Falsely jailed or fraud? Police to prosecute schoolteacher’s accomplices

[snoop1130]

Falsely jailed or fraud? Police to prosecute schoolteacher’s accomplices

By Coconuts Bangkok

 

Photo: Thai News Agency

 

Police don’t believe the story of Jomsap Saenmuengkot, the teacher who was jailed for a 2005 hit-and-run murder but recently released by a royal pardon. Jomsap is requesting a retrial to clear her name and says she has found the true criminal, a man named Sak Wapee, as well as a group of witnesses to verify her story. However, the police are calling these people accomplices to her lie.

 

Inspector Pol.Gen. Panya Mamen said yesterday that they have evidence that a scapegoat was hired to confess to the crime and make Jomsap look innocent.

 

As far as the police are concerned, it’s unclear why Jomsap, who spent a year-and-a-half in prison, has attempted to have her case re-tried. Pol. Gen. Panya said the police are investigating her motivation.

 

Full Story: http://bangkok.coconuts.co/2017/01/19/falsely-jailed-or-fraud-police-prosecute-schoolteachers-accomplices

 

-- © Copyright Coconuts Bangkok 2017-1-19

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

As far as the police are concerned, it’s unclear why Jomsap, who spent a year-and-a-half in prison, has attempted to have her case re-tried. Pol. Gen. Panya said the police are investigating her motivation.

Hmm, let's see, that indeed is a puzzler.

 

Oh I know

 

She's innocent and wants to clear her name, reclaim her life and get compensation?

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Hmm, let's see, that indeed is a puzzler.

 

Oh I know

 

She's innocent and wants to clear her name, reclaim her life and get compensation?

Maybe, but if the police have a case let them show it. Its not unheard of for normal people to commit fraud like this and try to get away with it.

 

Before I thought like you that she was innocent, right now I am not so sure anymore. The police has some good points (if true). Its kinda hard for me to judge who is lying in this case.. when it was first presented i thought for sure it was the police who did a bad job. Now I am not so sure anymore. 

[Bluespunk]

39 minutes ago, robblok said:

Maybe, but if the police have a case let them show it. Its not unheard of for normal people to commit fraud like this and try to get away with it.

 

Before I thought like you that she was innocent, right now I am not so sure anymore. The police has some good points (if true). Its kinda hard for me to judge who is lying in this case.. when it was first presented i thought for sure it was the police who did a bad job. Now I am not so sure anymore. 

She's been pardoned and is out and free.

 

I find it hard to credit she would be this stupid to make this up.

 

The BIB fixing a case, well now, that's a different matter.

 

You're right though, maybe she is pulling a fast one, but I find it hard to belive she is really that idiotic.

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

She's been pardoned and is out and free.

 

I find it hard to credit she would be this stupid to make this up.

 

The BIB fixing a case, well now, that's a different matter.

 

You're right though, maybe she is pulling a fast one, but I find it hard to belive she is really that idiotic.

I am torn here I am not 100%  sure either way. But if she gets a compensation and reinstated then we are talking a lot of money. It might the incentive that gets this going. People do a lot of stupid things for money and she might really think she can get away with it. Your points are valid too.. I would not be surprised either way. 

[Wilsonandson]

Opening up a can of worms is all I can read into it. Let it be missus. Face is a big thing in Thailand. Don't go for a full house just accept the cards that you have been dealt.

[JAG]

I am torn here I am not 100%  sure either way. But if she gets a compensation and reinstated then we are talking a lot of money. It might the incentive that gets this going. People do a lot of stupid things for money and she might really think she can get away with it. Your points are valid too.. I would not be surprised either way. 

If she is innocent, and I tend to the view that she is, and frankly place no credence on whatever "proof" or "evidence" the police present, then her life, career and future
prospects have been utterly destroyed, grounds enough for fighting for compensation rather than being quietly grateful, no?

[dcnx]

At his point the police and everyone else involved are going to try anything and everything to save face, even if it means they have to fabricate more evidence.

 

Face is everything here. The police can not admit they messed up or grassed her, as it then asks the question about endless cases before hers, in addition to the unbelievable amount of face loss.

[NCC1701A]

and the Thai police wonder why they have to pull young Thai girls off their scooters by their hair...

 

it is called zero respect for the police.

 

this will be going on for almost 12 years for this poor woman...

 

 

 

[Moonmoon]

Even if this woman might be a fraud, the BIB r so rotten to the core that its hard for them to have any public trust and confidence anymore.

 

BIB only have themselves to blame if no one believes them.

[JAG]

Even if this woman might be a fraud, the BIB r so rotten to the core that its hard for them to have any public trust and confidence anymore.
 
BIB only have themselves to blame if no one believes them.

I don't think that they give a damn what the public think about them. They are not worried about public trust or confidence. They will rely on being able to bully or frame anyone who crosses or challenges them.

