Detectives Beaten By PCAD Protesters, Police Say

By Khaosod English

BANGKOK: -- 4 police officers have been hospitalised after they were beaten by anti-government protesters, according to a police statement.

Spokesperson office of the Royal Thai Police said the 4 officers were detectives operating under the Special Branch Police.

According to the statement, at around 23.00 last night the officers were gathering intelligence near Lumpini Park where supporters of the People′s Committee for Absolute Democracy With the King As Head of State (PCAD) were holding a rally.

Suddenly, the police claimed, a group of protester guards attacked the detectives. They were later sent to hospital.

3 of the officers suffered from bruises, while the other officer lost 3 teeth and had small wounds on his face, the police said.

Their conditions have been described as stable.

Source: http://www.khaosod.co.th/en/view_newsonline.php?newsid=TVRNNE9UYzJOelU1T0E9PQ==&sectionid=TURFd01BPT0=

-- Khaosod English 2014-01-15

Seriously.....these goons know the rules in this game......laughable really...!

Perhaps a bit of karmic payback....... Given all the beatings the police have handed out,

hard to feel sorry for a couple of policemen being roughed up...

Let the police investigate these horrible crimes. I'm sure they'll make better progress than they make in finding the people who are shooting up protesters on a daily basis.

Also, I'm wondering what two detectives were doing in the midst of a peaceful demo. Spying, agitating... what?

Perhaps a bit of karmic payback....... Given all the beatings the police have handed out,

hard to feel sorry for a couple of policemen being roughed up...

Disgraceful comment. Some might be crooked but the vast majority are pretty ok and ordinary guys. They are the ones in the front line, ie between YOU , ME and the loonies

Shame on posters who talk of karma or laugh on what happened... Karma could hit you too one day...

What a shame, really. Civil society is dead long ago as long extremist comments as those are allowed.

Posters make me SICK HERE

PATHETIC and condoning horrific acts of violence.

What were they doing there? Did they identify themselves? Where were they? Wandering around the crowd, or around the back of the stage?

I suspect they are part of the 140 who were assigned to special duty to gather evidence of wrong doing against the protesters.

The report I read from the police said that some of the officers were to 'disguise themselves as protesters' and infiltrate the rallies.

Perhaps their disguise wasn't good enough, as cops they should know how to blow a whistle.

Bit difficult to tell the difference between un-uniformed police and red shirts, unless they have grenades in there pockets.

It is perhaps too much to expect Khaosod to interview both sides of a story - a journalistic practice that predates Khaosod considerably. From this, we have one side, a gruesome story - told by the policemen involved - and gruesome pictures to match. But what is the full story ? A full story does not, incidentally, imply justification for violence. There is no justification for violence. What it does is it asks impassioned questions like - what exactly happened ? From what is printed here, there are legitimate questions that ought to be addressed. Let's address some of them here :

1. The fact that they were described as detectives suggests that they were in casual attire.

2. The men admitted that they came on the orders of the police department.

3. They claimed to be collecting evidence. What " evidence " would one be collecting at Lumpini park at 11 at night ? Had it been the scene of a crime that had previously taken place ? If so, why wasn't that released to the press ? Why wasn't it released by the police ? Why were they incognito ? Why wasn't a police detail sent to investigate in the clear light of day instead ? Why wouldn't they tell Khaosod what the evidence they were collecting was ? Or if that was " top secret ", why wouldn't they tell that to Khaosod instead ?

But then, once must inevitably pose questions to the journalistic practices of Khaosod, as shown in this story's coverage :

1. Did you pose any of these legitimate questions to these men ? And if not, why not ?

2. Would you consider - at some point in the future - a policy of interviewing the other side of this story ? But be careful here. The next question is the zinger -

If not, why not ?

Should not dress in black, and carry weapons.

Cannot condone beating up policemen doing their jobs but I would question the superiors who sent them out to protests in plain clothes to do whatever they were doing in a way that apparently made them obvious to the protest guards. Seems a pointless risk for little potential gain.

