Thailand's police chief admits 'men in black' are police

[Roadman]

A rare moment of honesty, from the RTP, perhaps his investigation will also reveal exactly what they were armed with, and which of their munitions were actually used ?

Rubber-bullets or real-bullets, flash-bangs or fire-crackers or gas-grenades, or what ?

And is this perhaps the reason, why there was the very-public-protest from hundreds of low-level policemen/women, concerning the failure to catch the culprits for their dead colleague ?

Should Tarit (DSI) now be preparing murder charges against the PM Yingluck as was bego Abhisit?

[soi41]

So where are all the red shirt huggers that said these were Suthep's mercenaries? Do they have the courage to apologise? Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes we do! I am sorry! I was very wrong!!

[Emptyset]

This is not looking good for Chalerm (or Yingluck for that matter)

Why was it wrong to place riot police on top of the building though? I have no idea why they didn't just admit it in the first place.

Maybe because of this reason :

Forensic police later confirmed that ballistic test on the killed police officer showed he was shot from a high ground position.

Yes, I guess that's why. But if this map is correct then it seems very unlikely that he could have been killed by those on top of the ministry.

The stadium is between the building and the cop that was killed. He was also shot by a pistol round, which given the distance, makes it seem even more improbable that he was shot from the top of this building. The police on top of the building seemed to be aiming their tear gas at protesters directly in front of them, either they were trying to get into the MoL or they were trying to get into the stadium via the soi to the right of the ministry. But the clash which killed the police officer happened on the other side of the stadium. So I doubt they could have shot one of their own from this position, even by accident.

I got the image from here, where there's more detailed analysis of this incident: http://on-off-course.tumblr.com/post/71568627399/was-a-thai-policeman-killed-by-gunmen-stationed-on-top

The video posted there shows police crouching and shots apparently coming from the direction of the protesters. If Narong was crouching when he was shot, which is quite probable, he needn't have been shot from a higher building.

[soi41]

Let's see how Captain Earwax wriggles out of this one... It's bound to be classic fabrication.....

Very simple really. A trade took place!

In exchange for

[diceq]

Pol Gen Adul admitted that “men in black” are police and vowed to investigate and bring them to justice procedure.

Would be interesting to see the exact quote of what he said. Because why bring them to justice procedure when we don't know if they did anything illegal?

I guess it's plausible that a police unknowingly fired live ammunition instead of rubber bullets, and that the policeman got caught in the line of fire. If he was shot by friendly fire, I very much doubt it was intentional as the location of the firing can be traced back to their position. And as Emptyset pointed out, the location of the two sites makes it very unrealistic.

As I recall, many of you, Yellow bashers,said that this is a fake picture and the Yellows should be ashamed for presenting false facts.

Eat your words now.

Who said that the picture was fake? I haven't seen any such post. I certainly did not make that claim. It was pretty obvious that the men in black were police as you can clearly see one of them throwing a tear gas grenade in a video.

Edited January 2, 2014 by diceq

[spare5]

"Men in Black are Police"

Case close. So now we know who killed most of the 97 people in 2010.

[wordchild]

yes this comment about "justice procedure" is very odd and it would be good to get the exact transcript (in Thai). Why use such a phrase? if it was just a case of they should not have been there but they did nothing else wrong then surely it would just be an internal disciplinary matter. To use the phrase "justice procedure" if that's what he said, or the meaning of what he said, then that suggests something more serious.

Edited January 2, 2014 by wordchild

[Skywalker69]

This is not looking good for Chalerm (or Yingluck for that matter)

Why was it wrong to place riot police on top of the building though? I have no idea why they didn't just admit it in the first place. I guess Adul should be applauded for his honesty although that's what should be expected, not the absurd fabrications we're used to from Chalerm. If they'd been honest about it from the beginning, there wouldn't have been all these rumours about Cambodians up there shooting at both sides etc.