They exist to serve the public, but in fact really serve themselves. Those laws which they do enforce, and any policing functions which they may undertake, are driven by the need to retain face and enrich themselves. Any benefit to the general public (and yes there is some) is coincidental.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

 

If she is innocent, and I tend to the view that she is, and frankly place no credence on whatever "proof" or "evidence" the police present, then her life, career and future
prospects have been utterly destroyed, grounds enough for fighting for compensation rather than being quietly grateful, no?

 

Jag, if I were innocent I would fight the case too so I can understand her. But als if she was not innocent and thinks to be able to get away with a huge settlement (reinstated back pay and so on.. not the amount from days in jail that is almost nothing) So comiting fraud could win her a lot of money too if she were not innocent and if she thinks she can get away with it .. who knows.

 

At this moment I am really split at first I really thought it was a setup but some of the things the police say make sense too. Problem is I can't judge who's evidence is fabricated. I would not bet on it either way. 

[webfact]

Mrs Jamsap’s retrial case smells fishy: police inspector-general

 

 

BANGKOK: -- The police inspector-general reiterated on Thursday that there is a group of people who is taking advantage of Mrs Jomsap Saenmuangkhote’s retrial of a fatal road accident case for financial gains.

 

Pol Gen Panya Mamen, the inspector-general, claimed the police had the evidence to prove the existence of this gang but he declined to give any details about it, saying that the details had been sent to the relevant authorities.

 

However, he admitted that Mrs Jomsap had the right to seek a retrial of her case if she felt that she was wrongfully charged, prosecuted and convicted. But he would like the media and the public to distinguish between an honest demand for a retrial and an exploitation of the case for personal gains.

 

Pol Gen Panya insisted that what the police had done so far about the retrial case was not meant to protect any policemen in particular. “If any policemen are found to be in the wrong, they will be punished,” he asserted.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/mrs-jamsaps-retrial-case-smells-fishy-police-inspector-general/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2017-01-20

[optad]

Why does an inspector general comment at all. On evidence or malfeasant police. 

[newatthis]

Have they interviewed again the original witness to the accident, in 2005, who claimed that a man got out of the pick-up to check the victim and drove off?  According to the other English newspaper, the BIB have found the owner of the green pick-up but, off course, he claims he only drove it on his farm and it was never lent to anyone. Are the BIB assuming he is telling the truth because it suits their agenda?

As for "not meant to protect any  policemen in particular".....

[smedly]

13 hours ago, robblok said:

I am torn here I am not 100%  sure either way. But if she gets a compensation and reinstated then we are talking a lot of money. It might the incentive that gets this going. People do a lot of stupid things for money and she might really think she can get away with it. Your points are valid too.. I would not be surprised either way. 

I think it is worth noting that all the press releases and statements are coming from the police because they can say what they want without retribution - hardly a level playing field, the issue should be fought in court (I suspect not a level playing field either) not in the press especially by one side only, this is something that is fundamentally wrong in this country and hugely unfair, maybe the police should concentrate on proving their case in court with legitimate evidence instead of in the media

[robblok]

11 minutes ago, smedly said:

I think it is worth noting that all the press releases and statements are coming from the police because they can say what they want without retribution - hardly a level playing field, the issue should be fought in court (I suspect not a level playing field either) not in the press especially by one side only, this is something that is fundamentally wrong in this country and hugely unfair, maybe the police should concentrate on proving their case in court with legitimate evidence instead of in the media

Yes but the lady started too with press statements and then the police started.. anyway lets wait and see what the courts say. The fact that her witnesses did not turn up can mean 2 things.. they are liars.. or they were intimidated. 

[greenchair]

The facts that everyone agrees on are. ...

1. Mr sap came forward and confirmed he did it. 

2. Mr sap has a green pick up truck.

3.witness confirms they saw a man.

4.the scratch on her car is on the left. But the man was hit from the right. 

 Mr sap has disappeared.

Suddenly  a new witness says, he bought the pick up before the accident but did not change the name from Mr sap because the pick up was old. Unfortunately, he has no evidence of this because he destroyed both the pick up and the registration . We can trust  the supreme Court analogy when wondering if this is true or not.  this witness has no reason to lie so we can believe him. 

as for myself, I will keep an eye on the evidence presented. I did write that an analysis of the green paint on the pick up would clear up the case. But the old disappearing evidence that the rtp is famous for has won the day again. 

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, greenchair said:

The facts that everyone agrees on are. ...

1. Mr sap came forward and confirmed he did it. 

2. Mr sap has a green pick up truck.

3.witness confirms they saw a man.

4.the scratch on her car is on the left. But the man was hit from the right. 

 Mr sap has disappeared.

Suddenly  a new witness says, he bought the pick up before the accident but did not change the name from Mr sap because the pick up was old. Unfortunately, he has no evidence of this because he destroyed both the pick up and the registration . We can trust  the supreme Court analogy when wondering if this is true or not.  this witness has no reason to lie so we can believe him. 

as for myself, I will keep an eye on the evidence presented. I did write that an analysis of the green paint on the pick up would clear up the case. But the old disappearing evidence that the rtp is famous for has won the day again. 

