Red-shirt protest leaders' trial begins

Published: 14 Dec 2012 at 14.46
Online news:

BANGKOK - The trial of leaders of the 2010 red-shirt protests on terrorism charges began on Friday, a day after the nation's former premier was charged over his role in the deadly unrest.

Protesters hold up pictures of some of those killed during a crackdown on anti-government rallies two years ago as former Thai prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva (not pictured) appears at a justice ministry building to be charged with murder over a civilians' death, in Bangkok on December 13, 2012. Terrorism trial against Thai leaders of the 2010 "Red Shirt" protests began on Friday.

The 24 accused, who include five current lawmakers, could in theory face the death penalty in the case, which was delayed again on Thursday because of the absence of key witnesses.

This article is older than 60 days, which we reserve for our premium members only.You can subscribe to our premium member subscription, here.

Your comments

howell
Post : 1,661
Send message

Discussion 26 : 15 Dec 2012 at 19.2726
Post this to my Facebook
@Dom. So AV should have given in to mob rule ? What happened to the ballot box you reds like to shout about ? Given the violence and heavily armed men it would have been more akin to giving in to terrorists.

It was never about democracy but Thaksin's money. He admitted it in an Al Jezeera interview when terrorism charges were laid against him.

Anther reason for him to turn down the offer was that his party were in disarray and the Dems might have won, for once.
Like dislike 2 people liked / 4 people disliked this comment
domdunnn
Post : 1,133
Send message

Discussion 25 : 15 Dec 2012 at 14.2525
Post this to my Facebook
Howell D24

The government does not need the oppositions agreement or permission to hold an election, they just dissolve parliament. AV could have declared an election any time he wanted and the protests would have faded away, he didn't because he didn't want one probably because he guessed he'd lose.
Like dislike 3 people liked / 3 people disliked this comment
howell
Post : 1,661
Send message

Discussion 24 : 15 Dec 2012 at 07.2024
Post this to my Facebook
@apachepat. '...the reds had ONLY one demand...' Err no, Thaksin was demanding his confiscated money and passport back and an election, in that order. The election offer did not include the money or passport hence he turned it down.
Like dislike 6 people liked / 5 people disliked this comment
apachepat
Post : 88
Send message

Discussion 23 : 15 Dec 2012 at 06.5623
Post this to my Facebook
abbhisit breaking promises?? where would you like me to start?? how about his promise to procecute the 21 PAD leaders over their violent occupation of government house and airport seizures
Like dislike 7 people liked / 5 people disliked this comment
apachepat
Post : 88
Send message

Discussion 22 : 15 Dec 2012 at 01.5822
Post this to my Facebook
no guesses or suppositions, facts are, abbhisit offered an election date, he had no power to do so as setting the election date was outside his remit. When asked to set the date he would dissolve parliament [which he could have done if he was genuine] he refused.
No one could make a deal on the basis of an offer for something from someone who had no athority to make that offer, if the election date offer was genuine he should have had no problem coming up with the date he would dissolve parliament, given that then a real deal could have been made and remember the reds had ONLY one demand, dissolve parliament call an election full stop
Like dislike 7 people liked / 6 people disliked this comment
englishbob
Post : 2,341
Send message

Discussion 21 : 14 Dec 2012 at 23.4521
Post this to my Facebook
Disc20 - So your theory is that Abhisit went on TV and offered a firm date of an early election and then later you believe he would renege on that deal?
Here's my answer. What basis do you have for that idea? Did Abhisit have a history of making promises and then breaking them? Do you have insider information that he would renege on the deal?

Or could it be that you have no basis whatsoever and are clinging to the Red Rhetoric? The rest of us remember that the negotiations were going well until that famous phone call when the offer was suddenly refused. Who made that call? What was said? Your guesses and suppositions don't wash her
Like dislike 10 people liked / 10 people disliked this comment
apachepat
Post : 88
Send message

Discussion 20 : 14 Dec 2012 at 21.0820
Post this to my Facebook
disc 10, exactly what I said, abhisit had no power to set november 14 as the election date, he could have reneged on his offer later because in thailand only the election commision can set this date, when pressed by the UDD to set the date he would dissolve parliament [something he could be held to] he refused and took the military option to set up live fire zones and snipers. BTW I was in Thailand and very close to what was happening at that time
Like dislike 13 people liked / 12 people disliked this comment
garabaldi
Post : 173
Send message

Discussion 19 : 14 Dec 2012 at 19.3019
Post this to my Facebook
I take it that none of the commentators here have read the report of the independent committee commissioned to investigate the events of April May 2010, less still the "Truth for Justice" report of the People Information Centre. If they had they would be rather less dogmatic in quoting "facts". The courts are not the only criterion of justice, you know!
Like dislike 4 people liked / 8 people disliked this comment
howell
Post : 1,661
Send message

Discussion 18 : 14 Dec 2012 at 19.2518
Post this to my Facebook
'Jatuporn Prompan.... But people of every political group should be granted an amnesty'.

This should have cleared any doubts that the 'other' trial is simply an attempt to coerce the Dems into accepting an amnesty deal. No chance.
Like dislike 20 people liked / 6 people disliked this comment
Renaissance
Post : 1,798
Send message

Discussion 17 : 14 Dec 2012 at 19.0717
Post this to my Facebook
Irrespective of which side one supports, all of the people mentioned in the article are there (or dead) because Thaksin wants to get his money and power back. The Red Shirt leaders allowed themselves to be used, and now they have the stress of a very long-lasting court case, with the daily worry that they may get life in prison. The accumulation of the stress will shorten their lives. And for what? So that Thaksin can get what he wants. Does he care about their situation? I doubt it. What a stupid waste of their lives!
Like dislike 17 people liked / 8 people disliked this comment

1 2 3 Next Last

Red-shirt protest leaders' trial begins | Bangkok Post: breakingnews

Red-shirt protest leaders' trial begins

Most Viewed

Anti-govt 'Thai Spring' website opened

Your comments

Sign in once and access every part of the website at your convenience!