I sympathise for these policemen that got hurt.

But I condemn first their superiors for sending them there and I also condemn the policemen that accepted to go there.

What did they think.....they were invisible...or they thought they were so clever as to fool the guards.

Don't really know if I should feel sorry for them as they are responsible for their own misfortune!

What were they doing there? Did they identify themselves? Where were they? Wandering around the crowd, or around the back of the stage?

It is not important why they were there, they are Thai and can go there freely, but more than likely they were on duty, they criminal act was the beating they got and the disgraceful comments of some here condoning the use of violence in regards to karma, "An eye for an eye makes every one blind", Gandhi.

What were they doing there? Did they identify themselves? Where were they? Wandering around the crowd, or around the back of the stage?

I think they not there for protect people...

Perhaps a bit of karmic payback....... Given all the beatings the police have handed out,

hard to feel sorry for a couple of policemen being roughed up...

How you known did they ever beat you? I am 86 I will love to teach to respect the police

Most people do not like spies and will not tolerate them, hence the beating.

By the way has anyone else noticed that police behaviour towards foreigners has become more hostile over the past month or so?

What were they doing there? Did they identify themselves? Where were they? Wandering around the crowd, or around the back of the stage?

I think they not there for protect people...

So it was good to beat them up, correct?

It is perhaps too much to expect Khaosod to interview both sides of a story - a journalistic practice that predates Khaosod considerably. From this, we have one side, a gruesome story - told by the policemen involved - and gruesome pictures to match. But what is the full story ? A full story does not, incidentally, imply justification for violence. There is no justification for violence. What it does is it asks impassioned questions like - what exactly happened ? From what is printed here, there are legitimate questions that ought to be addressed. Let's address some of them here :

1. The fact that they were described as detectives suggests that they were in casual attire.

2. The men admitted that they came on the orders of the police department.

3. They claimed to be collecting evidence. What " evidence " would one be collecting at Lumpini park at 11 at night ? Had it been the scene of a crime that had previously taken place ? If so, why wasn't that released to the press ? Why wasn't it released by the police ? Why were they incognito ? Why wasn't a police detail sent to investigate in the clear light of day instead ? Why wouldn't they tell Khaosod what the evidence they were collecting was ? Or if that was " top secret ", why wouldn't they tell that to Khaosod instead ?

But then, once must inevitably pose questions to the journalistic practices of Khaosod, as shown in this story's coverage :

1. Did you pose any of these legitimate questions to these men ? And if not, why not ?

2. Would you consider - at some point in the future - a policy of interviewing the other side of this story ? But be careful here. The next question is the zinger -

If not, why not ?

It's not just Kaosod, it's all the Thai press. Look any article of the opposite side The Nation, or any interview from BlueSky.

It is perhaps too much to expect Khaosod to interview both sides of a story - a journalistic practice that predates Khaosod considerably. From this, we have one side, a gruesome story - told by the policemen involved - and gruesome pictures to match. But what is the full story ? A full story does not, incidentally, imply justification for violence. There is no justification for violence. What it does is it asks impassioned questions like - what exactly happened ? From what is printed here, there are legitimate questions that ought to be addressed. Let's address some of them here :

1. The fact that they were described as detectives suggests that they were in casual attire.

2. The men admitted that they came on the orders of the police department.

3. They claimed to be collecting evidence. What " evidence " would one be collecting at Lumpini park at 11 at night ? Had it been the scene of a crime that had previously taken place ? If so, why wasn't that released to the press ? Why wasn't it released by the police ? Why were they incognito ? Why wasn't a police detail sent to investigate in the clear light of day instead ? Why wouldn't they tell Khaosod what the evidence they were collecting was ? Or if that was " top secret ", why wouldn't they tell that to Khaosod instead ?

But then, once must inevitably pose questions to the journalistic practices of Khaosod, as shown in this story's coverage :

1. Did you pose any of these legitimate questions to these men ? And if not, why not ?

2. Would you consider - at some point in the future - a policy of interviewing the other side of this story ? But be careful here. The next question is the zinger -

If not, why not ?