Pol Gen Adul admitted that “men in black” are police and vowed to investigate and bring them to justice procedure.

That´s why!

[nong38]

I thought they were hiding so they did not have to get involved

[diceq]

yes this comment about "justice procedure" is very odd and it would be good to get the exact transcript (in Thai). why use such a phrase? if it was just a case of they should not have been there then surely it would have been an internal disciplinary matter for the police, but to use the phrase "justice procedure" if that's what he said, or the meaning of what he said, then that suggests something more serious.

I wouldn't trust anything in a newspaper. Especially not when the newspaper makes such an absurd claim as "The broadcaster that you can trust".

[mrtoad]

I will assume that Tarit will now be charging Surapong, Chalerm and Yingluck with murder

[pmugghc]

What did anyone expect? Ninjas? Police, exactly where they should have been. The question is, did they do anything wrong?

No, the question is why the government didn't admit it right away but tried to blame the demonstrants.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[ginjag]

I will assume that Tarit will now be charging Surapong, Chalerm and Yingluck with murder

Off topic, I love your member picture.

[Thait Spot]

So where are all the red shirt huggers that said these were Suthep's mercenaries? Do they have the courage to apologise? Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes we do! I am sorry! I was very wrong!!

Splendid.

It seems almost certain they were Chalerm's buddies so let's see where that leads. Possibly even to 2010

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Skywalker69]

Which unit?

Who was the commander of the unit?

Who was the responsible team leader?

What orders were given?

Who gave orders?

What weapons were used?

Where are the application logs?

Whom let them in to a Department Khun Chalerm happens to be the cheif?

[diceq]

No, the question is why the government didn't admit it right away but tried to blame the demonstrants.

Because it's a police matter. Which is why a police chief just admitted that they were police when asked. Maybe he was asked the question before and did not answer because he did not know all the facts.

Tried to blame it on the demonstrators? You phrase that as it was determined already that the 'men in black' were indeed responsible. Even though you know the two locations would most likely make that impossible.

[bigbamboo]

So where are all the red shirt huggers that said these were Suthep's mercenaries? Do they have the courage to apologise? Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes we do! I am sorry! I was very wrong!!

Splendid.

It seems almost certain they were Chalerm's buddies so let's see where that leads. Possibly even to 2010

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Well at least we know Chalerm's gun toting son couldn't have been involved.

The targets were much too far away.

[Mosha]

I will assume that Tarit will now be charging Surapong, Chalerm and Yingluck with murder

More likely those against Abhisit will be dropped.

[soi41]

I will assume that Tarit will now be charging Surapong, Chalerm and Yingluck with murder

Because police-chief Adul is not able to control his men??

Then lied to the public, only to admit it to Gen Prem, who officially have no political role to play!

The political game in Thailand stinks on all levels!

And change is badly needed! But as long all sides are only interested in getting their place at the trough, it is not going to happen.

Makes me sad to see Thailand, which could be a very prosperous country, going down the drain, because of greed and powerhunger!!

[Pi Sek]

This is not looking good for Chalerm (or Yingluck for that matter)

Why was it wrong to place riot police on top of the building though? I have no idea why they didn't just admit it in the first place. I guess Adul should be applauded for his honesty although that's what should be expected, not the absurd fabrications we're used to from Chalerm. If they'd been honest about it from the beginning, there wouldn't have been all these rumours about Cambodians up there shooting at both sides etc.

Not all that wrong IMO to place observers on top of a ministry-building with a good view of the protest, Chalerm (as minister responsible for the building) should have been open about it and defended the decision to let them upstairs, unless it turns out that they were contributing to the violence in some way, perhaps getting carried-away & exceeding their orders ?

As police I would find it hard to believe that they were not armed with real-bullets, in their hand-weapons, or perhaps also with rubber-bullets & gas-grenades/flash-bangs.

One of the questions which now urgently needs to be answered is, which of those (if any) did they actually use, and what prompted their use ?

