The 2012 hit-and-run case in which the heir to the Red Bull energy-drink fortune crashed his Ferrari into a police motorbike on Sukhumvit Soi 47 has dragged on for more than two years, still with no sign of a court case in sight.
Pol Snr Sgt Maj Wichian Klanprasert was killed in the crash. The delays occurred despite the fact that prosecutors have indicted Vorayudh Yoovidhya over the incident, according to Ruecha Krairiksh, a senior prosecutor in charge.
Mr Vorayudh has failed to make several appointments in which he was called to report to prosecutors to acknowledge the charges.
Other delays occurred on the prosecution side. The result is that the prosecutions have yet to proceed to court, and the statute of limitations on a speeding charge which he faced has now run out. The suspect remains a free man.
The first indictment was postponed because prosecutors said they were still studying police files, and the second and third were delayed at Mr Vorayudh's request, he said.
Mr Vorayudh submitted a request to Julasing Wasantasing, then attorney-general, to call four more witnesses, two of which were experts, he said.
The fourth appointment was cancelled by prosecutors who said they were processing Mr Vorayudh's request for additional witnesses.
They eventually approved the request, which led to more witness interrogations, he said.
Mr Ruecha said Mr Vorayudh's lawyer submitted another request to postpone the fifth appointment, pleading that his client was sick. He submitted a medical certificate to back the request.
The sixth appointment was set for Sept 2, 2013, three days before the one-year statute of limitations on the accused's speeding charge expired.
Again, Mr Vorayudh asked his lawyer request another postponement, claiming he still was sick.
Mr Ruecha said that after the six postponements, he decided to seek a warrant for the Red Bull heir's arrest because Mr Vorayudh had escaped prosecution in the past.
Police have yet to submit a formal request for the court to issue a warrant for Mr Vorayudh's arrest, he said.
Thanit Buakhiew, a lawyer representing Mr Vorayudh, told the Bangkok Post his client is now in Thailand.
Mr Thanit refused to go into the details, saying Mr Vorayudh would continue to fight for justice.
Mr Vorayudh still faces charges of reckless driving causing death and failing to stop a vehicle to render assistance.
The statute of limitations of these charges are 15 years and five years respectively, said Mr Ruecha, who no longer oversees Mr Vorayudh's case. He works as a prosecutor at the Southern Bangkok Civil Court.
Mr Ruecha said he was convinced of the need for an arrest warrant for Mr Vorayudh, as he had a tendency to flee Thailand.
Recently, Mr Thanit reportedly submitted a request for more witnesses, one of whom is said to be a foreigner who saw the crash.
Warin Thiamjaras, a former senator and independent lawyer serving as a member of the Lawyers Council of Thailand's sub-committee providing legal advisory services to the public, has offered his opinion on the case.
Three more charges — driving without a licence, illegally modifying a car, and reckless driving causing death — should be brought against Mr Vorayudh, he said.
It would easy to check whether the suspect had driven the car without a licence, Mr Warin said, adding that it should take no more than a year to verify this charge.
The statute of limitations on the illegal vehicle modification charge is one year.
The charge of reckless driving causing death has a statute of limitations of 15 years, Mr Warin said. Proceedings in the lower court, meanwhile, should last between two and three years at most, he said.
The suspect would face a maximum jail sentence of 10 years if found guilty on this charge, he said.
Police investigations might stretch to over a year if the suspect is released on bail during the probe, Mr Warin said.
Normally, prosecutors have the authority to order police to re-investigate if they think police case files are incomplete.
This has both advantages and disadvantages, he said.
The case might take longer than usual if prosecutors return the case to police, and there is no guarantee that prosecutors will indict the suspect, even after police re-investigate the case, he said.
In most cases, the courts eventually give the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt when police wrap up their investigations too fast or prosecutors indict suspects prematurely, Mr Warin added.