Jump to content

Court approves warrants for Kritsuda, two other reds over weapons cache


Lite Beer

Recommended Posts

So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?

 

How would I know that? The fact is I don't. I wasn't there, and no evidence has been given by anyone, on any side, only allegations. People have opinions, which is fine —  IF AND ONLY IF the opinions are backed by the (relatively few) available facts. 

 

That was my point about your post. She did not fail to report. When ordered to report, she was in fact already in army custody. People are going to believe she was (not) tortured and people are going to believe she was (not) supplying weapons, but it is nothing more than belief. Trying to insert unfactual information can only make your beliefs seem even weirder than they are.

 

For me: I think that given Thai army history, a torture allegation is credible and deserves to be properly investigated. I think that allegations that Kritsuda gave/sold guns to people is credible and deserves proper investigation. Neither allegation has apparently received any investigation at all.

 

I think that the army's actions in the Kritsuda case are, or border on, criminal. It has failed to act on evidence of a crime, and the very best you can say is that officers of several units, at levels up to the head office of the coup administration, did not perform their duty as expected in serial incidents.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

 

So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?

 

How would I know that? The fact is I don't. I wasn't there, and no evidence has been given by anyone, on any side, only allegations. People have opinions, which is fine —  IF AND ONLY IF the opinions are backed by the (relatively few) available facts. 

 

That was my point about your post. She did not fail to report. When ordered to report, she was in fact already in army custody. People are going to believe she was (not) tortured and people are going to believe she was (not) supplying weapons, but it is nothing more than belief. Trying to insert unfactual information can only make your beliefs seem even weirder than they are.

 

For me: I think that given Thai army history, a torture allegation is credible and deserves to be properly investigated. I think that allegations that Kritsuda gave/sold guns to people is credible and deserves proper investigation. Neither allegation has apparently received any investigation at all.

 

I think that the army's actions in the Kritsuda case are, or border on, criminal. It has failed to act on evidence of a crime, and the very best you can say is that officers of several units, at levels up to the head office of the coup administration, did not perform their duty as expected in serial incidents.

 

 

Didn't fail to report because already apprehended? If already apprehended there is no need to summon someone to report.

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

Edited by rubl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't fail to report because already apprehended? If already apprehended there is no need to summon someone to report.

 

Gee, you'd think so, anyway. And yet she was in custody, and she was summoned. Or, to be exquisitely and exactly correct, that is what the army (credibly) states, specifically the celebrity spokesman Col Winthai.

 

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

And yet the "real fact" is that she was in custody by one office, and the main office summoned her. The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that. Do you have any evidence? I bet you don't.

 

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

I guess they should have. Or just handled it themselves, since it's martial law and they have that right, also.

 

Yet they did neither.

 

Me, I think they acted incompetently and there was malfeasance in one or more military offices. But I only say that based on available facts and evidence made public by the RTA. Unfortunately, there is either a lot more facts and evidence the army will not currently release - or the army is lying, there is no third possibility. So it's tough coming to an informed opinion really, and mine is certainly open to change in case more facts emerge.

 

.

Edited by wandasloan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A post in which the quoted content had been snipped and altered to change the context of the post has been removed as well as a reply: 

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

And yet the "real fact" is that she was in custody by one office, and the main office summoned her. The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that. Do you have any evidence? I bet you don't.

 

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

I guess they should have. Or just handled it themselves, since it's martial law and they have that right, also.

 

Yet they did neither.

 

Me, I think they acted incompetently and there was malfeasance in one or more military offices. But I only say that based on available facts and evidence made public by the RTA. Unfortunately, there is either a lot more facts and evidence the army will not currently release - or the army is lying, there is no third possibility. So it's tough coming to an informed opinion really, and mine is certainly open to change in case more facts emerge.

 

.

 

 

1. "The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that."

I wrote "the army could help her to report"

 

2. letting suspects go.

As it would seem no one likes the army to detain people without proper 'proof' as to why, it seems a bit hilarious to complain the army let someone go as there wasn't sufficient evidence yet.

 

BTW ''malfeasance" ? As in "the willful and intentional action that injures a party." ? Do you want to claim here that k. Krisuda was injured if only in a legal sense? Should she complain that she wasn't handed over to the police to get nicely charged ? I'm afraid I have problems understanding your use of "malfeasance".

 

Anyway, k. Kritsuda has arrest warrants open against her, is in 'self-exile' and the case against her will be waiting till she comes back to acknowledge the charges or till the case can be dropped

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

seriously they try to make us believe, this 40 kg woman does the same job than Viktor Bout? really?cheesy.gif

Which yellow came with this stupid allegation? the mad monk???