Did the RTP actually shoot one of their own, in a tragic accident, and did they use weapons against the anti-government protesters below ?

And lastly, why has all of this taken so long, to come out ?

That's a very strong series of "ouch" questions and they need to be answered.

Of course, with the information we know now, we don't know if these (armed probably at least with pistols) individuals are the same ones that shot the policeman and/or the numerous protesters. I don't have much doubt that the complete admission will be that all victims were shot from another rooftop (very likely in the case of Khun Narong).

However this is nonetheless a very incriminating admission, especially with Chalerm's public fielty to Thaksin and his silence to demands for him to explain their secretive presence on top of his building, and one that won't go down with anyone who has a reasonable sense of balance - but especially with those from the anti-Shinawatra crowds - regardless of whether they were merely look-outs/observers/recorders as was quite justifiable.

And if they were on this building... were they on any other buildings?

[Pi Sek]

I will assume that Tarit will now be charging Surapong, Chalerm and Yingluck with murder

Because police-chief Adul is not able to control his men??

Then lied to the public, only to admit it to Gen Prem, who officially have no political role to play!

The political game in Thailand stinks on all levels!

And change is badly needed! But as long all sides are only interested in getting their place at the trough, it is not going to happen.

Makes me sad to see Thailand, which could be a very prosperous country, going down the drain, because of greed and powerhunger!!

If you feel this way, maybe you should go and buy a whistle and join in the discussion outside your local provincial hall one evening. More opinions are good, for everyone.

[diceq]

However this is nonetheless a very incriminating admission, especially with Chalerm's public fielty to Thaksin and his silence to demands for him to explain their secretive presence on top of his building, and one that won't go down with anyone who has a reasonable sense of balance - but especially with those from the anti-Shinawatra crowds - regardless of whether they were merely look-outs/observers/recorders as was quite justifiable.

Why is it an incriminating admission? And what exactly is secretive about placing riot police on top of buildings? They were wearing uniforms and made no attempt to hide their presence. And why should a government official explain what the police did?

First you accuse them of being silent. And when they do speak out, it's incriminating.

Edited January 2, 2014 by diceq

[NCC1701A]

they are the police!

i can prove it.

from that photo here is my computer enhanced image of what they are holding in their hands:

[Scamper]

This is an extraordinary admission. It is unexpected to encounter this degree of candor from the police. But the admission has been made, and frankly really doesn't come as a surprise. It also lends additional light to the general campaign of anonymous attacks against the protesters. The edifice of this administration appears to be crumbling from within. It seems to be all catching up with it. As the registration period has now ended with well over 5 % of the constituencies uncontested, the election itself seems now pointless from even Pheu Thai's standpoint. It's time to turn down the pressure cooker, and allow reform discussions to take place in a manner that engages the input of all sectors of society in a peaceful manner.

[Emptyset]

This is not looking good for Chalerm (or Yingluck for that matter)

Why was it wrong to place riot police on top of the building though? I have no idea why they didn't just admit it in the first place. I guess Adul should be applauded for his honesty although that's what should be expected, not the absurd fabrications we're used to from Chalerm. If they'd been honest about it from the beginning, there wouldn't have been all these rumours about Cambodians up there shooting at both sides etc.

Not all that wrong IMO to place observers on top of a ministry-building with a good view of the protest, Chalerm (as minister responsible for the building) should have been open about it and defended the decision to let them upstairs, unless it turns out that they were contributing to the violence in some way, perhaps getting carried-away & exceeding their orders ?

As police I would find it hard to believe that they were not armed with real-bullets, in their hand-weapons, or perhaps also with rubber-bullets & gas-grenades/flash-bangs.

One of the questions which now urgently needs to be answered is, which of those (if any) did they actually use, and what prompted their use ?

Did the RTP actually shoot one of their own, in a tragic accident, and did they use weapons against the anti-government protesters below ?

And lastly, why has all of this taken so long, to come out ?

