Court hands ‘Am Cyanide’ death sentence in Pol Maj Nipa murder case

Thailand’s Criminal Court on February 20, 2026, sentenced Sararat Rangsiwuthaporn—widely known as “Am Cyanide”—to death for the premeditated murder of Pol Maj Nipa Saenchan, nicknamed “Inspector Pu”. The court later reduced the sentence to life imprisonment, saying the defendant’s testimony was of some benefit.

The ruling was delivered at the Criminal Court on Ratchadaphisek Road in Bangkok in case number Aor.77/2568, brought by prosecutors from Criminal Litigation Division 5.

Prosecutors: cyanide used to kill and cover up fraud

According to the prosecution’s summary, on April 1, 2023, the defendant planned and prepared the act by mixing cyanide into food, medicine or a drink and causing Pol Maj Nipa to consume it by an unspecified method. The prosecution said the amount was sufficient to cause death, and that the killing was carried out with premeditation to benefit the defendant and to conceal the defendant’s own wrongdoing, including fraud allegedly committed against the victim.

The incident took place in Phra Pathom Chedi subdistrict, Mueang district, Nakhon Pathom province.

Family attends verdict hearing

Sararat was brought from prison to attend the hearing. Members of Pol Maj Nipa’s family—including her older sister Laddawan and younger sister Charuwan—were present in court. Assoc Prof Dr Weerachai Phutdhawong, also known as “Ajarn Ood”, also attended.

Court cites premeditation

After reviewing evidence from both sides, the court ruled that the defendant had the intent to kill with premeditation and issued a death sentence. However, it reduced the penalty to life imprisonment, citing some mitigating benefit from the defendant’s testimony.

Victim’s family: grateful, but wanted death penalty

After the ruling, Laddawan said she was satisfied that the court had imposed the death penalty as the family had hoped, though it was later reduced. Hearing the details in court made her feel deeply saddened that a good person lost her life to a murderer, she said, adding that her sister had treated the defendant well and trusted her, never expecting someone close would kill her. She said she wished the punishment had remained the death penalty, arguing that life imprisonment felt too light for what happened.

Expert witness points to shop testimony, phone evidence and purchases

Ajarn Ood said the defendant fought the case fully, but praised investigators from Provincial Police Region 7 and prosecution witnesses, saying their testimony was consistent and supported by testing.

He said the court considered whether the victim had been at the chicken rice shop with the defendant as alleged. The defendant claimed she was in Hua Hin, he said, but evidence showed phone calls arranging to meet, and the shop owner testified clearly that both were present.

He added the shop owner said that when Pol Maj Nipa went to the toilet, the defendant poured two glasses of water in advance. The victim then returned, drank the water and ate before they parted ways, and the victim later died.

Ajarn Ood said the court also considered whether cyanide was found in the victim’s body and concluded it was. He said evidence included the ordering of the substance and subsequent searches of a vehicle and the defendant’s home that “tied everything together”. He said the court believed the killing was linked to clearing online gambling debt, and that the defence contained inconsistencies and appeared to have been constructed later.

He said the next court level would determine whether the sentence could be increased to the death penalty, similar to an earlier case already ruled, or whether the defendant would present additional arguments.

Sister: no compensation sought, only justice

Charuwan said the family did not seek damages because they did not want money, only justice for her sister. She said the family still cannot come to terms with what happened, even though the court has now delivered justice. She thanked the Royal Thai Police, officers involved, witnesses, and Ajarn Ood for helping bring the case to conclusion.