Thai court dismisses murder charges against former PM Abhisit

[ianf]

The dismissal seems a lot like an amnesty to me.

Why? Nothing to do with an amnesty. It was an ill-thought prosecution from the legal point of view which was designed to serve certain political interests and appease red supporters. Anyone who has followed these events closely will understand the nature of events at the time and the enormous pressure under which Abhisit operated in 2010. Indeed he was at pains to bring the whole episode to an end but the reds wouldn't have it. He even offered an election, something the reds demanded, but they turned that down. Why? Because violence and a bloody crackdown was their ultimate aim. If these events had occurred in any European democracy I firmly believe we would have seen more deaths than we did in Thailand at the time. Further, the reds keep banging on about 90+ deaths but they'll never tell you how many of these deaths were caused by weapons under the control of their own red leadership/propagandists. Anyone thinking this is a simple amnesty certainly does not understand these events.

[oldsailor35]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

seems to bring back many old sayings

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones

If you want to play in the road do not complain if you get hit

yes some one has to take responsibility

but as many thais will tell you if Farlang where not there at the time it would not have happened

so is it not true if The Red shirts had not taken over the streets there would have been no deaths

Guess another saying is true

If you make your bed

you have to lie in it

My 5 bahts worth

And if that young nurse had not done what she was sworn to do i.e. Minister to the sick and wounded and to try to save lives. She would not have been mercylessly gunned down on the orders of Khun Suthep.

[oldsailor35]

The charge was political anyway by the Shin government. Why should Abhisit have been charged with murder when he was doing his duty as PM to disperse the crowds. He didn't plot to kill them.

No but his deputy Khun Suthep ordered the gunning down of harmless Thai citizens. I honestly do not consider Abishit to be as ruthless as Suthep, who from what is evident, would no, and did not, hesitate to order the army to use live ammunition to put down citizens protest.

Edited August 28, 2014 by oldsailor35

[oldsailor35]

"The Red Shirts are mostly supporters of billionaire tycoon turned premier Thaksin Shinawatra, who was toppled in a previous coup in 2006 and lives in self-exile to avoid prison for a corruption conviction."

No he wasn't toppled. He is not in exile, but is a criminal fleeing justice.

Justice trumped up by a military appointed court set up with the intention of getting rid of Thaksin, something that could not be done through the ballot box.

[kimamey]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

seems to bring back many old sayings

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones

If you want to play in the road do not complain if you get hit

yes some one has to take responsibility

but as many thais will tell you if Farlang where not there at the time it would not have happened

so is it not true if The Red shirts had not taken over the streets there would have been no deaths

Guess another saying is true

If you make your bed

you have to lie in it

My 5 bahts worth

And if that young nurse had not done what she was sworn to do i.e. Minister to the sick and wounded and to try to save lives. She would not have been mercylessly gunned down on the orders of Khun Suthep.

Ok where's the evidence that Suthep ordered the shooting of the nurse?

I've seen the translation of the ROE and it isn't in there. In fact there aren't any orders to kill anyone only permission to shoot in certain circumstances of which hers wasn't one.

I've tried to find the ROE but I can't at the moment but I did find this.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/01/30/expert-testimony-alleges-criminal-acts-by-thai-army-in-april-may-2010/

This seems to be evidence from one of Robert Amsterdam's experts that says the army weren't following orders.

Edited August 28, 2014 by kimamey

[oldsailor35]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

There does need to be accountability from politicians and the military and Abhisit and Suthep were prepared to go to court to defend themselves. It's not their fault or the fault of the criminal court that it was sent to them when it was obvious they couldn't hear the case. The lawyers told them this but they ignored it. I suspect the idea was that it would get thrown out without the evidence being heard which was unlikely to back up the charges anyway but it could still be used to discredit Abhisit.

What evidence do you have that Abhisit is 'objectionable'? Is it the class he was born into which is hardly his fault or the actions of his father which were not his fault either?

As for his class, have you seen where he lived after he was born in Princess Mary Maternity Hospital Newcastle, an NHS hospital?

http://goo.gl/maps/rWZQ7

It's the one with the blue car in front. The door is on the left and it's the upstairs flat with 2 bedrooms. Very palatial and upper class.

As for a government they haven't chosen remember that Thaksin wasn't in the election but still seems have had a lot of control and didn't trust most of the elected members of his party. Add to that the case in this thread and I think you can see who's really objectionable.

