Most societies have their mythological bogeymen to frighten into submission children who stay out late or disobey their parents. In ancient Rome, mothers would threaten youngsters with “Hannibal is coming” and German families in world war two warned “The Russians will get you” unless their offspring ate an unappetizing meal and went to bed on time.
Thailand’s only criminal ever convicted for cannibalism was shot to death on the orders of military strongman and field marshal Sarit Thanarat in 1959 for murdering and eating the body parts of six Thai children in several provinces. His name was Si Quey whose paraffin-waxed body has stood bending over in a Bangkok black museum for decades. He is now scheduled for cremation and the hope of many is that his ashes will then lie permanently in a temple.
Although Si Quey’s trial lasted nine days in 1958, it was hardly a case of due process. He was a Chinese laborer who had fought the Japanese in world war two before crossing to Thailand and working casually as a gardener. He was actually convicted of murdering and cannibalizing just one eight year old boy near Rayong without any proper evidence except his own admission in court. But Si Quey did not speak Thai and was promised by arresting officers that he could go back to China if he confessed to six unsolved child murders in various provinces.
The eight year old Rayong youngster was Somboon Boonyakan whose mutilated corpse was found in a ditch by his parents. Si Quey was working as a gardener in a nearby orchard and was accidentally encountered by the frantic father as he was preparing to burn some dry leaves and twigs. The parents testified in court that their son’s heart and liver had been very recently removed, but no evidence was ever produced. So was the accused a patsy?
At the time, Thailand was in the grip of anti-communist hysteria and the Chinese were very unpopular and marginalized, especially in the eyes of the ruling class. They were frequently scapegoated for a wide variety of offences. At his trial, Si Quey was photographed whilst yawning, but the image makes him look extremely sinister. The police were under intense pressure to find a killer to explain several child murders in different provinces. But nobody bothered to ask how a poor immigrant laborer had the funds to travel round the country.
Urban myths grew by the day. It was argued vaguely that Si Quey had developed a taste for human blood whilst fighting the Japanese as food was in very short supply. Or that he claimed that children’s livers and hearts provided the most satisfying meal. In fact, the accused denied cannibalism and admitted to all six murders only on the promise of the reward to return home. To say that Si Quey was convicted on doubtful grounds would be an understatement, although (to be fair) forensic science was virtually unknown in Thai police work at the time.
Amateur sleuths have suggested several other criminal candidates over time. A relative of a most senior Rayong district official had a history of mental illness and was said to have hidden a piece of human liver in his pocket, but no action was taken. A criminal about to be machine-gunned in a 1972 execution apparently offered to add child cannibalism to his list of misdemeanors if he was excused. But the most obvious explanation is that the various child murders were committed by several people. And that alleged cannibalism was simply added to make them seem yet more disgusting.
Whether Si Quey was an obscene child killer or whether that sobriquet is better applied to the system which engulfed him is an historical unknown. But Chavoret Jaruboon, who executed 55 prisoners between 1984 and 2002, did write in his memoirs, “I have come to the conclusion that executions are wrong because they risk killing the innocent and serve no purpose except public revenge.” Amen to that.
 |
 |
 |
