Bangkok Criminal Court acquits Tarit of power abuse charge

[webfact]

Courts acquits Tarit of power abuse charge



BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court Friday acquitted former chief of the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) of power abuse charge which was brought against him by former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, and former deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban.

Abhisit and Suthep filed power abuse charge against former DSI chief Tarit Pengdit and three other investigators after they concluded the investigation into the military suppression of redshirt protest against the Abhisit government in bloody riot in 2010 which over a hundred of protesters were killed and injured.

In conclusion, the investigation team led by the former DSI chief filed a court case against Abhisit and Suthep charging them of premeditated murders.

Abhisit and Suthep cried foul over the charge saying it was a persecution with intent to put them in jail. Both then brought power abuse charge against Tarit and his 4-member investigation team in the Criminal Court.

But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them.

The court then acquitted Mr Tarit and his team of the power abuse charge brought against them by Abhisit and Suthep.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/courts-acquits-tarit-power-abuse-charge/

[thaipbs]2014-08-08[/thaipbs]

[EricBerg]

Sounds acceptable. Now put him on trial for the crimes he committed. Guilty as hell he is. And please don't forget his Buddy Chalerm. Please don't let him go same Jattuporn with two probation convictions. Criminals should be send to prison.

[CiaranO]

Sounds acceptable. Now put him on trial for the crimes he committed. Guilty as hell he is. And please don't forget his Buddy Chalerm. Please don't let him go same Jattuporn with two probation convictions. Criminals should be send to prison.

I presume you also include yellow shirt criminals too

[Skywalker69]

 

Sounds acceptable. Now put him on trial for the crimes he committed. Guilty as hell he is. And please don't forget his Buddy Chalerm. Please don't let him go same Jattuporn with two probation convictions. Criminals should be send to prison.

I presume you also include yellow shirt criminals too

 

But...But....But....But....

This thread is not about the yellows they are in an other thread.

[NeilSA1]

 

Sounds acceptable. Now put him on trial for the crimes he committed. Guilty as hell he is. And please don't forget his Buddy Chalerm. Please don't let him go same Jattuporn with two probation convictions. Criminals should be send to prison.

I presume you also include yellow shirt criminals too

 

There always seems to be a 'tit-for-tat' response to any legal action against any red. Judging from the comments from most of the TV members (who agree that all wrong doers be punished equally), and the recent actions by the courts, the playing fields are now level.    

Edited August 8, 2014 by NeilSA1

[Mango Bob]

[billd766]

What, yet ANOTHER Thaksinista being found not guilty by the courts?

 

I thought that the red shirt supporters were against every court decision, or is that another double standard?

[winstonc]

[Boxclever]

And so they should! Tarit did nothing but perform his job with diligence. Justice at last.

[chainarong]

The court has spoken , there is still a few other loose ends to tie up , one I referred to the imported luxury spare parts scam, not much done in that area General Prayuth, I am starting to get bad vibes that too many from the top end of town were involved , so why the delay or at the least a progress report.     

[Baerboxer]

And so they should! Tarit did nothing but perform his job with diligence. Justice at last.

 

 

Selective diligence - taken to new heights by Khun Tharit when director of the DSI and second in command of CAPO.

[rubl]

"But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them."

 

I'm somewhat confused with the logic displayed here.

 

The investigation team didn't have substantial evidence when they charged Abhisit/Suthep and therefore they are allowed to indict and bring charges? Isn't it more normal to have substancial evidence before actually charging ?

 

Did something get lost in translation?

[FangFerang]

 

 

Sounds acceptable. Now put him on trial for the crimes he committed. Guilty as hell he is. And please don't forget his Buddy Chalerm. Please don't let him go same Jattuporn with two probation convictions. Criminals should be send to prison.

I presume you also include yellow shirt criminals too

 

But...But....But....But....

This thread is not about the yellows they are in an other thread.

 

But...but...but..has turned into a whinge for 'but'heads, who are really saying  -- stop sniping both sides, after all, only one side is corrupt.  What silliness..  The poster said he thought all criminals should be brought to justice, just like the head of the yellow shirt movement being found guilty of worse charges than those leveled against Thaksin. thaksin was served three years, the other guy was served twenty years...hmm?  No one on the yellow side likes biting that bullet at all...whinge...it's all so unfair, I mean, it's fair because the NCPO is in charge now but, I mean...it must be something has gone terribly wrong...and it still must be...(you got it)..Thaksin..is influencing things...again.

 

Give it a rest. No centrist can believe the implications of but...but..but...because the implications are entirely too uninformed, vacuous and self-serving.

 

Really...sputtering and spitting but...but..but...is a real whiners whinge of a whine cooler. Some people just defend their chosen side as if they own the issue. Sorry -- you cannot even rent the issue. It's not for sale to foreigners.

 

Never saw a but...but...'but'head complain when some yellow punter sallied into the red side without thread, or provocation.  That's okay, because it was, after all, their favorite team player breaking the unwritten rules.

 

In short, see the icon below.  It's a raspberry. Jam that in your sandwich and chew awhile.  Good Thais are trying to become less polarized, as General prayuth asked them, but the TVF farangs keep on with the same driveling song -- 'Our side is best--of course they break the laws like the rest.  Our side is best because...our side is best!"

 

Go back to the rugby match.  Politics seems too complicated for you and such black-and-white thinking.

Edited August 8, 2014 by FangFerang

[Robby nz]

"But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them."

 

I'm somewhat confused with the logic displayed here.

 

The investigation team didn't have substantial evidence when they charged Abhisit/Suthep and therefore they are allowed to indict and bring charges? Isn't it more normal to have substancial evidence before actually charging ?

