jingjoe

I also flew the legs you refer to last dec/jan in star class and thought it sucked pus. Lot's of people disagree with me though. The food was passable, and it might be an idea to pre-purchase your meal to save a whole lot of stuffing around and delay on-board.

My first time on Eva in economy deluxe, early October BKK-AMS-BKK was good for leg room and with a wider seat was worth the extra $. The seats themselves are as hard as stone, and the contour is suited to a child. Everything else was good, including the work-a-holic F/A's. Seat back IFE was passable with a few good movies to pass some time.

Flight delayed 12 hours on return, so was put up at the Sheraton close by and given a EU$29 meal voucher.

I DO rate Eva Air.

Conclusion: Pay for your travel using your Platinum Visa or MasterCard, but take out secondary Travel Insurance.

Kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it?

It's not like you can double dip and make both policies pay up right???

Was it just silly behaviour never likely to get out of hand? Then snap out of it.

Was it dangerous, were the consequences "dire"? Let 'em fkn rot.

I pay for my travel with Platinum m/c because it boasts "generous" and "free" travel insurance as a reward. For years I have relied on this fact, in case of an emergency.

I'm about to set off again in a week, and took time to read through the free policy fine print (underwritten by Zurich), which states;

"We do not insure you for any event that is caused by or arises from:" - any act of terrorism.

What's the fkn point of offering travel insurance these days without cover for such an unlikely event? Except to deceive the customers they claim to value so highly?

WCR = Western Car Rentals

Thanks for the mention. I am still around, but with much reduced stock as I have sold off most of the cars due to me working full time on another business now. However I still have a couple of cars I rent out to my regular customers.

All cars have RENTAL insurance and Bail Bond as standard.

Do you have a web site WCR?

I've been sponsoring kids through World Vision (Australia) for quite some time.

I do it for purely selfish reasons, which do not (and will never) include wanting any personal involvement.

Each of us should do what we can, as we can.

"We suspect she took both her weapon and his.

Can you blame a person for fleeing when accused of these allegations?

Welcome to Thai Visa.

It's called "flight" and in Law, suggests guilt and/or the Consciousness of Guilt.

As for the comments that not being found not guilty in a court of law does not mean that somebody is innocent- fair enough comment. But if the trial had gone ahead & Mr Mountford had been found Guilty would that also mean that he was not guilty?

No, that would mean he was found guilty.

REF: The Advertiser - Adelaide

What the court didn't hear

Article from: The Advertiser

COLIN JAMES, LEGAL AFFAIRS EDITOR

August 31, 2007 02:15am

A PARLIAMENTARY report that accused priest John Mountford of sexually abusing a private school student was not presented to court by prosecutors.

The child sex case against Mr Mountford collapsed through lack of evidence this week.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions instead decided that the student would be a hostile witness if he was called to give evidence.

Mr Mountford's trial for allegedly molesting another student was aborted on Tuesday, just weeks before it was due to start.

Mr Mountford, 52, yesterday flew out of Australia at taxpayer expense after emphatically denying he was a pedophile who sexually abused students while he was employed by St Peter's College in the early 1990s.

But an Anglican Church-commissioned report, tabled in State Parliament in 2004, said he was sacked by former principal Richard Burchnall in June, 1992, after Mr Mountford admitted attempting to have sex with a Year 10 boarder in his house on the school's grounds at Hackney.

The report said Mr Burchnall confronted Mr Mountford after he was formally reported for giving alcohol to the student before getting into bed with him and a 27-year-old Balinese man.

Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Pallaras, QC, has become embroiled in another heated dispute with the State Government after being publicly rebuked by Treasurer Kevin Foley and Attorney-General Michael Atkinson for suggesting limited resources contributed to the withdrawal of eight child sex charges against Mr Mountford.

Mr Pallaras yesterday insisted the principal reason for his decision had been the deteriorating mental health of his alleged victim, who was admitted to hospital earlier this year after attempting suicide following repeated courtroom attacks on his credibility. Mr Mountford yesterday told The Advertiser he wanted to take legal action against the former student and the State Government over his arrest and extradition from Thailand in February, 2005, but he had no money.

He confirmed he had spent at least $300,000 on legal costs defending allegations he sexually abused the former student in the St Peter's chapel and his home on the school's grounds between 1991 and 1992.

This included the cost of hiring private detectives to obtain damaging information about the former student.

He yesterday refused to comment because of an ongoing $3 million damages claim against St Peter's College.

Mr Mountford said he expected public sympathy because he was an innocent man who had been prosecuted "for political reasons by the Rann Government".

