webfact Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Police says not enough evidence to support premeditated murder charges against youthsBANGKOK: -- Chokechai police did not slap premediated murder charges against a group of teenagers allegedly involved in the killing of a disabled man in Lat Phrao area because of insufficient evidence to prove that the crime was pre-mediated, said Pol Lt-Gen Sanit Mahathavorn, acting metropolitan police commissioner, on Monday.However, he said the enquiry officers of Chokechai police station have filed murder charges against the suspects which carry maximum penalty of death similar to pre-mediated murder charges.He explained that police could not overcharge the suspects otherwise they would be accused by the public of being biased or unprofessional. Some of the suspects told the police that they merely responded to a friend’s call for help and not call to kill the disabled man, he said.The family of the victim, Mr Somkiat Srichan, has lodged a petition to the national police chief questioning why the police did not slap the suspects with pre-mediated murder charges.Pol Lt-Gen Sanit asserted that the case could not be distorted in favour of the suspects simply because two of them were children of policemen in Chokechai and Bang Chan police stations.Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/content/163519 -- Thai PBS 2016-05-17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Bob Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Shouldn't that be up to the Attorney General office to decide and not the police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starky Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Biased? Unprofessional? The RTP? Perish the thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestburypark Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Alice in Wonderland logic here: How would it be in the favour of the suspects to be charged with the more serious offence? Surely that would be in the favour of the victims relatives? It would definitely not distort the case in the way the commissioner is implying. Maybe we are not supposed to be able to think rationally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 "He explained that police could not overcharge the suspects otherwise they would be accused by the public of being biased or unprofessional." I doubt that very much. Well no more than usual anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesetat2013 Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Alice in Wonderland logic here: How would it be in the favour of the suspects to be charged with the more serious offence? Surely that would be in the favour of the victims relatives? It would definitely not distort the case in the way the commissioner is implying. Maybe we are not supposed to be able to think rationally. You just don't understand Thai! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rykbanlor Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Let's see if the plain old murder charges stick then, premeditated or not. I mean, theres no lack of evidence that he was quite plainly beaten to death. It all depends on the rank of the Fathers one presumes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesetat2013 Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Why couldn't they charge each individual accordingly? The one who initiated the actions leading up to that man's death and going to get weapons to inflict damage is the one who premeditated this so he should be the one charged with it. The others should be charged with the murder of course. Or accomplices to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadGeordie Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Why couldn't they charge each individual accordingly? The one who initiated the actions leading up to that man's death and going to get weapons to inflict damage is the one who premeditated this so he should be the one charged with it. The others should be charged with the murder of course. Or accomplices to it. Please go and have coffee, you are offering sensible logical solutions to a problem. Perish the thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rykbanlor Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Let's see if the plain old murder charges stick then, premeditated or not. I mean, theres no lack of evidence that he was quite plainly beaten to death. It all depends on the rank of the Fathers one presumes. Nope, silly old me. I just read from another source the Police are pushing for manslaughter, not murder, let alone premeditated, as that lying spokesperson insinuated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 I can understand the ' not premeditated ' aspect since it seems it wasn't planned but rather a violent over-reaction to the deceased shouting at them. The concern should be that the murder charges laid actually stick and that the ducking and weaving isn't in train already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezzra Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 If the police can't prove intention to murder than the next best thing is to charge them with Culpable homicide that will see them 10-20 years in jail, and the relatives can sue in civil court for damages and loss of income..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smutcakes Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I can understand the ' not premeditated ' aspect since it seems it wasn't planned but rather a violent over-reaction to the deceased shouting at them. The concern should be that the murder charges laid actually stick and that the ducking and weaving isn't in train already. I tend to agree. I doubt they went out that evening with the intent of murdering someone. More likely a combination of drugs, drink and pack mentality led to this tragic occurence. I would be pleased to see them jailed for an extended length of time, regardless if they can prove or not that it was pre-meditated. It was murder and in my opinion whether it was pre-meditated or not is by the by. They probably like the outcry about pre-meditated or not as it gives them something to huff, fluff, umm and ahh about as they are busy playing legal gymnastics behind the scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MockingJay Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Hear, hear... Was there the usual kind and understanding nodding by the RTP when those wannabe Samurai police sons stated at the police station that they were "angry"? Usually this is enough to create mutual understanding among officers in charge and to create sympathy towards the perpetrators. Everyone here must understand how it feels to be angry, no? Then you just cut that bastard who made you angry to pieces with the swords and deadly weapons you brought along in the first place - that's not premeditated murder, clearly not, because when they left their homes to cause havoc, they simply did not know yet WHO it would be to make them "angry"...F all this - another perfect LOW in Thailand's rapid decline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nausea Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Not his decision, is it? Up to the public prosecutor,isn't it? Sorry, I felt I needed to reiterate that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahorse Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Ah, the old "There isn't enough