Troops to boost police presence at final hearing in Yingluck’s trial

[webfact]

Troops to boost police presence at final hearing in Yingluck’s trial
By The Nation

 

File photo

 

BANGKOK: -- The military will deploy troops to help the police maintain security later this month during the final hearing in the rice-pledging case involving embattled former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

 

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions has scheduled two more hearings in the case, the first for this coming Friday and then the final hearing on July 21.

 

A huge number of people are expected to turn out to show their support for Yingluck on the last day of her trial. 

 

Army chief General Chalermchai Sitthisart said on Tuesday that public order would be maintained by sending troops in addition to police officers, who are normally in charge of security at the court. 

 

“If they want to hold any activities or protest, they need to seek permission from the agencies concerned. But if they just want to show up to give moral support, they should know how to behave to avoid any conflict,” he said.

 

Yingluck has been charged with negligence for failing to prevent corruption in the rice-pledging scheme when she was prime minister, and could face a long jail term if found guilty. 

 

She has also been told to pay a compensation of Bt35 billion by a separate executive order for causing losses to the State as a result of her policy.

 

The scheme allegedly wasted about Bt500 billion of the state budget.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30319916

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-05

[Samui Bodoh]

4 minutes ago, webfact said:

“If they want to hold any activities or protest, they need to seek permission from the agencies concerned. But if they just want to show up to give moral support, they should know how to behave to avoid any conflict,”

 

Er... meekly? 

[JAG]

A "gentle reminder"?

[steven100]

Yingluck and her wishy washy rice scam ...  sorry'  i mean scheme ...... 

[leeneeds]

 More Stressful time ahead for her

and brothers response will be  a vituperate tongue

once the verdict comes down in September,

a few more twists to play out. 

 

[canuckamuck]

Increase in troops because when then the guilty verdict is read, some folks are gonna go ape.

[bristolgeoff]

will they find her assets or some of the family assets.what will big brother say come to me and live,and hope one day we can return to thailand

[whatawonderfulday]

More troops to help maintain security ? The Junta are really reeling now,  more like more troops to intimidate Yingluck and her legal team along with her supporters. 

[worgeordie]

" could face a long jail term if found guilty. " we all know that's never going to happen,

but if they can find any monies that she has not already moved overseas,thats fair game.

regards worgeordie

[Ron19]

A troll post has been removed.

 

 

 

 

[Baerboxer]

7 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Increase in troops because when then the guilty verdict is read, some folks are gonna go ape.

 

Especially those paid to do so when instructed.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, whatawonderfulday said:

More troops to help maintain security ? The Junta are really reeling now,  more like more troops to intimidate Yingluck and her legal team along with her supporters. 

 

Dear dear dear.

 

The police, as anyone here knows, struggle to do their duty sometimes. And it seems the injection of a few troops helps them focus.

 

As for Yingluck - well must worry her that judges telephone numbers and home addresses have been given out; nor have judges had crap and burning coffins with their photos placed outside their homes; no grenades, ping pong bombs thrown around near courts; and no threats from Chalerm and other PTP doyens about the dire consequences for the country should the judges not make the "right" decision.

 

No intimidation this time round, no chance of the old pastry box attempt - shock horror, can't fix the verdict.

 

Just a question of how much dosh big brother can afford to muster rent a mob.

[Smarter Than You]

Her enduring popularity really eats away at the Junta, I love it.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Smarter Than You

[Eric Loh]

32 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Dear dear dear.

 

The police, as anyone here knows, struggle to do their duty sometimes. And it seems the injection of a few troops helps them focus.

 

As for Yingluck - well must worry her that judges telephone numbers and home addresses have been given out; nor have judges had crap and burning coffins with their photos placed outside their homes; no grenades, ping pong bombs thrown around near courts; and no threats from Chalerm and other PTP doyens about the dire consequences for the country should the judges not make the "right" decision.

 

No intimidation this time round, no chance of the old pastry box attempt - shock horror, can't fix the verdict.

 

Just a question of how much dosh big brother can afford to muster rent a mob.

Baerboxer would advocate the military set up live firing area and position snipers. That will be his mother of all intimidation. 

[jayboy]

26 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Dear dear dear.

