sambum

"especially if he was not actually threatening anyone,"

B*****t!:-

"Jitana then said he got back on the bike and drove out of the KFC and went to the area of the store where there are banks and shoe shops. Security and members of the public tried to grab him but he started to fight."

Just about anyone would "start to fight" if a bunch of people tried to grab him or her. i.e. some struggle. But before that happened, is there evidence that he was threatening anyone, e.g. did he say "I'm going to kill all of you!", or "give me all of your money or else!"? Was he holding a knife or gun?

So he did leave the KFC to go on his way but was chased and then bashed... for exactly what reason? Did he refuse to pay for some chicken?

How many times do you have to be told?

Thailand speedboat crash: Missing Brit was celebrating first anniversary with wife when tourist vessel capsized

Jason Parnell, 46, was travelling on the Angthong Discovery Tour vessel with his wife, Puja, and 30 other holidaymakers when it capsized in rough seas

InstagramJason Parnell with wife Puja on their wedding dayJason Parnell and his wife, Puja, were celebrating their first wedding anniversary

The British man missing after a deadly speedboat crash in Thailand was celebrating his first wedding anniversary with his wife, it emerged today.

Jason Parnell, 46, was travelling on the Angthong Discovery Tour vessel with his spouse, Puja, and 30 other tourists yesterday afternoon when it capsized in rough seas.

Full story: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/thailand-speedboat-crash-missing-brit-8064405

Mirror 2016-05-28

Not being flippant, but yes, I think I got it the first time.

Those with drug problems should be shown the same amount of compassion as those with physical diseases, such as HIV or cancer.

Hmmm. Seems to me that the majority of drug problems are self-inflicted. I know HIV is sometimes self-inflicted is but is cancer self-inflicted? I didn't think it was but I might be wrong, that's happened before.

If I wanted to be all compassionate and stuff, I think I'd give money to orphans or something - that's not self-inflicted unless the kid killed the parents, which they usually didn't.

I wouldn't give the time of day to alcoholics either.

W

I wrote my later post before I read yours - sorry for the similarity!

Sure this guy should be made accountable for his actions, just like anybody else would be.

But there is a good chance he is haunted by the death he caused and may well be sick, both mentally and physically by what he has done, and may well be for the rest of his life..

To know you are responsible for a persons death is a hard thing to live with, and unless he is a hardened criminal or serial killer, that is quite likely the case here. After all it was a road accident, sure with speed and drugs ? playing a big part,

but that happens every day here. It was not a case of putting a gun to a persons head and pulling the trigger.

And most parents would do what they could to keep their children from 20 years in jail.

Sure he is spoiled rotten, and very rich parents, but that is his fortunate or unfortunate roll in life...

Just a unrelated point, about 22 war Vets commit suicide every day in America, haunted by what they have been through with war and killing other people, and they are trained solders .... not spoiled kids.

At last the voice of reason.

And yes, all parents would do their utmost to keep their kids from going to jail.

Quite, I'm sure the boy and indeed his family are suffering.

The boy probably has a drug problem, which could happen to any of our children.

If any parent would turn their own son into the police and recommend jail if they had the means to avoid it please raise your hands now. If not, let it go.

Those with drug problems should be shown the same amount of compassion as those with physical diseases, such as HIV or cancer.

99.9% of those people with with drug problems brought it on themselves - after all nobody forced them to stick a needle in their arm, or forced the stuff up their nose! Same with HIV - in this enlightened age anybody who doesn't use a condom when having sex with a relative stranger - well, in most cases, som nom na (? spelling) in my opinion. Cancer is a scourge that can afflict anybody, and is not of their own making, unless you are a smoker, in which case the previous comment applies.

And getting back on topic, I wonder what the above apologists would be saying if it was their son or husband that was dead due to this little spoilt out of control brat's actions? I don't think they'd be saying "Oh, he probably had a drug problem - that explains it!"

You would think that Thais who are crushed under corruption and have little choice in the life they are assigned would riot in the street...

The Thai Army are there to protect the rich and privileged in Thai society, if that includes shooting their fellow Thai's then that's what they will do, as long as the poor are kept in line and are afraid of The police and Army, they are doing their jobs correct and the heads of these organizations will enjoy the massive opportunities to continue the never ending circle of corruption, with nobody to answer to, cos the only people with the power to clip the wings of all these Generals won't do a thing, cos they need their protection from the poor masses.

Army and Police Generals can amass millions of USD's under this system, it suits them, it suits their rich and privileged masters. it doesn't suit the poor, but whoever cared about the poor anyway, they are expendable and the Thai education system is churning out thousands of poorly educated, brainwashed kids each year to continue the cycle.

And social media websites like Facebook are the light at the end of the tunnel!

My question is if you need to go to the toilet urgently why should you buy something first? I went to a shopping complex(Bunning's ,Good guys ect. spread over about 4 hec area) in Australia and all of a sudden I had to use the toilet .The place was unfamiliar to me so I don't know if there are any public toilets. I ask the security guy at the Good guys if there are any toilets close by. He told me there are two ,one at Bunning's and one at Gloria beans but it is for customers only .So where do the people shopping have to go? Do it right there in public on the footpath like a frigging dog?

In which case you could be arrested for a public disorder offence. But I see your point - I don't think I have seen any public toilets here apart from at bus stations and train stations, and they usually have a cover charge of 5 or 10 baht. So, if you are desperate to relieve yourself, what's the difference to paying in a railway/bus station to paying in a bar? Actually, usually when you are in a bus/train station, you are a customer, so you shouldn't have to pay. At least if you are a customer in a bar, you don't have to pay!