Of course they were prepared to go to court, knowing full well that the court would be sympathic to their cause. A fact now bourne out with this decision. They knew that they were on a win win situation.

[Bluespunk]

"The Red Shirts are mostly supporters of billionaire tycoon turned premier Thaksin Shinawatra, who was toppled in a previous coup in 2006 and lives in self-exile to avoid prison for a corruption conviction."

No he wasn't toppled. He is not in exile, but is a criminal fleeing justice.

Justice trumped up by a military appointed court set up with the intention of getting rid of Thaksin, something that could not be done through the ballot box.

Nope. He was a crook. He got caught. He was convicted. He ran away.

[Bluespunk]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

There does need to be accountability from politicians and the military and Abhisit and Suthep were prepared to go to court to defend themselves. It's not their fault or the fault of the criminal court that it was sent to them when it was obvious they couldn't hear the case. The lawyers told them this but they ignored it. I suspect the idea was that it would get thrown out without the evidence being heard which was unlikely to back up the charges anyway but it could still be used to discredit Abhisit.

What evidence do you have that Abhisit is 'objectionable'? Is it the class he was born into which is hardly his fault or the actions of his father which were not his fault either?

As for his class, have you seen where he lived after he was born in Princess Mary Maternity Hospital Newcastle, an NHS hospital?

http://goo.gl/maps/rWZQ7

It's the one with the blue car in front. The door is on the left and it's the upstairs flat with 2 bedrooms. Very palatial and upper class.

As for a government they haven't chosen remember that Thaksin wasn't in the election but still seems have had a lot of control and didn't trust most of the elected members of his party. Add to that the case in this thread and I think you can see who's really objectionable.

Of course they were prepared to go to court, knowing full well that the court would be sympathic to their cause. A fact now bourne out with this decision. They knew that they were on a win win situation.

Maybe they knew the charges were complete BS, part of the PT effort to get an amnesty for the DL, and as such had no validity or basis in fact. They could have weasled their way out of it by accepting the "give thaksin what he wants" amnesty bill, but chose instead to fight their case in court and not run away. If only all politicians were willing to do the same.

[Robby nz]

So zero accountability for 100 plus deaths. Disgusting.

Red inflation is alive and well.

In total there were 91 deaths and at least a third of those were directly caused by bullets and grenades fired by the armed element of the red rioters.

For instance the army Colonel posthumously promoted to general whose wife is still trying to get his death investigated. She may have more luck now Tarit has gone.

Then there was the lady who was killed by the grenade attack on the sky train station.

The accountability must come from those who were leading what was in fact an armed rebellion attempting to oust a legal Government.

Had there been no shots fired or grenades thrown at the army there would have been no live fire retaliation.

If you attack an army with weapons of war you must expect retaliation in kind.

The red leaders had every chance to call off their riots and send their followers home when Abhisit agreed to their terms for an early election, his agreement was at first accepted and the red leaders agreed to call off the riots.

The next day that had changed and the agreement withdrawn, we can only speculate that the boss from overseas had vetoed the idea as he needed more blood.

Any deaths and injuries after that were the direct responsibility of the decision not to end the riots and must rest with those who made that decision.

It should be noted that one of the red leaders Veera walked out after the recanting of the decision to pack up and accept the terms offered, he could see what was coming and wanted no part of it.

The red leaders have all been charged with various offences up to and including terrorism and have left a huge trail of evidence against themselves.

Their day in court will come and that evidence will all be rehashed and should prove beyond all doubt where responsibility lies. Accountability will come.

[rametindallas]

Of course the murder charge was dismissed. All criminal charges against these totalitarian/fascist criminals will be dismissed. How soon for the International Court of Justice to lay charges of crimes against humanity against these murderers. Absolutely sickening what is going on in Thailand!

Look what jumped out of the box, someone not so clever it would seem.

You probably forgot that on the 31st of January 2011 the legal representatives of the UDD requested the ICC (aka International Criminal Court) to look into possible crimes against humanity. Dr. weng as Pheu Thai MP even made suggestions to temporarily grant the ICC the right to look into 'all' he thought they might need.

Till now no reaction as the ICC doesn't comment on cases in the very early stages. For a while we had Robert A. report once in a while on "progress" and "under consideration", but it has been quiet for a while now.