 

The police, as anyone here knows, struggle to do their duty sometimes. And it seems the injection of a few troops helps them focus.

 

As for Yingluck - well must worry her that judges telephone numbers and home addresses have been given out; nor have judges had crap and burning coffins with their photos placed outside their homes; no grenades, ping pong bombs thrown around near courts; and no threats from Chalerm and other PTP doyens about the dire consequences for the country should the judges not make the "right" decision.

 

No intimidation this time round, no chance of the old pastry box attempt - shock horror, can't fix the verdict.

 

Just a question of how much dosh big brother can afford to muster rent a mob.

Absolutely.How refreshing it is to hear your brave statement of the facts.Personally I do not think it was worth bringing this case to trial at all because the heaviest penalties are so obviously appropriate.The fact that there has been no evidence produced is immaterial.Political leaders should be responsible for the damage their policies do to the country.It is outrageous that some bad thinking people have pointed out that Yingluck was a legitimate leader implementing policies endorsed democratically while those who seized power caused infinitely greater damage and have avoided punishment.The two cases are not comparable as the military leadership has  brought tranquillity and content.What is more they have obtained a massive vote of satisfaction in the constitutional referendum.The fact that all debate was banned and dissidents were punished is of little relevance.The important thing is that the Shinawatra clan is eviscerated, and the people of Thailand should take guidance from the "good people".

 

[Eric Loh]

29 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Her enduring popularity really eats away at the Junta, I love it.

Upset Baerboxer too . He probably has no appetite for dinner. 

[stephen tracy]

18 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Absolutely.How refreshing it is to hear your brave statement of the facts.Personally I do not think it was worth bringing this case to trial at all because the heaviest penalties are so obviously appropriate.The fact that there has been no evidence produced is immaterial.Political leaders should be responsible for the damage their policies do to the country.It is outrageous that some bad thinking people have pointed out that Yingluck was a legitimate leader implementing policies endorsed democratically while those who seized power caused infinitely greater damage and have avoided punishment.The two cases are not comparable as the military leadership has  brought tranquillity and content.What is more they have obtained a massive vote of satisfaction in the constitutional referendum.The fact that all debate was banned and dissidents were punished is of little relevance.The important thing is that the Shinawatra clan is eviscerated, and the people of Thailand should take guidance from the "good people".

 

"bad thinking people"... I didn't know Prayuth was a member on TV.

[halloween]

5 hours ago, jayboy said:

Absolutely.How refreshing it is to hear your brave statement of the facts.Personally I do not think it was worth bringing this case to trial at all because the heaviest penalties are so obviously appropriate.The fact that there has been no evidence produced is immaterial.Political leaders should be responsible for the damage their policies do to the country.It is outrageous that some bad thinking people have pointed out that Yingluck was a legitimate leader implementing policies endorsed democratically while those who seized power caused infinitely greater damage and have avoided punishment.The two cases are not comparable as the military leadership has  brought tranquillity and content.What is more they have obtained a massive vote of satisfaction in the constitutional referendum.The fact that all debate was banned and dissidents were punished is of little relevance.The important thing is that the Shinawatra clan is eviscerated, and the people of Thailand should take guidance from the "good people".

 

"No evidence produced" ? I would have the outstanding debts to various banks, not to mention the millions of tons of unsold rice, had some substance. Silly me.

[stephen tracy]

5 minutes ago, halloween said:

"No evidence produced" ? I would have the outstanding debts to various banks, not to mention the millions of tons of unsold rice, had some substance. Silly me.

I don't think you really need evidence in Thailand to lock people up, and even in cases where there is overwhelming evidence, if you're rich enough it doesn't matter, you wont get locked up.

[jayboy]

"No evidence produced" ? I would have the outstanding debts to various banks, not to mention the millions of tons of unsold rice, had some substance. Silly me.

Yes silly you.It is known the scheme was poorly managed but no evidence was ever produced to establish Yingluck's personal culpability, and certainly no evidence of personal corruption.Leaders are not in any case usually considered personally responsible for poorly implemented policy.If this was the case the current government would be preparing for jail time.Silly you.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

AFAIK, the court won't have any verdict after the final hearing in late July. AFAIK, they'll then take the case under submission and render a verdict later in the year, fall or otherwise.

