ECT Member Reveals Split Decision in Senator Collusion Case

Discussion on the discovery of 'cheat sheets' used to coordinate Senator votes across multiple provinces.

Sittichot expresses disagreement with the ECT Chairman's press briefing regarding the unanimity of the resolutions.

Distinguishing between cases with clear forensic evidence and those involving party executives where votes were split.

Sittichot explains why he and another member voted to penalize party executives based on the weight of evidence.

Analysis of how the collusion was exclusively linked to a single political party through members and MPs.

Details about a meeting on the 21st in Bangkok where phones were confiscated to determine the Senate leadership.

Discussion on the consistency of witness statements and the suspicion surrounding witnesses who retracted their testimony.

Sittichot discusses the possibility of being sued under Section 157 and his confidence in his documented reasoning.

Explanation of financial evidence linking 'booster' candidates to politicians via intermediaries.

Discussion on the ECT's 4:3 decision to stop tracing certain financial trails and the role of the DSI.

Addressing witness claims that high-ranking ministers were the architects of the collusion scheme.

Reference to CCTV footage from June 26 showing a voter using a cheat sheet, debunking claims that they were fabricated later.

Explaining the necessity of forming a joint committee with DSI and police to bypass local obstruction.

Distinguishing between personal memory aids and coordinated lists used for fraudulent voting.

Discussion on whether the Supreme Court can call for more evidence or if the ECT's finality stands.

Analysis of cases where Senators are accused of applying in the wrong professional group.

Sittichot responds to allegations that the ECT is biased toward a specific political color (Blue).

Sittichot concludes that his goal is to ensure the public understands the decisions were not unanimous.