against Suthep and Abhisit despite them, in theory, being protected by the "amnesty clause" of the Emergency Decree stems from the knowledge/possession of this evidence. Time will tell.

Of course it's far easier to pretend that the charges are just a way to pressure Abhisit to accept the so called "Thaksin Whitewash" Bill, although this is undermined extensively by the fact that the "whitewash bill" is not the one supported by the Government, but let's ignore that unfortunate fact, shall we?

Which white wash bill? Chalerms or the other one... did you miss the part about if they are passed they could be merged at a later date.

There are many such bills waiting in the wings. Personally the charges against Abhisit and Suthep would have had merit IF they had been negligence in supervising the emergency decree etc.. but Murder.. it just does not stack up.. as for pressuring Abhisit sure that's what all the posturing is about.

As for Amsterdam. He is a paid lawyer with no powers in Thailand. He is for the international stage that's all. What is surprising is the fact he is still around.. a time ago he said he is no longer representing Thaksin.. who is he representing now?

[thaicbr]

the only way they will ever get to the bottom of this is to bring in an independant group fom overseas(US, UK or aussie) to do the required research/ballistics etc and then we would know the truth but the ptp, redshirts and thaksin would not allow it because they do not want the truth to be found out, innuendo suits them much better.

Let pornthip loose on it. She would probably find Thaksin DNA and fingerprint and signature on the bullet.

Well maybe on Seh Daeng's bullet.. Was Thaksins plane seen in Chiang Rai that week.

[seajae]

Plus, this man KNEW he was taking a life threatening risk for the pictures. I may pity his mom or family, but not him. He jumped into the fire on his own free will, knowing damn well....

So it is ok for the regime under Abisith to target and murder journos because it's their risk . . . and because Bangkok is like Iraq and Afghanistan.

That cursed Thaksin has a lot to answer for

he knowingly went into a fire zone with no hi-vis jacket/clothing indicating he was a reporter, the helmet marking would not have been readable from a distance, no bullet proof vest and was dressed like all the others there, he chose to do this job just as I chose to join the army and have people shoot at me. The only one responsible is the man in question for putting himself in that position, it is called taking responsibility for your own actions/decisions, or when you lie down on a road do you expect cars to simply drive around you, pull your head out of the sand.

[amore]

If you mean ROE's, you can. Whether you take them as the truth or not is your choice. An English translation version is printed on Robert Amsterdams "Blog"

http://robertamsterdam.com/thailand/2012/12/13/letter-to-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-icc-concerning-abhisits-criminal-liability/

If you look at Appendix 2 you will find images of the two pages of the original ROE and the Six pages of the revised ROE. If you can read Thai you can match the English translation and the original Thai version together.

Of course, some on here would immediately decry the legitimacy because of the source with no real thought to the content. He is regularly decried on here. The Law Society of Upper Canada take him seriously though particularly with the way he has been treated in Thailand

>As a result of attempting to carry out his professional obligations, lawyer Robert Amsterdam has been subjected to intimidation and interference by members of the Democrat Party in Thailand. In particular, he has had legal action threatened against him in his capacity as legal counsel to former Prime Minister of Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra. Despite the outcome of the July 2011 general election in Thailand, which resulted in Her Excellency Yingluck Shinawatra becoming Prime Minister, there are still concerns for the personal safety of Mr. Amsterdam.[/size]

Personally speaking, I don't think that he would have sent that letter to the Prosecutor of the ICC (link above) without being very sure about his evidence. I would say that the confidence that the DSI has in pressing charges against Suthep and Abhisit despite them, in theory, being protected by the "amnesty clause" of the Emergency Decree stems from the knowledge/possession of this evidence. Time will tell.

Of course it's far easier to pretend that the charges are just a way to pressure Abhisit to accept the so called "Thaksin Whitewash" Bill, although this is undermined extensively by the fact that the "whitewash bill" is not the one supported by the Government, but let's ignore that unfortunate fact, shall we?

Which white wash bill? Chalerms or the other one... did you miss the part about if they are passed they could be merged at a later date.

There are many such bills waiting in the wings. Personally the charges against Abhisit and Suthep would have had merit IF they had been negligence in supervising the emergency decree etc.. but Murder.. it just does not stack up.. as for pressuring Abhisit sure that's what all the posturing is about.

