Jump to content

Yingluck's lawyer petitions for justice again


Recommended Posts

Posted

Yingluck's lawyer petitions for justice again

Yingluck-19-wpcf_728x413.jpg

BANGKOK: -- Former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawata resubmitted petition to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC ) today seeking testimony of eight more witnesses to defend her for alleged negligence of duty, and corruption in the rice-pledging scheme.

Her lawyer Noravich Laleng was designated to submit the petition to the NACC after earlier petition for witness testimony was rejected.

She claimed in the petition Tuesday that any rejection to hear witness testimony from eight witnesses would be unfair to her to defend the alleged corruption case.

She said this was not to delay the NACC’s inquiry case but merely for justice to prove her innocence in the allegations.

She wanted the NACC to clearly check the 2.977 million tons of rice stockpiles which she assured did not go missing and to not rush to conclude its finding by basing on the figures released by the auditing committee.

NACC’s suspension of all witnesses in the rice-pledging scheme is unfair to her and will only mislead the public into believing that widespread corruption prevailed in the scheme as the ongoing stockpile checks are still underway and not yet finished.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/yinglucks-lawyer-petition-justices/

thaipbs_logo.jpg
-- Thai PBS 2014-07-08

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

is unfair to her and will only mislead the public into believing that widespread corruption prevailed in the scheme

Really, well I never ...........................

  • Like 1
Posted

If they have nothing to worry about, why not let her have her witnesses, surely this would be a fair way to find out the truth. Rather than to suppress any evidence whatsoever. coffee1.gif

what evidence? She never attended a meeting. Farmers didn't get paid. Now she is trying to blame the so corrupted farmers. These are the facts. Need any wittiness for no show?

  • Like 2
Posted

If there existed real justice back then, the Thaksin clan and their close members should be punished.

What kind of justice is she looking for? Hiding the truth? Stealing a lot of money? It is a pay back time for her for what she did.

  • Like 2
Posted

Yingluck already has a gaggle of witnesses. What's wrong with them, and why does she want more ? She is now trying to defend the indefensible. Not a clever move, and as one who used to have some sympathy for her, I hope she gets held accountable to the full extent of the law.

  • Like 1
Posted

justice must be seen to be done

outcome of the trial has probably been decided

no they still need to decide if beheading or hanging.

  • Like 1
Posted

For what it's worth, although a god-almighty waste of the courts time hearing these irrelevant character witnesses, they might be better off allowing their testimony. It's not as if there is a cat in hell's chance of her proving she was not head of the rice committee. It's a cold, hard fact that she was the head, at least in name. Allowing their testimony might slow the shin lovers monotonous drone of "politically motivated, unfair trial, kangaroo court" etc etc

This is a momentous and quite thrilling period in Thai history. A big fish, after losing her megabucks PR team, unable to flee the borders, will actually face trial, and Allah Inshallah will get the justice she so deserves.

Totally agree. wonder if any of the witnesses were involved in the inspections carried out during her term that found little or no irregularities.

I'm pretty certain she can prove she wasn't directly involved in allowing corruption due to her lack of attendance at meetings and ordering the previously mentioned inspections. Whether her lack of attendance is able to be used to prove negligence I don't know.

I can understand that she wasn't going to be able to do a good job as PM due to her lack of experience but she was CEO of at least one Shin company which I would have thought involved attending meetings and arguing the case for your proposed actions and standing up and explaining those actions. Bearing in mind her habit of not being at meetings or parliament it makes me wonder how real the CEO position was as well.

  • Like 1
Posted

Of course had the rice scheme worked Yingluck would have been the first to claim responsibility for its success. Just like Thaksin took Chuans' credit for the success of the IMF bailout.

  • Like 1
Posted

The lady is desperate. I'm sure that the witnesses have been well scripted already with alibis for her. Each witness will ask one after the other for a postponement of a month after each session with the hope that the case can be dragged out until the next elections.

Posted

For what it's worth, although a god-almighty waste of the courts time hearing these irrelevant character witnesses, they might be better off allowing their testimony. It's not as if there is a cat in hell's chance of her proving she was not head of the rice committee. It's a cold, hard fact that she was the head, at least in name. Allowing their testimony might slow the shin lovers monotonous drone of "politically motivated, unfair trial, kangaroo court" etc etc

This is a momentous and quite thrilling period in Thai history. A big fish, after losing her megabucks PR team, unable to flee the borders, will actually face trial, and Allah Inshallah will get the justice she so deserves.

Totally agree. wonder if any of the witnesses were involved in the inspections carried out during her term that found little or no irregularities.

I'm pretty certain she can prove she wasn't directly involved in allowing corruption due to her lack of attendance at meetings and ordering the previously mentioned inspections. Whether her lack of attendance is able to be used to prove negligence I don't know.

I can understand that she wasn't going to be able to do a good job as PM due to her lack of experience but she was CEO of at least one Shin company which I would have thought involved attending meetings and arguing the case for your proposed actions and standing up and explaining those actions. Bearing in mind her habit of not being at meetings or parliament it makes me wonder how real the CEO position was as well.

Chalerm was leading the inspection teams if i remember correctly.
  • Like 1
Posted

justice must be seen to be done

outcome of the trial has probably been decided

I must agree. It does seem that incompetence and corruption on Yingluck's part, albeit on behalf of her brother, is self-evident and clear cut.

Posted

Do I see some similarities with Junta appointed AEC taking legal action against Taksin who also refused to hear 300 witnesses and re-consider 100 additional pieces of evidence? Got to find the reason to justify an action.

Posted

Do I see some similarities with Junta appointed AEC taking legal action against Taksin who also refused to hear 300 witnesses and re-consider 100 additional pieces of evidence? Got to find the reason to justify an action.

You mean the same biased AEC that did not pursue the case against Yingluck (Ample Rich share dividends)?

  • Like 2
Posted

I guess she has too keep up the lies in order not to lose the support from those red shirts who still believe all her previous lies. Every day pictures and evidence of rice scam corruption is published in the newspapers, yet I am sure there are still some naive Shinawatra supporters out there.

She is obviously just trying to delay the case against her, but anyway, if I was the court, I would tell her she can bring one last list of a limited amount of witnesses to be heard, provided she agreein writing not to bring any more witnesses after that.

  • Like 1
Posted

For what it's worth, although a god-almighty waste of the courts time hearing these irrelevant character witnesses, they might be better off allowing their testimony. It's not as if there is a cat in hell's chance of her proving she was not head of the rice committee. It's a cold, hard fact that she was the head, at least in name. Allowing their testimony might slow the shin lovers monotonous drone of "politically motivated, unfair trial, kangaroo court" etc etc

This is a momentous and quite thrilling period in Thai history. A big fish, after losing her megabucks PR team, unable to flee the borders, will actually face trial, and Allah Inshallah will get the justice she so deserves.

Totally agree. wonder if any of the witnesses were involved in the inspections carried out during her term that found little or no irregularities.

I'm pretty certain she can prove she wasn't directly involved in allowing corruption due to her lack of attendance at meetings and ordering the previously mentioned inspections. Whether her lack of attendance is able to be used to prove negligence I don't know.

I can understand that she wasn't going to be able to do a good job as PM due to her lack of experience but she was CEO of at least one Shin company which I would have thought involved attending meetings and arguing the case for your proposed actions and standing up and explaining those actions. Bearing in mind her habit of not being at meetings or parliament it makes me wonder how real the CEO position was as well.

When she left that position she wasn't replaced so can't have been contributing too much to the enterprise.

A request for more witnesses can only be stalling for time.

  • Like 1

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...