Updated q&a on the 'cash in the bag'

 But although Bt2 million is peanuts, the mysterious circumstances surrounding the cash allegedly left in a bag at the Supreme Court on Tuesday only served to confirm the growing nastiness in an ongoing power struggle.

Here are updated answers to key questions:

1. What actually happened?

The Supreme Court only vaguely announced that an investigation would be completed soon. The spokesperson did not address major questions like how much money was found, who "left" it and to whom was it returned?

More details emerged yesterday, although the sources had to remain anonymous. Apparently, two men came to the court's political section around noon on Tuesday and at the end of a brief meeting with general affairs officials, handed them the bag and said something ambiguous like "Go on and share it".

After the duo left, the bag's contents were examined in the presence of a judge, who either was called into the room or went there out of curiosity.

2. Why wasn't the money seized and the bribe-giver charged?

The court insisted the incident was properly documented and photographs of the evidence were taken. But to return crucial evidence to the suspect in what could be a major crime is hard to understand. Can there be a bigger insult to the court's integrity than this alleged incident?

3. Who were the mysterious men?

The court will have to reveal that soon. So far, the sources described one of them as a lawyer who "had been seen working on a case at the political section". The other was thought to be a relative of a politician charged in

that case.

4. Why has this all been linked to Thaksin Shinawatra?

The only connection so far is that the incident took place on the day his lawyer was scheduled at the court on the Ratchadaphisek land-deal case. Thaksin's spokesman Pongthep Thepkanchana promptly described the incident as a joke. Yesterday, Thaksin's lawyer in the  case, Pichit Chuenban, dismissed any involvement, saying he "wouldn't have even thought about it".

5. What was the two men's motive?

Initially it was perceived as a blatant bribery attempt, or a smear campaign against the court, or an attempt to discredit a certain politician. Another theory emerged yesterday, in which court officials were the bribery targets because they were well informed about the cases' development.

tulsat@hotmail.com