As for Amsterdam. He is a paid lawyer with no powers in Thailand. He is for the international stage that's all. What is surprising is the fact he is still around.. a time ago he said he is no longer representing Thaksin.. who is he representing now?

Yes I must have missed that - have you got a link to the nation article?

[Sing_Sling]

I thought the cause of the deaths was the verbal intentions of the Red Shirts, and the supposed implementation of their threats.

No Red Shirts, no hatred stirring, no conflict. But as usual, it's the victims (innocent non-reds) who come off worse.

Grow up, accept responsibility. Fat chance.

Indeed, the Red Shirts - nay, Thaksin himself, fired the bullets at the protesters . . .

Grow up, accept responsibility. fat chance, too many apologists

[thaicbr]

If you mean ROE's, you can. Whether you take them as the truth or not is your choice. An English translation version is printed on Robert Amsterdams "Blog"

http://robertamsterdam.com/thailand/2012/12/13/letter-to-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-icc-concerning-abhisits-criminal-liability/

If you look at Appendix 2 you will find images of the two pages of the original ROE and the Six pages of the revised ROE. If you can read Thai you can match the English translation and the original Thai version together.

Of course, some on here would immediately decry the legitimacy because of the source with no real thought to the content. He is regularly decried on here. The Law Society of Upper Canada take him seriously though particularly with the way he has been treated in Thailand

>As a result of attempting to carry out his professional obligations, lawyer Robert Amsterdam has been subjected to intimidation and interference by members of the Democrat Party in Thailand. In particular, he has had legal action threatened against him in his capacity as legal counsel to former Prime Minister of Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra. Despite the outcome of the July 2011 general election in Thailand, which resulted in Her Excellency Yingluck Shinawatra becoming Prime Minister, there are still concerns for the personal safety of Mr. Amsterdam.[/size]

Personally speaking, I don't think that he would have sent that letter to the Prosecutor of the ICC (link above) without being very sure about his evidence. I would say that the confidence that the DSI has in pressing charges against Suthep and Abhisit despite them, in theory, being protected by the "amnesty clause" of the Emergency Decree stems from the knowledge/possession of this evidence. Time will tell.

Of course it's far easier to pretend that the charges are just a way to pressure Abhisit to accept the so called "Thaksin Whitewash" Bill, although this is undermined extensively by the fact that the "whitewash bill" is not the one supported by the Government, but let's ignore that unfortunate fact, shall we?

Which white wash bill? Chalerms or the other one... did you miss the part about if they are passed they could be merged at a later date.

There are many such bills waiting in the wings. Personally the charges against Abhisit and Suthep would have had merit IF they had been negligence in supervising the emergency decree etc.. but Murder.. it just does not stack up.. as for pressuring Abhisit sure that's what all the posturing is about.

As for Amsterdam. He is a paid lawyer with no powers in Thailand. He is for the international stage that's all. What is surprising is the fact he is still around.. a time ago he said he is no longer representing Thaksin.. who is he representing now?

Yes I must have missed that - have you got a link to the nation article?

Nope. I read the Bkk post and we are NOT allowed to link to that. Maybe you can go out and buy one 30b. That is IF your in Thailand. I find the online version not so good. I'm old fashioned when it comes to reading newspapers.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

Edited June 1, 2013 by thaicbr

[kimamey]

I don't know why they bother with Inquests. There's seemingly 10 or 20 people posting here who know more about what happened than the eyewitnesses and the Judge and presumably have thoroughly researched each and every situation via the learned court of The Nation "newspaper".

How supposedly educated westerners could make such earnest apologies for a military that was out of control and actively encouraged through the supplied ROE and built in amnesty of the Emergency Decree to shoot civilians, with a known past history of outrages against their fellow citizens is beyond me. Really, you're welcome to it.

You seem to have missed my comment immediately before yours. I partly agreed with you but pointed out some assumptions that you made which don't seem to be entirely accurate. I also notice you assume that all the information has come from The Nation although some have mentioned other sources however there does seem to be a lack of links but then it's not always easy to find old stories. There does seem to be some evidence that points to others than the military in the area at the time although I've not seen this for myself.

I notice that although the shots were fired apparently by the military there has been no push to hold the military responsible by the authorities. This seems to be more of a get Abhisit and Suthep operation to me.