So, all this leaves us with 'innocent, charges dismissed'. You may now jump back into the box you come from.

(PS according to Bernard Woolley "'"Under consideration" means we've lost the file. "Under active consideration" means we're trying to find it!""

Love the 'Bernard Woolley' reference. He would be an asset to any government in the world.

[See the bears]

Why don't you mention the brutal bombings and killings of officials and civilians by the red shirts in your propaganda piece? The ones who started this mess.

In stead of talking about a monk who wasn't even around in 2010.

PAD officially formed Feb 8, 2006 (although Sondhi's weekly rants preceded that date) . The reds first formed after the coup which occurred on 19 September 2006.

[metisdead]

Off topic deflection posts have been removed as well as the replies.

[bangrak]

Probably the correct decision given the circumstances at the time, however could the court not have mentioned it had no jurisdiction at a slightly earlier time in proceedings?

No the Court could not, considering the 'pressure' from PTP/UDD/DSI/AG, Shins, and 'grandmaster' Thaksin'...

[bangrak]

It said the only court with the authority to consider the allegations was the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions.

Presumably the only organisation with the power to bring a case against them to the designated "proper" court would be the NACC. One would have thought that this decision could have been made back in December 2013, when the Court accepted to hear the case. Of course that was pre-coup, Oh, well.

Fabby being in favour of the NACC, today we can tell we have seen it all, curtain, please, LOL

[kimamey]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

There does need to be accountability from politicians and the military and Abhisit and Suthep were prepared to go to court to defend themselves. It's not their fault or the fault of the criminal court that it was sent to them when it was obvious they couldn't hear the case. The lawyers told them this but they ignored it. I suspect the idea was that it would get thrown out without the evidence being heard which was unlikely to back up the charges anyway but it could still be used to discredit Abhisit.

What evidence do you have that Abhisit is 'objectionable'? Is it the class he was born into which is hardly his fault or the actions of his father which were not his fault either?

As for his class, have you seen where he lived after he was born in Princess Mary Maternity Hospital Newcastle, an NHS hospital?

http://goo.gl/maps/rWZQ7

It's the one with the blue car in front. The door is on the left and it's the upstairs flat with 2 bedrooms. Very palatial and upper class.

As for a government they haven't chosen remember that Thaksin wasn't in the election but still seems have had a lot of control and didn't trust most of the elected members of his party. Add to that the case in this thread and I think you can see who's really objectionable.

Of course they were prepared to go to court, knowing full well that the court would be sympathic to their cause. A fact now bourne out with this decision. They knew that they were on a win win situation.

Have you actually looked at the evidence? If they thought they were innocent what else could they do but go to court.

If this is all down to bias by the court then was it sent to the wrong one by Tarit and the Ag in the knowledge that they couldn't hear the case and the evidence wouldn't be heard? Why weren't the army investigated since the courts that heard the evidence said they fired the shots. Remember that the courts are supposed to be on the side of the Dems and also the army. The courts don't always find in the Dems favour at all.

Your trouble is you won't accept anything that doesn't go your way. Some of us have gone to the trouble of reading to try to find the facts.

Give yourself a treat and read this.

http://asiapacific.a...april-may-2010/

This is from one of Robert Amsterdam's experts and I don't think you can call RA biased in favour of Abhisit.

[bangrak]

"Abhisit's establishment-backed government in 2010 in street clashes between mostly unarmed "Red Shirt" demonstrators and security forces firing live rounds in Bangkok."

This AFP is getting tiresome.

They are right. Most red-shirts were unarmed. let's say 90% was unarmed out of 20,000 or so that were on the streets in 2010..... And it is normal for security forces to use their guns when threatened. That is one of the reasons the cop that stopped me this morning was carrying a gun. I guess.

Oh, don't be ridiculous - 2000 armed redshirts?! Even the army spokesman, Col. Sansern Kaewkamnerd, said that "500 “terrorists” had infiltrated the protest area and that the military were armed with M16s and prepared to defend themselves" ( http://csis.org/publication/thailand-steps-unknown ) to justify using force on the UDD demonstrators, and that was BS enough.

When Fabby corroborates 500 by quoting it, I think we might go for it, so Fabby, who were those 500, who paid for them, who trained them, who lead them, who armed them, were they wearing black too? Tell us more, please, it's time the truth comes out, and as you know so much about that trash...!