He had wanted his trial to proceed so he could clear his name.

"I am a homosexual and I make no apologies about being a homosexual. But homosexuals are not pedophiles," he said.

"I am not a pedophile. I am not a child sex offender. But I have not been given the opportunity by the state of South Australia to make this crystal clear."

Mr Mountford said his life had been destroyed by his arrest and extradition from Thailand.

"I can sue the Government, I can sue my accuser, I can sue his mother, but I can't afford it," Mr Mountford said.

"I have no money, three years of my life have gone, I have no job, I have spent all of my life savings, I have used all of my private pensions. I am against the power and funding of the state. I can't take that on."

Mr Mountford said he would visit his terminally ill father in England before returning to Thailand, where he had a long-term partner.

He rejected suggestions made in the report to Parliament that he had flown overseas in 1992 less than 24 hours after being sacked from St Peter's College after senior Anglican Church officials, including former Adelaide archbishop Ian George, told him to leave the country within 48 hours or they would call police.

"The decision to leave Australia in 1992 was mine and mine alone, nobody else's," he said.

"I had resigned my job, I was not an Australian citizen, I have no family here. The sensible thing to do was leave."

No reason to adopt the worst habits of the locals. If you feel it's polite to make a gesture of thanks it's no harm doing so.

Exactly, courtesy costs nothing. It might even catch on.

If it had been serious at the time, would the child's parents not have known?

If anything had happened, wouldn't there have been signs before now, nearly ten years on?

I present these questions not only as a family member, but also as someone that believes in other people

Welcome to Thai Visa. Allow me to address your questions.

1. Not necessarily.

2. Yes, but who was watching?

There have got to be more important things than something that happened perhaps ten years ago involving a man that had left the country and had a life elsewhere.

I hope we never return to a culture where ignorance in matters of this nature is the norm.

As a character witness, I can say that my cousin is many things, but a peodophile he is NOT.

Family loyalty is admirable, but surely you're not in a position to vouch absolutely for his every action over the last 10 or 15 years?

...and hope that someone somewhere may actually look at both sides rationally and without prior bias.

Most comments expressed in this thread have tried to do just that. What about you?

Samran, type the hotel name that interests you into google "earth"... you get a VERY clear view of where exactly where your hotel will be in relation to PTT.

You could treat yourself to the Shangri-la for around 4500 baht, it's just a stroll away from PTT.

Or consider the 5* Equatorial Hotel Kuala Lumpur at under 2500 baht, also just a short stroll to the Towers.

Well, you've clearly found him guilty on all counts.

I'll keep an open mind on it.

Not at all. I'm just making clear that innocence is not an outcome of a criminal trial. The closest thing would be an accuser confessing to making a false accusation or being convicted of perjury at a later time.

Mr Mountford was extradited to Australia in March 2005 after spending six months in Bangkok's Klong Prem prison fighting his return. - AAP

Hmm Six months in a Thai gaol fighting extradition vs probable residential bail in South Australia and a speedy opportunity to defend the accusation(s)?

As an asside, under English law, alleged victims of sex crimes are afforded anonimity in the press, alleged perpetrators are not.

JingJoe's assertion regarding being found Not Guilty is the reason why the two parties in sex crimes ought both to be treated to the same rights of anonimity.

Fair enough.

AU$650 on Jetstar BKK-BNE

Australian courts cannot declare a person innocent.

Being found not guilty does not infer the accused is innocent, only that the standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) has not been met.

If he chooses to seek damages, he leaves himself open to;

a) the original complainant finding the courage to have charges re-instated. (a fresh indictement can be presented again at any time).

or

b ) the publicity bringing out another skeleton/complainant from his past.

He better be certain his slate is clean before he takes this any further.

Yeah mud sticks, but that's hardly a revelation.

A lot of the cheaper hotels encourage lepers as guests. They generally leave a tip.

These hotels also have the luxury of recycling the lepers bath water for soup

Fair dinkum?

only 5 weeks left to wait for me, but I can assure you that weeks 10 to 5 have been the slowest in living memory

Silver, Blue and Gold - Bad Company

Nah it's cause their kiwi mates are too tight to come along too.

George, I'd like to see a competitive pre-paid, and properly priced chauffeur/taxi service (including meet and greet) added to your travel site as it is improved.

BKK - EWR with Eva air via TPE is about 45000 baht inc taxes (www.evaair.com) and flight time comes to 21 hours 35 minutes.

BKK - KWI approx 7.5 hours.

KWI - JFK approx 14 hours.

BTW: BKK - JFK approx 18-19 hours flight time if going east.