'Men in black' controversy: Thai Police on defensive over Dec 26 conflict

[whybother]

since when does the police have to justify where they where stationed and when to observe / teargas violent protestors storming government properties?

The rooftop group are clearly identifiable as riot police - only the alcoholic / brainless Chalerm was the one who denied they where there - he probably did not even know what day it was and in which country this was happening!

Same for the police chief - as always in Thailand the "managers" are never around and have no clue what is happening!

Then again just another "The Nation" story!

Police have to justify their stations when it is reported that people are shot from a height.

[waza]

Police on defensive over Dec 26 conflict

When police are on the defensive you know that they have been nefarious.

[RonCM]

Skype!!! I wonder who she will Skype?

[tomacht8]

The left hand of the police department doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Really makes you feel safe have such a police department doesn't it!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

I have a feeling that more and more will finally come out as to who has been behind all these shootings and killings. Only in time.

"The left hand of the police department doesn't know what the right hand is doing."

It is also important that clear separation of powers prevails in a democracy.

Executive, legislative, judicial and open media.

For example: Chalerm Yubamrung is a minister who also chairs the DSI's special case committee.

Incredible

That is never good for a democracy that lawmakers holding also police positions.

The possible abuse of power is intrinsically programmed here.

If they make reforms, hopefully they do here a clear cut.

[bunny11kk]

"Now, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra should provide answers herself," he said.

Good luck with that one.

When had you heard of any answers from the crab woman? At most she would come to cry and tell you she feel sorry for the police who was killed ( not even the protestors who were killed somehow)!

[bunny11kk]

So Chalerm's claim that they were protestors was just an outright lie?

Everything that comes out of this drunken thug's stupid mouth is either an outright lie, or pure fantasy.

And I take back what I said when I saw the heading of this story, "Men in Black controversy", as I thought this topic would be overrun by trolls.

So far "fabio" and co. have not gathered the courage to open their stupid mouths, unlike their hero Chalerm.

This Chalerm should be exported to China. For a thick skin liar like him, he would have a bright future there!

[TPI]

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

Why is it that the term, all pride but no shame comes to mind! You wouldn't mind if they looked at the photos and sprouted some nonsense!

But they don't even look at their own media information before they shot themselves in the foot! It's very sad really.

[aimbc]

"He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas."

Right. No sidearms, nothing like a handgun. How often do you see RTP carrying a gun, it's almost unheard of.

Yes, they only had rubber bullets and tear gas, how did he know that? He didn't even know who were up there. So it was an unsupervised team and definitely not part of the riot police. So who knows what they could really have up there. And we are suppose to believe what again? Sad, these guys have tarnish the name of law enforcement worldwide.

[Emptyset]

If these men-in-black were police (now confirmed by the police themselves), were the 'men-in-black' in 2010 also police?

Except they weren't 'men in black' they were just ordinary police. And they wear blue, not black. And no, they weren't.

[beammeup]

 

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

 

definitely assault weapons

[Emptyset]

since when does the police have to justify where they where stationed and when to observe / teargas violent protestors storming government properties?

The rooftop group are clearly identifiable as riot police - only the alcoholic / brainless Chalerm was the one who denied they where there - he probably did not even know what day it was and in which country this was happening!

Same for the police chief - as always in Thailand the "managers" are never around and have no clue what is happening!

Then again just another "The Nation" story!

Police have to justify their stations when it is reported that people are shot from a height.

All I can find to suggest that they were shot from higher ground in the first place is Akanat's statement:

'As per autopsy reports, Pol Senior Sgt-Major Narong Pitisit was shot from a top-down, left-to-right and front-to-back direction. It was likely that the gunfire came from the top of the tallest building in the Labour Ministry compound. This happened at a time when no protesters were able to enter the ministry and, so far, the authorities have not been able to explain the men in black caught on camera on top of the building, he said. Akanat also said it was not possible for bullets from a Din Daeng flat to have hit Narong as police claimed, because the landscape did not allow for this to happen.'

Did forensic police actually say this in the first place? Because police are saying differently now:

'At a press conference before noon today, the national police chief said that autopsy and ballistic tests showed that both died from gunshots fired at horizontal level and not vertical level as many believed. He said the killed police officer died from a .32 caliber bullet and was shot through the rear, while the slain protester was shot from the front also at ground level.

