The case of "Thailand's Jack the Ripper", a paroled serial killer arrested on Wednesday while attempting to escape his latest alleged sex and murder crime, demonstrates a serious loophole in a criminal justice process that cannot effectively prevent re-offending.
Somkid Pumpuang is accused of killing a divorcee he met on Facebook. He had moved into her house in Khon Kaen's Kranuan district on Dec 3, just two weeks before she was found strangled on Dec 15. Somkid was nowhere to be found until he was nabbed on Wednesday.
Similarly gruesome as the Dec 15 murder is his past. Somkid received the death sentence for killing three women in the provinces of Mukdahan, Lampang, and Buri Ram back in 2005. The sentences were commuted to life imprisonment after he made confessions that were "useful" to each case. He also received life sentences for another two murders in Trang and Udon Thani that same year. Another woman escaped death in June 2005 when he was arrested as he was taking her to a hotel in Chaiyabhum.
The Appeal Court sentenced him to life imprisonment in August 2012 and he was paroled and freed on May 17 this year.
According to the Corrections Department, Somkid was a "model prisoner", and his good behaviour secured him an early release, which now looks to have been a mistake as he appears to have killed again just seven months later.
The case has resulted in renewed calls from the public to impose capital punishment for sex crimes and murder. It has also cast more doubt over the criminal justice process as well as a state probation scheme that should have prevented a repeat of such offences.
Corrections Department director-general Naras Savestanan admitted in an interview with TPBS on Tuesday that mistakes were made in the agency's parole screening process which allowed a dangerous prisoner like Somkid to walk free from jail so easily and after having served a fraction of his sentence.
The interview also shed light on how prison overcrowding makes it hard or impossible for authorities to try and effectively rehabilitate inmates so that they can become law-abiding citizens.
Mr Naras vowed to prevent such a case re-occurring. Yet, this is easier said than done given the correction system's shortcomings.
According to Mr Naras, there are over 700,000 inmates behind bars. This number is "three times higher" than what the prison system is designed to cope with, let alone ensure that each prisoner properly takes part in a process that helps them turn over a new leaf.
The corrections chief did not say so, but there are reasons to believe there is a serious flaw in the probation system which suggests poor or no monitoring of parolees.
In practice there is supposed to be a support system to assist those on parole to adjust to life on the outside and avoid committing more crimes.
More importantly, the nature of Somkid's original crimes pointed to him having psychological problems. It remains unclear, however, if the Corrections Department ever sought a psychologist's opinion as to whether he was fit to be released from prison. There is no record that he received any treatment. Mistakes in screening prisoners for parole and a lack of monitoring after their release means killers and serious offenders like Somkid remain a serious threat to society.
The Corrections Department must correct these mistakes in order to not only prevent inmates from re-offending, but also to protect the public.