[fab4]

Ok where's the evidence that Suthep ordered the shooting of the nurse?

I've seen the translation of the ROE and it isn't in there. In fact there aren't any orders to kill anyone only permission to shoot in certain circumstances of which hers wasn't one.

I've tried to find the ROE but I can't at the moment but I did find this.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/01/30/expert-testimony-alleges-criminal-acts-by-thai-army-in-april-may-2010/

This seems to be evidence from one of Robert Amsterdam's experts that says the army weren't following orders.

You provided the link to the revised ROE (on the 18th April) that was issued by CRES with abhisits knowledge. If you read those revised ROE's you could see how those ROE's led to the deaths of several people - basically the gloves were taken off and were not seen to be a proportionate response to the perceived threat.

Modified rules of engagement that expanded the range of circumstances in which officials could use live fire were approved by CRES on 18 April 2010.

The document stated that the presence of armed elements within the demonstrators justified the broadening of circumstances in which officials could use force to protect “other people, official property, and private citizens under their guard” and to “allow the provision of medical assistance to the perpetrators according to human rights principles after officials have managed to bring the situation under control.”

Specifically, the regulations allowed officials to shoot anyone seen carrying weapons who disregarded a no trespassing order, posed any danger to others, or prepared to use the weapons against officials or the general public. As a last resort, even unarmed civilians could be shot with “shotguns and rifles” in cases where a large group of demonstrators advanced towards the officials, disregarding a no trespassing order, to the point of creating a dangerous situation.

Officials were also authorized to use live bullets against “suspects” who resisted arrest or refused to submit to a search.

Finally, the order approved the deployment of “marksmen,” or snipers, to elevated positions from which they were authorized to use live ammunition against armed persons mixed with crowds of “innocent people,” whom other officials were not allowed to target.

If the CRES was not ruled to be ordering a proportionate response to the threat (and authorising the use of snipers and live fire zones in a crackdown on a demonstration in an urban environment has got to be seen as a disproportionate response in my opinion) than the "amnesty" provided by the Emergency Decree at the time would be void thus allowing the prosecution of those officials that made up CRES. It should now be up to the NACC to bring these case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions.

It should be noted that the NACC paved the way in 2009 by voting 6-3 that then prime minister Somchai Wongsawad and former deputy PM Chavalit Yongchaiyudh violated the Criminal Code’s Article 157 on dereliction of duty by ordering the dispersal of the yellow-shirt protesters. They then forwarded a report to the OAG to file an indictment with the SCCDHPP.

Wonder if they'll have the courage of their "convictions" in this case........................

[Nickymaster]

Why don't you mention the brutal bombings and killings of officials and civilians by the red shirts in your propaganda piece? The ones who started this mess.

In stead of talking about a monk who wasn't even around in 2010.

PAD officially formed Feb 8, 2006 (although Sondhi's weekly rants preceded that date) . The reds first formed after the coup which occurred on 19 September 2006.

And now a link between this, the monk, 2010, the mayhem and Abhisit.......please.

[bangrak]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

In 2010 Thaksin told his red shirts to fight the army and that he was very near to Thailand and would come back to help them if the army would open fire on them. Remember those famous words?

Red shirt leader Jatuporn, natthawut etc have also told their supporters numerous times to fight the army. Even told them to burn down the city.

You don't mention them in your propaganda piece. Why not?

Nickymaster did you even take a split second to think about what you typed?

I didn't see Thaksin in the protest, you don't mention that in your propaganda piece. Why not?

So some person from a distant land says attack and even though they don't attack just because it was said it justifies the slaughter? WOW talk about a weak gene pool.

If that is OK, then if you ever tell anyone to attack/fight back for what you/they feel is your/their freedom then in your home country shouldn't they then attack and kill, your friends and/or family because that's basically what you said as your response. I for one wouldn't raise any concern if it happen like that to you in return.

So Yingluck fires someone from their post and gets removed, with a COUP to follow, Abhisit murders people and even gets busted on video talking about it and nothing to see here move along. Sounds like that gene pool is expanding.

This country will never see a posative change until fairness is fully enfourced for all people. When a PM runs around murdering people in a protest and walks away from it you can bet the future holds even worst things to come.

