Jump to content

‘Commando police’ arrest Phuket construction worker for stealing gun from policeman 15 years ago


webfact

Recommended Posts

‘Commando police’ arrest Phuket construction worker for stealing gun from policeman 15 years ago

 

1614917718_1-org.jpg

The “commandos” arrested 57-year-old Jamkat Sriwawong on Wednesday (Mar 3), one of the arresting officers told The Phuket News.

 

PHUKET: A construction worker in Koh Kaew has been arrested by officers from the Royal Thai Police Special Service Division, which calls itself the “Commando” division, for a gun he stole from a police officer’s house in Nakhon Ratchasima 15 years ago.

 

Jamkat Sriwawong, 57, was arrested at a construction site in Koh Kaew on Wednesday (Mar 3). Photo: Royal Thai Police Special Service Division

 

Jamkat was wanted on arrest warrant No. 52/249 issued by Nakhon Ratchasima Provincial Court on Sept 8, 2006, for the charge of “theft from an accommodation in the nighttime”, said the officer.

 

Full story: https://www.thephuketnews.com/commando-police-arrest-phuket-construction-worker-for-stealing-gun-from-policeman-15-years-ago-79242.php

 

tphuketnews_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Phuket News 2021-03-05
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do they even have records that go back 15 years.....I know they have mountains of paper files stored somewhere aircraft sized warehouses.....but nabbing a guy that nicked a gun 15 years ago?? Give us a break!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worker had not been convicted for the theft.

Thus, in judicial fairness he is charged for 'alleged' theft. 

After 15 years it will be interesting to see what evidence is available for conviction unless he "confesses."

The article does not detail any circumstances in connection with the arrest warrant, ie., compounding crimes (armed robbery, murder) so I assume simple alleged theft. Obviously,  the accused has not been surreptitious about his presence in Thailand. 

So a question comes to mind is whether after 15 years from the date of the arrest warrant is whether the statute of limitations had expired for what seems be a simple theft, albeit from the police.

A review of the Thai Penal Code seems vague as to a minimum for the statute of limitations for this alleged theft. But using the new arrest warrant issued against the "Boss" for cocaine use, the statute is 15 year; under the original arrest warrant for a charge of reckless driving causing death it appears also to be 15 years using the year of the auto accident (2012) to an expiration year of 2027. The subject worker's charge is in practice far removed from a 15 year statute of limitations.

So in the instant case wherein no additional charges have been made, it appears judicially the statute has expired. This case looks more like a "check the box" for police reticence to have had actively perform their duty.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Srikcir said:

The worker had not been convicted for the theft.

Thus, in judicial fairness he is charged for 'alleged' theft. 

After 15 years it will be interesting to see what evidence is available for conviction unless he "confesses."

The article does not detail any circumstances in connection with the arrest warrant, ie., compounding crimes (armed robbery, murder) so I assume simple alleged theft. Obviously,  the accused has not been surreptitious about his presence in Thailand. 

So a question comes to mind is whether after 15 years from the date of the arrest warrant is whether the statute of limitations had expired for what seems be a simple theft, albeit from the police.

A review of the Thai Penal Code seems vague as to a minimum for the statute of limitations for this alleged theft. But using the new arrest warrant issued against the "Boss" for cocaine use, the statute is 15 year; under the original arrest warrant for a charge of reckless driving causing death it appears also to be 15 years using the year of the auto accident (2012) to an expiration year of 2027. The subject worker's charge is in practice far removed from a 15 year statute of limitations.

So in the instant case wherein no additional charges have been made, it appears judicially the statute has expired. This case looks more like a "check the box" for police reticence to have had actively perform their duty.

 

If you read the article, it said there was still 6-months left on the warrant, so I would imagine it is a 15-year statute of limitations.

 

It also said there were 3 thieves, 2 of which already had been arrested and the revolver recovered.  Probably had statements from them which led to the issuance of the warrant.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...