1) mr sap did not come forward again and did not testify, 3) that witness also did not come forward again

4)good point

the other part is murky about the name change but if there is no proof I don't think the court will accept the story so that speaks for the lady. However the witnesses not repeating the story mr sap included speaks against her. 

 

That is why I am torn. 

[SOUTHERNSTAR]

In a country where there is rule of law this case may have had another ending but here there will only be one, the police is correct and if you disagree we will throw defamation and computer crime laws against anyone that differs.

 

A few points in this case in favour of the women:

1. The bicycle had green paint on it. This paint was never tested in a lab to confirm it came from the woman's vehicle. This is sloppy police work.

2. Eye witnesses said a big man was driving the vehicle that killed the old man' She is a woman, is this not enough for reasonable doubt in court ?

3. Eye witnesses said that the vehicle was green (her vehicle was silver). The police claim she have repainted the vehicle in a different colour, THIS IS FALSE - at the Land Transport Department they have the colour of the vehicle in their system. If she changed the colour of her vehicle it would be reflected in the vehicle registration documents. Further more they have presented no proof of this, at most its rumour and cant be presented in court as evidence. Another issue is that the police claim they found scrape marks on her vehicle, but how can that be if she had her vehicle repainted ? The scrape marks was also on the wrong side of the vehicle.

 

Points counting against her:

1. This Thailand and anything is possible.

2. Lure of money makes crooks of many people.

 

 

[ujayujay]

....yeah,there are millions Innocent in prison around the world

[Freed1948]

Not too sure who to believe in this case.

Just feel that if the BIB put as much effort into normal policing as they are doing in this case, 

Thailand would have less crime.

So far my money is on the woman, but anything could happen to her witnesses.

[rkidlad]

Apparently this lady did all the police work herself. She cleverly (albeit common sense) did some detective work which should have been second nature for the police. She was clever as far as civilian standards go. I think the police have been humiliated and aren't having it.

[Baerboxer]

17 hours ago, JAG said:

 

If she is innocent, and I tend to the view that she is, and frankly place no credence on whatever "proof" or "evidence" the police present, then her life, career and future
prospects have been utterly destroyed, grounds enough for fighting for compensation rather than being quietly grateful, no?

 

 

Would seem so, although agree with Rob, have to wait and see. 

 

If you think there are more cases like this, then should she win, be compensated, then it's reasonable to assume other "victims" would also consider taking action. And to assume some action must be taken against officers who incorrectly handled the case.

 

So both sides now have very vested interests.

 

Somehow, I suspect this is another case that can be added to the long list of cases we never see reported on in the future.

[Jonmarleesco]

20 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Pol. Gen. Panya said the police are investigating her motivation.

Er, to have her name cleared, the right individual collared ... and to show the RTP up for what they all too often are? Ah, the last bit. That's the bit the RTP have a job swallowing without choking.

[Jonmarleesco]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

'... he would like the media and the public to distinguish between an honest demand for a retrial and an exploitation of the case for personal gains.

Something the police would never dream of doing ...

[Jonmarleesco]

19 hours ago, dcnx said:

At his point the police and everyone else involved are going to try anything and everything to save face, even if it means they have to fabricate more evidence.

 

Face is everything here. The police can not admit they messed up or grassed her, as it then asks the question about endless cases before hers, in addition to the unbelievable amount of face loss.

The RTP already have a case like that ... much more serious, and with the international element, that one's not going to go away, no matter how much they would like it to.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Would seem so, although agree with Rob, have to wait and see. 

 

If you think there are more cases like this, then should she win, be compensated, then it's reasonable to assume other "victims" would also consider taking action. And to assume some action must be taken against officers who incorrectly handled the case.

 

So both sides now have very vested interests.

 

Somehow, I suspect this is another case that can be added to the long list of cases we never see reported on in the future.

Yes, I wouldn't be surprised if it's heading for the long grass. 

[elgordo38]

21 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

As far as the police are concerned, it’s unclear why Jomsap, who spent a year-and-a-half in prison, has attempted to have her case re-tried. Pol. Gen. Panya said the police are investigating her motivation.

Enough to make a grown man cry. 

[greenchair]

10 hours ago, robblok said:

1) mr sap did not come forward again and did not testify, 3) that witness also did not come forward again

4)good point

the other part is murky about the name change but if there is no proof I don't think the court will accept the story so that speaks for the lady. However the witnesses not repeating the story mr sap included speaks against her. 

 

That is why I am torn. 

Mr sap and the eye witness were scheduled to appear in court. 

Suddenly they did not. 

Suddenly there is news that the green truck in Mr sap name has been destroyed along with the ownership papers. 

Think about that for a minute.