'quicky', can you please do me the favour to read what you have been writing? Thank you, and when you can confirm it is not by some temporary vagaries of a disturbed mind you are the author of, to say it in a mild and polite way, so much nonsensical, biased, untrue, propaganda horse manure, I will give you some recommendations for serious psychological help...

[Thanet]

Well now, there's a surprise.

They're grooming him to be the next PM.

[bangrak]

Court letting AV go due to technicality just like before. Coincidence or consistency.

A consistency no doubt is your very shroud and insidious pro-Shins biased 'contributions', and that for sure can't be a coincidence, I hope your clients reward your well for your services.

[fab4]

Oh, don't be ridiculous - 2000 armed redshirts?! Even the army spokesman, Col. Sansern Kaewkamnerd, said that "500 “terrorists” had infiltrated the protest area and that the military were armed with M16s and prepared to defend themselves" ( http://csis.org/publication/thailand-steps-unknown ) to justify using force on the UDD demonstrators, and that was BS enough.

When Fabby corroborates 500 by quoting it, I think we might go for it, so Fabby, who were those 500, who paid for them, who trained them, who lead them, who armed them, were they wearing black too? Tell us more, please, it's time the truth comes out, and as you know so much about that trash...!

I ignored your silly little analysis of one of my posts earlier but this is just plain stupid. How can you interpret a figure in a quote by an army spokesman that I stated was BS as being corroborated by me. If you must keep your baiting hatefest going, try somebody else.

Edited August 28, 2014 by fab4

[bunuel]

The Thai elite have been killing their own people for years and getting away with it, why on Earth did folks think it was going to be any different this time around?

There has to be some sort of accountability from politicians and military for the deaths, regardless of the circumstances at the time. In any civilised society this is a bare minimum. In ruling they have no jurisdiction they are preventing the truth from being known.

No doubt they will attempt to yet again foist this objectionable upper class twit who's father supported the odious dictator Suchinda upon the poor Thai populace. It runs in the Vejjajiva family.

Dark days ahead indeed as we have seen the rural Thais still haven't forgotten Democrat bitter medicine policies from the late 90's, and the cycle looks to continually repeat itself in the future, as they will never accept a government they haven't chosen, hence the attempts to cheat the system by the junta.

seems to bring back many old sayings

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones

If you want to play in the road do not complain if you get hit

yes some one has to take responsibility

but as many thais will tell you if Farlang where not there at the time it would not have happened

so is it not true if The Red shirts had not taken over the streets there would have been no deaths

Guess another saying is true

If you make your bed

you have to lie in it

My 5 bahts worth

A Laotian Buddhist saying seems a bit closer to home:

When the water runs high,

the fish eat the ants;

when the water runs low,

the ants eat the fish..

Or, as they say in New York:

What goes around, comes around..

[bangrak]

The Beat goes on.

I sure would like to see Suthep with his head shaved and wearing the saffron robes. Now that the heat's off he can go back to being a worm.

Now that you go on the biology tour, I'd have to contradict you when facing the alternative to call one a worm, or a larva. TS, for instance IMO is clearly a worm, there are worms growing very big, living long, and causing a lot of harm, but or still, they will always remain just that: worms, no positive evolution can be expected, while for what ST is concerned, I'd rather go for larva then, he has caused damage, but, as evolution has shown there has been some metamorphosis taking place with him for the better (of the Thai people)...

[96tehtarp]

Ok where's the evidence that Suthep ordered the shooting of the nurse?

I've seen the translation of the ROE and it isn't in there. In fact there aren't any orders to kill anyone only permission to shoot in certain circumstances of which hers wasn't one.

I've tried to find the ROE but I can't at the moment but I did find this.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/01/30/expert-testimony-alleges-criminal-acts-by-thai-army-in-april-may-2010/

This seems to be evidence from one of Robert Amsterdam's experts that says the army weren't following orders.

You provided the link to the revised ROE (on the 18th April) that was issued by CRES with abhisits knowledge. If you read those revised ROE's you could see how those ROE's led to the deaths of several people - basically the gloves were taken off and were not seen to be a proportionate response to the perceived threat.

Modified rules of engagement that expanded the range of circumstances in which officials could use live fire were approved by CRES on 18 April 2010.

The document stated that the presence of armed elements within the demonstrators justified the broadening of circumstances in which officials could use force to protect “other people, official property, and private citizens under their guard” and to “allow the provision of medical assistance to the perpetrators according to human rights principles after officials have managed to bring the situation under control.”

