Tingtau

Disgusting!!!!   Absolutely disgusting!!!!  All that I can say that, if that if the officer was a member of MY family, that piece of disgusting cowardly scum would have to live the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder for my vengeance!!!  I would not rest until he was maggot food!!  Thailand......you treat your ordinary citizens no better than the animals you profess to protect!!!!  Shame!!!  

Actually, rockin Robin, I vaguely remember there being pictures of them at the border.

Mon was cleared on 25th September

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/police-now-rule-koh-tao-headmans-son-murder-suspect-turn-foreign-tourists-probe

As for the phone according to the BP (which I cant link to ), the police explained how they found the phone , evidently after their arrest the police asked about the phone and the Burmese told them it was left with a friend

One of the Burmese was arrested on a ferry , supposedly going to a new job

Greenchair I do know you have changed your mind and feel very upset,

I dont know if they are guilty or innocent but one of the stumbling blocks for me is that I fail to understand how MM did not retrieve his guitar.

There as been very little told with regards MM testimony yet it seems so crucial

"The investigation into the murder of two British backpackers on Koh Tao was, from the very start, a muddled affair"

Specially muddled by people airing uninformed opinions and the press happily playing along. Such as this:

"Irked government officials claimed the reaction was all a conspiracy to discredit the Royal Thai Police. It would be wonderful if it could be so easily imagined away."

That there are groups of people working to discredit the Koh Tao police investigation is a fact, they even set FB pages and websites for that purpose.

"The Koh Tao investigation was compromised from the beginning, when police failed to properly seal off the crime scene. A rumour that the attack was carried out by someone linked to influential figures on the island was summarily dismissed and investigators quickly focused on the migrant community, refusing to even contemplate the possibility that Thais might have been involved."

Except that they did name and question said influential figures, Thais and foreigners besides migrant workers. So, false again... what was that about muddled things?

"Respected forensic scientist Pornthip Rojanasunand, who has clashed with law-enforcement officials in the past, was denied access to the investigators' findings."

The defense was allowed to retest the evidence, Pornthip worked on it and reviewed the documentation. On top of that it was the defense that declined to retest the main DNA evidence, after asking for it.

"More doubts were raised over the failure to run comparative DNA tests the female victim's clothing and a hoe that was the purported murder weapon. Pornthip, acting on behalf of the defendants, conducted that test and found that the DNA on the hoe did not match that of the accused."

How about adding the factual nuance to that statement, for the sake of unmuddlying things? The initial police analysis found DNA from Witheridge on the hoe, Pornthip's analysis found also DNA from David Miller, and a third partial profile that matched 25% of the markers from one of the Burmese.

"The court presumably attached more credence to prosecution testimony that the suspects' semen was found on the female victim's body, even though analysis of the DNA samples of three people was, in the view of other witnesses, done too hastily."

Why wouldn't the judge attach more credence to people presenting actual evidence against biased opinions from the defense?

"Most troubling of all for the police case - and for the police force's reputation - is the fact the defendants, having withdrawn their confessions once a lawyer was belatedly provided, claimed they had admitted to the crime after being tortured. The court did not even take this point into consideration."

The court did take that into consideration, as anyone that reads the court ruling can see for themselves; so again muddle muddle muddle. The judge decided that there was no evidence of torture, in any case it's all moot since the ruling did not use the confessions to reach a decision(all of them, including to the Human Rights Commision, Myanmar embassy officials and other people)

"In spite of these many doubts and shortcomings, the national police chief, Pol Gen Jakthip Chaijinda, had the audacity to suggest that an unnamed political group had instigated the ensuing protests to discredit his men."

The very politically involved Ma Ba Tha sect that has been organizing the largest protests.

"The simple answer is that none of the other cases caught the interest of the foreign press, which stemmed from the fact that the victims in this murder were citizens of Britain, where the news media are not only highly opinionated but also alert to the hazards of Thai tourism."

This was not the first time Burmese murdered foreigners in Thailand, the difference is that in this case the defense team made every effort to, in their own words, have the case judged on the court of public opinion. Perhaps the should had focused on the court of law instead.

"Moreover, the story evoked an all-too-common narrative - defenceless migrant workers becoming ready scapegoats in criminal probes and the victims of the whims of the rich and powerful."

Bingo, it's all about the narrative, not what the facts dictate.

AlecG I have tried to answer your lengthy defence of the prosecution's case in as brief a fashion as possible...i.e. responding to your points with my response immediately following each point you make. I make no judgement nor do I intentionally criticize the Thai Court judge in any way for the decision made. It's too bad that only those who were allowed into the courtroom were in a position to judge the veracity of a witness nor, since no transcript of the proceedings is(to my knowledge) available to the public to know exactly what any witness actually stated, word for word!! This absence leads to the many questions which the public has and must remain unanswered. Transparency....no!! That's is the only opinion of which I feel no criticism can be levied against me!!

"Irked government officials claimed the reaction was all a conspiracy to discredit the Royal Thai Police. It would be wonderful if it could be so easily imagined away."

That there are groups of people working to discredit the Koh Tao police investigation is a fact, they even set FB pages and websites for that purpose.

There ARE groups of people who were and are working to expose what was, from the information released by the police at the time, a blatant mismanagement of the crime scene!! Just look at the photo of Montriwat Toowichian stepping over the rope containing the crime scene and then standing, unchallenged by the officer standing next to him, looking down at what probably was one of the two victims!!! No one needs to work to discredit the police investigation…..the police did a thorough job of that all by themselves!! If I, or a loved one, happen to be murdered and a similar quality of investigation takes place…I bloody well hope that there will be scores of people and groups of people making a similar effort to rectify the situation!!

"The Koh Tao investigation was compromised from the beginning, when police failed to properly seal off the crime scene. A rumour that the attack was carried out by someone linked to influential figures on the island was summarily dismissed and investigators quickly focused on the migrant community, refusing to even contemplate the possibility that Thais might have been involved."

