A 63-year-old former cosmetics factory owner has filed a formal complaint with Bangkok police, accusing her biological son of masterminding her abduction, stealing 9.4 million baht in assets, and confining her against her will in a Kanchanaburi elder care facility for more than two and a half years.
Mother recounts abduction and alleged captivity
Mrs. Phat, accompanied by Ekapop Luangprasert, founder of the Sai Mai Must Survive advocacy page, filed the complaint at Wang Thonglang Police Station on October 8, 2026. The filing names her son, her daughter-in-law (a dentist), and two volunteer rescue workers who allegedly carried out the physical abduction.
Mrs. Phat told police that on the day of the incident, her son arrived at her Lat Phrao residence with two unknown men. She was handcuffed, gagged, and struck in the face before being forced into a vehicle. She stated that her daughter was present during the abduction but did not intervene or assist her.
The group transported her to the Sothornchai Nursing Home in Tha Mueang district, Kanchanaburi province. Mrs. Phat claims that during her confinement, staff forced her to take sleep medication and that she was physically assaulted if she refused orders. She remained there from early 2024 until her recent escape in late 2026.
Police collect evidence amid conflict-of-interest concerns
Wang Thonglang Police have recorded Mrs. Phat's testimony and seized CCTV footage from her residence. Officers are working to retrieve footage from the time of the abduction, though significant time has passed.
A primary challenge has emerged regarding jurisdiction. Mrs. Phat filed her complaint in Bangkok because she distrusts local police at Tha Mueang station. She stated she learned that the nursing home staff have personal relationships with local officers, raising concerns about impartiality.
Police from the Crime Suppression Division (CSD) conducted an inspection of the Kanchanaburi facility. During the visit, officers discovered a room constructed like a cage with iron bars enclosing a patient bed, directly contradicting the facility owner's claims of standard care.
Financial motive appears linked to family business
The alleged financial motive centres on Mrs. Phat's cosmetics factory business. She claims her son orchestrated the confinement to seize control of a business valued at over 1 billion baht. According to her statement, approximately 9.4 million baht in cash and valuables was taken from her safe during the abduction.
Police are consulting with prosecutors to determine the exact charges. The case is expected to involve allegations of robbery and unlawful confinement under the Thai Penal Code.
Legal framework provides protection for elderly victims
Mrs. Phat's case falls under several existing Thai legal protections.
The Elderly Act B.E. 2546 (2003) establishes the rights of elderly persons to receive protection and assistance when subjected to abuse, exploitation, or abandonment. Section 11 specifically mandates state support for victims.
The Domestic Violence Victim Protection Act B.E. 2550 (2007) provides mechanisms for victims to seek protective orders and legal remedies. In 2026, the Cabinet approved a new draft of this act. The amendments reclassify domestic violence as a non-compoundable offence, meaning victims cannot be pressured into withdrawing complaints, and expand the definition to include economic control.
The Thai Penal Code addresses abandonment in Section 307. Anyone with a legal duty to care for a dependent who abandons them, risking harm, faces imprisonment up to three years or a fine up to 6,000 baht, or both.
Case echoes earlier precedent
The case draws comparisons to the high-profile Ama Huay ruling. In April 2024, the Supreme Court upheld a 12-year prison sentence for a daughter who stole 24 million baht from her 86-year-old mother. That verdict established that exploiting a parent's vulnerability during illness warranted severe punishment without suspension.
Police have summoned the son, his wife, the two rescue volunteers, and nursing home staff for questioning. Mrs. Phat has stated she will pursue the case to its conclusion, saying that despite feeling pity for her son, she insists on full legal accountability.
