Criminal Court sentenced the accused in Mae Manee Pyramid Scheme to 12,640 years' imprisonment

published: 11/5/2566 13:54:09 updated: 12/5/2566 7:47:27 1061 views   TH

                  Reference is made to the DSI’s investigation into Special Case No. 150/2562, in which Wantanee Tippaveth and accomplices (totaling 9 persons) conspired to deceive the public via social media into investing in the “Mae Manee” Ponzi scheme with a promise of combined principal and interest payment of 1,930 baht for every 1,000 baht invested for 9 months. The promised rate was higher than the highest interest rate to be paid by the financial institution under the law. The offering of such investment plan and return was merely a scam and false statement. In fact, Wantanee and her accomplices did not provide savings or investment services which yield sufficient returns to be paid to investors at the advertised rate. Their act cost 2,533 victims a total of 1,376,215,359 baht in damage, and constituted offences of conspiring to commit a pyramid scheme, conspiring to commit public fraud and conspiring to enter false information into the computer system. The special case inquiry officials had submitted the inquiry file to the public prosecutor, who later issued a prosecution order against Wantanee Tippaveth and accomplices (9 persons in total) as the accused at the Criminal Court in the black case no. 167/2563.

                 On 10 May 2023, the Criminal Court convicted Wantanee Tippaveth (the accused no. 1) and Methee Chinnapa (the accused no. 2) of the charges committed in the manner of several distinct and different offences, and inflicted upon the accused the punishment for the offence of borrowings which are regarded as public cheating and fraud, which carries the heaviest penalty, sentencing the accused to 5 years’ imprisonment for each of the 2,528 counts (totaling 12,640 years). Given that the accused confessed to the crime, the sentence was reduced by half to 5,056 years and 15,168 months. However, as both of the accused committed several distinct and different offences, the total punishment of every count of offence must not exceed 20 years’ imprisonment in accordance with Section 91 (2) of the Penal Code.

                  Both of the accused were sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment and ordered to  compensate the victims with the damages plus interest. The accused no. 3 – 9 were acquitted due to the lack of implicating evidence.