Except that they did name and question said influential figures, Thais and foreigners besides migrant workers. So, false again... what was that about muddled things? You are partially correct, in that influential figures were questioned. But you appear to be ignoring the release that was initially made on September 23^rd 2014 - “Eighth Region Police Command commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen identified the first suspect as Mon “ (Montriwat Toowichian, brother of village headman. Woraphan Toowichian); “He was arrested after evidence which police collected were examined and proved he was involved, he said“; “He said both suspects (the both referring to Mon and Woraphan’s son, (Warot Toowichian (Nomsod) were captured by CCTV cameras and the police have gathered enough evidence to implicate them in the murders“ Doesn’t sound to me as though the reporter could have misinterpreted the officer’s alleged comments! But then….all of a sudden, after Woraphan comes into the station and talks with the police, all evidence of complicity vapourizes, never existed….and even the stated implicating CCTV camera footage suddenly no longer exists!! Muddled thing…yesssss….but by whom? http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

"Respected forensic scientist Pornthip Rojanasunand, who has clashed with law-enforcement officials in the past, was denied access to the investigators' findings."

The defense was allowed to retest the evidence, Pornthip worked on it and reviewed the documentation. On top of that it was the defense that declined to retest the main DNA evidence, after asking for it. "More doubts were raised over the failure to run comparative DNA tests the female victim's clothing and a hoe that was the purported murder weapon. Pornthip, acting on behalf of the defendants, conducted that test and found that the DNA on the hoe did not match that of the accused." How about adding the factual nuance to that statement, for the sake of unmuddlying things? The initial police analysis found DNA from Witheridge on the hoe, Pornthip's analysis found also DNA from David Miller, and a third partial profile that matched 25% of the markers from one of the Burmese. By all means, let’s unmuddy things….starting with factual evidence! Did I miss that little tidbit….”initial police analysis found DNA on the hoe” Perhaps my eyes deceive me or the news reporter misunderstood, but my understanding of the sworn testimony of witnesses is that the police stated that they had NOT even tested the hoe for DNA but rather sought only fingerprints!! Please enlighten me if you have evidence to the contrary! My source is - http://www.bangkokpost.com/learning/learning-from-news/689964/koh-tao-murders-no-dna-match-says-dr-pornthip As for the your comment that it was the defence that “declined to retest……after asking for it” Yes, they did decline and for good reason!! Read the written words of an independent witness who attended every day of the trial and wrote down her best recollection (the relevant portion agrees completely with that of Andy Drummond) …starting at “ The defense team requested that the DNA be retested independently……………But what actually remained of the police's alleged DNA "evidence" to be retested was, in fact, merely the midway solution required in the actual DNA testing process itself. This midpoint solution will give an accurate profile; however, it CANNOT determine the actual ORIGINAL SOURCE of the DNA! Therefore, it will NOT show if original alleged DNA from the female decedent at the crime scene came from "semen" as the Royal Thai Police claim, or if it in fact came from oral mucosa, skin, hair, blood, saliva, cigarette butts, etc..and ending with “ For those two reasons, the defense team then; very wisely, declined retesting. “ Would you be willing to have anything to do with such “evidence”?? Better still, read the entire article…….

https://www.change.org/p/david-cameron-independently-investigate-the-horrific-murders-of-hannah-witheridge-an-david-miller/u/14822666Koh And yes, by all means, let’s unmuddy things!!!

"The court presumably attached more credence to prosecution testimony that the suspects' semen was found on the female victim's body, even though analysis of the DNA samples of three people was, in the view of other witnesses, done too hastily." Why wouldn't the judge attach more credence to people presenting actual evidence against biased opinions from the defense? Ahhhh…do you think it possible that a reasonable person with a modicum of common sense would feel that a good reason thinking this would be that these “biased opinions” were those of eminently qualified persons in the field of evidence being relied upon, and NOT the evidence any of the investigators who had, to some of us, given the appearance of being both biased and unqualified in DNA matters? By the way, what is your justification for saying “biased opinions? Why their opinions “biased” and not the prosecution witnesses? What factual evidence do YOU possess that points toward such a conclusion?

"Most troubling of all for the police case - and for the police force's reputation - is the fact the defendants, having withdrawn their confessions once a lawyer was belatedly provided, claimed they had admitted to the crime after being tortured. The court did not even take this point into consideration."

The court did take that into consideration, as anyone that reads the court ruling can see for themselves; so again muddle muddle muddle. The judge decided that there was no evidence of torture, in any case it's all moot since the ruling did not use the confessions to reach a decision (all of them, including to the Human Rights Commision, Myanmar embassy officials and other people) ood No, in their ruling they made no written reference to using the confessions to reach a decision…instead, as I understand it, the sole evidence that they relied upon was what has been described as “a sloppy one page document replete with handwritten amendments and crossings out, including date changes. “ The reported words of the Judge in a curt reference to torture were “ there was no weight to the two men's claims that they had been tortured during interrogation by police. “ That does not translate for me as not having played any part in the conviction..but rather that the Judge opined that their claim “ have been tortured was baseless!

"In spite of these many doubts and shortcomings, the national police chief, Pol Gen Jakthip Chaijinda, had the audacity to suggest that an unnamed political group had instigated the ensuing protests to discredit his men."

The very politically involved Ma Ba Tha sect that has been organizing the largest protests. “Is it then your position that bad people cannot, even sometimes, do good things? I mean, sure I would rather, if I was believed to be innocent of a crime for which I had been convicted and sentenced to be put to death, that some group such as the ‘Benevolent Order of the Established Saints” were to be organizing a protest against the decision rather than an organization who were involved in what appears to be criminal activism, but…hey..beggars can’t be choosers! And, they can protest….can Thais flock to the streets in front of the Courthouse in Koh Samui? Hardly!! Read the following excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Thailand

” The judgment of Thai courts may not be criticized. After a controversial ruling in July 2006 in which a criminal court jailed three election commissioners, the court worked with the police to identify 16 individuals who were captured on TV news footage criticizing the judgement.^[73]The court later found all the individuals guilty and gave jail terms to 4 of them. The maximum jail sentence for the offence is seven years.^[74]” The simple answer is that none of the other cases caught the interest of the foreign press, which stemmed from the fact that the victims in this murder were citizens of Britain, where the news media are not only highly opinionated but also alert to the hazards of Thai tourism."

This was not the first time Burmese murdered foreigners in Thailand, the difference is that in this case the defense team made every effort to, in their own words, have the case judged on the court of public opinion. Perhaps they should had focused on the court of law in instead. Ha” And herein lies the dilemma, if one has no confidence in the impartiality and/or the competence of the relevant judicial system, where would YOU focus your attention. And, in any event, I thought from what I have seen that they DID focus on the court of law, but received a less than a welcome reception!

