Criminal Court Acquits Am Cyanide in Vegetable Vendor Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence Connection

The Criminal Court acquitted "Am Cyanide" of the murder charge of "Pee Noi," a vegetable vendor, alleged to have been killed over a 60,000 baht debt, due to insufficient evidence linking the defendant to the crime.

At courtroom 813 of the Criminal Court at 10:00 a.m. on 21 Jul 2026 GMT+7, the court heard the verdict in Am Cyanide's fifth case, black number A.857/2568, in which the criminal prosecution division 10 charged Mrs. Sararat Rangsivutaporn, or Am Cyanide, age 39, with premeditated murder.

The prosecution alleged the defendant poisoned food with cyanide intending to kill Mrs. Roscharin Nilnoi, or Pee Noi, the victim and vegetable vendor. The motive was said to be clearing a 60,000 baht debt the defendant owed the victim. The defendant allegedly mixed cyanide into a vegetable salad the victim ate before suffering seizures and dying in hospital.

The defendant denied the charges.

The court reviewed that amid multiple deaths linked to cyanide poisoning in March 2023, the victim's husband suspected the defendant's involvement in Mrs. Roscharin's 2022 death. He filed a complaint accusing the defendant of deliberately poisoning the victim by contaminating her salad with cyanide, causing absorption into her bloodstream and death.

A treating physician testified that the victim's blood showed acidosis due to severe infection or poisoning but could not confirm cyanide poisoning or how the toxin entered her body. The expert could not verify whether the poison was self-administered or from another source. Evidence did not prove the defendant poisoned the victim with cyanide.

An employee witness claimed to have seen the defendant bring salad for the victim, identifying the defendant's car since she visited often. However, the witness failed to answer defense counsel's questions about the car make and model, weakening the testimony's credibility that the defendant delivered the salad.

Regarding the alleged motive of killing over a 60,000 baht debt, facts showed the victim pawned a car with the defendant for 100,000 baht and had repaid 50,000 baht. After the victim's death, the defendant claimed the pawn debt was 600,000 baht but agreed to reduce it to 300,000 baht, which the victim's husband fully paid to reclaim the car. Thus, the motive was not credible. The prosecution's evidence did not link the defendant to the crime, so the court acquitted the defendant.

Reporters noted the Criminal Court had previously ruled on four other cases involving Am Cyanide.

• In the first case, the court sentenced Am Cyanide to death for poisoning Ms. Siriporn or Koi Kwanwong to death near the pier in Ban Pong District, Ratchaburi Province.
• In the second case, involving poisoning Police Lieutenant Colonel Nipa Saenchan or Inspector Pu, the court sentenced death but reduced the penalty to life imprisonment due to the defendant's helpful testimony.
• In the third case, involving poisoning Ms. Nittaya Kaewbuppha, an engineer in Nakhon Pathom Province, the court acquitted due to insufficient evidence that the defendant possessed cyanide or intended to commit theft.
• In the fourth case, involving poisoning Police Captain Sukanda Wimonmalai or Captain Nui, former deputy financial inspector at Phu Pham Man Police Station, Khon Kaen Province, the court sentenced Am Cyanide to death but reduced the sentence by one-third, imposing life imprisonment.