"Lawyer Tum" presented evidence to file a complaint against "Peter and Pojaman" for defrauding 1.5 million baht in a digital coin investment. He opened up in a post addressed to Je Aoy, writing from genuine feelings with no intention to use it in legal proceedings.
At 11:00 a.m. on 23 June 2026 at Bang Sao Thong Police Station, Mr. Sittha Bieabangked, known as Lawyer Tum, brought chat evidence with the defendants to meet with Police Lieutenant Colonel Suebsak Parasri, Deputy Superintendent (Investigation) of Bang Sao Thong Police Station, to file fraud charges against Mr. Peter and Ms. Pojaman, witnesses in the 71 million baht case of Ms. Chatuporn Lertubon, or Je Aoy. He stated that Peter and Pojaman deceived him by claiming they could list a digital coin on a public platform, taking 1.5 million baht from him in 2023, promising that within two years the coin would be tradable. The truth emerged after his sister showed him chat evidence of Peter and Pojaman talking, revealing they never intended to create the digital coin and had discussed potential fraud charges since 2023.
Additionally, there was an attempt to involve his wife’s name in the company registration, which he declined, requesting only the agreed coin share of about 25% or 27%. To date, no coins have been listed. Today he submitted this chat evidence to the police to prove when he realized the deception. Regarding the three cases announced yesterday by the other side—71 million baht, the app case, and 39 million baht involving Mr. Nu and Ms. Sa—and their claim of having key evidence, he questioned the validity and disputed claims of 20 million baht, stating no such amount appears in the chats.
Regarding the 1 million and 2.79 million baht, he separated these two amounts, stating both witnesses received this money from Je Aoy, indicating repeated deceptive behavior. Concerning the 1 million baht, he asserted that both testified in court that they requested this money from Je Aoy to settle debts related to the 1.5 million baht digital coin case, claiming he intended to sue them. In reality, he was in prison then and never received this money, meaning they deceived Je Aoy again.
For the 2.79 million baht, the defendants claimed it was for foundation piles. Initially, they wanted him to sue Je Aoy over damage to the piles, but he doubted this since he had just returned from abroad less than five days earlier, making it unlikely he could have caused damage. When he requested receipts, the defendants said none existed.
When asked about the opposing lawyers’ threat to request his bail be revoked, citing witness intimidation, he insisted they should be responsible for their words. The lawyers know the case is closed, with evidence reviewed and no new witnesses examined. He had his team record the interview accusing him of intimidation, preparing to take legal action in response, citing law and Supreme Court rulings that exercising legal rights is not intimidation. He questioned some media outlets on why they rushed to silence him and revoke his bail, suggesting they feared he would expose collusion in bidding. He affirmed he did not violate bail conditions by fleeing the country.
Lawyer Tum opened up about his post to Je Aoy earlier that morning, affirming it was written from true feelings with no legal intent and that he does not bear ill will toward Je Aoy, who had helped him and his family. However, he acknowledged the two witnesses as his main targets.
When asked who started the fallout between him and Je Aoy leading to the current situation, Lawyer Tum said it was well known and he had already said to ask P’Noi, Je Aoy’s secretary. But now P’Noi and Je Aoy are on different paths, so he prefers not to get involved. He recalled previously mediating when the two quarreled, and his case closing statement clearly stated it was because of P’Noi.
Police Lieutenant Colonel Suebsak said they had preliminarily accepted the complaint and evidence, and will thoroughly examine the evidence and interview the victims to determine if it qualifies as joint fraud. They will summon the defendants for questioning and, if appropriate, press charges following legal procedures.
Earlier that morning, Lawyer Tum posted on Facebook,Sittha Bieabangked, Secretary of the People’s Lawyers Team Foundation,addressing Je Aoy, stating: "To Aoy, I don’t know how else to talk to you to clear things up, so I’m sharing my feelings through this message."
"It’s been a long time since we’ve had a chance to talk and share feelings. Before all this happened, you once asked me to mediate with P’Noi, but I didn’t. Then rumors spread that I lent my car to a Chinese tenant and other stories that made you dislike me more. Then you met this couple, right? You saw how much they lied on media, acting pitiful in front but calling you 'three-wheeled' behind your back, similar to what I faced. They urged me to sue, claiming damage, but when I asked for receipts, none ever appeared. When I didn’t sue, they told you differently, making you even angrier with me."
"A major media outlet claimed not to accept money but still asked for it one way or another, attorney fees or donations to the foundation. They used your case to attack me and promote their nearly unseen channel, since viewers know this media takes jobs and must find money elsewhere, unlike other channels with their own income. Is this what they call genuinely helping people? Have you seen what they did to P’Noi? She became a villain in an instant. Big media destroys lives for ratings and satisfaction, lacking morality or ethics."
"The case you hate me most for is the 39 million baht one. I have proven that I was also deceived by Nu and Sa, as I sent emails and undisclosed chats to the court, which your lawyers have reviewed."
"Regarding the 71 million baht case, only you, P’Noi, and I truly know what happened. I know you believe in karma. If I’m innocent but jailed for this, I wonder how many lifetimes the bad karma will carry on. During my 1 year and 7 months in prison, I thought if you ever forgave me, you might do something someday. Don’t worry that if I win the case, I will sue you. I say this clearly: I would never do that to you, who once loved me and my family dearly. I only want to prove the truth that I didn’t defraud you. If I receive justice, it ends there. Don’t believe those stirring trouble; you know me better than them."
P.S. This post is unrelated to the ongoing court case; the witness examination is complete. This post will not be used in the appeal. I opened this page just 24 hours ago and will close it, reopening only after I prove myself.