"Moreover, the story evoked an all-too-common narrative - defenceless migrant workers becoming ready scapegoats in criminal probes and the victims of the whims of the rich and powerful."

Bingo, it's all about the narrative, not what the facts dictate. BINGO, it was all about whose evidence was accepted and whose was not!! That is your real Bingo!

None of the above comments by me should be construed as a criticism of a Thai Court of Law…..if I have seemed critical, let me say simply this. It is unfortunate that one feels the need to state what I have just stated!!

It was no "rumour" as to having two suspects, both of whom are related to the headman in Koh Tao..at least one was even arrested...but...............!! And when one looks at the various CCTV photos of the persons believed to have been involved, that have been made available, the resemblance to the two that were Pol Lt-Gen Panya Mamen's suspects, is truly uncanny. Couple that with the apparent fact no DNA was ever obtained from either of those two (unbelievable!!), the abrupt about-face by police after those two's father/uncle respectively comes in to talk with the police and the ABSOLUTELY appalling conduct of so-called trained investigators during the entire investigation....and the list goes on......missing/used up evidence of guilt..no problem, word of investigators is accepted, while evidence (DNA on murder weapon is found to be that of two unknown subjects) that is supports a belief that others are the guilty party...that is ignored!!! The resultant conclusion is almost, if not totally inescapable!! I hope that the hue and cry does not let up.........there is no "conspiracy to defame or belittle the RTP" by any clandestine group, for krissake!! The RTP did that all on their own and, imho, did a bang up job looking at all the evidence that has become public knowledge!! Now,their bang up job is being hung out and waved in the public's face by those whom I thought were working on ridding Thailand of corruption!

I know that non-Thais are "expected" to keep their "noses" out of politics, but with what has happened in this case, surely it can be understood that there is now a legitimate fear that if something happened to one of us, a similar shoddy (corrupt?) investigation could take place OR that even there is a possibility that one or more of us might find ourselves accused, charged and convicted in the same manner as the two Burmese men! The information that is contained in "Anonymous" report is largely confirmed by actual photo or video footage or by statements that have been made in court! One last comment....one cannot prove that torture was involved because of the very nature of the circumstances under which it is alleged to have been committed, but with the similarities of claims made by others over the years, plus the disappearance of a human rights lawyer after being provably abducted by members of the RTP while he was in the midst of representing persons making accusations of torture against RTP officers..........at some point, a reasonable person must say "There is definitely something very rotten here!!" And it doesn't require any "clandestine group working to defame the police" to come to that conclusion!!

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/one-tourist-murder-suspect-now-arrested-another-run

" Under the "train-the-trainer" program..........Thai teachers who teach English in government schools ............... intensive six-week training course taught by English specialists from the British Council" A good idea...but until they stop passing ALL students irregardless of the how low a mark they achieved on their test, I don't care who they have teaching English, the students will never cut it. And another thing...you have to WANT to learn, so if they really want to improve a student's proficiency, they will have to come up with two things: 1) An incentive to be in the class to learn, not just occupying a chair because their curriculum requires it. and 2) Require that the student actually can pass the tests that are administered, before advancing them. There are countless students who are deservedly at the Prathom 5 level in Thai subjects, but would be hard-pressed to, legitimately, be able to pass tests at the Prathom 1 or 2 level in English grammar. This is through no fault of the teachers nor is it fair to criticize the student, for he or she has been brought up to KNOW that they will get a pass no matter what their actual knowledge is!! That is the reality!

If he packed his case then he should know what is in there, if he didn't ,he's an idiot ,

I would agree....if you had used the word "careless" to describe the "apparent" reason for the presence of the two bullets, rather than to call him "an idiot". Or does one careless act translate into a state of idiocy on the part of one who may have simply been careless. Speaking of 'careless"....not knowing yet how it was that those 2 bullets came to be where they were found, we cannot make any judgement as to whether this person was careless in them being in the suitcase prior to packing for his trip! The only finding of carelessness would have to be predicated upon a finding that, because they obviously were there when he packed for the trip, he must have failed to make a sufficiently CAREFUL examination of the suitcase prior to and during the packing! Do you, andy8017, turn your suitcase "inside out" and "upside down" prior to packing it, looking for anything and everything that might have found its way into the suitcase? I am not suggesting that 'carelessness' of some degree and in the general sense of the word, is not to blame here...but at what point does one's carelessness translate into "idiocy".for you? Personally, it would be my position, for the term "an idiot" to be applicable, that some knowledge or reasonable expectation of the possibility that 2 bullets could be present in the suitcase. In this young man's case, barring any evidence to suggest otherwise, I would suggest that he has been judged not merely careless, but "criminally negligent" by the authorities and thus, charged with "Possession of Ammunition"!

A fitting end to the beginning career of another donut muncher!

A short, concise and clearly stated opinion! And, if this had been a case of bullets accompanied by a firearm, your comment would meet with my total agreement...for one cannot possibly accidentally leave or drop such an item into one's suitcase! But, with the few given facts, I find your comment to be absent any sense true justice! Any suggestion, fredge45, as to what motivates your use of the words "fitting end" and "donut muncher"!! Your sense of justice appears can be measured with the same tiny thimble into which your degree of esteem for law enforcement personnel would fit! I don't know you, nor do I know what your occupation might be.....but I do hope that the penalty for any possible transgression that you might commit is not put in the hands of someone who, similar to yourself is apparently no fan of Portia's plea to Shylock when she sought mercy by imploring " The quality of mercy is not strained......it blesseth him that gives and him that takes", but who would instead be calling." GUILTY!! Take him out and hang him!! Next case! " even before a trial took place!!

He appears to have acknowledged that the two bullets MAY have been from an oversight on his part, so I think that we can disregard any suspicion of a "scam to extort" by the authorities.

