webfact Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 PM Yingluck's lawyer not worried about rice case BANGKOK, 21 April 2014 (NNT) – The lawyer of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is confident that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) will not rule the Premier guilty of charges in connection with the rice pledging scheme.Mr. Bancha Parameesanaporn, Miss Yingluck's lawyer, said he was not worried about the rice case although the NACC had refused to hear from two more witnesses, citing as reason that it had enough information on the case.He said the NACC had violated Section 157 of the Criminal Code for not hearing new witnesses as requested, and he would this week file a complaint against the NACC regarding the matter.The lawyer went on to say that if the NACC ruled against Miss Yingluck, he would ask the Criminal Court to investigate the anti-corruption body for ignoring its duty and its wrongful conduct.The NACC last week resolved not to allow any more witnesses on the Prime Minister’s side in the rice fraud case, claiming the information received so far was already adequate.-- NNT 2014-04-21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post winstonc Posted April 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he aint worried he will be paid unlike the farmers.. 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong38 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Perhaps he knows something we dont eh? Perhaps others know something he does not eh? Will he be Yingluck's lawyer in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TVGerry Posted April 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 21, 2014 They should be worried but they're not. They have an army of paid red thugs on standby with the addresses of the NACC members. But intimidation won't work this time. Just have that private jet on standby, Poo. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costas2008 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Mr. Bancha Parameesanaporn, Miss Yingluck's lawyer, will need plenty of Paracetamol after the NACC, will rule the Premier guilty of charges. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseFrank Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The lawyer of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is confident that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) will not rule the Premier guilty of charges in connection with the rice pledging scheme. Another weatherman turned lawyer. The lawyer went on to say that if the NACC ruled against Miss Yingluck, he would ask the Criminal Court to investigate the anti-corruption body for ignoring its duty and its wrongful conduct. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patjem Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Insider info the the lunchboxes have been suitably loaded, then? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rametindallas Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Need.To.Delay.Until.Find.Acceptable.Intermediary.To.Pass.The.Money. OR, "Just found intermediary LOL". I hope he's bluffing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he aint worried he will be paid unlike the farmers.. and if things go pear shaped it's not him that has to bear the consequences except maybe the wrath of a certain big brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The lawyer of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is confident that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) will not rule the Premier guilty of charges in connection with the rice pledging scheme. Another weatherman turned lawyer. The lawyer went on to say that if the NACC ruled against Miss Yingluck, he would ask the Criminal Court to investigate the anti-corruption body for ignoring its duty and its wrongful conduct. More intimidation and more contempt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uty6543 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he aint worried he will be paid unlike the farmers.. And if she is convicted he will get paid more for appeals. Also if all the appeals are lost he won't have to go to jail with his client. Lawyers never lose. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatsujin Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Section 157: Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions to the injury of any person, or dishonestly exercises or omits to exercise any of his functions, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years or fined of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht, or both. So the PT lawyers know the law better than anyone else? Based on past performance from them, I'd hazard a guess that they don't know shit from Shinola based on their previous "(mis)interpretations" of the law. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I see it reported that Kitterat gave the NACC 60 pages of evidence. I have to assume that coming from the minister of finance involved with the scheme that the 60 pages would be a full and accurate accounting of the scheme audit by independent auditors showing that there was absolutely no corruption involved. That would be the ultimate defense which would account for the lawyers lack of worry and certainty that they would find in Yinglucks favor. But then again if she is found not guilty he will be out of a job while a guilty verdict will mean he can continue defending her through the next step of the proceedings and keep charging all those exorbitant fees. (Paid by the tax payer ?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbamboo Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he aint worried he will be paid unlike the farmers.. And if she is convicted he will get paid more for appeals. Also if all the appeals are lost he won't have to go to jail with his client. Lawyers never lose. Somchai did...... but he was batting for the wrong side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Scamper Posted April 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Contempt of court is becoming a daily fancy of Pheu Thai. Intimidation plus. This " lawyer " relays the following - - he is confident the NACC will rule Yingluck not guilty. ( Isn't he supposed to say he's confident his client is innocent ? Or are we missing a distinction here ? ) - Section 157 of the Criminal Code gives any witness the power to recall hundreds upon hundreds of witnesses - her cook, her cleaner - the sky's the limit. ( Pheu Thai lawyer mantra - if you find yourself charged with anything, don't worry. Just get a telephone book and start with the " A's " ) - he will file a charge with the Criminal Court against the NACC - of course, if the NACC find her innocent, those charges will be dropped, even though no more witnesses were granted. Yes, this " lawyer " certainly does very confident, doesn't he ? In the meantime, he may wish to begin researching his own defense against intimidation of a constitutional empowered agency. Edited April 21, 2014 by Scamper 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post semester Posted April 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 21, 2014 PM Yingluck's lawyer not worried about rice case 