 

[halloween]

4 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Yes silly you.It is known the scheme was poorly managed but no evidence was ever produced to establish Yingluck's personal culpability, and certainly no evidence of personal corruption.Leaders are not in any case usually considered personally responsible for poorly implemented policy.If this was the case the current government would be preparing for jail time.Silly you.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

So, in your opinion, the buck stops nowhere. No personal responsibility, no duty of care for the money you are entrusted to manage, no need to alter policies that are financial disasters. How very convenient.

[Ricardo]

6 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Yes silly you.It is known the scheme was poorly managed but no evidence was ever produced to establish Yingluck's personal culpability, and certainly no evidence of personal corruption.Leaders are not in any case usually considered personally responsible for poorly implemented policy.If this was the case the current government would be preparing for jail time.Silly you.

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

While I would tend to agree that little/no evidence has yet emerged, that the former-PM benefitted personally from the scheme, it was very clear at-the-time that she was ignoring all allegations of wrongdoing or corruption.

 

This was negligent of her, her being in-denial probably caused the losses to be higher, one might wonder whether she was following her own judgement, or was reluctant to consider the possibility of members of her party/government taking corrupt advantage of the scheme, or whether she was acting-under-orders.  Or perhaps indeed all three.

 

The scheme clearly did major & long-lasting damage to the rice-growing industry, which is important to Thailand & poor farmers, it would not IMO be right that the person who ignored the warnings should escape all responsibility.  There should be consequences, political or otherwise, for this misguided action.

 

In much the same way,if/when it's shown that the handling of the medium-speed heavy-freight line was wrong or the purchase on un-needed military equipment was a mistake, there should be consequences. 

 

The rice-scheme was a cynical electoral ploy, which led to major losses, someone ought to pay for it and it should not only be the Thai taxpayers.  There were other better uses for the money squandered.

[robblok]

 

 

19 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Dear dear dear.

 

The police, as anyone here knows, struggle to do their duty sometimes. And it seems the injection of a few troops helps them focus.

 

As for Yingluck - well must worry her that judges telephone numbers and home addresses have been given out; nor have judges had crap and burning coffins with their photos placed outside their homes; no grenades, ping pong bombs thrown around near courts; and no threats from Chalerm and other PTP doyens about the dire consequences for the country should the judges not make the "right" decision.

 

No intimidation this time round, no chance of the old pastry box attempt - shock horror, can't fix the verdict.

 

Just a question of how much dosh big brother can afford to muster rent a mob.

Exactly, they are making sure that the reds behave. The things you post are exactly the things they done int he past so its facts, and the army shows forward thinking. The reds are allowed to show support as long as they behave.. just the way it should be. 

[robblok]

7 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Yes silly you.It is known the scheme was poorly managed but no evidence was ever produced to establish Yingluck's personal culpability, and certainly no evidence of personal corruption.Leaders are not in any case usually considered personally responsible for poorly implemented policy.If this was the case the current government would be preparing for jail time.Silly you.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

No if you chair the rice program and you don't show up and it is left with huge debts.. there is absolutely no reason to say that her scheme and her not showing up were the reason of those debts. Remember it was said to be cost free she was warned by international organisations like the world bank and she threatened the person who brought out the figures of the rice scheme instead of investigating it and accepting it went wrong.but worst of all it was financed off budget (not taken into the central budget). I know you don't like the facts. But name some other countries where a cost as large as the health budget is kept off books and called self financing.

 

I wait your reply (probably deflection and no real reply as is your standard)

[robblok]

30 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

 

While I would tend to agree that little/no evidence has yet emerged, that the former-PM benefitted personally from the scheme, it was very clear at-the-time that she was ignoring all allegations of wrongdoing or corruption.

 

This was negligent of her, her being in-denial probably caused the losses to be higher, one might wonder whether she was following her own judgement, or was reluctant to consider the possibility of members of her party/government taking corrupt advantage of the scheme, or whether she was acting-under-orders.  Or perhaps indeed all three.

 

The scheme clearly did major & long-lasting damage to the rice-growing industry, which is important to Thailand & poor farmers, it would not IMO be right that the person who ignored the warnings should escape all responsibility.  There should be consequences, political or otherwise, for this misguided action.