Such caliber gun was not used by the police.

His confirmation of the ballistic tests dismissed speculation that “men in black” on the rooftop of the Labor Ministry’s building were responsible for their deaths by shooting from the rooftop.

There was no way that the police atop the building could fire at both of them who were on the ground and under cover of other lower buildings, he said.

Pol Gen Adul said that the men in black were anti-riot police and they went atop to perform their duties to push protesters out in case they broke into the center.

He said about 10 police were on the rooftop and they were equipped only with tear gas guns and no other service pistols.'

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/police-chief-says-two-clash-victims-shot-police/

Personally I think there's still reason to doubt both. Suely he could have been shot from any height depending on where he was and if he was standing/crouching/sitting...

Edited January 3, 2014 by Emptyset

[Emptyset]

So Chalerm's claim that they were protestors was just an outright lie?

Yes.

If the police chief and video evidence are to be believed, then Chalerm and CAPO simply lied. Any one surprised?

Where are all the red posters who were insisting it was all protesters in stolen police uniforms?

CRES lied a lot in 2010 and those involved still haven't admitted that any protesters were killed by soldiers. I'm not saying that justifies this, merely that it's standard procedure to deny, deny, deny. Even when it's absurd and unnecessary. Personally I think they changed their minds on this one after realizing that they were covered - the evidence is there to show that Narong couldn't have been shot by cops on the Labour Ministry. Either that or Adun is just more honest than the rest and I think that's doubtful...

[Emptyset]

I posted way back when this was actually happening that the Mrs who was there phoned me and told me someone was shooting at them from on the roof.

That was long before any photos and videos came out.

She was helping one of the nurses at the time and told me of helping one of the protesters who had been shot in the leg.

Yes she has nursing training and has seen bullet wounds before.

I prefer to believe her as she was actually there to witness the shooting rather to believe the top cops who are most likely trying to cover their own ass.

Does she think they were shot from a building behind the stadium or behind the protesters as they were attacking the stadium? Or a building adjacent to the stadium? Police could've surely shot down at protesters who were attacking the Labour Ministry, but not those on the other side of the stadium where Narong and at least one other policeman was shot. Be interesting to know which side of the stadium she was on when she was shot and the direction she thinks the shots came from.

[Emptyset]

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

Wherever these pictures are from, they're not from the Labour Ministry rooftop. What's the source of the pictures? Can't really say much more without knowing that and if there are any more pictures which give a better view of their location. But no one has been reported shot by sniper rounds or AK47 rounds yet. At least two policemen were shot with .32 rounds.

[Skywalker69]

If these men-in-black were police (now confirmed by the police themselves), were the 'men-in-black' in 2010 also police?

"Men in black" are policemen, Chalerm claims

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Men-in-black-are-policemen-Chalerm-claims-30171725.html

[Emptyset]

If these men-in-black were police (now confirmed by the police themselves), were the 'men-in-black' in 2010 also police?

"Men in black" are policemen, Chalerm claims

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Men-in-black-are-policemen-Chalerm-claims-30171725.html

It's nonsense. I'm amazed at people on here who wouldn't believe a word Chalerm says normally take this statement seriously. It's obvious who he was trying to pin the blame on, obvious to those the statement was directed at, anyway.

[brownbear]

Emptyset

I think you have made your point mate and we all know which side you are on: not the side of logic or reason. You are fighting a lone battle in this thread and for that I admire you.

[JRSoul]

CRES lied a lot in 2010 and those involved still haven't admitted that any protesters were killed by soldiers. I'm not saying that justifies this, merely that it's standard procedure to deny, deny, deny. Even when it's absurd and unnecessary. Personally I think they changed their minds on this one after realizing that they were covered - the evidence is there to show that Narong couldn't have been shot by cops on the Labour Ministry. Either that or Adun is just more honest than the rest and I think that's doubtful...

Changed their minds, or changed the autopsy results to something more suitable?

[Emptyset]

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

Wherever these pictures are from, they're not from the Labour Ministry rooftop. What's the source of the pictures? Can't really say much more without knowing that and if there are any more pictures which give a better view of their location. But no one has been reported shot by sniper rounds or AK47 rounds yet. At least two policemen were shot with .32 rounds.

