Innocent furniture assembler or thief?
MAN HAD NO IDEA HE WAS SUSPECT IN BURGLARY CASE
>> Anon Lachanthuek, 43, making a living as a furniture assembler, had no idea he was carrying around “evidence” of a crime until police sought his arrest for alleged burglary on Jan 26 this year.
In a warrant approved by the Thon Buri Criminal Court, Mr Anon was accused of breaking and entering, and stealing 200,000 baht cash stashed in a wardrobe at a house in Bangkok’s Thung Khru district.
The burglary was occurred during the night of Jan 20 and was reported early on Jan 21 last year.
It was not until Aug 15 last year that police identified Mr Anon as a suspect and submitted evidence to back the warrant request.
Mr Anon denied the charges when he was nabbed in front of a laundry in Nakhon Ratchasima’s Muang district where he worked after relocating to the northeastern province with his wife and two stepchildren.
He was taken from Nakhon Ratchasima to Bangkok the following day and detained for 69 days at Thon Buri Special Prison before his request for financial assistance from the Justice Fund was granted and he was released on bail.
Mr Anon insisted he was wrongfully accused of the break-in and theft and he was not sure how police found the evidence. He had his wife as a sole alibi, as he said they were together on the night of the break-in.
Convinced her husband was not a thief, Sirichan Suwattanawiset, 27, travelled between Nakhon Ratchasima and Bangkok to visit him and help prove his innocence.
The couple did not have anything to defend Mr Anon until he learned the police had identified him from fingerprints left on the wardrobe.
It started to make sense as to why his fingerprints were at the house. He had delivered furniture to the house and assembled it for the customer.
According to Mr Anon, he delivered a wardrobe to the house and assembled it on July 27, 2015.
Police found several sets of fingerprints at the scene, but none except those of Mr Anon could be identified. The house owner reported a second break-in late in 2017 and the fingerprints did not match Mr Anon’s.
According to police, no witness could verify that Mr Anon had delivered the furniture to the house and the investigation proceeded to the point where he was arrested and charged.
The efforts to clear Mr Anon’s name sped up after his request for financial aid from the Justice Fund was granted. He was released on 120,000 baht bail on April 5.
On July 17, the Thon Buri Criminal Court threw out the charges against him. Based on the court’s ruling, the prosecution failed to prove when Mr Anon left his fingerprints — before or after the break-in.
In an interview with the Bangkok Post, Mr Anon said he had no idea he was a suspect in a burglary case until police showed up at his workplace and made the arrest.
He said he changed his job and relocated to Nakhon Ratchasima because he followed his wife, an employee of a chain department store, who was transferred to work there.
According to Mr Anon, it was difficult to find evidence to prove he had delivered the furniture to the house because the paperwork listed only the team, and provided no details about individual members.
Even so, his wife got the paperwork and brought it to police who later interviewed his former employer and the furniture truck operator while he was being detained.
“I felt really bad for my wife. She quit her job to work on the case for me. My mother had to sign as a guarantor for financial assistance. We had no job and no money,” he said tearfully.
Mr Anon said he was angry with police at first, but came to understand why they did what they did.
“There was no summons or anything. When they told me they had found my fingerprints at the scene, I recalled I must have delivered the furniture and assembled the pieces there,” he said.
“Police were following the lead they had, but they should have questioned me first. The fingerprints were left there several years ago. I assembled the furniture at the house. I touched every piece of it,” he said.
Some pieces of the furniture were stained with a sticky substance and might have been the reason why his fingerprints stayed on for such a long time.
He said he will lodge a petition with authorities demanding they to bring the real culprits to justice because it is the only way to clear his name for good.
“And I’d like to ask police to be more prudent when gathering evidence to substantiate the charges,” he said.
Pol Lt Col Arthit Srisupoj, a senior police investigator at Thung Khru station, defended the police handling of the case, saying police do their job by the book.
He said police can seek an arrest warrant when they have fingerprints as evidence and background checks showed the suspect has a drugs record.
Pol Lt Col Arthit said the suspect can fight the charges in court, while noting police have done their part and it is up to the prosecution whether they will appeal against the decision to throw out the case.
The prosecution has 30 days to appeal.