I wish I could see an English translation of the ROIs.

If you mean ROE's, you can. Whether you take them as the truth or not is your choice. An English translation version is printed on Robert Amsterdams "Blog"

http://robertamsterdam.com/thailand/2012/12/13/letter-to-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-icc-concerning-abhisits-criminal-liability/

If you look at Appendix 2 you will find images of the two pages of the original ROE and the Six pages of the revised ROE. If you can read Thai you can match the English translation and the original Thai version together.

Of course, some on here would immediately decry the legitimacy because of the source with no real thought to the content. He is regularly decried on here. The Law Society of Upper Canada take him seriously though particularly with the way he has been treated in Thailand

>>As a result of attempting to carry out his professional obligations, lawyer Robert Amsterdam has been subjected to intimidation and interference by members of the Democrat Party in Thailand. In particular, he has had legal action threatened against him in his capacity as legal counsel to former Prime Minister of Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra. Despite the outcome of the July 2011 general election in Thailand, which resulted in Her Excellency Yingluck Shinawatra becoming Prime Minister, there are still concerns for the personal safety of Mr. Amsterdam.

Personally speaking, I don't think that he would have sent that letter to the Prosecutor of the ICC (link above) without being very sure about his evidence. I would say that the confidence that the DSI has in pressing charges against Suthep and Abhisit despite them, in theory, being protected by the "amnesty clause" of the Emergency Decree stems from the knowledge/possession of this evidence. Time will tell.

Of course it's far easier to pretend that the charges are just a way to pressure Abhisit to accept the so called "Thaksin Whitewash" Bill, although this is undermined extensively by the fact that the "whitewash bill" is not the one supported by the Government, but let's ignore that unfortunate fact, shall we?

Thanks for that. I've asked several times if anyone had these details and as far as I know this is the first link although I may have missed it.

I did mean ROE and not ROI. Not sure what I was thinking there.

The DSI have already said that they issued a statement that they had good evidence that Thaksin was behind the red shirt rallies and funding them due to pressure from the then Democrat government. I don't think they can be relied upon now.

I would guess that the version given by Robert Amsterdam of the ROEs is as accurate as possible. I don't know much about him apart from what I hear on this forum and I know he's disliked. I did see a video a while back where he addressed red shirts claiming he was one of them and talking about Abhisit. I think he used the word murder. Strangely for someone who claimed to be a red shirt and who must have spent time talking to Thais he only once spoke any Thai. That was at the end when he turned to leave and he was nudged by someone who said 'sawatdee krap' which he then turned and mumbled. I started doing that before I even came here. I can't find that video at the moment but I have looked at a few others and he's just like a lawyer should be in court. Totally biased and over the top. To hear him speak you would think that Abhisit went out like Rambo and slaughtered anyone he could find. I think he likes the sound of his own voice. I'm not sure that even if what he says is true that it would count as murder but then I'm not a lawyer. It's noticeable that he seems not to use that word in legal documents where he has to stick to the facts In one he keeps reffering to the junta which if that were true would mean Abhisit wasn't in control and so can't be responsible. This was in 2010 when Abhisit was still being called a puppet of the military and before it became convenient to say he was in total control.

I've had a look at the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials although I couldn't find them on the UN site but on the University of Minnesota site has them. I'll have to assume they're correct.

Amsterdam states in the link you gave that :

These regulations are in clear violation of the international standards specified in the United Nations’ “Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.” Even in the event of unlawful and violent assemblies, the Basic Principles only authorize the lethal use of firearms “when strictly unavoidable to protect life”

(Principle 9).

He only quotes one part which suits him.If you look at the rest it isn't so clear cut.

As with a lot of these type of rules there is an element of interpretation. One of these comes when deciding if the military in this case were acting as the military or as law enforcement officials in place of the police. The probably were to start with but it's less clear at the time of the killings. This could be a point of discussion but I don't know enough of the facts.

Looking at the ROEs the main area where they might contravene the UN regulations is in the killing in protection of property although this can still pose a threat to life so it may still be acceptable.

With regard to Fabio I can't see anything in the ROEs that would justify his killing: He wasn't armed, he wasn't attacking property, he wasn't resisting arrest or a search, he wasn't in a large crowd and he wasn't posing a threat. If you can tell me where in the ROEs there was justification for his killing under those rules I'd be glad to see it.

