Popular criticism of the Thai government is growing and Bangkok Post is taking it up a notch. Because why is an incorrigible revolving door criminal released early through a royal pardon?
Bangkok Post is not tender in its comments following the robbery in Lat Phrao, in which a man was stabbed to death when he refused to hand over his iPhone. The perpetrator is 26-year-old Kittikorn Wikaha, who has been imprisoned eight times and has a criminal record dating back to the age of thirteen.
Such a person should not be eligible for royal amnesty for good behavior, writes Bangkok Post. The man is a hardened criminal who does not change his behavior and is therefore a danger to society.
The newspaper is also not pleased with the reactions of Prime Minister Prayut and Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu. Prayut said revolving door criminals have little chance of being released early. That turned out not to be true.
Wissanu made it even more colorful. He blamed the public for criticizing the royal amnesty system. The newspaper rejects this and writes that it is mainly about the selection of which criminal is released early. There is criticism of the Department of Probation, the Department of Corrections and also the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection. who did not do her job well.
Mistakes have been made in releasing prisoners who are incorrigible. It would be good to review the whole procedure again. Pointing the finger at the population, as Wissanu has done, is outrageous.
Source: Bangkok Post
I think enough has been paid to get out.
sorry this is possible
now an investigation after the motivation to release him and who made this decision (filling pockets).
I wish the victim's family a lot of strength.
John Sweet
He was released as a result of a rather extensive amnesty. The occasional rotten mango in between seems inevitable to me.
I also notice that the Thai authorities are completely incapable of managing anything.
I heard the PM say they have done everything they can to make traffic safer. Result more deaths than in the years before. His conclusion: we did everything we could. It is up to the next government to deal with this problem.
Have you read about the massive fraud in police exams? In return for payment, the invigilators gave the answers to the candidates. The solution is not mass dismissal, but the fraudsters are allowed to retake the exam. Examples galore. But then this part gets too long.
In every country there is a regulation of early release.
But why not hold the person who signs such a release document PERSONALLY responsible for the consequences? I've been wondering that for a long time, even when I still lived in Belgium. Because that's what happens there, of course.
It's all too easy to come up with pseudo intellectual reasons and lots of blah blah blah.
Suppose these highly learned gentlemen themselves are held personally responsible for their decisions, you'll see.... suddenly there won't be any more need for early releases. Strange isn't it....
Suddenly they won't be so sure about release policies anymore.
I wonder for a long time why such a policy is not possible why it is not happening.
Maybe someone from this blog has a better view on this?
After all, it will only be your child or loved one who is killed by such a (early released) cunning criminal…..
If someone has been committing crimes since the age of 13, there may also be something wrong with his mental abilities. In Western countries, someone is then accompanied, taken care of after a finding of reduced responsibility due to mental disability. But I think in Thailand not much attention is paid to that. Then you indeed get that certain people act wrong but do not realize this and walk around freely in Thai society.
If the person who has to decide on release is held personally responsible, it will probably be clear to you that no one will be released anymore.
Or is that the solution...
That would perhaps be for the best, except perhaps for the category of very minor "crimes".
A sentence imposed by the court must be taken seriously and respected.
It must also be frustrating for the judge to see that he is not considered serious and that his decision is partially overturned. This encourages judges to initially hand down higher sentences.
In fact, it is all too easy to act like an expert and to get paid well for it too. There may be some serious responsibility involved.
Obviously, a distinction should be made between serious incorrigible criminals and minor crimes. And people who cannot be held responsible for their actions fall into the other regime anyway.
To pick up on Khun Roland's reaction…
Thailand may not have gradations in terms of penitentiary?
Anyone who is convicted and may/must sit, will be placed directly between rapists and murderers.
That's how I read in Pedro Tragter's book. So you're out of luck if you've committed 'only' fraud or another minor offense.
A separate penitentiary for lightly sentenced people would be better and the authorities immediately know that they will not release serious criminals in case of amnesty.
This means that only those who are in such a light regime would be eligible.
If incorrect, be open to new information