So it took me less than 3 minutes on Google to find your pictures posted on this forum. Note the date: 18 Aug 2012 - 18:05.

[Emptyset]

CRES lied a lot in 2010 and those involved still haven't admitted that any protesters were killed by soldiers. I'm not saying that justifies this, merely that it's standard procedure to deny, deny, deny. Even when it's absurd and unnecessary. Personally I think they changed their minds on this one after realizing that they were covered - the evidence is there to show that Narong couldn't have been shot by cops on the Labour Ministry. Either that or Adun is just more honest than the rest and I think that's doubtful...

Changed their minds, or changed the autopsy results to something more suitable?

The only source we have that the autopsy was changed is that it conflicts with what Akanat claims police forensics had said. Do we know that they actually said this? And, again, how would they even know the height from which he was shot without knowing how his body was positioned? Even Michael Yon pointed that out to his followers who made much of Akanat's statement. I believe the police here because that's what the evidence I've seen supports.

[Emptyset]

Emptyset

I think you have made your point mate and we all know which side you are on: not the side of logic or reason. You are fighting a lone battle in this thread and for that I admire you.

Thanks mate. Obviously I'd disagree with you, but that's just me, lol. In any case, I believe I can back up most of what I say with reasons and evidence if challenged. Obviously I'm not going to be right about everything, so if you think I'm wrong about a specific point or claim I've made, fire away...

[Pi Sek]

Emptyset

I think you have made your point mate and we all know which side you are on: not the side of logic or reason. You are fighting a lone battle in this thread and for that I admire you.

Whilst I have been carrying a whistle around my neck for the last few weeks and am praying for the good of the country (for social and economic reasons) that Yinglak and the whole Shinawatra-inspired populist kleptocracy is undermined, driven out in shame and condemned by the Red Shirt movement for betraying them (I won't hold my breath on that one), I think emptyset's arguments here are entirely based on logic and reason. Generally I think emptyset is someone who I can disagree with and at the same time whose opinion I can respect, because he is pretty well informed, he doesn't offer the same one-sided vitriolic BS that we get from other posters (on both sides) and he doesn't attempt to flame or insult.

It is extremely unlikely that Sergeant Narong was killed from the Labour Ministry rooftop. At the same time I also think it's extremely unlikely that we can trust the police under the current circumstances. And it's extremely unlikely that we can 100% believe in Akanat's, Chalerm's, Surapong's or Suthep's statements at any time.

[Emptyset]

It is extremely unlikely that Sergeant Narong was killed from the Labour Ministry rooftop. At the same time I also think it's extremely unlikely that we can trust the police under the current circumstances. And it's extremely unlikely that we can 100% believe in Akanat's, Chalerm's, Surapong's or Suthep's statements at any time.

Indeed. Well, I actually totally agree. I only believe the police's new claims regards Narong because I'd looked at the available evidence myself and what they say about him being shot from the Gate 3 area rather than the Lab Min rooftop fits with it. I'm far from convinced about their other major claim which is that Wasu was killed by protesters who shot down from a nearby building though. I rather suspect they did it whilst either returning fire or perhaps it could've been a lone cop or two going rogue and deciding to take justice into their own hands following the incidents that morning. All they seem to have to support their claim about protesters in this building is two murky iphone pictures which don't tell you much one way or the other.

The Wasu shooting is impossible to figure out objectively because we don't have the photos and videos like we do in the Narong case. It just so happened that that cameraman was filming on the spot at the time when Narong was shot. By contrast I don't know if any journalists were with Wasu at the time he was shot, so it's really impossible to know for certain what happened. Michael Yon said that there were few journalists on the protesters side, most were with police.

So it's basically the police's word against the protesters' in Wasu's case. All I read was that he was killed somewhere around the Labour Ministry side of the stadium during the early afternoon (police are saying he was at Gate 5 which I believe is directly opposite the side entrance to the Labour Ministry). However, we do have a video I linked in a previous thread of the police in the afternoon breaking out of the stadium to confront protesters and you can hear what sounds like automatic gun fire coming from the police side. So putting two and two together...