There will always be mistakes in situations like this when the military take action based on flawed assumptions and those have to be addressed in the courts but I can't see any thing that paints Abhisit or Suthep (who I don't like) as murderers.

There seems to be some basis for the ROEs possibly infringing the UN regulations but even then it's not really certain.

As for the other deaths the same will apply. Were the ROEs adhered to?

Edited June 1, 2013 by kimamey

[rubl]

Although I still think Fabio is in part to blame for his early demise, I agree with his sister's plea not to vote in favour of 'the' Thai amnesty bill. There's still almost all unclear about the 91 deaths and how it came to a situation where army personel got involved and had to exchange gunfire with peaceful, grenade lobbing protesters.

There's still a long road ahead of us and it needs to be traveled. To vote for amnesty would be like avoiding a road by not travelling and staying put in the current misery. IMHO.

[alanferdi]

As much as I feel sorry for the death of her brother it seems she is getting a lot of media publicity. I guess the other people who lost loved ones just don't rate.

I dont think that is her point... Her point is that those who are responsible should not be given amnesty..... whether in this govt or in the military!

Justice prevails when it has the culprits exposed and not given amnesty.

[Thai at Heart]

As much as I feel sorry for the death of her brother it seems she is getting a lot of media publicity. I guess the other people who lost loved ones just don't rate.

I dont think that is her point... Her point is that those who are responsible should not be given amnesty..... whether in this govt or in the military!

Justice prevails when it has the culprits exposed and not given amnesty.

The army already have amnesty.

So the whole witch hunt is never going to find the reality of what happens. If I remember, there were reports at the time that the army would not intervene until they were given roe's that would protect them legally anyway.

[pilot321]

As much as I feel sorry for the death of her brother it seems she is getting a lot of media publicity. I guess the other people who lost loved ones just don't rate.

I dont think that is her point... Her point is that those who are responsible should not be given amnesty..... whether in this govt or in the military!

Justice prevails when it has the culprits exposed and not given amnesty.

With parliamentary immunity being available (with it affecting quite a few more PTP MP's than Democrats), it will be a long, long, long road to justice.

Even if no amnesty is granted to anyone, it's slow going on prosecutions.

Natthawut, for example, has pending charges going back six years.

Edited June 2, 2013 by pilot321

[lemoncake]

As much as I feel sorry for the death of her brother it seems she is getting a lot of media publicity. I guess the other people who lost loved ones just don't rate.

So what if she is receiving a lot of publicity - why would you have a problem with that? I guess had your brother/sister/mother/father been murdered you would simply shrug your shoulders and keep keep stuffing burgers down your throat, preferring to not make a fuss as you wouldn't want to stand out from the crowd of murder victims.

Respect for this woman - she is an example as to how the other victims should be vocal

Only no one forced her brother into the middle of "war".

All reporters assume risk when going into a war zone.

[GeckosDiving]

The red shirt schmucks will never think they did anything wrong that is their "motto" blame every one else !! well that's what they get paid for by the criminal in Dubai who thinks the same way !! This is the intelligence of people that have been dropped on the heads when their were BABY'S Knowing this you really have to feel sorry for them "NOT"

[Noistar]

It's easier for the government supporters to believe the rhetoric, when they don't need to bother with the facts. The decisions are given to them.

They really are being manipulated, but are not being given the tools (education) to come to their own conclusions.

Should be even easier when the tablets are entrenched. Just search for "how to make Thailand better" and the answer "bring back Thaksin" will be displayed. If its on the Internet it must be right.

So you have to feel sorry for the populace, but have a thought for the brainless morons who are stoking the fires of hatred.

[Sing_Sling]

The red shirt schmucks will never think they did anything wrong that is their "motto" blame every one else !! well that's what they get paid for by the criminal in Dubai who thinks the same way !! This is the intelligence of people that have been dropped on the heads when their were BABY'S Knowing this you really have to feel sorry for them "NOT"

Umm, isn't this a good example of the reverse?

This is the intelligence of people that have been dropped on the heads when their were 'BABY'S' ?

[Beetlejuice]

The guy walked straight into a combat zone and he should have been aware of the risks involved.

The only conclusion in my opinion is that this was death by misadventure and no one can be held accountable or to blame.

[Sing_Sling]

The guy walked straight into a combat zone and he should have been aware of the risks involved.