Specifically, the regulations allowed officials to shoot anyone seen carrying weapons who disregarded a no trespassing order, posed any danger to others, or prepared to use the weapons against officials or the general public. As a last resort, even unarmed civilians could be shot with “shotguns and rifles” in cases where a large group of demonstrators advanced towards the officials, disregarding a no trespassing order, to the point of creating a dangerous situation.

Officials were also authorized to use live bullets against “suspects” who resisted arrest or refused to submit to a search.

Finally, the order approved the deployment of “marksmen,” or snipers, to elevated positions from which they were authorized to use live ammunition against armed persons mixed with crowds of “innocent people,” whom other officials were not allowed to target.

If the CRES was not ruled to be ordering a proportionate response to the threat (and authorising the use of snipers and live fire zones in a crackdown on a demonstration in an urban environment has got to be seen as a disproportionate response in my opinion) than the "amnesty" provided by the Emergency Decree at the time would be void thus allowing the prosecution of those officials that made up CRES. It should now be up to the NACC to bring these case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions.

It should be noted that the NACC paved the way in 2009 by voting 6-3 that then prime minister Somchai Wongsawad and former deputy PM Chavalit Yongchaiyudh violated the Criminal Code’s Article 157 on dereliction of duty by ordering the dispersal of the yellow-shirt protesters. They then forwarded a report to the OAG to file an indictment with the SCCDHPP.

Wonder if they'll have the courage of their "convictions" in this case........................

It takes courage to display "convictions" based on color preference.

[rubl]

Oh, don't be ridiculous - 2000 armed redshirts?! Even the army spokesman, Col. Sansern Kaewkamnerd, said that "500 “terrorists” had infiltrated the protest area and that the military were armed with M16s and prepared to defend themselves" ( http://csis.org/publication/thailand-steps-unknown ) to justify using force on the UDD demonstrators, and that was BS enough.

When Fabby corroborates 500 by quoting it, I think we might go for it, so Fabby, who were those 500, who paid for them, who trained them, who lead them, who armed them, were they wearing black too? Tell us more, please, it's time the truth comes out, and as you know so much about that trash...!

I ignored your silly little analysis of one of my posts earlier but this is just plain stupid. How can you interpret a figure in a quote by an army spokesman that I stated was BS as being corroborated by me. If you must keep your baiting hatefest going, try somebody else.

True, oh so true. I still admire the honesty of Nick Nostitz describing how he encountered some Men in Black in the night.

[bangrak]

Does it matter whether there are evidence. The court dismiss the case due to technicality - wrong court. All the proof and evidence will go to the shredder. Court is a real joke. A serious case ruled out by technicality.

Now, now, don't get depressed, you have to think about your young career, what can you do well outside of playing with words, what would you do with your life when there would be no Courts anymore, here or in Singapore, hmm?

[northernjohn]

"The Red Shirts are mostly supporters of billionaire tycoon turned premier Thaksin Shinawatra, who was toppled in a previous coup in 2006 and lives in self-exile to avoid prison for a corruption conviction."

No he wasn't toppled. He is not in exile, but is a criminal fleeing justice.

Justice trumped up by a military appointed court set up with the intention of getting rid of Thaksin, something that could not be done through the ballot box.

Nope. He was a crook. He got caught. He was convicted. He ran away.

Only being in and out at that time it seems to me it was his own party that tried and convicted him. The military had nothing to do with it. Wasn't there an attempted bribe in there?

[rubl]

Well now, there's a surprise.

They're grooming him to be the next PM.

Since this topic is on a Criminal Court decision it would be logical to assume you refer to the criminal court as "they" who are doing the grooming.

Still that doesn't really make sense. Could you please explain your reasoning?

[bangrak]

The Beat goes on.

I sure would like to see Suthep with his head shaved and wearing the saffron robes. Now that the heat's off he can go back to being a worm.

Must said that the shaven head and saffron robe have worked their charm in court. Expect him to disrobe quickly and get back to being a scoundrel and manipulator.

Suthep bashing is not your best side, writing about 'being a scoundrel and manipulator' makes a lot of people think about another person, some evil luxury fugitive you do your best for, associated with many other even less flattering adjectives... With your talents, you should have been able to avoid this 'pot calling the kettle black' situation, but nobody's perfect, I'm sure you won't do the same mistake again...