 

In much the same way,if/when it's shown that the handling of the medium-speed heavy-freight line was wrong or the purchase on un-needed military equipment was a mistake, there should be consequences. 

 

The rice-scheme was a cynical electoral ploy, which led to major losses, someone ought to pay for it and it should not only be the Thai taxpayers.  There were other better uses for the money squandered.

Agreed.. people should be held responsible for their failings.. and even if the army is not held responsible (id want them too) it does not mean others have to come of free. This should signal people to do their job better and not just buy votes with schemes that are just bad. 

[metisdead]

Off topic deflection posts and replies have been removed.

[Smarter Than You]

5 hours ago, halloween said:

So, in your opinion, the buck stops nowhere. No personal responsibility, no duty of care for the money you are entrusted to manage, no need to alter policies that are financial disasters. How very convenient.

Buck stops with the voters.

Can you see the problem with the current situation?

Yeah, no voters.

I wonder who that benefits?

[jayboy]

So, in your opinion, the buck stops nowhere. No personal responsibility, no duty of care for the money you are entrusted to manage, no need to alter policies that are financial disasters. How very convenient.

No, if corruption is proven in a non partisan and non politicised justice system, culprits whether politicians or bureaucrats should face the full penalties of law.

As to incompetence or maladministration guilty officials should be demoted or dismissed.

As to politicians - as regards incompetence etc -the verdict lies with the people to be shown in a free and fair general election.If they are guilty of corruption or illegal acts (such as seizing power by force if arms) the law must take its course - but see above regarding the need for the justice system to be "blind".

It goes without saying that politicians cannot award themselves pardons.In exceptional circumstances a democratically mandated government can do that in respect of predecessors who have committed criminal acts( e.g. Ford:Nixon)


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[jayboy]

3 hours ago, Ricardo said:

 

While I would tend to agree that little/no evidence has yet emerged, that the former-PM benefitted personally from the scheme, it was very clear at-the-time that she was ignoring all allegations of wrongdoing or corruption.

 

This was negligent of her, her being in-denial probably caused the losses to be higher, one might wonder whether she was following her own judgement, or was reluctant to consider the possibility of members of her party/government taking corrupt advantage of the scheme, or whether she was acting-under-orders.  Or perhaps indeed all three.

 

The scheme clearly did major & long-lasting damage to the rice-growing industry, which is important to Thailand & poor farmers, it would not IMO be right that the person who ignored the warnings should escape all responsibility.  There should be consequences, political or otherwise, for this misguided action.

 

In much the same way,if/when it's shown that the handling of the medium-speed heavy-freight line was wrong or the purchase on un-needed military equipment was a mistake, there should be consequences. 

 

The rice-scheme was a cynical electoral ploy, which led to major losses, someone ought to pay for it and it should not only be the Thai taxpayers.  There were other better uses for the money squandered.

There's a big difference between "little" evidence and "no" evidence which you bracket together.Let us be clear: there is no evidence at all to link Yingluck personally to corruption.

 

I agree with you that her performance was sub par on this issue.Much fuller engagement in policy/detail would of course have been better.The policy itself was misguided but whether you like it or not was designed to help the farmers - which is not to say nobody saw opportunities for corrupt opportunities.

 

You make various statements about corruption.Undoubtedly this was involved but it was certainly not limited to political entities/politicians linked to her.You need to be more careful in your language here as this kind of distinction is misleading.

 

Politicians should face the consequences of poor decisions.But it is ultimately for the people to decide in fair democratic elections. The vulgar but pertinent phrase "kick the bums out" applies.Illegal activity is a different matter of course but in Thailand it's hard to find independent assessment.In any event politicians do not pay personally for perceived mistakes - especially when the policy was democratically legitimate.What you call a cynical electoral ploy and what others call populism is equally the line taken by every legitimate democratic government - to implement policies which find electoral support.Only in Thailand would a crazy idea about holding Yingluck personally financially responsible find fertile soil.Do the Americans hold Obama personally responsible for Obamacare losses? Do the Brits hold Cameron personally financially responsible for the Brexit fiasco? One only has to ask the question to see how bat shit crazy things have become in Thailand.

 

Why then this insanity of personal vindictiveness in Thailand? It's certainly nothing to do with the rice policy but that perhaps is for discussion in another place.