evidence" line. That has been very useful to the RTP over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlQaholic Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Shouldn't that be up to the Attorney General office to decide and not the police. Ag does what the police tells them to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colabamumbai Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 The friends responded to a call for help.....How many does it take to kill a disabled man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheard Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 "He explained that police could not overcharge the suspects otherwise they would be accused by the public of being biased or unprofessional. Some of the suspects told the police that they merely responded to a friend’s call for help and not call to kill the disabled man, he said." Call for help? Was the disabled man getting the better of the friend? Give me a break! Pathetic a***holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanukjim Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Shouldn't that be up to the Attorney General office to decide and not the police. In most countries that would be the case but in Thailand the cops tell the courts how to proceed in most all cases even to predetermine whether it is a criminal case or civil..The laws here have little meaning outside of who and how much can be paid.Don't forget one of the cold blooded killers is a police officer's relative,and I am sure that was in this decision. As Trink cited TIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prbkk Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Whatever but as everyone knows: had it not been for social media exposure this case would have long since disappeared into the too hard, insufficient evidence basket without any charges at all. 25 years for murder would be a reasonable outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatsujin Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Sickening. The murder. And now the excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chainarong Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Shouldn't that be up to the Attorney General office to decide and not the police. No , it is up to the police to lay charges , it is up to the AG to decide if they are correct one's laid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yann55 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 No matter how nauseating, shocking, despicable these guys are, justice demands that people be charged with whatever they did. It's pretty obvious in this case that there was no premeditation, so, like it or not, the police officer is right. That the family of the murdered guy should ask for maximum charges is also understandable, I can only imagine how enraged they must be right now, they can't be thinking straight, so they probably want revenge as opposed to justice. What everyone in this country wants to see now, is to see justice served, and these guys punished according to what they did, no matter who their fathers are. By the way, last time I heard, it was not two of them who had fathers in the police force, but four. So ... which number is correct ? Just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chainarong Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 (edited) One wouldn't think that premeditated was involved, unless some one knows they all sat around planning this ugly event, it would be just plain straight out murder , probably pissed a skunks and doped ( Iced ) off their brains, how could any one sane do this Sh!!t.......................................... . Edited May 17, 2016 by chainarong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artisi Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Why couldn't they charge each individual accordingly? The one who initiated the actions leading up to that man's death and going to get weapons to inflict damage is the one who premeditated this so he should be the one charged with it. The others should be charged with the murder of course. Or accomplices to it. Yu tink to muc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOUTHERNSTAR Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I can understand the ' not premeditated ' aspect since it seems it wasn't planned but rather a violent over-reaction to the deceased shouting at them. The concern should be that the murder charges laid actually stick and that the ducking and weaving isn't in train already. I tend to agree. I doubt they went out that evening with the intent of murdering someone. More likely a combination of drugs, drink and pack mentality led to this tragic occurence. I would be pleased to see them jailed for an extended length of time, regardless if they can prove or not that it was pre-meditated. It was murder and in my opinion whether it was pre-meditated or not is by the by. They probably like the outcry about pre-meditated or not as it gives them something to huff, fluff, umm and ahh about as they are busy playing legal gymnastics behind the scenes. The original reports indicated that they had an argument with the victim. The gang then left and returned with weapons used to kill the victim. That is premeditated murder. If they killed him during the argument its murder or manslaughter, but by leaving and coming back with weapons it becomes premeditated murder. Well in normal countries, but here for police children anything can be arranged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artisi Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 (edited) The friends responded to a call for help.....How many does it take to kill a disabled man? Using the dodgy Thai statistics, probably at least 4, maybe 5 if they feel out numbered or threatened. Edited May 17, 2016 by Artisi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yann55 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 (edited) One wouldn't think that premeditated was involved, unless some one knows they all sat around planning this ugly event, it would be just plain straight out murder , probably pissed a skunks and doped ( Iced ) off their brains, how could any one sane do this Sh!!t.......................................... . Exactly, and premeditation would require a minimum amount of brains, which is not something these guys seem to have. Hormones, ego, adrenaline, arrogance ? have. Brains ? no have. But that's OK, right ? Who needs brains when you have a father in the force ? Your future is taken care of. Well, in this case at least, let's HOPE that JUSTICE will take care of theirs. Edited May 17, 2016 by Yann55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaidam Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 To clarify for the benefit of any newbies here. What is happening here is basic obfuscation. Charges of premeditated murder dropped due to insufficient evidence, next the murder charge will be dropped as it wasn't premeditated so it can't be murder, so now we are down to a manslaughter charge. Mitigating circumstances because the disabled guy shouted at the gang of thugs, this will bring it down to self defense. They will walk with a few hours community service max - although as police family members they will not actually need to do the community service. Weekend in the temple for these youths and all smiles again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now