I would venture to say that, however the two bullets arrived in that suitcase, they did so without any deliberate intent on the part of this young fellow. And the assertion that they were found "hidden" in his suitcase!! Were they secreted in a hidden compartment? Sewn into the lining of the suitcase? Secreted in the toe of a rolled up sock? How were they "hidden" Whose word is being used here....the reporter or the police? Is it possible that they were found in a corner, crease, fold of the suitcase lining....exactly where one would expect a loose cartridge to roll or fall while being carried about., not "hidden" in the true sense of the word!! I won't even try to speculate as to how those two bullets found their way into his suitcase...some amount of carelessness, no doubt, but "smuggling" two bullets "hidden" in one's suitcase, coming presumably to vacation in Phuket? No.....this is, imho, no case of an attempt to "smuggle" anything! Does it warrant a criminal charge of "possession of ammunition"? That, I am afraid is up to the ability of Thailand authorities to use their discretionary powers.....which I have seen more than ample evidence that they do have!! What this will mean to the career of Mr.Heggem Simen Oliver, will be up to his bosses in the Norwegian Police Force and will, I suspect, largely depend upon his lawful access to such an item in that country as a police recruit and what is decided as to how two 9mm bullets were apparently unaccounted for by him (or someone who may have had the use of his suitcase?) !! Whatever happens, a helluva an ending to what was most probably an intended vacation with the friend seen sitting to his right!!

I think you scaled your "humanitarium" wrongly Tigtau. If you take into consideration the daily activities of cetaceans, your human enclosure should be much smaller.

555 You are absolutely correct in your observation. Since the dolphin travels an average of 100 kilometres per day vs the average human male travels less than a 1/10th of that, one could argue for the enclosure in which the human should be imprisoned to be reduced to....I'll be generous and give them 40 sq. feet. One human wouldn't last out the month, let alone putting 5 into that size of an enclosure. I am so glad to see that there is at least one person that can appreciate the lunacy of this tank being considered as suitable for those dolphins. But, I still am unable to get even one editor of one newspaper to ask how, if the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act was considered, it was possible for that tank to be approved for even a "temporary enclosure" let alone as a "for the rest of their lives" abode. We opponents to this dolphin abusement centre caled the "Dolphin Bay Phuket dolphinarium have provided a great deal of material which literally stands up and 'BEGS" to be addressed.....but what is the result.....a deafening silence...a failure by any of the papers to respond to any requests ....not even one response to my reqiuest for them to contact me....a request in which I stated unequivocally that not one person has ever contacted me to ask my opinion but that I was ready and willing to go on the record with my opinion and "Hey....here I am....ask away...any venue you want...providing them with telephone number and email address.....not one contact, but they have the gall to tell their readers that....here's the Phuketwan's claim "Phuketwan has sought comments from several sources among groups and individuals who initially opposed the project. So far we have found no Dolphinarium opponents who still wish to speak on the record about their viewpoint” and yet they never once contacted mysellf or another cetacean activist, both of us whom I have absolutely no doubt but that they know not only of us, but how to contact us..in fact one person was interveiwed on a public Thai TV station several months ago. Someone suggested that the reason behind our 4th Estate's failure to print any material that could be adverse to this dolphinarium's interests could quite likely lie them having a pecuniary interest in this place succeeding! How else to explain the columns that were written just after the opening....columns in which they claimed they had received "glowing reports" from those who had attended and "the General Manager stated that ...venue was to present only a one-off premiere today, but demand saw a second show performed at 2pm" Not one word with respect to the existence of a law that prohibits "inflicting a cruelty"....not one word of this or the fact that some of the opponents felt that some form of enquiry should be made as to whether this Act was considered.....not by any one of them, and that includes this one in which I write my comment to you!! One has to wonder, with all of this....Is the failure due to the fact that this 4th Estate of ours is not acting in the interests of the public, but rather, has somehow been convinced that their "bread is buttered on what I consider to be the opposite side, that of the Russian consortium who are behind this enterprise!! In fact from what I have read and seen of them, the trailer trash cousin in this side of the world to Seaworld!! As you can easily tell, I am disgusted with every last one of these papers.....one of whose General Managers, said that he was busy all last week, but would look at all of the material provided to him and get back to me! Not one word from him!! Sorry for the rant...but when persons in a position such as our news media are, readily print glowing reports when they know there ae claims of a dark side; print what I believe to be spurious claims regarding the absence of any opposition willing to confirm opposition to the place, fail to make any effort to respond to or contact persons after the fact, who have access to information which points toward a violation of Thai law......!! The mind boggles..simply boggles. They can still correct the appearance of corruption which arises from all of this, but I'm not sure that they give a fig!! Maybe they have decided that having the face of corruption hasn't hurt the average mafia guy, so what the heck...."let's take the rubles"

 

Ill go and watch it before i make judgement.

Armchair activists is actually spot on. Lots of them who would do nothing hands on. Just some likes and outrage on facebook is all they can muster.

 

Come one Hans. Never mind how the training is done, but consider the size of the living conditions for an animal who swims 100s-1000s of km a year. That alone is called torture. Still wanna go?

Yes ill go for sure. No point being outraged at something i havent experienced first hand.

Mr. Hansgruber.....Do you really mean "no point in being outraged at something I havent experienced first hand"? I think that you may have misspoke yourself and that you meant 'no point in being.........................I haven't seen first hand", for I truly doubt that you would be willing to subject yourself to spending even one week, let alone a lifetime confined to the equivalent of what those dolphins are being imprisoned in!! .You obviously are unaware of the fact that dolphins average at least 100 kilometres of travel a day in their natural environment....this is impossible for them, confined as they are to this prison! You may not realize that dolphins communicate via 3-Dimensional pictures in their natural environment ....this they cannot do in little tanks like this Take a look at the photos which I am attaching and then tell me that you "must experience first hand" the cruelty which is inherent in that piddly little tank! Especially, knowing that in order for you to see these magnificent, intelligent creatures and satiate your need to "experience" what amounts to a depraved indifference being carried out inside that dolphin prison, you are giving money and therefore "support" to those people! Both the all too real Dolphin Bay Phuket tank and the fictional "Humanarium" place of confinement are approximately 340 square metres in surface area, the tank measuring slightly more than 20 metres in diameter and the "humanarium" measuring slightly over 21 m X 16 m. The depth of the tank is no more than 4 metres. Both the people and the dolphins (and 2 fur seals) are to scale!

I am appalled and outraged at the actions of this "creature"..creature for he is no man in my lexicon to commit such a cowardly and brutal assault on anyone, let alone that poor helpless women. I have no idea what sparked and I don't really care!!t No matter what it was, there is absolutely no excuse for his actions and, I dearly hope that, on seeing this video, the judge seized with determining a proper sentence, will sentence this creature to the maximum possible time in the worst of the worst prisons that Phuket can offer. .

