Big Joke: Timeline of the breaking point with former subordinates, major counter-lawsuits over gold bribe and assault allegations; focus on uncovering the truth;
The epic conflict within the Thai police force has reached a difficult breaking point. Once strong bonds between the "boss" and his "subordinates" have turned into adversarial relationships, culminating in intense legal battles.
The case involves "Big Joke," or Police General Surachate Hakparn, former Deputy Commissioner of the Royal Thai Police, who faces multiple legal storms simultaneously. Allegations include involvement in a high-level bribery scheme to interfere with justice in an online gambling case. He is also embroiled in a serious conflict with a trusted former subordinate, which escalated to the point where the subordinate and others filed complaints to pursue legal action against their former superior.
Amid this confrontation, both sides have strategically presented evidence to counter each other’s claims. One side highlights improper conduct and abuse of power, while the other relies on forensic evidence and medical records to prove innocence and point out irregularities in the complaints filed. This legal battle is not only about establishing the truth but also about defending the honor and careers of all parties involved.
Thairath Online’s special news team has compiled the timeline marking the start of former subordinates launching large-scale counter-lawsuits as follows:
Police Colonel Phakphum Pisamai, a former close subordinate of Police General Surachate, filed a complaint to prosecute six suspects for "jointly giving property or other benefits to officials." The allegation concerns giving gold bars to officials in judicial and prosecutorial positions to induce improper acts or delays in their duties.
The complaint states that the former top police officer had an individual named Mr. S deliver two boxes of gold bars weighing a total of 246 baht to Police Colonel Phakphum. These were to be handed over to Mr. A, a member of the National Anti-Corruption Commission responsible for the case involving the former officer and associates as suspects. The purpose was to influence the case to obtain a decision not to indict or discipline them. The incident occurred on 31 Aug 2024 GMT+7.
Police Lieutenant Colonel Krit Priyaket and Police Colonel Aris Kuprasitrat, former close subordinates, filed complaints against Police General Surachate Hakparn for "assault causing bodily or mental injury." Police Lieutenant Colonel Krit testified that Police General Surachate struck his left ear violently with his right hand 4-5 times on 20 Feb 2017 GMT+7. Police Colonel Aris stated he was frequently verbally abused with foul language and threatened with retaliation if he did not comply with orders or if Surachate returned to service, causing fear, stress, insomnia, and requiring psychiatric treatment.
Mr. Sanyaphatchara Samart, attorney authorized by Police General Surachate Hakparn, filed a counter-complaint against Police Lieutenant Colonel Krit Priyaket for "filing a false complaint." Medical record reviews showed that Krit’s outpatient treatment indicated general symptoms consistent with a normal person. Vital signs such as pulse, blood pressure, and breathing were normal. The doctor discharged him immediately, prescribing 20 antibiotic tablets and 10 painkillers, with a follow-up appointment only.
The complainant questioned that if the injury was as severe as claimed, the doctor would likely have recommended hospital admission for observation rather than immediate discharge.
The legal cases between Police General Surachate and several former subordinates reveal internal conflicts within the police force that have escalated from workplace relationship issues to using the justice system to investigate facts on multiple fronts. These processes are currently underway following legal procedures.
Ultimately, the final outcome will depend on the examination of evidence and the discretion of the relevant authorities. These processes will determine which allegations are substantiated and who must be held legally responsible. Society continues to closely follow the proceedings based on facts and the rule of law.