Rice damage charge filed

[JOC]

They alleged 100 defendants caused loss to the government - finally a clear distinction between the perpetrators and the government. This contrast much with BS here that blame everything on the government and mades a difference in the actual loss. The total loss is still a moving target with many working parts

The government on hiring millers and warehouse owners to participate in the RPPS had the obligation to manage, control supervise and audit.

From the OP:Commerce Ministry permanent secretary Chutima Bunyaprapha-sara, Foreign Trade Department director-general Duangporn Rodphaya and representatives from the Public Warehouse Organisation yesterday filed the complaint with the Crime Suppression Division of the Royal Thai Police.<<

"representatives from the Public Warehouse Organisation filed the complaint........................"

So according to your logic, they are filing a complaint against themselves??

No this is about criminal individuals from both sides of the political divide, but conveniently used as ammunition by the current powers!!

[rubl]

They alleged 100 defendants caused loss to the government - finally a clear distinction between the perpetrators and the government. This contrast much with BS here that blame everything on the government and mades a difference in the actual loss. The total loss is still a moving target with many working parts

The government on hiring millers and warehouse owners to participate in the RPPS had the obligation to manage, control supervise and audit.

From the OP:Commerce Ministry permanent secretary Chutima Bunyaprapha-sara, Foreign Trade Department director-general Duangporn Rodphaya and representatives from the Public Warehouse Organisation yesterday filed the complaint with the Crime Suppression Division of the Royal Thai Police.<<

"representatives from the Public Warehouse Organisation filed the complaint........................"

So according to your logic, they are filing a complaint against themselves??

No this is about criminal individuals from both sides of the political divide, but conveniently used as ammunition by the current powers!!

Calm down, my dear chap. I only indicated that the government should shoulder some of the blame as Eric put a too fine distinction between government and perpetrators.

[rubl]

They alleged 100 defendants caused loss to the government - finally a clear distinction between the perpetrators and the government. This contrast much with BS here that blame everything on the government and mades a difference in the actual loss. The total loss is still a moving target with many working parts

Did you read ALL of the post including this bit?

quote "It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project."

Now silly me thought that politicians WERE a part of the government certainly on the PTP side.

They are really going around in circles here. The TDRI stated a long time ago that their report should not be used as evidence. This report was already discarded by the Attorney General. Is this really all they have?

The 123 billion is simply a percentage of the total loss based on the normal corruption rate in Thailand. The TDRI did not uncover 123 billion bht in corruption.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758809-tdri-opposes-nacc-using-its-report-as-evidence-in-rice-pledging-case/

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

[tomacht8]

It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project.

123.000.000.000 Baht went to involved politicians.

How much of the stolen money was brought back up again today from these corrupt politicians?

Why the government wait so long to recoup his money?

I think only a firing squad will discourage this type of behavior.

Unbelievable there is little public outcry or or the general population "up in arms".

Yes is crazy.

No or only little outcry in the public.

Is

123.000.000.000 Baht

------------------------------- = 1.835 Baht per Thai.

67.000.000 Thais

Every Thai citizen has been robbed statistically for 1,835 baht.

Wonder that the population accepts this theft so calmly.

If the Thais could calculate, they would normally sharpen the knives

Edited January 13, 2015 by tomacht8

[Thai at Heart]

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

[brucec64]

They alleged 100 defendants caused loss to the government - finally a clear distinction between the perpetrators and the government. This contrast much with BS here that blame everything on the government and mades a difference in the actual loss. The total loss is still a moving target with many working parts

Did you read ALL of the post including this bit?

quote "It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project."

Now silly me thought that politicians WERE a part of the government certainly on the PTP side.

They are really going around in circles here. The TDRI stated a long time ago that their report should not be used as evidence. This report was already discarded by the Attorney General. Is this really all they have?

The 123 billion is simply a percentage of the total loss based on the normal corruption rate in Thailand. The TDRI did not uncover 123 billion bht in corruption.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758809-tdri-opposes-nacc-using-its-report-as-evidence-in-rice-pledging-case/

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

[rubl]

They are really going around in circles here. The TDRI stated a long time ago that their report should not be used as evidence. This report was already discarded by the Attorney General. Is this really all they have?

The 123 billion is simply a percentage of the total loss based on the normal corruption rate in Thailand. The TDRI did not uncover 123 billion bht in corruption.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758809-tdri-opposes-nacc-using-its-report-as-evidence-in-rice-pledging-case/

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

There's also nothing to suggest the NACC can't use the TDRI data. Of course if you think the NACC should only rely on information they manage to dig up themselves, you seem to have no problem with waste of time, effort and money.

[brucec64]

They are really going around in circles here. The TDRI stated a long time ago that their report should not be used as evidence. This report was already discarded by the Attorney General. Is this really all they have?