Now, with respect to the camera person filming this outrage!...It it was a woman filming this, then they can be quite possibly be excused for not going to the aid of this woman, but it was a male, I cannot understand why he did not render some form of assistance...even it were only yelling for him to STOP!!. This assault, in the manner it was being committed, could easily have resulted in death...stomping on the worman's head...My God!!! I understand that to interfere in a dispute between a husband and wife, or a man and a woman for that matter, is not taken lightly! Okay...a dispute is one thing......but not a cold-blooded murderous assault such as this though! I am happy that there is video evidence of this assault, but I am dismayed that nobody....nobody, not the camera person, not any one of the drivers of the vehicles which can be seen passing by, nobody lifted a bloody finger to stop what, as I said, obviously could have resulted in that lady's death!!!

Ill go and watch it before i make judgement.

Armchair activists is actually spot on. Lots of them who would do nothing hands on. Just some likes and outrage on facebook is all they can muster.

Well, Mr. Hansgruber! So "armchair activist" term is "spot on" is it?! Jolly good, pip, pip and tally ho, after those pesky foxes!! Seriously...what would you have us do? Become terrorists and run down to that damnable place and "blow it up", after of course having "hied" the captive animals to a refuge of safety? Form an army of demonstrators who could stand outside the premises and force every last ignorant or selfish idiot who wishes to see how a dolphin does "NOT LIVE" and/or go "oooh" and "aaahhh" at the sight of this intelligent animal forced to do "parlour tricks" in order to be fed dead fish like some "street beggar", to run a gauntlet of placards and hisses of "shame, shame, shame'? Or perhaps, you would have us organize marches to take place throughout the streets in front of the Bangkok Departmeht of Fisheries or in front of the Phuket Governor's residence in Phuket? Knowing all of that to be illegal...... or did you.... and would only result in our arrest and deportation from Thailand.....just what, Mr. Hansgruber, would you like to see us do. Give us a valid and legal "hands on" thing to do, other than what we are already doing....namely, trying to get the likes of you to join in wrting to every damn news media source we can; posting on Facebook in order to educate people as to the wrongfulness of allowing the existence of such places of slavery; trying our damndest to get the news media to ask questions which we feed to them, questions regarding Thailand's own law which prohibits the infliction of a cruelty upon any animal included under their "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Welfare of Animals Act, 2014. I try and remain polite whenever I reply to even the most infantile and stupid comments, but your comment, I admit frustrates me to no end for it forces me to recognize the true depth of 'misunderstanding", that some of the public whom we wish to educate have! No disrespect intended, but you, sir, appear to have just arrived at 'junior kindergarten' insofar as your knowledge as to what it is we do and face in our efforts to obtain freedom for the cetacean here in the Land of Smiles! Feel free to contact me through the "private messaging" capability which ThaiVisa forum provides....you could, properly informed become another ambassador for "those who cannot speak". A saying which, knowing now what I know concerning their true abiltiy at communication, would more correctly be put 'those who speak a thousand words with each picture they transmit...but we have not yet evolved the mental equipment to hear, let alone respond to them"!

Having just made my comment to Mr. Fairfield, I noticed, but was unable to remove the somewhat annoying repetition of those of his comments to which I referrred in my comment. I have no idea as to how or why they ended up near the bottom of my commentl, NOR could I find any way to delete them. If they actually do constitute a part of my comment which you vierw, I wish to advise (tongue in cheek) that their presence was neither asked nor called for and tthat they refused to remove themselves when asked. Please bear with these unwelcome guests...I am sure that it is solely due to a lack on my part of understanding the intricacies of posting to ThaiVisa forums.

I believe that Mr. Jonathan Fairfield authored the original 'Opinion - Phuket Dolphinarium Legitimacy Put On Show' piece, and so I address my comment to him personally as well as to his sponsoring news media and any interested readers:

Mr. Fairfield...you stated on the 25th of October that -

" While we don’t condone the captivity and exploitation of any animals for profit – or humans for that matter – we remind all, that there are underlying “laws” that determine whether an operation is “legitimate” or otherwise."

Sir.....I am in 100% agreement with you thus far! There ARE underlying "laws", laws which I mention later in this comment, which should determine the legitimacy of an operation! My issue is with your statement -

"The dolphinarium has not breached any codes up to this point and thus deserves no public trial on legal grounds'

It is at this point that we part company and travel in opposite directions. With respect, Mr. Fairfield, I believe that you are wrong! I believe that they not only HAVE breached certain "codes", but that, with every day that goes by in which those 5 Bottlenose dolphins continue to be incarcerated in that tiny tank, those codes are continuing to be broken. AND, Thai government agencies may, unintentionally, be complicit in causing these codes to be broken in the first instance and their continuing breach!

And the following are my reasons for believing that you are wrong:

On or about December 27th 2014, the government of Thailand enacted a piece of legislation called the
"Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Welfare of Animals Act, 2014.

I am surprised that no one has seen fit to mention this Act, let alone suggest that it may have been overlooked during the determining process as to the "legitimacy" of opening a new dolphinarium. Under this Act, Section 17, it was made a criminal offence, punishable by up to 2 years imprisonment and/or a 40,000฿ fine, to "inflict a cruelty" on any animal included under this Act. Under Section 3 of the Act, "Cruelty" was defined as being

"any action or no action, that provides an animal physical or mental suffering, pain, illness, disability..."

and under that same section the Act included

" any animal - that is normally kept as a house animal.....or an animal kept for public entertainment...or kept for any other purpose"

I pose this as an analogy. Say I own a donkey and daily I beat this donkey over the head with an iron bar, leaving welts and bruises. The fact of this daily act on my part may or may not have been seen by anyone, including the authorities. In any event, I have not been charged with "inflicting a cruelty" upon this donkey nor, of course, have I been convicted of any such offence. A question, to you, Mr. Fairfield.....is it your position that I have" not breached any codes up to this point" and thus deserve no public outcry? To the contrary, I say!! I certainly HAVE breached Section 17 of this Act and even though, for whatever reason....lack of knowledge or understanding of the Act, the responsible authorities have yet to take a formal action against me, I certain am deserving of condemnation from every person who has become aware of my depraved acts!! As justification for my continued efforts to make every effort to ensure that any and all "underlying laws" are considered, I can tell you that I am a firm believer in what was stated by a very intelligent man years ago

"Those who have the privilege to know, have the duty to act"

by which I understand it to mean, that if I know something to be WRONG, I have the duty to at least TRY to prevent or correct that wrong!

