The Appeal Court on Wednesday threw out a request by the relatives of victims of a gruesome mass murder in Krabi to serve as co-plaintiffs as part of their bid to seek a harsher penalty.
Region 8's Court of Appeal ruled that relatives can only serve as co-plaintiffs in a civil case under Section 44/1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The court said seven of the relatives did not ask prosecutors if they could serve as co-plaintiffs at the beginning.
The verdict put an end to their hope to see heavier sentences, after eight of their relatives were brutally murdered by a group of men last July.
Three others, including two young children, were shot but survived.
Six of their attackers were sentenced to death by the Krabi Provincial Court in March. They are Surikfat Bannopwongsakul, Prajak Boontoy, Komsan Wiangnon, Abdulloh Doloh, Tawatchai Boonkong, and Thanachai Jamnong.
After the Criminal Court's ruling in March, the victims' relatives appealed and sought to become co-plaintiffs as they wanted those who were not sentenced to death to receive harsher punishment.
As of Wednesday, the Appeal Court is standing firm on the decision to sentence the six defendants to death.
The court ordered the six men on death row to pay eight relatives of the victims 60,000 baht every year to cover funeral costs and financial support for dependents. The number of years of compensation payments varies.
Another two defendants received prison terms: one year and nine months for Tawatchai Boonkong and one year for Chalita Sangchote.
Worayut Sanglang, 46, chief of Moo 1 village in tambon Ban Klang of Ao Luk district, and seven members of his family were killed in his home on July 10, 2017.
Surikfat, also known as Bang Fat, and his accomplices wore military-like clothing when they forced their way into Worayut's home and held 11 members of the family captive.
They were later all shot, execution style. Three of the victims, a mother and her two young daughters, survived.
Worayut's father-in-law had promised a plot of land to Surikfat to secure a loan. He later repaid the loan but Surikfat refused to return the property.