The only conclusion in my opinion is that this was death by misadventure and no one can be held accountable or to blame.

I guess it is true what they say about opinions!

[Thai at Heart]

The guy walked straight into a combat zone and he should have been aware of the risks involved.

The only conclusion in my opinion is that this was death by misadventure and no one can be held accountable or to blame.

I guess it is true what they say about opinions!

Will since no one can conclusively say who or which side definitely pulled the trigger, it was a legally declared live fire zone with 2 days warning for people to leave, legally what other verdict can there be?

Lawful killing?

[Noistar]

The guy walked straight into a combat zone and he should have been aware of the risks involved.

The only conclusion in my opinion is that this was death by misadventure and no one can be held accountable or to blame.

I guess it is true what they say about opinions!

Will since no one can conclusively say who or which side definitely pulled the trigger, it was a legally declared live fire zone with 2 days warning for people to leave, legally what other verdict can there be?

Lawful killing?

I have no reason to disbelieve you, but if it was a 'live fire zone' I would have to ask 'why?'

Does the presence of peaceful protestors necessitate such a requirement, or was there a belief that an element hell-bent on destruction was there?

[Thai at Heart]

The guy walked straight into a combat zone and he should have been aware of the risks involved.

The only conclusion in my opinion is that this was death by misadventure and no one can be held accountable or to blame.

I guess it is true what they say about opinions!

Will since no one can conclusively say who or which side definitely pulled the trigger, it was a legally declared live fire zone with 2 days warning for people to leave, legally what other verdict can there be?

Lawful killing?

I have no reason to disbelieve you, but if it was a 'live fire zone' I would have to ask 'why?'

Does the presence of peaceful protestors necessitate such a requirement, or was there a belief that an element hell-bent on destruction was there?

Well not to split hairs, but there was an armed element to the protestors and they had barricaded themselves in.

So, anywhere in the world defy any form of law enforcement, for long enough, and they will come in and get your ass. They have fair warning, told everyone they were coming and that they had the right to use live ammunition. But SWAT teams if police storm armed situations every day all over the world. If the cops can do it, why can't army? It isn't perfect, but why not?

Now of course, no one wanted to die, and I doubt very much that the foreign press realised how ruthless the Thai army would be.

I would always have expected the army to shoot first and not really worry about the questions afterward.

But at the end of the day, running around in front of armed lines in bangkok at close proximity, has to be about the riskiest thing you can do in journslism.

They all knew there was going to be a lot of shooting. Tragically, they got caught up in it.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

Will since no one can conclusively say who or which side definitely pulled the trigger, it was a legally declared live fire zone with 2 days warning for people to leave, legally what other verdict can there be?

Lawful killing?

I have no reason to disbelieve you, but if it was a 'live fire zone' I would have to ask 'why?'

Does the presence of peaceful protestors necessitate such a requirement, or was there a belief that an element hell-bent on destruction was there?

Well not to split hairs, but there was an armed element to the protestors and they had barricaded themselves in.

So, anywhere in the world defy any form of law enforcement, for long enough, and they will come in and get your ass. They have fair warning, told everyone they were coming and that they had the right to use live ammunition. But SWAT teams if police storm armed situations every day all over the world. If the cops can do it, why can't army? It isn't perfect, but why not?

Now of course, no one wanted to die, and I doubt very much that the foreign press realised how ruthless the Thai army would be.

I would always have expected the army to shoot first and not really worry about the questions afterward.

But at the end of the day, running around in front of armed lines in bangkok at close proximity, has to be about the riskiest thing you can do in journslism.

They all knew there was going to be a lot of shooting. Tragically, they got caught up in it.

Interestingly that very same day we had a group of journalist / reporters spread out in terror when something exploded in their midst and only moments later Canadian vanderGrift, foolishly running around with the army, had a grenade lobbed on him and a few soldiers, 'only' killing one (soldier). It has been described (almost clinically objective and non-prejudiced ) as "Then the Black Shirts, a radical faction under the Red Shirts, started firing grenades against the military and Vandergrift was hit by one of the grenades."

So, once more, don't vote for amnesty but get to the bottom of this

[Thai at Heart]

Will since no one can conclusively say who or which side definitely pulled the trigger, it was a legally declared live fire zone with 2 days warning for people to leave, legally what other verdict can there be?