Many may not have known, and indeed many, many more, may yet not comprehend the cruelty which is involved in enslaving such a creature as the dolphin or its cousins, those being any other cetacean! But surely, the educated public has a right to ASK that this issue be examined by knowlegeable persons, persons of law and persons who have studied cetacean nature and abilities.

All that I ask of the news media, is that

a) they pose relevant questions which arise from this knowledge, questions which I suggest would reasonably include asking for a public enquiry to be made as to the relevance of Thailand's Animal Protection law, which admirably was designed to provide protection for, at least certain animals! and

they understand that, in order for us to speak openly, and on the record as to our opinions regarding this opening, they need to actually reach out to those activists from whom they claimed to have received no response to a request that we do so!

Sincerely,

Bruce H. Crocker

NOTE: To assist the reader in better understanding the "cruelty" which, as I see it, is being inflicted on those animals, I have included a number of photos. Photos which include scaled depictions of both the "ACTUAL" home at Dolphin Bay Phuket, to which these 5 dolphins and 2 fur seals have been condemned and a fictional "humanitarium" with 5 adult confined therein. Each provides the same 'surface area" and, of course, there are no exit points in either, since leaving the "building" is not a choice for either animal. I also make reference to a belief that our difficulty in understanding and measuring the degree and depth of intelligence possessed by the dolphin (cetacean) is not due to any lack of intelligence on their part, but rather is due to a lack of our own. It has been said "I think, therefore I am". Well, every dolphin can say "WE think, therefore WE know WE are". We just haven't evolved sufficiently to be able to understand that truth yet! Before you cry "NUTS...he's NUTS", I might suggest that you visit http://www.cymascope.com/cyma_research/oceanography.html and consider the ramifications inherent in the findings described therein.

Foreigners need to stop playing Hardy Boys in Thailand.

Sir....Either your ignorance as to what constitutes an R.T.P. Liaison Officer (comprised of volunteer ex-pats) is showing or you are just being offensive! The expat police volunteers are in a formal relationship with the Royal Thai Police as R.T.P. Liaison Officers, In addition to being readily available to answer the many questions which the foreign visitor may have, fulfill a very important function in that they act as a liaison between non-Thai speaking "foreigners" and the Thai RTP officers, usually as a result of the said "foreigner" more often than not being in an inebriated state and having done something that, without the aid of the Volunteer, could easily result in the "offender" spending the night in a Thai jail, not a pleasant place at all!! They are not "cowboys" or "wannabees" and have been carefully screened before being accepted as a Liaison Officer. Many are retired police officers with extensive service in their home country and have a desire to GIVE something to both the country in which they have chosen to reside and to the visiting tourists or any other non-Thai speaking person who is in need of help. "Playing Hardy Boys"...such a frivolous and undeserved comment! In this case, from the reports provided, the volunteer was doing precisely what he or she is expected to do, no more and no less. Drunks are one thing...a common item to be found on Bangla Road and are treated with respect by the volunteers. There is absolutely no indication or suggestion that this officer was acting in any way inappropriately, (S)he witnessed the infractions and, informing them as to the nature of their transgression, ASKED them to move on, as is the volunteer's job to do. Drunken thugs out to pick a fight are fortunately a rarity...most people, drunk or sober are out for a good time..good meaning happy! Not, as was the case with these thugs, a group of drunken low-lifes who are a disgrace to themselves and their country of origin. They constitute a disruptive and hazardous presence, a presence which runs counter to the safety and well-being of those decent folks who deserve the protection of both the Thai RTP officers and the Volunteers who donate their time and efforts to make it a safer place.....even for people such as yourself who deride what most decent people would find commendable.

This country.....

That is a sentence that needs finishing.

Here, let me help.

This country, .... that did quite nicely since the 12th century and now is crawling with over fed, over inflated, overly self important Foreigners whining, bch'n and complaining that the Citizens will not kiss their backsides might be wise to just say "Off you go" to many of them.

And by that, I mean the rats of the well known red zones that are actually an embarrassment to many other Foreigners who live here in happy, peaceful, product lives and are .. wait for it ....

GRATEFUL to be here.

The flights leave daily ... Farang-atopia .. is just one ticket away!

Go for it.

"GRATEFUL to be here." .... Ha-ha-ha ... Really ... ? Are you that un-wanted in your home-country ... ?

Allow me to add to Bangkokequity's remark in responding to yours, Kannikapor88. Like Bangkokequity, I am GRATEFUL to be here.. to enjoy all that Thailand has to offer...friendly people, wonderful weather, beautiful scenery and food, a chance to learn another language, AND, at some point in the not that distant future, be eligible to gain Permanent Residence and even citizenship! And no, I am not unwanted in my home country...I came here for a purpose, discovered how much I loved it here and decided to make it my home if at all possible. From your snide remark, I would have to assume that you quite possibly fall into one or other of those described by Bangkokequity....the "over fed, over inflated, overly self important Foreigners whining, bch'n and complaining that the Citizens will not kiss their backsides" Thailand, believe it or not, I have found to be a welcoming place albeit rife with problems that have plagued many a developing country. I have done much travelling in my lifetime and found that the old saying "'people tend to treat others as they are being treated" is very, very true....and I have Thailand to be no different.

"Col Pongphichan noted that expat police volunteers have no law-enforcement rights whatsoever unless a regular officer on duty is with them, which is often the case."

So why are they demanding that people move on? Som nam na.

With all due respect, Sir.....Do you deliberately mis-state what an author has written, have difficulty in reading accurately, or are you reacting with some undisclosed personal bias towards the "ex-pat police volunteers? It was clearly stated that "The people were asked to leave, as parking the car [and] drinking alcohol [there] is not allowed and playing loud music was not appropriate at the police box..." The expat police volunteers, who are in a formal relationship with the Royal Thai Police as R.T.P. Liaison Officers, in addition to being readily available to answer the many questions which the foreign visitor may have, fulfill a very important function in that they act as a liaison between non-Thai speaking "foreigners" and the Thai RTP officers, usually as a result of the said "foreigner" more often than not being in an inebriated state and having done something that, without the aid of the Volunteer, could easily result in the "offender" spending the night in a Thai jail, not a pleasant place at all!! They are not "cowboys" or "wannabees" and have been carefully screened before being accepted as a Liaison Officer. In this case, from the reports provided, the volunteer was doing precisely what he or she is expected to do, no more and no less. Drunks are one thing...a common item to be found on Bangla Road and treated with respect by the volunteers. There is absolutely no indication or suggestion that this officer was acting in any way inappropriately, (S)he witnessed the infractions and, informing them as to the nature of their transgression, ASKED them to move on, as is the volunteer's job to do. Drunken thugs out to pick a fight are fortunately a rarity...most people, drunk or sober are out for a good time..good meaning happy! Not, as was the case with these thugs, a group of drunken low-lifes who are a disgrace to themselves and their country of origin. They constitute a disruptive and hazardous presence, a presence which runs counter to the safety and well-being of those decent folks who deserve the protection of both the Thai RTP officers and the Volunteers who donate their time and efforts to make it a safer place.....even for people such as yourself who react with a "Som nam na" remark. Sometime, Mr. rwdrwdrwd, if you do visit Bangla Road, you may find yourself in need of the services of one of those dedicated volunteers! One thing of which I am certain is that should you require the services of one or more of these officers, "Som nam na" will not be a comment voiced by them!!