 

Did something get lost in translation?

 

Thinking that too rubi.

 

Seems something very wrong with indicting someone without substantial evidence.

[Bender]

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

[culicine]

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

right.....

[Baerboxer]

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

 

Suthep and Abhisit = 2 

[JacChang]

"But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them."

 

I'm somewhat confused with the logic displayed here.

 

The investigation team didn't have substantial evidence when they charged Abhisit/Suthep and therefore they are allowed to indict and bring charges? Isn't it more normal to have substancial evidence before actually charging ?

 

Did something get lost in translation?

I think it was referring to the counter sue that Suthep and Abhisit are doing.

 

The original story was that carrot Tarit brought upon an investigation to put charges on Suthep and Abhisit.

 

Then Suthep and Abhisit counter sue Tarit for abuse of power and so on.

 

BUT because the court didn't view the 1st story as true due to lack of evidence. Then the 2nd story by Suthep and Abhisit wouldn't apply because the 1st story failed. So because the 1st story didn't have enough evidence, it "never" reached a conclusion, and ongoing investigation is allowed and legal.

 

In simpler words, Tarit tried to defame Suthep and Abhisit. But the defamation didn't have enough evidence = defamation never happened. If defamation never happened, the counter sue could not apply.

[MaiChai]

Glad someone cleared that up!

[jaidam]

 The red masterminds really didn't think this through properly. So, now that Tarit was "right" to charge Abhisit and Suthep for premeditated murder in the first degree for cleaning(after way too much warning IMO) the steaming pile of crap Thaksin left on the burning Bangkok streets, won't the Darling of Isaan Yingluck be charged in the same way  for all the deaths that occurred to protesters when her govt was in power?

 

 Did the red elite really want to see Yingluck charged with "premeditated murder in the 1st degree"? LOL at their lack of logical thought process.

 

 But it's worse than that. Much worse. As evidence comes almost daily that the terror campaign against the peaceful anti-Thaksin regime was sponsored and organized by the red elite. So, premeditated murder in the 1st degree and sponsoring terrorism? Thanks Tarit, nice job.

 

 

[Arkady]

"But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them."
 
I'm somewhat confused with the logic displayed here.
 
The investigation team didn't have substantial evidence when they charged Abhisit/Suthep and therefore they are allowed to indict and bring charges? Isn't it more normal to have substancial evidence before actually charging ?
 
Did something get lost in translation?

I am also confused. It reads as if Tarit was not guilty of power abuse because he charged them with premeditated murder without substantial evidence. So if he had produced evidence, would he have been convicted?



Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[phutoie2]

 

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

 

Suthep and Abhisit = 2 

 

 

Gosh where would we be without Inspector Numpty of the spelling & grammar Police. Anyone with half a brain cell knew Bender meant to write "only ones"

[Robroona]

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

Why do you wish for that outcome? I believe you have the right to get your wish, but just wonder why you made that statement.

It is like me saying " I hope Bender is insane". I have no idea if he is or not, but I said it

[rubl]

 

And one day, soon i hope, the only one who will be found guilty are suthep and abhisit.

 

Why do you wish for that outcome? I believe you have the right to get your wish, but just wonder why you made that statement.

It is like me saying " I hope Bender is insane". I have no idea if he is or not, but I said it

 

 

It's almost as if you try to suggest that if bender would be sane he wouldn't write what he did 

[JacChang]

 

"But at the hearing of the ruling, the court judge said that the investigation team has not yet had substantial evidence to prove both Abhisit and Suthep had done wrong as it charged them of premeditated murder in connection with the suppression of protesters.

Therefore the judge said the investigation team has the right within the scope of its authority to indict and bring charge against both of them."
 
I'm somewhat confused with the logic displayed here.
 
The investigation team didn't have substantial evidence when they charged Abhisit/Suthep and therefore they are allowed to indict and bring charges? Isn't it more normal to have substancial evidence before actually charging ?
 
Did something get lost in translation?

I am also confused. It reads as if Tarit was not guilty of power abuse because he charged them with premeditated murder without substantial evidence. So if he had produced evidence, would he have been convicted?



Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

 

It gets complicated with law.

 

I will try to use another example. Remember, these are all only examples used only for the use of explanation, and not real.

 

Law 1) Police cannot trespass any civilian property to search for criminal activities unless given 3 days advance notice.

 

The police head on Monday was tipped that a civilian house on a specific property on Tuesday would have drugs.

 

The police went in on Tuesday and busted that compound, and really did found drugs. They started a case, and charge the civilian with possession of drugs.

 

The civilian countered sue on the clause of Law 1, stating the police didn't give 3 days advance notice. The case also goes to court.

 

The police, being protective of themselves, and aware of the Law 1, CANNOT under any circumstances state they have trespassed into private property without warning and found the drugs. Instead, the police state, they have witnesses who report there are drugs on the property. And "ongoing investigation" is still going. This all leads to the court saying Case 1 rejected, due to lack of sufficient evidence. If case 1 failed, the police "never trespassed the compound, never found the drugs, nothing happened", case 2 will not apply because case 1 "suddenly never happened".

 

Edit: Addition

So yes, I think if Tarit did provide the evidence and the court accepted the evidence. Case 2 would be upon him as well, and Tarit convicted.

 

Use the prior example to see it more clearly. If from my example, the police provided evidence to Case 1, stating they found drugs and confiscated it by trespassing. Case 1 would have enough evidence, because the police as first hand witness, actually went into the compound and found the drugs. But because of doing so, they broke Law 1. Then they will face the counter sue of Case 2, in which case 2 will be successful as well.

Edited August 9, 2014 by JacChang