Lawful killing?

I have no reason to disbelieve you, but if it was a 'live fire zone' I would have to ask 'why?'

Does the presence of peaceful protestors necessitate such a requirement, or was there a belief that an element hell-bent on destruction was there?

Well not to split hairs, but there was an armed element to the protestors and they had barricaded themselves in.

So, anywhere in the world defy any form of law enforcement, for long enough, and they will come in and get your ass. They have fair warning, told everyone they were coming and that they had the right to use live ammunition. But SWAT teams if police storm armed situations every day all over the world. If the cops can do it, why can't army? It isn't perfect, but why not?

Now of course, no one wanted to die, and I doubt very much that the foreign press realised how ruthless the Thai army would be.

I would always have expected the army to shoot first and not really worry about the questions afterward.

But at the end of the day, running around in front of armed lines in bangkok at close proximity, has to be about the riskiest thing you can do in journslism.

They all knew there was going to be a lot of shooting. Tragically, they got caught up in it.

Interestingly that very same day we had a group of journalist / reporters spread out in terror when something exploded in their midst and only moments later Canadian vanderGrift, foolishly running around with the army, had a grenade lobbed on him and a few soldiers, 'only' killing one (soldier). It has been described (almost clinically objective and non-prejudiced ) as "Then the Black Shirts, a radical faction under the Red Shirts, started firing grenades against the military and Vandergrift was hit by one of the grenades."

So, once more, don't vote for amnesty but get to the bottom of this

Yeah, I am all for it. Problem is, no one is going to touch the army and they are going to try to prove that abhisit used telekenisis to pull a trigger at 10km distance.

Reconciliation? Reality is, the army chief and all his commanders would be in jail for wrongful murder.

Abhisit would end up in jail for not stopping the protests once he saw the way the army acted.

Thaksin would still be in Dubai and yingluck would still be pm.

[rubl]

I have no reason to disbelieve you, but if it was a 'live fire zone' I would have to ask 'why?'

Does the presence of peaceful protestors necessitate such a requirement, or was there a belief that an element hell-bent on destruction was there?

Well not to split hairs, but there was an armed element to the protestors and they had barricaded themselves in.

So, anywhere in the world defy any form of law enforcement, for long enough, and they will come in and get your ass. They have fair warning, told everyone they were coming and that they had the right to use live ammunition. But SWAT teams if police storm armed situations every day all over the world. If the cops can do it, why can't army? It isn't perfect, but why not?

Now of course, no one wanted to die, and I doubt very much that the foreign press realised how ruthless the Thai army would be.

I would always have expected the army to shoot first and not really worry about the questions afterward.

But at the end of the day, running around in front of armed lines in bangkok at close proximity, has to be about the riskiest thing you can do in journslism.

They all knew there was going to be a lot of shooting. Tragically, they got caught up in it.

Interestingly that very same day we had a group of journalist / reporters spread out in terror when something exploded in their midst and only moments later Canadian vanderGrift, foolishly running around with the army, had a grenade lobbed on him and a few soldiers, 'only' killing one (soldier). It has been described (almost clinically objective and non-prejudiced ) as "Then the Black Shirts, a radical faction under the Red Shirts, started firing grenades against the military and Vandergrift was hit by one of the grenades."

So, once more, don't vote for amnesty but get to the bottom of this

Yeah, I am all for it. Problem is, no one is going to touch the army and they are going to try to prove that abhisit used telekenisis to pull a trigger at 10km distance.

Reconciliation? Reality is, the army chief and all his commanders would be in jail for wrongful murder.

Abhisit would end up in jail for not stopping the protests once he saw the way the army acted.

Thaksin would still be in Dubai and yingluck would still be pm.

Problem is not only 'no one is going to touch the army', problem is also no one is admitting 'we red-shirts did anything wrong'. Strictly speaking your reply is a good example of that. IMHO.

PS no I'm not saying you're a red-shirt supporter, just that your reply is a bit one sided.

Edited June 3, 2013 by rubl

[Noistar]

The whole situation is one-sided.

Can't see it ever being resolved while the Government supports the perpetrators and accuses everyone else of being the guilty parties.

If the Red Shirts hadn't descended on Bangkok threatening mindless destruction, it's a reasonable assumption that none of this would have happened