The 123 billion is simply a percentage of the total loss based on the normal corruption rate in Thailand. The TDRI did not uncover 123 billion bht in corruption.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758809-tdri-opposes-nacc-using-its-report-as-evidence-in-rice-pledging-case/

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

There's also nothing to suggest the NACC can't use the TDRI data. Of course if you think the NACC should only rely on information they manage to dig up themselves, you seem to have no problem with waste of time, effort and money.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

[Thai at Heart]

They are really going around in circles here. The TDRI stated a long time ago that their report should not be used as evidence. This report was already discarded by the Attorney General. Is this really all they have?

The 123 billion is simply a percentage of the total loss based on the normal corruption rate in Thailand. The TDRI did not uncover 123 billion bht in corruption.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758809-tdri-opposes-nacc-using-its-report-as-evidence-in-rice-pledging-case/

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

There's also nothing to suggest the NACC can't use the TDRI data. Of course if you think the NACC should only rely on information they manage to dig up themselves, you seem to have no problem with waste of time, effort and money.

Indeed, why they can't use the info as a reference, who knows.

That said, would be nice to be sure that their estimates are based on a reasonable methodology.

[rubl]

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

There's also nothing to suggest the NACC can't use the TDRI data. Of course if you think the NACC should only rely on information they manage to dig up themselves, you seem to have no problem with waste of time, effort and money.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

Yes, as I said that was September. Also it would seem the TDRI president has more faith in the capabilities of the NACC than most posters here. Anyway as I wrote, there is nothing wrong with the NACC using TDRI data as long as that data is valid, proven, etc. Why would they not save time and money ? Do you think this RPPS disaster should be dragged on and on?

[Thai at Heart]

Thsi would lead me to believe that the TDRI report may as well be treated with a little skepticism. If its correct, why can't it be used in a court?

[candide]

That was in September. In November the TDRI came with more

2014-11-10

"The loss incurred from the rice-pledging scheme could reach almost 1 trillion baht if it takes 10 years to sell 18 million tonnes of milled rice in stockpiles, says the head of an economic think tank.

...

The TDRI’s study estimated that fraud in the scheme amounted to 94-109 billion baht, with 75 billion incurred from rice sales, 32 billion from replacing pledged grains with low-quality rice and 1.9 billion from missing rice."

http://tdri.or.th/en/tdri-insight/rice-scheme-loss-may-reach-b1tn/

There is nothing in your link that suggests that the TDRI changed their position regarding the use of the estimates in the study as evidence of actual crimes committed.

There's also nothing to suggest the NACC can't use the TDRI data. Of course if you think the NACC should only rely on information they manage to dig up themselves, you seem to have no problem with waste of time, effort and money.

Indeed, why they can't use the info as a reference, who knows.

That said, would be nice to be sure that their estimates are based on a reasonable methodology.

The TDRI is a private Think Tank (how is it financed?). It has no judicial investigation power and therefore cannot legally establish proof of crimes. It's an estimate based on suspicion that fraud occured. From a legal point of view, investigations are still going on, i.e. in the OP a charge has been filed and we'll know after the investigation what evidence has been gathered. Same for the GtoG deals, the investigation is not finished.

That's why the TDRI declared that their report could not be used as evidence of actual crimes commited.

PS: As for the political orientation of TDRI, this quote from the linked page is eloquent: “I believe a third round of damage from such a subsidy will happen if there is an elected government,” he said.

[rubl]

The TDRI is a private Think Tank (how is it financed?). It has no judicial investigation power and therefore cannot legally establish proof of crimes. It's an estimate based on suspicion that fraud occured. From a legal point of view, investigations are still going on, i.e. in the OP a charge has been filed and we'll know after the investigation what evidence has been gathered. Same for the GtoG deals, the investigation is not finished.

That's why the TDRI declared that their report could not be used as evidence of actual crimes commited.

PS: As for the political orientation of TDRI, this quote from the linked page is eloquent: “I believe a third round of damage from such a subsidy will happen if there is an elected government,” he said.

For more info on TDRI and it's sponsors see the "about us" page. Interesting list

http://tdri.or.th/en/about/mission-en/

[Thai at Heart]

The TDRI is a private Think Tank (how is it financed?). It has no judicial investigation power and therefore cannot legally establish proof of crimes. It's an estimate based on suspicion that fraud occured. From a legal point of view, investigations are still going on, i.e. in the OP a charge has been filed and we'll know after the investigation what evidence has been gathered. Same for the GtoG deals, the investigation is not finished.

That's why the TDRI declared that their report could not be used as evidence of actual crimes commited.

PS: As for the political orientation of TDRI, this quote from the linked page is eloquent: “I believe a third round of damage from such a subsidy will happen if there is an elected government,” he said.

Which of course begs the question, in which case why is ANYONE putting any weight behind anything it has to say.

I mean honestly, if the Koch brothers were commisioning their own anti global warming reports everyone would jump up and down and claim it was biased. Of course, I would think that the defence, if she is allowed something like that, would call them and try to pooh pooh their report if it was that dodgy. But making up a claim and then back tracking that its only good enough for research without it being useful in a case like this means that basically, no one should put too much stall by any of their research.

[Gonsalviz]

So they pinched some £2.5 Billion? £2,500,000,000.