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Section 157: Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions to the injury of any person, or dishonestly exercises or omits to exercise any of his functions, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years or fined of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht, or both. So the PT lawyers know the law better than anyone else? Based on past performance from them, I'd hazard a guess that they don't know shit from Shinola based on their previous "(mis)interpretations" of the law. There you have the defense Tatsujin : It says HIS so therefore does not apply to Yingluck. Case dismissed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seajae Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he isnt, he would be well aware of which flight she will be on to avoid any any possible jail time, I am sure thaksin and yl will be happy living together and bitching about how hard done by they are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoopyDoo Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 This guy is just saying what he has been paid to say. Nothing new here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chainarong Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 If this or any other cases are before the court and are subject to court determination, and opinions and are being conveyed indirectly or directly to the courts about judgements from out side of the court , then this is sub- judicial , all these people should be handed summons for contempt of court , if a court is siting you keep your mouth shut in most western Countries , err those with Democracy. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
looping Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Same same... If she's found guilty it's not fair and they won't accept it. Moving on... Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 of course he aint worried he will be paid unlike the farmers.. Unless he's taken the case on a contingency basis if such a thing exists here although I can't see many Thai lawyers taking that risk. If the NACC finds against YL he might not get paid and could become yet another lawyer who joins the ranks of the ' disappeared '. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lungmi Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> They should be worried but they're not. They have an army of paid red thugs on standby with the addresses of the NACC members. But intimidation won't work this time. Just have that private jet on standby, Poo. Chiang Mai airport is open 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pib Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Mr. Bancha Parameesanaporn, Miss Yingluck's lawyer, will need plenty of Paracetamol after the NACC, will rule the Premier guilty of charges. No problem, Thai doctors/hospitals/pharmacies issue Para like it's candy...and of course you can pickup a bottle/pack of Para from 50 different manufacturers at any store. I'm sure Yinluck and her lawyer have plenty already laying around the house and they are most likely taking it as we'll speak. If there is one legal drug in Thailand that is the national drug it's Para. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Section 157: Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions to the injury of any person, or dishonestly exercises or omits to exercise any of his functions, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years or fined of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht, or both. So the PT lawyers know the law better than anyone else? Based on past performance from them, I'd hazard a guess that they don't know shit from Shinola based on their previous "(mis)interpretations" of the law. It's the same approach as the NACC used against the government. One should put the comments of legal counsel in perspective. Defense counsel will never say, oh my client is guilty. They always put out a positive message, even though he basically admits that he anticipates a finding of culpability because he raises the appeal option. He has laid out the basis on which he will appeal the finding, which we all know was pre-determined some time ago. By laying out the appeal process, it is intended to calm people as well, as it is to be expected that some will use this as an excuse for violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginjag Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 They should be worried but they're not. They have an army of paid red thugs on standby with the addresses of the NACC members. But intimidation won't work this time. Just have that private jet on standby, Poo. Would be good to have a rotation of aircraft SPOTTERS at Chiang Mai, collecting numbers of aircraft, especially private, or chartered. Looking up who owns them and report back. OK I know I cannot, but there are enthusiasts around. Posters interested. This lawyer is saying the same of the rest----intimidation tactics-- The Shins forever use this method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Bruce Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 NACC will not let defense witnesses give evidence? <deleted>! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pib Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 First two phrases lawyers learn in school are: - My client is innocent. - We will appeal. They say these phrases over and over and over until they become automatic statements in any trial or press release....they become like involuntary reflexes...just like breathing and blinking your eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatsujin Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Section 157: Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions to the injury of any person, or dishonestly exercises or omits to exercise any of his functions, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years or fined of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht, or both. So the PT lawyers know the law better than anyone else? Based on past performance from them, I'd hazard a guess that they don't know shit from Shinola based on their previous "(mis)interpretations" of the law. It's the same approach as the NACC used against the government. One should put the comments of legal counsel in perspective. Defense counsel will never say, oh my client is guilty. They always put out a positive message, even though he basically admits that he anticipates a finding of culpability because he raises the appeal option. He has laid out the basis on which he will appeal the finding, which we all know was pre-determined some time ago. By laying out the appeal process, it is intended to calm people as well, as it is to be expected that some will use this as an excuse for violence. "pre-determined" as in she broke the law and will be found guilty of doing so, in this I agree with you. The rest of your interpretation of his words/thoughts/actions I mostly disagree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiisnotrequired Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 There are only 2 possible reasons why she wouldn't be found guilty. Brown envelopes flying around, or death threats. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now