This is a good point. What is the other side of the story? Its easy for someone to blame someone else and not mention their own wrong doing.

That said, is it the responsibility of the police to give a report to the public on what evidence they were looking for? This makes no sense because if they did that, the perpetrator(s) (if any exist) would know they are on to them. Has it occured to anyone that looking for evidence at night when people are off the streets would not only be easier but also not interfere with the "peacefull" protests? Is it illegal for police to walk peacefully in or out of uniform in these areas? There are bound to be calls to the police for help and attention by private individuals both related to and unrelated to the protests. Does having protests mean that the police are not allowed to do their normal job as they should to protect and serve?

But like Scamper pointed out, we don't have the other side of the story or any proof. They may have been been doing their job and are victims of lunatic protestors, or they may have been up to no good harassing people and deserved what they got.

These 2 won't be taking any backhanders for a wee while!!

Perhaps a bit of karmic payback....... Given all the beatings the police have handed out,

hard to feel sorry for a couple of policemen being roughed up...

How you known did they ever beat you? I am 86 I will love to teach you to respect the police

What are you going to do Harry? Beat the guy up simply because he doesn't like members of one of the largest criminal organizations in the world? How are you going to teach him Harry, with a rubber cosh, baton, pistol butt, etc?

It is perhaps too much to expect Khaosod to interview both sides of a story - a journalistic practice that predates Khaosod considerably. From this, we have one side, a gruesome story - told by the policemen involved - and gruesome pictures to match. But what is the full story ? A full story does not, incidentally, imply justification for violence. There is no justification for violence. What it does is it asks impassioned questions like - what exactly happened ? From what is printed here, there are legitimate questions that ought to be addressed. Let's address some of them here :

1. The fact that they were described as detectives suggests that they were in casual attire.

2. The men admitted that they came on the orders of the police department.

3. They claimed to be collecting evidence. What " evidence " would one be collecting at Lumpini park at 11 at night ? Had it been the scene of a crime that had previously taken place ? If so, why wasn't that released to the press ? Why wasn't it released by the police ? Why were they incognito ? Why wasn't a police detail sent to investigate in the clear light of day instead ? Why wouldn't they tell Khaosod what the evidence they were collecting was ? Or if that was " top secret ", why wouldn't they tell that to Khaosod instead ?

But then, once must inevitably pose questions to the journalistic practices of Khaosod, as shown in this story's coverage :

1. Did you pose any of these legitimate questions to these men ? And if not, why not ?

2. Would you consider - at some point in the future - a policy of interviewing the other side of this story ? But be careful here. The next question is the zinger -

If not, why not ?

I totally get were your coming from about journalism here in Thailand.. BUT gruesome pictures.. I've had worse injuries falling out of bed ...... It may have happened.. but like normal this is total overkill... in hospital beds for bruises.. Christ . no wonder the police aren't't doing anything they are to scared they gonna break a nail.

Serving who?

Should not dress in black, and carry weapons.

my thoughts exactly - considering several protest sites have come under weapons fire at night these police were either extremely stupid or had sinister intent - either way they shouldn't have been there without uniformed police with them

I will leave it here.

Too many comments to the OP are just disgusting and not worth of civil discussion.

I wonder your parents which education gave to you all...

Bit difficult to tell the difference between un-uniformed police and red shirts, unless they have grenades in there pockets.

A sick comment.

These 2 won't be taking any backhanders for a wee while!!

you think that's f*cking funny? two serving officers down? and it's a joke? typical

listen to you... down where?

They got a few bruises and lost some teeth.. they are policemen it CAN happen in the job. I don't condone it, But i do think that with the shooting and explosions these things can happen. But these pictures and story are more PR than anything else.

What ever happened to "Thai rak Thai"?

Sometimes the police get tips on people gathering weapons etc therefore they go and detect/investigate. It has helped stop MANY aof shootings many times. I think it was undeserved and trust me I am NOT one to side with the police normally but......