Appeals Court acquits ‘popcorn’ gunman

[khunken]

Just now, Smarter Than You said:

Why were all these pleasant souls out on the streets on this particular day?

It was Feb 2 2014 - election day.

Why are armed gunmen trying to stop people from voting?

Lets lay the blame at the feet of the people who decided that they were above the law and created the environment where innocent lives where unnecessarily lost.

Yes, the people who were trying to stop people from voting were partially to blame. That does not make armed militias acceptable by either side.

 

Your extreme bias can;t even bring you to comment on the Ko Tee militia, allegedly responsible for many violent attacks on and deaths of protestors. They were given a free hand by CAPO & the police - more than that in fact - as CAPO & the police said all the deaths by shooting & grenades were self-inflicted.

[Smarter Than You]

19 minutes ago, khunken said:

Yes, the people who were trying to stop people from voting were partially to blame. That does not make armed militias acceptable by either side.

 

Your extreme bias can;t even bring you to comment on the Ko Tee militia, allegedly responsible for many violent attacks on and deaths of protestors. They were given a free hand by CAPO & the police - more than that in fact - as CAPO & the police said all the deaths by shooting & grenades were self-inflicted.

Why are there people in the streets with guns?

It doesn't matter if they're Red, Yellow, Green whatever - why are there people in the streets with guns?

 

Respect elections and there is no one dead, very, very simple.

 

Does corruption justify ignoring the will of the electorate and creating an environment where people unnecessarily die?

Corruption hasn't gone away, in all likelihood it has increased - so what have these people died for?

Coups won't end corruption, only democracy will bring about a reduction in corruption.

So why are there people in the streets with guns killing other people?

 

 

[Becker]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

None of this would have happened without the Thaksin amnesty.. think long and hard about that. 

Thaksin never got an amnesty - the junta did. Think long and hard about that.

[khunken]

38 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Why are there people in the streets with guns?

It doesn't matter if they're Red, Yellow, Green whatever - why are there people in the streets with guns?

 

Respect elections and there is no one dead, very, very simple.

 

Does corruption justify ignoring the will of the electorate and creating an environment where people unnecessarily die?

Corruption hasn't gone away, in all likelihood it has increased - so what have these people died for?

Coups won't end corruption, only democracy will bring about a reduction in corruption.

So why are there people in the streets with guns killing other people?

 

 

No corruption itself doesn't justify protests, bought 'will' of the people or deaths.

Creating an 'environment' is shifting the blame as the red shirts in 2010 created the exact same 'environment'.

Nothing will end corruption - it can only be abated. It's world-wide. Coups won't end it and democracy certainly won't end it.

For an answer to your last question - ask Thaksin & Suthep.

Oh and the reason behind current coup wasn't corruption - that came as an attempted strategy later. The coup was precisely to get the armed militias of the streets and get the totally corrupt police to do their job - arrest as many of the real killers before they fled overseas.

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by khunken
grammar

[candide]

15 minutes ago, khunken said:

No corruption itself doesn't justify protests, bought 'will' of the people or deaths.

Creating an 'environment' is shifting the blame as the red shirts in 2010 created the exact same 'environment'.

Nothing will end corruption - it can only be abated. It's world-wide. Coups won't end it and democracy certainly won't end it.

For an answer to your last question - ask Thaksin & Suthep.

In both cases there were strong doubts on the legitimacy of the government ( was it representing the will of the people at this particular time?). One difference is that YL dissolved the assembly and called for elections in order to let citizens decide, while Abhisit sent the troops. Another is that the PDRC wanted  to bring to power an unelected government, while the red shirt were asking for early elections. That's two big differences.

Edited June 27, 2017 by candide

[Smarter Than You]

29 minutes ago, khunken said:

No corruption itself doesn't justify protests, bought 'will' of the people or deaths.

Creating an 'environment' is shifting the blame as the red shirts in 2010 created the exact same 'environment'.

Nothing will end corruption - it can only be abated. It's world-wide. Coups won't end it and democracy certainly won't end it.

For an answer to your last question - ask Thaksin & Suthep.

Oh and the reason behind current coup wasn't corruption - that came as an attempted strategy later. The coup was precisely to get the armed militias of the streets and get the totally corrupt police to do their job - arrest as many of the real killers before they fled overseas.

 

"The coup was to get the armed militias off the streets"

 

You've got that backwards.

 

The PDRC were in the streets in order to create a pretext for the coup.