 

 

and except the yellow looney on this forum, who they want to fool? Because any people with more than 2 brains cells....whistling.gif

 

What does her weight have to do with buying and distributing "war weapons", come now Mr Bender, time to wear boxing gloves to bed!!!  biggrin.pngwai.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these so-called Red trouble-makers are just misunderstood innocents on trumped up charges.  What about  Suthep, Abhisit & "the yellow monk?"   Seriously, these bleeding heart PTP/UDD apologists make me sick.  Don't like the time???  Shouldn'ta done the crime.  Oh I forgot, your lot was the democratically elected governent then & bosses in UDD promised nothing could go wrong, click, could go wrong, click, could go wrong, clickj, could go wrong!

Edited by The Deerhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."
 
This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.
 
For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?
 

 

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

 

 

I asked you to correct this and you haven't. Did you miss my request? I take it quite seriously.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."
 
This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.
 
For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?
 

 

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

 

 

I asked you to correct this and you haven't. Did you miss my request? I take it quite seriously.

 

 

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

I didn't claim that she 'smiled for the camera' - your words (in my mouth). I'm responding to your claims that she may have done it under duress and, equally, your unfounded claim that she may not have asked to stay in custody. My claims are as much a possibility as yours and patronising comments don't add to yours.

 

I am certainly not 'gobsmacked' that you cannot accept contrary opinions that are very much as strong as yours - your history of pretence of being unbiased towards the military is being repeated.

 

I agree that the army should allow an investigation into the claims of torture. How?

 

The army has nothing to investigate as far as the weapons allegations are concerned - these have been made by arrested suspects (by the police) and the court has approved arrest warrants for the woman and others. Nowhere in the Op does it say they are relying on photo(s). This is purely a smokescreen to attempt to make the weak torture allegations look slightly less weak. The military have a damn site more credibility than posters using innuendo.

 

I'm certainly not shooting you personally or virtually, but I will shoot down any of your messages that I think are untrue or wild conjecture.

 

Edited by khunken
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

 

Like Pheu Thai spokesperson Prompong used to say "I accuse you. It's up to you to prove me wrong".

 

In the mean time some like to pressure the army, junta, NCPO into being more likable. Strange, really. Next we'll see people talking about government when discussing the NCPO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

.........................."And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese."..............................

 

Perhaps, wanda4, it is not the message you are carrying that annoys people to no end, but the way you are carrying it. Every post you have posted since joining TV has reeked of condescension. Us "mere males" have feelings too, you know. Lighten up !     thumbsup.gif

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".
 
Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?
 
Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.
 
Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

There's no proof of course but then there's no proof she was tortured or that her weight would stop her giving someone weapons either.

I guess you don't have a background in science then. Is quite difficult to probe something didn't happen. Try proving other redshirts didn't torture her for propaganda.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. blink.png

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. blink.png

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

 

Thank you, uncle  wub.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. blink.png

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

 

 

Yes - particularly as AleG has posted in this thread that her accused partner in crime - the red shirt poet - was murdered in April.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

To escape justice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thai Airways should be making a profit this year with all the Thai people leaving the country.

...free seats in First Class as usual, plus the 20 large suitcases direct to the tarmac...

 

by the way, has YS returned as promised??

Edited by bangon04
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

 

 

I appreciate that. 

 

In these days, in this atmosphere, anyone might/could be accused. Anyone who tempts that or tests that is a fool. At least.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

Lots of words with no facts. 
 - seems to be talking about himself. Lots of hot air with nothing solid as usual.

 

You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen

- You can't prove god doesn't exist so surely he must. Same pile of crap as what you just said. The onus is on her to prove the wrong doing she alleged DID happen, same as the authorities must prove she did what they said she did. I know which one my bet is on.

 

Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.

- As commented by djjamie, it is very well known and documented. Again you are all hot air.

 

Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

- Because she is guilty as hell and like Pistorious she doesn't have a leg to stand on.....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

 

 

I appreciate that. 

 

In these days, in this atmosphere, anyone might/could be accused. Anyone who tempts that or tests that is a fool. At least.

 

 

Sorry, but 'tempts that', or 'tests that'? What you mean with 'that' ? Do you mean 'tempting or testing to be accused'? Please some explanation.

 

BTW even in previous times any one could be accused, even when the police had clear evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seriously they try to make us believe, this 40 kg woman does the same job than Viktor Bout? really?cheesy.gif

Which yellow came with this stupid allegation? the mad monk???

 

 

and except the yellow looney on this forum, who they want to fool? Because any people with more than 2 brains cells....whistling.gif

Because any people with more than 2 brains cells..

 

Clearly you do not belong to that group....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

indeed... she might have been wise to have kept quiet about any torture (if there was any). Now I feel, as they say Snatch "she's proper fooked"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...
""