Former DSI director Tarit sentenced to two years in prison

[billd766]

I was expecting this snake to flip and join the new government and do their bidding. Guess he didn't flip fast enough.

Or the junta is just smart enough not to want him.

I don't think any government would want him as he changes colour quicker than a chameleon and is less trustworthy than a scorpion.

[slapout]

Any compentent manager should / must folloiw the rule of the law when terminating, demoting, etc any employee who reports to him. It is reported while head of DSI this man slowed down and in some cases he ordered investigations put on hold or even stopped and in this case demoted a individual without ''just cause;;

The Thai sytem is what is of importance not what other countries do, their penalties etc. The man knew he was wrong if he acted on someomes orders who was not in the civiul service chain of command, above him. It would seem several groups, decided this was the case, including the judical system and they set a penality that sends a message to this individual and anyone else who acts or may be considering managing people in this way.

Good for them, give the corrupt several things to consider before acting in a irresponsiblle.manner. There are a lot more looking at the same conquenses as this man, before its all said and done

[Baerboxer]

Will the courts address every grievance government employees have?

In the case "after the colonel’s transfer, he petitioned to the Office of the Civil Service Commission’s Merit System Protection Committee which ruled the transfer was illegitimate. Besides, the permanent secretary of Justice had also scrapped the transfer order, and reinstated him back to the position with instruction that any transfer of senior official must be considered with caution."

So the complaint was accepted, processed and concluded by internal grievance procedures. The employee was reinstated. Perhaps the only thing missing is a letter from Tarit to the employee appologizing for the incident or a warning letter from Tarit's manager placed in the administrative file for Tarit's next performance evaluation. Why did this then have to go to the courts when it was resolved?

What this court has done is essentially micro-managed the employee-employer relationship irrespective of procedural safeguards to address employee grievances. The end result is that truly unfit and unprofessional employees will be untouched. It's not worth a manager's risk to their own security to take issue (in Thailand called "conflict") with any employee performance. So the Thai government is left with a broken chain of command and an unaccountable workforce.

You are correct that unfair dismissal, transfer, demotion should, and apparently was in this case dealt with by the internal grievance and disciplinary procedures. Tarit should have received a warning about future conduct, apologized and the status quo returned, which appears to have happened.

However, there appears to be the question of why this happened. An on-going investigation which the wronged officer wanted to pursue, including seizing the assets of certain individuals. That is what needs to be investigated further. Was the suggested seizure in accordance with the law, or wasn't it? If it was in accordance with the law then Tarit needs to explain fully why he disagreed with that action, and why he subsequently demoted and transferred the officer suggesting it without following correct procedures.

If Tarit cannot explain this, and it was in accordance with the law, then he needs to explain exactly how and why he reached that conclusion. If he can't do that, then he was guilty of abusing his power to protect certain individuals in conflict to the law.

He is appealing, which is his right. On what grounds is he appealing? The sentence seems harsh for a first offence. Maybe he'll get the sentence suspended on appeal, appeal again and get jailed for a year!

Edited August 12, 2015 by Baerboxer

[Darkknight666]

........

I haven't done any google searches but are you quite sure they get bail after being sentenced, in the countries mentioned in your post.

Bail in most countries comes after being arrested and charged, and only if you fit certain guidelines.

Yes, he is wrong. In the states it would be called a furlough. You do not get bail after being sentenced, you only get bail until you've finished go your case... Then, Remand.

"Once someone is convicted of a crime, its more difficult to obtain bail. Its not impossible, but bail requirements are tougher. The presumption of innocence no longer applies. It doesnt matter if the conviction was in federal or state court." http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/obtaining-bail-after-a-conviction.htm

BTW Remand is being held in custody after being charged but before conviction.

I read the same article. Context matters. They're saying if you have a prior conviction you can still obtain bail in a new case.

Once you are sentenced for a crime you serve that time, no bail. Ever. You can get a furlough if a loved one dies, that's not bail. You can also in some cases be on bail during an appeal.

In the states, you do nothing t get bail once you're ordered to jail. You're either serving what was ordered or being released due to over crowding, possibly on electronic monitoring... But you don't get out on bail once you're doing your time.

Google more.

You said...

No you cannot be bailed out once you are sentenced.

This is incorrect, at least with respect to the US.

First, the individual States vary. Some do not allow bail after sentencing. But most do.

Second, it is typically up to the Judge. In many States, Judges are given the discretion to permit bail after sentencing, provided of course the convicted person (their lawyer) declares intent to file an appeal.

Third, it depends on the crime. Bail after sentencing is not permitted for some types of crimes...every State is different.

Fourth, the time frame for appeal, versus the duration of the sentence, is a common factor. If the length of time for appeal is likely to exceed the length of the sentence, bail during the appeals process is more likely.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-i-bail-while-i-appeal-conviction.html

Read my post's. I'm saying once you're sentenced and serving your time there is no bail, Sentenced meaning your case has been exhausted and you're sent to penitentiary. I already noted that you can apply for bail during an appeal.

And yes, I used remand wrong.

[Fat Haggis]

Any compentent manager should / must folloiw the rule of the law when terminating, demoting, etc any employee who reports to him.

and then there's living in the real world, in other countries where the work, health and safety laws are bent and twisted to whatever suits the employer.

[djjamie]

2 years in prison with no suspension then released on 200 000 baht jail. I thought the idea of no suspension was an inability to be released.

You don't believe in the fundamental right of appeal?

I never mentioned appeal, I mentioned bail.

Sure he can appeal the sentence and it is well within his right.

[tomacht8]

How about to freeze his assets.
Was indeed a long time his favorite measure.
And what about with his illegal buildings in the national park?
This man should never have come to the head of a police organization. ,

[yuv06]

Tarit appeals NACC order http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Tarit-appeals-NACC-order-30266470.html?

[axact]

So you cannot transfer your subordinate if you have "conflict of working" with him? And get 2 years for that?

Had you have read the original post properly you would have read he was found guilty of abuse of power by giving his subordinate a lower ranking post.

Had he tranfered the worker to an equal grade post there would not have been a court case.Hardly the sort of actions one would expect from the head of a Police Service.