(You are right about corruption though, and the amnesty bill, and the rice scheme etc. etc. - all just strategies to keep the whistle blowers in the streets long enough for enough people to die and enough economic damage to be done so that the tanks could roll in)

 

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by Smarter Than You

[Smarter Than You]

3 minutes ago, khunken said:

Not that much difference, the red shirts wanted the dictatorial Thaksin (who wanted his ill-gotten money back) and the PDRC wanted the military.

Correction: Red shirts wanted elections.

 

[candide]

56 minutes ago, khunken said:

Pity you had to twist 2010. The military were sent in because the police, many of who supported the red shirts, were not doing their job. Abhisit offered an early election - on TV - but the mercenary Jatuport turned it down after receiving a phone call & also after Veera had accepted Abhisit's offer.

 

Yes, I agree that the PDRC's secondary effort was to completely get rid of the Shin interim government and instigate a coup. But they were inadvertently assisted by the militia killers, CAPO & the watermelon (again) police.

 

Not that much difference, the red shirts wanted the dictatorial Thaksin (who wanted his ill-gotten money back) and the PDRC wanted the military.

You have just proved that your real name should be 'stupider than you'. No more discussion with a red flaming dick..

I am not twisting anything. Abhisit could have just dissolved the assembly and call for elections. He did not. And YL did. He promised to dissolve assembly without giving a date for the dissolution (by the way it is the only decision that he was allowed to make, dissolve assembly, not give a date for elections). Behind this date problem was the appointment of a new army chief due in September (you know who was appointed, right?). Abhisit wanted an appointment before the dissolution, and the red shirts before. In the light of the later 2014 events, it appears as a quite legitimate concern.

Edited June 27, 2017 by candide

[candide]

9 minutes ago, khunken said:

Yes you are twisting quite a lot. For example Abhisit gave a 3-month deadline for an election. Abhisit 'wanted an appointment' - crap, there is no evidence of that just pure conjecture. 'and the red shirts before' before what?

Part distortion and part meaningless - enough. As usual you can have the last word, words, & distortions although not as bad as the other half-wit.

He gave an election date, not a dissolution date. If the dissolution happens before the appointment of the new army chief, it means it will be the new government who will influence the appointment of the new army chief. And Prayuth, who was already working with Abhisit was appointed. Does it really seems to be a wild idea to you to think that it played a key role, in a country in which coups are common practice?

[Scott]

Inflammatory posts and replies removed.   Continue and suspensions will be given.   Please stay on topic.  

[Enoon]

13 hours ago, robblok said:

Think a minute about the fact that your the guy who has kid killers on his side and hospital bombers. In no way do i condone any violence, as you see in my statement about this case. Even if there is a junta it does not justify any killings same if you got a corrupt government like YL's it does not justify any violence. 

 

"same if you got a corrupt government like YL's it does not justify any violence."

 

But it's OK to use the threat of violence (which Prayuth would have used if the government had not given way) to remove a "government like YL's"?

 

It was violence that deposed the government.

 

The quiet, smiling, "negotiated", implicit violence of a man (whose trade is violence) with an army behind him, who wanted to return power to his faction.

 

That is the sole reason the coup took place.

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by Enoon

[webfact]

‘Popcorn gunman’s conviction overturned despite confession
By The Nation

 

File photo

 

BANGKOK: -- THE Court of Appeals yesterday overturned the conviction of a man accused of being the “popcorn gunฌman” who shot dead a man and wounded four other people at a 2014 demonstration led by the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC).

 

The court ruled that there were no witnesses to implicate Wiwat Yodprasit in the crime. Despite the acquittal, however, the Appeals Court ordered Wiwat be detained pending the Supreme Court’s deciฌsion on the case.

 

Wiwat was alleged to have fired an M16 assault rifle covered with a popcorn bag at redshirt protesters during the clash with PDRC protesters around the Lak Si Intersection in February 2014. Police arrested him in Surat Thani province a month later.

 

The Criminal Court sentenced him to more than 37 years in jail for murder and attempted murder. 

 

He was also found guilty of possessing guns and ammunition without permission, carrying guns and ammunition in a public place without permission, and carrying guns in areas under an emergency decree.

 

The original court had sentenced Wiwat to life imprisonment, but commuted that to 37 years and four months on the grounds that he confessed to the crimes during the police investigation.

 

Despite the alleged confession, Wiwat maintained his innocence during the trial.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30319285

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-06-28

[wakeupplease]

That means that nearly everyone on one side has got off scot free, now who would have believed that? It could have all been planed to end that way and no doubt was. The man confessed and got off Retards.

