The Antagonist was Surprisingly Kept on Prison Once Again

Surprisingly, Ratsadon fight co-pioneer Parit “Penguin” Chiwarak wouldn’t partake in a Criminal Court meeting that was analyzing proof in the lese majeste argument against him.

In view of this, Mr Parit, who has been on an appetite strike for 30 days, shown up in court in a wheelchair and connected to trickles. He is blamed for violating the lese majeste law while tending to the purported MobFest rallies at the Kok Wua crossing point and close by Democracy Monument from Nov 14-15 a year ago.

Related Posts

Judge refers to defense argument as a ‘red herring’ while Jeffrey Ong still denied bail

RM17.9 millions from Yayasan Akalbudi withdrawn without permission

Thailand Police Fire Back Ober Jatuporn’s Continuous Protest

The Unexpected Situation of Penguin Led Him to Laid Low Over His Charges

He was again remanded in authority after his bail application was dismissed.

The court permitted him to talk momentarily with his mom, sister and two companions from Thammasat University. Mr Parit would not acknowledge the 32 observers introduced by the indictment and furthermore demanded that his detainment was out of line since he had not at this point been sentenced. He said his detainment had kept him from mounting a full lawful protection and that delivered the legal cycle unfair.

He even advised the court he would keep on declining to recognize the whole lawful body of evidence against him until he was delivered on bail.

He additionally fired his whole group of legal counselors who are Krissadang Nuttajaras, Khunthika Nuttajaras and Noraset Nanongthum. Mr Krissadang said after the meeting that Mr Parit had chosen not to be essential for the equity interaction thus the legal advisors were of no utilization. The primary assessment of indictment witnesses is on June 25 and guard observers on Aug 13^th.

Morever, Mr Krissadang shared that whenever sentenced, Mr Parit was probably going to be imprisoned for at any rate 50 years, given the gravity of the offense. He may accept that regardless of whether he is made a decision about blameworthy, he may win equity.  however, the court will actually want to give over a decision in any case.