Some stories contain BS.

Some stories are BS.

This story however is in a world class standard of BS all of its own.

I would be most interested, sir, in knowing the basis for your casual dismissal of the o/p's opinion? I am a firm believer in the "live & let live" doctrine, however the Muslims (and not just the radicals, the Islamists), according to the written word of their Qu'ran and the teachings of many of their imans, have the stated goal of having all humanity practice the Muslim faith! I don't profess to know whether or not those are the true thoughts of all Muslims, just that I am satisfied that is what they are being taught! There was a time in history when there were those of various other faiths,notably the Catholic Christians, who felt the same way....BUT an important difference....the Bible insofar as I am aware, never supported or promoted the genocide of any disbelievers NOR even an insistence that all humanity convert to the Christian faith! The non-believer might be, in the Bible's opinion, "damned and doomed to a hereafter in Hell or at least denied entry to Heaven" but the Bible contains no exhortations to "kill those who refuse to obey the will of Mohammed and Allah".

So, you will pardon me, absent proofs of the reasonableness for your lack of concern, the Islamization of Thailand will continue to cause me great concern for I have seen and am seeing what happens in other parts of the world when the toe-hold turns into a foot-hold and the foot-hold threatens to become the leg stuck in the doorway! Yes, right now they are relatively quiet and undemanding....as they were in England, France, parts of the US and now too in Canada!! Their undemanding ways are undergoing a rapid and very disturbing change in those countries!!

So he thinks that he is "angered" by the breathalyzer test requests, does he?? Shall we let him in on a secret? The public is angered, but not not at the request,SIR.....at your refusal!! If indeed he had not ":had a drop", why not take the test? At some point after taking the test and passing with flying colours, then would have been the time for him to remonstrate with these officers with the question "Why are you wasting police and public's time testing obviously sober people?" Two possibilities as to why he would have treated the officers in this manner, neither of which are glowing endorsements of the RTP. One, he was fearful of being "stitched up" on a phony "FAIL" believing/knowing the RTP Traffic Division to be corrupt, or two, that he was fearful of failing any such test because he had been drinking and suspected/knew that he would fail any breathalyzer test!! Disgusting behaviour that once again, establishes to the masses, that the law here in Thailand, insofar as applying to everyone equally, does NOT exist!! This high ranking officer has abused his position and is a disgrace to his uniform.....in my humble and personal opinion which, I hasten to say, is based solely upon the scant evidence given and is not intended to reflect upon this high ranking officer's actual competence or character!! For that, I will leave in the capable hands of HIS superior(s) who hopefully can see that such incidents as these do nothing to advance the reputation of the ROYAL Thai Police Force or the country!!

I carry a serrated blade every where I go. Even when in Thailand I carry it and it can be seen as it is the type with a clip for the pocket. As a kid growing up on a farm it was natural to have a knife on you. Being in the military it was useful. Being in the construction industry it was useful. In Thailand or any country with bad drivers it is useful if you have ever seen a driver die in a burning vehicle that could not escape. The seatbelt tends to get locked in a violent crash and the only way to free yourself is to cut the seatbelt. Buy a piece of fruit off the street it is useful. Opening a knife in a fight is the last resort as with any weapon you risk it being taken and used against you. So , I support anyone carrying a knife. If you have any military training you are given basic hand to hand combat so it does give you some confidence incase you are ever accosted or in fear of your life. But as a last resort. Glad to hear justice might prevail.

One of, if not indeed the most, sensible posts I've read on TVF.

I salute you sir!

Bloody hell, the bogwash that you salute is amazing (unless you're being sarcastic). To quote him...

"In Thailand or any country with bad drivers it is useful if you have ever seen a driver die in a burning vehicle that could not escape. The seatbelt tends to get locked in a violent crash and the only way to free yourself is to cut the seatbelt. Buy a piece of fruit off the street it is useful."

How many times do you think he has had to rescue a trapped driver in a burning vehicle following a violent crash? And did the knife protect him from the raging inferno whilst he was rescuing all those people in those incidents?

There is another way to release a seatbelt, locked or not and that is to push the release button on the buckle, quite a clever innovation and a lot more convenient than having to saw through the tough webbing. Maybe he doesn't know that inertia-reel seat belts only lock-up momentarily to prevent the user being thrown around, as soon as the inertia of the crash has gone and tension is released from the belts they are free to move, but let's disregard that, eh?

The fruit that is sold on the streets is always cut up by the vendor, no-one needs a knife in that situation.

His post was nonsense in a vain attempt to justify his claim of carrying a "serrated blade" at all times.

To add to SG's post, agree it would be rare to have to disengage a locked seatbelt in a flaming car crash, hopefully not something you happen across every day. in Thailand even more rare to find them actually wearing the seatbelt, this applies to Thais and Farrang drivers

Might be rare...but however rare, it only need to occur ONCE in your lifetime, to prove beyond all doubt that such capability was well possessed. As for the topic at hand.....simply knowing of the possibility should be sufficient cause...after all it seems to be lawful or at least accepted for 2,3 4, 5 whatever number to attack one,no matter what the origin of the dispute! I may NEVER use my knowledge of CPR or First Aid...does that mean that I am wrong to avail myself of such education? Anyone who would suggest that I not avail myself of whatever ability I may possess to deal a criminal attack by some unknown as yet person, is (imho) not being reasonable! But I guess that some will say that it would have been better that the innocent one suffer possibly grievous bodily injury as opposed to the "criminal' ending up dead!! That may be your opinion...it is not mine! As my father used to say....."don't stick your hand in the path of a buzz saw when it's running! Good advice....especially with the caveat..."you may not realize that it is running", so better to "not attack the unknown, especially if you think that you might be in the wrong! Both the Australian and the deceased man's family, I have not doubt, wish that the deceased had not chosen to act in the manner that he did! R.I.P. Khun Security Guard. Condolences to your family!!