[wxpwzrd]

That's about how justice works here... 

[Thechook]

Pays to be on Suthep and prayuths team.  Meanwhile students arrested for citizing the junta

[gamini]

The police were pro Taksin and forced a confession out of him.

[Baerboxer]

9 hours ago, wakeupplease said:

That means that nearly everyone on one side has got off scot free, now who would have believed that? It could have all been planed to end that way and no doubt was. The man confessed and got off Retards.

 

Sadly, that the man confessed is meaning less here. As we've seen in other cases.

 

In any normal country, the police would also be looking for other evidence, including witnesses to corroborate a confession.

[Srikcir]

The meaning of "unconfess" -

When all witnesses no longer exist, a confession no longer applies.

[Smarter Than You]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Sadly, that the man confessed is meaning less here. As we've seen in other cases.

 

In any normal country, the police would also be looking for other evidence, including witnesses to corroborate a confession.

How about an extended interview Wiwat gave where he repeatedly refers to himself as the popcorn gunman, recounts being given the weapon, admits to firing 20 shots and explains why he hid the gun inside the popcorn bag.

 

http://www.newmandala.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Popcorn-gunman-fully-opens-his-heart.pdf

 

Please forward the link to the Appeals Court when you're done.

[jayboy]

On 27/06/2017 at 11:22 AM, robblok said:

We will see, I hate it when people like this get off on technicalities. Just like more then a few red shirts came free because lack of evidence. Seemed a lot of people on here complaining about the men in black convictions based on similar evidence saying they should not be convicted as evidence was not strong. Now lets see if those same people will say that this guy should be set free. 

 

The cases are quite similar, I was for those red black shirts to be jailed on the evidence and that is compatible to this and want this guy to be jailed on the same evidence. Good thing is he still did not get free. 

LIke many I have more or less abandoned this forum on the matter of political discussion.Nobody is to be blamed but in current day Thailand an open discussion isn't possible.

 

Still on occasion the issue isn't censorship but ignorance.On the subject of the men in black we (by which I mean educated opinion of all political views) have slowly been able to piece together some but not all of the mystery .In brief, it doesn't make any sense to describe them as "red" since their background was quite different.Every informed Thai has a reasonable grasp of this but apparently some foreigners a a little slow in catching on or are so rooted in prejudice they can't be honest.They persist in assuming the MIB were hired assassins in the pay of TS demonstrating they simply haven't kept up or don't have access to the facts.The question they should ask is why not one MIB member has ever been interrogated to provide a link to TS's invovement in violence - the one thing his enemies wanted above all else.And of course they have no answer.

[robblok]

11 hours ago, jayboy said:

LIke many I have more or less abandoned this forum on the matter of political discussion.Nobody is to be blamed but in current day Thailand an open discussion isn't possible.

 

Still on occasion the issue isn't censorship but ignorance.On the subject of the men in black we (by which I mean educated opinion of all political views) have slowly been able to piece together some but not all of the mystery .In brief, it doesn't make any sense to describe them as "red" since their background was quite different.Every informed Thai has a reasonable grasp of this but apparently some foreigners a a little slow in catching on or are so rooted in prejudice they can't be honest.They persist in assuming the MIB were hired assassins in the pay of TS demonstrating they simply haven't kept up or don't have access to the facts.The question they should ask is why not one MIB member has ever been interrogated to provide a link to TS's invovement in violence - the one thing his enemies wanted above all else.And of course they have no answer.

Jayboy.. is has been kept up.. the arrests were made convictions too and they were affiliated with the reds. So sorry to burst your bubble. Now go and play and play Thrump with fake news somewhere else. 

[jayboy]

Jayboy.. is has been kept up.. the arrests were made convictions too and they were affiliated with the reds. So sorry to burst your bubble. Now go and play and play Thrump with fake news somewhere else. 

The Nation reported the convicted men were not identified as assailants in the deadly shootings of April 2010.None of the five defendants were charged with murder.Nobody has been punished for the shootings.

Nobody has ever denied there was a violent element in the redshirts (though minor compared with the establishment forces) - but the MIB discrepancy remains partially unresolved.Most analysts attribute intra military disputes.But remember at the time Abhisit was talking about a professional group of black uniformed professionals murdering soldiers.For this there is no evidence which even the partisan courts have had to concede.Needless to say no link with Thaksin has been established.

Even poorly informed expatriates might be expected to focus on the facts and stop peddling half truths.Dont bother arguing with me.Ask any well informed Thai of any political persuasion.The MIB myth is just that - a myth.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app