Mekong Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Doctor Porntip Rojanasunan, the director of the Central Institute of Forensic Science, announced Tuesday that a troop killed during a clash between troops and protesters on April 28 was not killed by a friendly fire. Porntip said the ballistic study found that Pvt Narongrit Sala was shot by someone from a building under construction near a petrol station. The shooter was not on the Don Muang Tollway, Porntip said. The petrol station was the are where a foreign media captured a man in black with gun. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldFun Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 saw the footage yesterday on tv & fits well with all the other 'black' incidents recently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 5, 2010 Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 I'd never thought the "friendly fire" explanation fit the wound at all. Shots fired into the air do not strike someone in the side of the head. It was clearly a head shot meant to kill, just as in the other "ninja" killings. The soldier apparently was just an ordinary Somchai in uniform, so he was either targeted accidentally (shot meant for someone else) or the killing was meant to cause further violence. The gunmen are clearly professionals, military trained without doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizardKing Posted May 5, 2010 Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 And shots fired in the air do not bust open an adult's skull. The math just does not work (mass plus terminal velocity versus the strength of the human skull). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted May 5, 2010 Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 There seems to be a video of the shooting here (the top video on the page). You can see a puff of smoke on the right of the screen then the soldier falls off the bike to the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Looking at this video, it seems bizarre that anyone would suggest this was friendly fire. I mean, it's on live tv... the cloud of smoke is obvious... all the cops on motorcycles then get off their motorcycles and go chase into the direction from where the shot came. Nobody who was there thought for a moment that it was friendly fire. When the news story came out they even cited 'foreign media witnesses' who claimed it was friendly fire. WTF. Nobody suggested it was the redshirts or blackshirts who did this, not the police, the army, not any news source and not even the government. What the F is up with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldFun Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 maybe with too clear evidence the face loos for involved parties caught red handed would be too much to bear in an already way too hot conflict - so the trial will be announced once the reds has dispersed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Here's an idea: the guy who shoots somebody in the head gets to worry about his own face before shooting somebody in the head. Oops, forgot, this is Thailand. The guy who shoots doesn't have to worry about anything. Only everyone else does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldFun Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 sad, but true in most cases apparently - like how many *real* killers get caught % wise in LOS - 1 digit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drogon Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Smoke? Except if you are using an old weapon at least 19th century then there is no 'smoke' when a shot is fired -> all modern weapons use smokeless powder (except if you modify one to fire a 19th or older century's round)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.