And our politicians in the UK go to jail for fiddling a few Mars Bars on expenses.

Come on. Is this a real country?

Me thinks the Mars Bars are a cover for what is really grafted.

[scorecard]

The TDRI is a private Think Tank (how is it financed?). It has no judicial investigation power and therefore cannot legally establish proof of crimes. It's an estimate based on suspicion that fraud occured. From a legal point of view, investigations are still going on, i.e. in the OP a charge has been filed and we'll know after the investigation what evidence has been gathered. Same for the GtoG deals, the investigation is not finished.

That's why the TDRI declared that their report could not be used as evidence of actual crimes commited.

PS: As for the political orientation of TDRI, this quote from the linked page is eloquent: “I believe a third round of damage from such a subsidy will happen if there is an elected government,” he said.

Which of course begs the question, in which case why is ANYONE putting any weight behind anything it has to say.

I mean honestly, if the Koch brothers were commisioning their own anti global warming reports everyone would jump up and down and claim it was biased. Of course, I would think that the defence, if she is allowed something like that, would call them and try to pooh pooh their report if it was that dodgy. But making up a claim and then back tracking that its only good enough for research without it being useful in a case like this means that basically, no one should put too much stall by any of their research.

Just your biased attempt to make TDRI look dodgy - all to suit your purpose of negativity X 3.

Others have a different opinion of the overall credibility of TDRI.

[scorecard]

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Edited January 13, 2015 by scorecard

[Thai at Heart]

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Well, what is going to happen if this lot are found not guilty?

Of course these charges should have been laid if not first then at the same time that they started messing with Yingluck.....

[scorecard]

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

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Well, what is going to happen if this lot are found not guilty?

Of course these charges should have been laid if not first then at the same time that they started messing with Yingluck.....

Grow up, your on a loser, get a good nights sleep and return with some logical discussion.

No matter how this is approached you will turn it to a negative.

If they arraigned the small fish first then you and many others would scream about the small fry being persecuted and no action on the big fish.

Which way do you want it?????????

Your as obvious as the nose on your face.

I'm on standby for your next attempt to twist and turn.

[Thai at Heart]

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

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Well, what is going to happen if this lot are found not guilty?

Of course these charges should have been laid if not first then at the same time that they started messing with Yingluck.....

Grow up, your on a loser, get a good nights sleep and return with some logical discussion.

No matter how this is approached you will turn it to a negative.

If they arraigned the small fish first then you and many others would scream about the small fry being persecuted and no action on the big fish.

Which way do you want it?????????

Your as obvious as the nose on your face.

I'm on standby for your next attempt to twist and turn.

I am glad they have done it, and done it now eventually. If Yingluck is guitlt of something at least they are going after this other lot also, because if people really defrauded the system, at least they are after them all not just her.

[Douglas2]

the ptp/reds/their close friends/family that own the storage sheds/participated in the corrupt practices etc will never face anything, they will blame the lower downs and just keep laughing all the way to the bank. We will not see any politicians or any other hi so's charged with anything, it will all be the fault of the workers and none of the corrupt money will be forth coming.

Agree with most of your post, but, just wondering about all the dem's/Yellow/their family/friends that own storage sheds/participated in the corrupt practice etc???

Probably not any because of those 100 charged, 77 were people directly contracted by the previous government to store or survey rice under the Yingluck's scheme (as per other paper's article)

There's plenty of hi-so's connected to Shinawatra's color to be contracted with tax payer's money. There would be no need to ever contract with a non-Shinawatra color.

[halloween]

Agree with most of your post, but, just wondering about all the dem's/Yellow/their family/friends that own storage sheds/participated in the corrupt practice etc???

Probably not any because of those 100 charged, 77 were people directly contracted by the previous government to store or survey rice under the Yingluck's scheme (as per other paper's article)

There's plenty of hi-so's connected to Shinawatra's color to be contracted with tax payer's money. There would be no need to ever contract with a non-Shinawatra color.

I have to wonder how many of the 77 were at the Four Seasons secret meeting.

[Robby nz]

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Well, what is going to happen if this lot are found not guilty?

Of course these charges should have been laid if not first then at the same time that they started messing with Yingluck.....

You know very well T a H that there are two separate things here.

The negligence charges against Yingluck have come from the NACC investigation over the last 3 years.

While these charges have originated from the inspections of the rice storage facilities "urged" by Yingluck.

You also know that there are investigations ongoing into ex commerce ministers and their staff regarding corruption within the scheme.

These things all have a common denominator but are being done separately as they are handled by different legal entities.

[scorecard]

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

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

Ok good. If they want to chase Yingluck for negligence, presumably, she wasnt the only one on her own. This is a possibility to start something akin to a proper investigation and solution not a witch hunt.

Witch hunt?

Start at the start would be a good place to start!

Well, what is going to happen if this lot are found not guilty?

Of course these charges should have been laid if not first then at the same time that they started messing with Yingluck.....

Not necessarily. If that was the way it worked then in a case where there are several or many people suspected you could not start any proceedings until all people are charged and that might well take years.

Try again to spin.