Edited January 4, 2014 by Emptyset

[rametindallas]

CRES lied a lot in 2010 and those involved still haven't admitted that any protesters were killed by soldiers. I'm not saying that justifies this, merely that it's standard procedure to deny, deny, deny. Even when it's absurd and unnecessary. Personally I think they changed their minds on this one after realizing that they were covered - the evidence is there to show that Narong couldn't have been shot by cops on the Labour Ministry. Either that or Adun is just more honest than the rest and I think that's doubtful...

Changed their minds, or changed the autopsy results to something more suitable?

The only source we have that the autopsy was changed is that it conflicts with what Akanat claims police forensics had said. Do we know that they actually said this? And, again, how would they even know the height from which he was shot without knowing how his body was positioned? Even Michael Yon pointed that out to his followers who made much of Akanat's statement. I believe the police here because that's what the evidence I've seen supports.

"I believe the police here because that's what the evidence I've seen supports"

Which police do you believe? Pol. Gen. Adul or the four Thaksin lackeys who got caught out lying? You are in a small minority of the people in and out of Thailand who believe the RTP have any credibility.

[Emptyset]

CRES lied a lot in 2010 and those involved still haven't admitted that any protesters were killed by soldiers. I'm not saying that justifies this, merely that it's standard procedure to deny, deny, deny. Even when it's absurd and unnecessary. Personally I think they changed their minds on this one after realizing that they were covered - the evidence is there to show that Narong couldn't have been shot by cops on the Labour Ministry. Either that or Adun is just more honest than the rest and I think that's doubtful...

Changed their minds, or changed the autopsy results to something more suitable?

The only source we have that the autopsy was changed is that it conflicts with what Akanat claims police forensics had said. Do we know that they actually said this? And, again, how would they even know the height from which he was shot without knowing how his body was positioned? Even Michael Yon pointed that out to his followers who made much of Akanat's statement. I believe the police here because that's what the evidence I've seen supports.

"I believe the police here because that's what the evidence I've seen supports"

Which police do you believe? Pol. Gen. Adul or the four Thaksin lackeys who got caught out lying? You are in a small minority of the people in and out of Thailand who believe the RTP have any credibility.

Adun, in this specific case. My opinion has nothing to do with police credibility or otherwise because it doesn't rely on any evidence provided by them. I came to my conclusion before they'd made their turnaround and provided their own explanation of events.

[citizen33]

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

Wherever these pictures are from, they're not from the Labour Ministry rooftop. What's the source of the pictures? Can't really say much more without knowing that and if there are any more pictures which give a better view of their location. But no one has been reported shot by sniper rounds or AK47 rounds yet. At least two policemen were shot with .32 rounds.

So it took me less than 3 minutes on Google to find your pictures posted on this forum. Note the date: 18 Aug 2012 - 18:05.

Good spot. Some TVF posters have no integrity whatsoever - unbelievable!

[Emptyset]

... He was also quick to add that the police team on the rooftop had only rubber bullets and tear gas....

Have a look at those pictures here under and you will see that this is not teargas guns or even shotguns!

This is rifles! It seems like 1 is sniper rifle, an other one is a AK and the 3rd one a M16!

Have a look by your self!

Wherever these pictures are from, they're not from the Labour Ministry rooftop. What's the source of the pictures? Can't really say much more without knowing that and if there are any more pictures which give a better view of their location. But no one has been reported shot by sniper rounds or AK47 rounds yet. At least two policemen were shot with .32 rounds.

So it took me less than 3 minutes on Google to find your pictures posted on this forum. Note the date: 18 Aug 2012 - 18:05.

Good spot. Some TVF posters have no integrity whatsoever - unbelievable!

In fairness to ManopY it's probably something he got from an anti-govt Facebook or some such rather than something he found himself in order to deceive people. Always best to err on the side of caution when a picture like this suddenly emerges, I think. I've seen several recycled pictures bandied around purported to be from these protests when they're either from 2010 or 08. As you probably know, Thai Rath even used one on their front page and they really should know better. It's one of those things with the internet though, isn't it, it's as good for putting out propaganda as it is for challenging it...

[Halion]

scurrying like rats in a trap.