That's a very strong series of "ouch" questions and they need to be answered.

Of course, with the information we know now, we don't know if these (armed probably at least with pistols) individuals are the same ones that shot the policeman and/or the numerous protesters. I don't have much doubt that the complete admission will be that all victims were shot from another rooftop (very likely in the case of Khun Narong).

However this is nonetheless a very incriminating admission, especially with Chalerm's public fielty to Thaksin and his silence to demands for him to explain their secretive presence on top of his building, and one that won't go down with anyone who has a reasonable sense of balance - but especially with those from the anti-Shinawatra crowds - regardless of whether they were merely look-outs/observers/recorders as was quite justifiable.

And if they were on this building... were they on any other buildings?

Check out the blog I posted on the previous page. It seems as though if Narong were shot from another rooftop, it would've had to be from the flats behind the protesters. But there's no reason to assume he was shot from a rooftop... someone on top of those flats would also be spotted pretty easily in broad daylight, I'd venture.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Emptyset

[diceq]

This is an extraordinary admission. It is unexpected to encounter this degree of candor from the police. But the admission has been made, and frankly really doesn't come as a surprise. It also lends additional light to the general campaign of anonymous attacks against the protesters. The edifice of this administration appears to be crumbling from within. It seems to be all catching up with it. As the registration period has now ended with well over 5 % of the constituencies uncontested, the election itself seems now pointless from even Pheu Thai's standpoint. It's time to turn down the pressure cooker, and allow reform discussions to take place in a manner that engages the input of all sectors of society in a peaceful manner.

Again, care to explain what's so extraordinary about admitting that the police had people stationed on rooftops?

[fstarbkk]

A rare moment of honesty, from the RTP, perhaps his investigation will also reveal exactly what they were armed with, and which of their munitions were actually used ?

Rubber-bullets or real-bullets, flash-bangs or fire-crackers or gas-grenades, or what ?

And is this perhaps the reason, why there was the very-public-protest from hundreds of low-level policemen/women, concerning the failure to catch the culprits for their dead colleague ?

Rubber bullets, flash-bangs and gas grenades are very unlikely as they all are only effective at a short range. Looks like an ideal sniper position to me though.

I'm not optimistic that the whole truth will ever come out, but my money is on real bullets in high-powered rifles.

[Pi Sek]

However this is nonetheless a very incriminating admission, especially with Chalerm's public fielty to Thaksin and his silence to demands for him to explain their secretive presence on top of his building, and one that won't go down with anyone who has a reasonable sense of balance - but especially with those from the anti-Shinawatra crowds - regardless of whether they were merely look-outs/observers/recorders as was quite justifiable.

Why is it an incriminating admission? And what exactly is secretive about placing riot police on top of buildings? They were wearing uniforms and made no attempt to hide their presence. And why should a government official explain what the police did?

First you accuse them of being silent. And when they do speak out, it's incriminating.

It is incriminating because of his silence. It is secretive because they said no police were on any rooftops. They were wearing uniforms but they did make attempts to hide their presence, as did the minister who denied they were there.

Why should a government official explain what the police did?

Is this a serious question? I guess the values from my country don't apply everywhere - fair enough, there's good and bad everywhere.

[pmugghc]

No, the question is why the government didn't admit it right away but tried to blame the demonstrants.

Tried to blame it on the demonstrators? You phrase that as it was determined already that the 'men in black' were indeed responsible. Even though you know the two locations would most likely make that impossible.

Didn't the government say the people on the rooftop and the ones smashing the car were demonstrators that had stolen police uniforms?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[diceq]

Rubber bullets, flash-bangs and gas grenades are very unlikely as they all are only effective at a short range. Looks like an ideal sniper position to me though.

I'm not optimistic that the whole truth will ever come out, but my money is on real bullets in high-powered rifles.

Looks like it's a 5 story building. If the demonstrators were standing on the street below it is a short distance.