Nate Naksuk explains why he decided not to indict Red Bull heir Vorayuth Yoovidhya.

Nate Naksuk explains why he decided not to indict Red Bull heir Vorayuth Yoovidhya over a hit-and-run incident back in 2012 in which a policeman was killed.

Former deputy attorney-general Nate Naksuk said his decision was made based on the evidence and statements in the investigation report sent to him for consideration.

There is no clear evidence of wrongdoing to bring charges against Red Bull heir Vorayuth based upon the allegation of reckless driving causing death, he added.
“If I could go back in time, I would not change my decision,” Mr Nate said.

Last year, a committee was set up to carry out a serious disciplinary investigation into Mr Nate’s decision to drop a charge of reckless driving causing death against Red Bull scion Vorayuth.

In May, the Public Prosecutors Commission (PPC) chaired by Pachara Yuttidhammadamrong voted unanimously to discharge Mr Nate from the civil service over his controversial decision.

A meeting concluded that Mr Nate had handled the case with gross negligence, causing damage to the state under the 2010 Public Prosecutors Act. But the penalty was later reduced and that has allowed him to keep his pension as he had not committed any other wrongdoing during his 40 years of service.

Mr Nate said he made the decision based on the oral evidence, statements given by experts in the investigation report being passed to him for consideration and the prosecutors’ decisions.

Earlier, four prosecutors investigated the case but declined to charge Mr Vorayuth who is accused of reckless driving causing death.

There is not sufficient legal basis to press charges against Mr Vorayuth, he stressed.
Mr Nate noted that the testimony given by three eye-witnesses to investigators is the same. The witnesses, two air marshals and Jaruchart Madthong, told investigators who questioned them that the accused was driving at a normal speed when the accident occured.

According to the statement of Pol Lt Col Somyot Ab-Neam, who examined the condition of the vehicles, the accused was driving within the legal speed limit when the incident took place.

Pol Lt Col Surapol Dejrattanawichai said it was impossible that the accused has driven his Ferrari at 180 kilometers per hour (kph) when he was allegedly involved in an accident that killed a policeman.

Pol Lt Col Surapol is an accident investigations expert witness attached to the Traffic Police Division under the Justice Court.

Assoc Prof Saiprasit Kerdniyom, a lecturer at King Mongkut’ s University of Technology North Bangkok (KMUTNB), echoed the police officers’ statements over the speed of the car. He also heads the KMUTNB’s Research Center of Automotive Safety and Assessment Engineering.

But Pol Col Thanasit Tangjan, who calculated the speeds of the cars, said the accused had driven the car at the 179 kph in the initial report. He later recanted his testimony on the condition of the vehicles involved in the accident, saying the speed was estimated at below 80 kph.

Based on this lower speed, together with other evidence given to him for consideration, Mr Nate said he decided to drop a charge of reckless driving causing death against Red Bull scion Vorayuth.

“If I could go back in time, I would drop the case due to insufficient evidence of wrongdoing to press a charge against the accused. The trial against Mr Vorayuth was legal. I will talk no more about this,” Mr Nate said.

Mr Nate disagreed with the PPC’s ruling.

On July 11, 2022, he petitioned the Administrative Court, asking judges to withdraw the order of discharging him from the civil service over his controversial decision.
He has filed a lawsuit against Ms Pachara who chaired the PPC and former attorney general Singchai Thaninson for the PPC’s decision against him.

The first trial has not yet been scheduled.

Source : https://www.khaosod.co.th/politics/news_7396371