The Remark Nobody Forgot
Just before King Ananda Mahidol was due to leave Thailand, one of his attendants said the trip wouldn’t happen. He gave no explanation. It was easy to dismiss at the time. A few days later, those words would sound very different.
Pictures from History, Getty Images
A King Who Grew Up Far Away
Ananda became king in 1935, when he was just nine years old. He spent much of his reign studying in Switzerland while others handled royal duties in Siam, as the country was then called. For years, many of his subjects knew their king mainly from photographs.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images
He Finally Came Home
Ananda returned to Bangkok in December 1945. He was 20, and the visit gave people a chance to see the young man who had worn the crown since childhood. It was brief: he planned to leave again in June to continue his studies in Switzerland.
June 13 Was On The Calendar
The royal party was scheduled to depart on June 13, traveling through the United States on its way to Europe. That was the trip attendant Chit Singhaseni told a lady-in-waiting would not happen. She thought he might be teasing her. He would later deny making the remark.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images, Modified
One Last Ordinary Morning
On June 9, another attendant, Butr Pathamasarin, saw Ananda awake around 8:30. The king had gone back to bed by the time his morning drink arrived. His younger brother, Bhumibol, later said he entered around nine, saw Ananda sleeping, and left.
Then Came A Sound From The Room
About 20 minutes later, a sharp crack came from Ananda’s bedroom. Chit rushed inside, then ran to fetch the king’s mother. Ananda was lying on his bed with a wound to his head. The young king’s planned departure was now impossible.
Ananda D Singpatthum, Wikimedia Commons, Modified
The Colt Beside Him
A Colt .45 lay near Ananda on the bed. At first, that seemed to offer a straightforward explanation. Chit’s immediate reaction also pointed toward Ananda having fired it himself. But what Chit believed in those first moments was only one part of the evidence investigators had to consider.
Unknown author, Wikimedia Commons, Modified
The First Explanation Changed
Early reports described what happened as an accident. As doctors examined Ananda and the scene, that account came under serious doubt. Questions about the position of the Colt and the path of the round made it difficult to accept the first explanation with confidence.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images
Even The Investigators Disagreed
A panel of doctors concluded that another person had fired. A later official commission ruled out an accident, yet said it could not establish whether Ananda had fired the Colt himself or someone else was responsible. The inquiry had narrowed the possibilities without settling the central question.
Krom phaen thi thahan bok (Royal Thai Army Survey Department), Wikimedia Commons
History's most fascinating stories and darkest secrets, delivered to your inbox daily.
The Country Was Changing Too
Ananda’s case unfolded during a struggle for power in Siam. Rumors drew in Prime Minister Pridi Banomyong, though he was never tried over the king’s case. After a 1947 coup removed his allies from power, attention turned to people connected with him and to two attendants who had been near Ananda’s room.
Three Men Faced Trial
The accused were Chit, who had rushed into the bedroom; Butr, the attendant who had seen Ananda that morning; and Chaleo Patoomros, a former royal secretary. Prosecutors said the three had helped arrange a plot. The case against them rested largely on disputed statements and an argument about what the physical evidence showed.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images, Modified
Chit’s Remark Came Back
The lady-in-waiting testified that Chit had said Ananda would not leave on June 13. She had asked why, but received no answer. Another palace worker described a similar conversation in which Chit mentioned Western superstition about the date. Chit denied having advance knowledge of anything.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images, Modified
Chaleo Had Allegedly Said It Too
An officer testified that he had asked Chaleo about the planned departure and received much the same answer: Ananda would not leave. Chaleo denied saying it. To prosecutors, the remarks suggested advance knowledge. On their own, though, the words did not explain what had happened in the bedroom.
Unknown, believe to himself, Wikimedia Commons, Modified
A Cartridge Raised Questions
Chit said he had found a spent cartridge near Ananda’s bed. Prosecutors pointed to differences in his accounts of exactly where he picked it up. Chit said he had been confused by the scene. The dispute mattered because prosecutors believed the cartridge had been placed there to support a false account.
Wide World Photos/ Archival by La Presse, Wikimedia Commons
So Did A Round In The Mattress
A round was found in Ananda’s mattress. Prosecutors argued that its condition showed it had been placed there, rather than having passed through Ananda. That conclusion was contested: testimony at the trial included an expert’s acknowledgment that a round could sometimes pass through a skull without becoming badly damaged.
Ananda D Singpatthum, Wikimedia Commons, Modified
The Case Needed A Different Pistol
Prosecutors argued that Ananda’s Colt had been fired days earlier. If they were right, it could not explain the wound, and someone must have used a different, unidentified pistol. The supposed second pistol was never recovered. Decades later, that claim about when the Colt had been fired would face a fresh challenge.
ullstein bild Dtl., Getty Images
Why Focus On The Attendants?
Chit and Butr knew Ananda’s routine and had access to the area around his room. Prosecutors argued that someone close to the king must have helped create the scene investigators found. Access made the two men possible participants in that theory; it did not establish which person, if anyone, had fired.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images
And Why Chaleo?
Chaleo’s former position gave him a connection to the palace, while his political associations helped prosecutors build a broader theory of a plot. A witness claimed to have overheard a discussion involving Chaleo and others before Ananda’s planned departure. The account became a major point of dispute at trial.
The Witness’s Story Was Challenged
The defense questioned whether the witness had been at the house when he claimed to hear the discussion. Other testimony and letters complicated the timeline. The first court ultimately rejected his account of the alleged plot, leaving prosecutors to rely on the other disputed pieces of their case.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images, Modified
The Defense Faced Problems Of Its Own
The trial was long and difficult to manage. Defense counsel asked for more time to examine the large body of evidence and were refused. Two defense lawyers were later charged with treason. Those difficulties have remained part of the argument over whether the three men received a fair hearing.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images
Only One Man Was Convicted At First
In 1951, the first court convicted Chit of involvement but cleared Butr and Chaleo. It also concluded that neither attendant had personally fired the fatal round. The verdict left an unsettling gap: the court found Chit responsible in some way without identifying the person who had entered the bedroom and fired.
Unknown authorUnknown author, Wikimedia Commons
The Verdicts Did Not Stay That Way
Prosecutors appealed. An appeals court then convicted Butr as well as Chit. In 1954, the Supreme Court upheld those convictions and found Chaleo responsible too. Three men now faced the same sentence, even though the person prosecutors said had fired remained unidentified.
Universal History Archive, Getty Images, Modified
All Three Insisted They Were Innocent
Chaleo, Chit, and Butr maintained their innocence. Their requests for clemency failed, and all three were executed on February 17, 1955. The court case had reached its end, but its outcome did not make every question about Ananda’s final morning disappear.
N.S.P. chiwit beunglang khao, image retrieved from Siambook.net, Wikimedia Commons, Modified
The Question At The Center Remained
The convictions established an official account of a plot involving the three men. They did not name the person who fired. That absence matters, especially because so much of the case depended on the claim that Ananda’s Colt could not have been used that morning.
The Case Returned To Court
In 2023, representatives of Chit’s family asked for a new trial, seeking to clear his name. Hearings followed in 2024. Their petition challenged the old findings about Ananda’s Colt and argued that it could have been used on June 9. Reuters reported that it could not independently verify the new test claims.
Eight Decades Of Questions
Ananda was 20 when his reign ended. Three men were convicted, and their sentences were carried out. Yet the disputed evidence, the changing verdicts, and the unidentified person at the center of the prosecution’s theory have kept his final morning under scrutiny for nearly 80 years.
ullstein bild Dtl., Getty Images
You Might Also Like:
