Police Accused of Extortion: Demanding Money and Food for Case Handling

The report introduces new victims coming forward with accusations against a police officer after previous segments aired.

The segment briefly reviews the cases of four previous victims who reported being asked for money by a police officer.

An explanation is given for the nickname 'Muang 300' (Purple 300), which originated from a victim being asked for 300 baht.

The report details subsequent victims who were allegedly asked for larger sums, including 3,000 baht and 500 baht plus beef.

The case of 'Meow' is presented, where the victim was allegedly asked for 10,000 baht by the police.

A victim shares their experience of being asked for money by the police, including the process of requesting an arrest warrant.

The alleged fee demanded by the police officer is discussed, estimated to be around 10,000 baht.

A fifth victim comes forward, and the provincial police chief of Ubon Ratchathani is reportedly involved.

The provincial police chief of Ubon Ratchathani is actively investigating the allegations after learning about the fourth and fifth victims.

The report revisits the cases of 'Mu Fer' and 'Lamphai', clarifying the details of the alleged extortion.

The provincial police chief meets with victim Lamphai to hear her account of the alleged extortion.

Lamphai recounts her experience of being scammed online and subsequently being asked for money by the police.

The police chief acknowledges the seriousness of the situation and assures that the officer involved will face consequences.

Victim Lamphai expresses relief and gratitude for the police chief's intervention and promise of assistance.

Lamphai hopes for the apprehension of the initial online scammer, emphasizing the significant financial loss.

The report praises the Ubon police chief for his prompt action in addressing the online scam and extortion allegations.

The Ubon police chief's swift response in ordering the arrest of the online scammer is highlighted.

The successful arrest of the online scammer, identified as Sodsuda Kuasuda, is reported.

The report acknowledges the role of the Muang 30 police station in the arrest, while questioning their prior inaction.

A question is raised whether the arrest would have happened without the victim's public complaint about the officer's alleged demands.

The police superintendent of Muang 30 personally questioned the suspect, Sodsuda.

The arrested suspect, Sodsuda, states her intention to gradually repay the money owed.

The case will proceed according to legal procedures, with the suspect having the right to remain silent.

The difficulty in apprehending online scammers is acknowledged, contrasting with the swift arrest in this case.

The efficiency of the Muang 30 police in making the arrest is highlighted.

Sodsuda claims she returned stolen items to her employer and disputes the accusations.

Sodsuda explains her actions were due to selling products below market price, causing financial issues.

Sodsuda promises to repay Lamphai as soon as possible.

Another arrest is made, following the victim's payment of 500 baht and a kilogram of pork.

Footage shows the police chief calling a meeting regarding the ongoing investigations.

The current case is compared to the Nittaya case, highlighting the prolonged duration of the latter.

The Ubon police successfully arrested an online scammer, despite the general difficulty of such cases.

The case of the fourth victim, 'Meow', who was allegedly asked for 10,000 baht, is revisited.

The mother of victim 'Meow' recounts how a police lieutenant colonel demanded 10,000 baht for case processing.

The police officer allegedly offered a 'solution' for the financial case, asking for 10,000 baht.

The victim's mother had to resort to a high-interest loan to pay the demanded 10,000 baht.

The finance company arrived to repossess the vehicle, leading to the police officer's intervention.

The victim's mother and aunt paid the 10,000 baht in cash at the police station.

After receiving the 10,000 baht, the officer allegedly asked for an additional 1,000 baht for his subordinates.

The officer allegedly requested duck larb for his subordinates, further highlighting the alleged corruption.

The report suggests the officer's alleged actions are more disturbing than those of common thieves.

The total amount extorted is revealed to be 11,000 baht, including the duck larb.

The victim had to take out a loan with daily interest payments of 500 baht for 22 days.

The finance company later withdrew the case, leaving the victim confused about the initial police involvement.

The report questions why the police would demand money when the finance company's case was being resolved.

There is a call for the corrupt officer to be removed from the police force.

The core issue remains the alleged demand for cash and duck larb by the police officer.

A fifth victim, 'Dokmai', comes forward with allegations of extortion.

Dokmai was allegedly asked for 7,000 baht, with 1,000 baht for the police report and 6,000 baht for the opposing party.

Dokmai's father was injured in a cycling accident, prompting her to file a police report.

Dokmai was allegedly charged 1,000 baht for filing a police report, which she needed for medical expense claims.

During mediation, the officer allegedly demanded 6,000 baht as a 'zigzag' fee from both parties.

Dokmai paid the fees quickly to expedite the case and care for her injured father.

Multiple victims are now speaking out, seeking justice against the alleged corrupt officer.

Dokmai paid a total of 4,000 baht (1,000 for the report, 3,000 for the 'zigzag' fee).

The opposing party also paid 3,000 baht, totaling 7,000 baht for the alleged 'zigzag' fee.

The ease with which the officer allegedly accepted money from citizens is highlighted.

A call is made for fairness to the accused police lieutenant colonel, who may deny the allegations.

The victims' representatives appeal to the police chief to investigate the ongoing allegations.

Dokmai shares her experience, clarifying that the officer involved is different from the one in the previous case.

The officer denies any involvement or personal gain from the case.

Mediation occurred outside the police station, resulting in the payment of 3,000 baht each to the officer.

A police report was issued after the payment, with a fine of 400 baht.

Dokmai confirms paying 3,000 baht to the opposing party and 1,000 baht for the daily report.

The purpose of the 3,000 baht payment to the opposing party is questioned.

Attempts to contact the accused police lieutenant colonel were unsuccessful.

Concern is raised for the police superintendent, given the number of alleged victims.

The police superintendent appears stressed due to the ongoing investigations and numerous allegations.