Wonder how much money changed hands for this video to suddenly surface after 3 months. And who carries knives to midnight rotary meetings?

Aren't you the skeptic! And to your second question.....foresters, sailors.... a whole raft of people might if they were enroute from their chosen occupation..when I was camping, I carried what was called a "hunting" knife in a scabbard.....as a SCUBA diver, I wear a "dive" knife! No, I don't wear my dive knife on the way home, but then again, I don't wear my wet suit. His carrying of one (illegally,as appears to be evidenced by the 500฿ fine for carrying one in a public place) may have resulted in a different outcome from the illegal physical attack on his person) does not alter the fact that the attack was unlawful! If he had not had the knife, would he have suffered a beating at the hands of the "outside the law" security guard? Unknowable! And would have such a beating resulted in a satisfactory outcome for him! Perhaps, inherent in this incident is the message that, if you may NOT be carrying out your duties in a lawful manner, don't seek to muzzle someone who is innocently recording your possible transgression! That your transgression could end in your demise just may depend upon how you try to conceal your transgression! By this I am not saying that the victim in this instance deserved to die....never would I suggest that nor do I feel or believe that.....but as the saying in Thailand...som nom nah....or in English....as your sow, so you may you reap!! Is it fair..is it what you deserved? Possibly, possibly not...but it is what you brought about!! If he had not attacked this man for simply photographing/videographing what was taking place (and if it was lawful and reasonable, what was the problem?) he undoubtedly would still be alive! Some actions in real life have real consequences which cannot be reversed. I am sure of one thing and one thing only! Both the ultimate victim and the initial victim wish that the ultimate victim had not chosen his course of action!!

R.I.P. Francois Marie Michel Poncet Condolences to your wife and loved ones!

1) To sir charles IV Apparently there is some disagreement....one source (Oxford Dictionary) defines "electrocute" as meaning "to injure or kill by electric shock" Others insist that it means to cause death by electric shock. The word did originally have the sole meaning of to execute or kill by electric shock, however modern usage allows for the broader understanding.

2) Christmas on a rubber crutch!!!! There is that damn verb "to rush" again! Can someone please give the reporter a list of synonyms for "to rush". Or maybe even suggest to him or her that one does not always have to "RUSH" to a scene. I do hope on the other hand that someone did place a call "in haste" to the emergency services who, in turn, I hope "rushed", "hastened", "sped" ore even possibly "drove quickly" even "drove quickly using all manner of emergency warning signals available" to the scene! What need is there for the police officer to "rush" anywhere? If I am dying, I don''t give a rat's patootie if the officer 'RUSHED" to my location if he fogot to call for an flippin ambulance!!! Now....having said that.....if the call was about some man waving a gun around and threatening to kill me.....for Gawd's sake, officer please "RUSH AS FAST OR EVEN FASTER THAN HUMANLY POSSIBLE",and then the reporter can feel free to say "The officer SPED to the scene and apprehended the suspect before anyone (that's ME) was injured!!!!

3) Am I to gather from the various posts which suggest, nay,, claim/state that the Thai electrician is somewhat lacking in knowledge of his subject, that there are no 'building inspectors"? Edited comment - PS. (Egad....I heard the chortles even though I had gone for a 40 metre deep dive off Koh Dokmai!! immediately after posting this comment)

The two Chinese Americans accused of this horrific attack were out on bail - with the condition only urgent travel was allowed. Now they've both gone home and one is at Cornell University (wonder if daddy made a donation to some research or endowment?).

The Kiwi-Jap "witness" seems to have been discredited - no charges for wasting police time, making false charges, trying to pervert the course of justice?

Welcome to justice Thai style. Doesn't matter who did what, whose guilty or innocent, what the truth is. Who has the most money and can spread some around trumps everything!

Keywords "millionaire father"".

Will these boys come back for their trial - like hell. If the trial ever does surface, will Thailand request extradition - like hell. All be swept under the carpet. Usual Thai tactic, fabricate a counter charge, lie and then try to negotiate.

Feel sorry for Jack - his chance of seeing these thugs actually punished is about zero. Maybe he can bring civil actions for damages?

And remember. when this happened Jack's mum appealed to the PM. Who said he would personally ensure justice was served and requested regular updates on the case proceedings and progress.

Another strong message to all - the rich and their offspring are not subject to the law. That's only applicable to police everyone else.

They may not be subject to the "law", but if all the facts are as given.....they may well find themselves subject to another law which was in place a long, long time before "civilized" society existed with its "civilized behaviours"!! Say no more!!

^ they do not roadside bloodtests. The figure given is in breath. Which is considerably less than the blood alcohol reading. Which has already been stated.

With respect, Forkinhades, I believe that you are mistaken. The readings, whether determined by way of the breathalyzer machine or blood drawn, would be very similar!.

Refernce: http://www.ehow.com/about_5439555_breathalyzer-vs-blood-test-bac.html Quote - "A properly maintained and administered breath test will essentially be as accurate as a blood test,,,," The key is "properly maintained and administered" test, whether it be via drawn blood or breathalzyer machine.

Spent the night in banglamung jail cell ... All for drink driving .54 thank u. I still see the same police man who threatned to deport me and he seems a little embarassed when he looks at me.

For drink driving you should have been Jailed for 18 Months then deported with a no come back policy for at least 20 years.

Disgusting,

Yes and likewise I propose 2 years followed by deportation for speeding, 1 year for jay walking, illegal turns? 1 to 3, that should curb that dangerous activity. No helmet, maybe 6 months and deportation after all if you can't be a model citizen you should go back to your own country. There's more of course but you get the idea.

And deportation for under age sex......by that I mean sex with anyone more than ten years younger than yourself..or anyone older than their in-laws......that will sort a lot of people out!!!

I wait for the onslaught.

Mudcrab! It is not only impolite to speak with your tongue jammed up your cheek but it makes it very difficult for your listeners to decipher your words! Surely you meant "anyone LESS than ten years younger......"!