Thaksin's Football winnings

[Khun Don]

Football winnings

Ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra loses Man City on Tuesday to an Abu Dhabi group - but gains a profit of about 7.5 billion baht. "My financial position has changed in the last 15 months," he said.

(BangkokPost.com) - The takeover of Manchester City by Abu Dhabi investors has been made final, and ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra will lose the club by Tuesday, the British media reported from Manchester on Sunday.

"My financial position has changed in the last 15 months," said Mr Thaksin, according to the reports.

"I thus felt it was in the best interests of everyone associated with the club that I hand over the reins to new owners who share similar ambitions and visions to my own for Manchester City."

The deal is believed to be worth roughly 210 million pounds (about 12.76 billion baht; US$375 million).

In July of last year, he bought Manchester City Football Club for 82 million pounds, or 5.2 billion baht.

The reports quoted Premier League officials as saying that Abu Dhabi United Group, led by Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, has concluded its process of due diligence and finalised its negotiations to purchase the team from Mr Thaksin.

The former premier, living in exile in England to avoid corruption court cases in Thailand, will retain a minority stake in the club.

The Arab group's oil wealth makes City the richest club in world football. Man City has promised to make more high-profile signings in the January transfer window after already luring Brazil striker Robinho from Real Madrid.

Robinho scored in City's 6-0 win over Portsmouth on Sunday. (Compiled from agency reports)

Bangkok Post

[paul_au]

money makes money.

[OhIC]

Profit of the corruption money.

[Richard Barrow]

You know he was wealthy before he became prime minister? He has been a businessman for a long time. And, correct me if I am wrong, he hasn't actually been sentenced yet. Or did I miss something? The guy has had billions of baht frozen. He was close on bankruptcy. But within a year he managed to make a handsome profit on a business transaction. As much as I don't like him, you have to admit, he has good business abilities.

BTW, welcome to the fourms. It is nice to hear different viewpoints.

[tomboR]

I wonder if he returned to Thailand would he get a fair trial, doesn't seem likely.
And if he is guilty, why does the British Government harbour him?
I'm just asking because I don't know much about his case.

[senaratne]

I wonder if he returned to Thailand would he get a fair trial, doesn't seem likely.
And if he is guilty, why does the British Government harbour him?
I'm just asking because I don't know much about his case.

No. My thinking is different. If Thaksin is tried in Thai courts, he is sure to get a fair trial. I have my reservations about certain laws here but have the fullest confidence in the Thai courts of law.

Take the case of Christopher Paul Neil. Not only many in Thailand and some members of this Forums but lots of people all over the world were so emotional and demanding his blood. OK. You get emotional and lose your equilibrium.

But the courts were dispassionate and remained calm. So, courts knew that the punishment should just suit the crime, no more and no less. Neil was given a jail term of 3 years and 3 months only. Sure, those excited people must be wanting a life sentence or something like that.

Then take the case of Harry, accused of lese majeste, yes, only accused of.
We still have only news reports and one-sided views of some excited individuals. The police are still conducting investigations.

No evidence against him has so far been formally presented before courts. Nobody knows his version of the story. As for me, I am still not even aware if he has committed any offence at all. In short, there has been no judicial trial against him as yet.

But some individuals are so much excited and overflown with emotion, bordering on hysteria, merely on news reports that they almost demand Harry's blood!

For my part, I would await a decision by court in which I have the fullest confidence.

[tomboR]

That's good to know that the judicial system is fair. Which then has me wondering, if it is fair and if Thaksin will receive a fair trial but still chooses to avoid it, then he must be guilty unless his opinion differs from Senaratne's. And it still leaves the question, if he is accused of corruption, why do the British authorities allow him to stay, earning freely in the spotlight of the media and the press. A few things don't add up. Perhaps the U.K. and Thailand do not have extradition policies between each country. Or is it that its only an alleged crime so in their eyes he's not a criminal?

[Khun Don]

That's good to know that the judicial system is fair. Which then has me wondering, if it is fair and if Thaksin will receive a fair trial but still chooses to avoid it, then he must be guilty unless his opinion differs from Senaratne's. And it still leaves the question, if he is accused of corruption, why do the British authorities allow him to stay, earning freely in the spotlight of the media and the press. A few things don't add up. Perhaps the U.K. and Thailand do not have extradition policies between each country. Or is it that its only an alleged crime so in their eyes he's not a criminal?

1.Extradition takes a very long time under British Law-years

2.He has the money to hire the top Lawyers-like ex- PM Tony Blairs's wife -to fight his case,

3. As you say, Thaksin has not been convicted of anything-only his wife has.

[Richard Barrow]

The problem in this case is that some of the laws were changed by the military appointed government just so that they could build a case against Thaksin and his family. That is why he says it is politically motivated.

[senaratne]

That's good to know that the judicial system is fair. Which then has me wondering, if it is fair and if Thaksin will receive a fair trial but still chooses to avoid it, then he must be guilty unless his opinion differs from Senaratne's. And it still leaves the question, if he is accused of corruption, why do the British authorities allow him to stay, earning freely in the spotlight of the media and the press. A few things don't add up. Perhaps the U.K. and Thailand do not have extradition policies between each country. Or is it that its only an alleged crime so in their eyes he's not a criminal?

I am unaware if Thaksin is guilty or not. One should not jump to hasty conclusions.

Yes. The UK has permitted him to live there. So what? It is 100 p. c. legal and lawful under the British law.

Extradition of fugitives is a matter for the two respective governments. So, let the two governments sort it out.

And, as Khun Don has pointed out, extradition takes a long time because it involves complicated procedures.

Anyway, I raise my cap for you, tomboR, for being outspoken.