I'm with the manager on this, disgusting behavior by the Brit lout

I agree. The manager is quite within his rights to state that the toilets are for the us of customers only, and for the man to order refreshments in order to use the toilets, and then refuse to pay for them is bang out of order. And to then throw a 20 baht note in the managers face is absolutely disgraceful behaviour. It is the Brit who should be charged not the restaurant manager, and by the way, I'm British.

It’s not normal to be utterly stoned, and riding shirtless (as the Thais object to that) and helmetless in a shopping mall and KFC.

Yes, it's not normal, but is it illegal? It does warrant a request by a security guard to drive back outside but may not warrant public detainment and bashing.

"What if he’d ridden into a running toddler in the mall?" There would be an outcry then, about nobody stopping him riding, wouldn’t there?

That's a different situation. He should be escorted by a security guard (who would continually ask him to leave). At any sign of potential danger the security guard should then intervene.

In this case there was no clear sign of danger with his use of the motorcycle if he was stationary most of the time before the bashing. I think most of the people there would have been watching and would know to avoid him if he did drive near them.

Once again - B*****T! If he'd run into a toddler he should NOT "be escorted by a security guard (who would continually ask him to leave)"

So what would the security guard tell the police when they asked for the whereabouts of this stoned motorcyclist who drove his bike into KFC and knocked over a toddler?

​"Sorry, Sir, I don't know, I continually asked him to leave and escorted him from the building"

He'd be be locked up himself for aiding and abetting!

In fact, 99% of what you are saying regarding this matter is garbage - "if he was stationary most of the time before the bashing................avoid him if he did drive near them"

I feel inclined to think that you are on some kind of recreational drugs yourself as you write these posts because in my opinion you are spouting totally illogical drivel in defence of an out of control drug user who could have killed somebody, and was certainly fortunate not to have had an accident of some description.

In fact, is there some significance in your avatar? Which dimension are you on Hyperdimension?

A stoned man on a motorbike in KFC is "automatically" dangerous!

I do agree that people should not operate a vehicle whilst drunk / stoned / high. That is what he did wrong. Getting bashed, particularly by members of the public, I can't agree on if he did not pose a direct violent threat to them.

I imagine that if he was holding a knife or gun he would not have been bashed, because members of the public would not want to risk getting injured or killed.

I think it is also important to note that even though the main crime that was committed in this case is that he was operating a vehicle whilst mentally affected by a psychoactive substance, I don't think that was the reason for the bashing, nor what it makes this incident a news story. I think the bashing was a "get out, you are not welcome, we don't want you here" action. That has some significant human rights implications, especially if he was not actually threatening anyone, and that is what I wanted to highlight in my posts in this thread.

Also note that the people only had the courage to bash him because he was unarmed.

"get out, you are not welcome, we don't want you here"

And in the UK, if a pub landlord does not want to serve someone, he has the LEGAL right to refuse to serve him/her - without giving a reason.

What kind of "human rights implications" does that have? And before you say "We are not in the UK, we are in Thailand", I think the UK has afar better record on Human Rights than Thailand does!

A stoned man on a motorbike in KFC is "automatically" dangerous!

I do agree that people should not operate a vehicle whilst drunk / stoned / high. That is what he did wrong. Getting bashed, particularly by members of the public, I can't agree on if he did not pose a direct violent threat to them.

I imagine that if he was holding a knife or gun he would not have been bashed, because members of the public would not want to risk getting injured or killed.

I think it is also important to note that even though the main crime that was committed in this case is that he was operating a vehicle whilst mentally affected by a psychoactive substance, I don't think that was the reason for the bashing, nor what it makes this incident a news story. I think the bashing was a "get out, you are not welcome, we don't want you here" action. That has some significant human rights implications, especially if he was not actually threatening anyone, and that is what I wanted to highlight in my posts in this thread.

Also note that the people only had the courage to bash him because he was unarmed.

"especially if he was not actually threatening anyone,"

B*****t!:-

"Jitana then said he got back on the bike and drove out of the KFC and went to the area of the store where there are banks and shoe shops. Security and members of the public tried to grab him but he started to fight."

Going out in rough seas, in a boat not designed for it, wth a driver not trained to deal with the conditions exhibits a complete lack of common sense and greed on the part of the owner. The only way to prevent this kind of thing is to require training/licensing of the boat operators (licencee that can not be purchased with a donation) and accountability (heavy fines, loss of Licence, jail terms when negligence is found) by the pilot/operator and the boat owner. Does anyone else see the futility of this in a country that is unable to enforce even fire safety regulations or even bring to trial a boy why killed someone with his car? I myself have given up thinking anything will change. The systemic problems run far too deep and there is too much apathy. I feel like l live on a Hollywood movie set ... everything is a facade.

RIP to those who lost their life in this unfortunate accident. Wishes for a speedy recovery to those who were injured or traumatized.

Actually the drivers are trained... for one year before going out on their own, at least with the larger companies, and these boats deal with much rougher seas than it was yesterday.... All have life jackets too... people just don't want to wear them.

Pure nonsense in many of these posts ... and anyone would think these types of accidents don't occur in every country of the world...

They don't - some countries are landlocked.

How long is the big, rough, tough, soldier boy of a PM going to allow this fiasco to continue ?

The monk is making a fool of govt agencies and being allowed to do so but i suppose it's easier dragging in students etc for AA and threatening critics with 10 years in jail because they're all easier to handle.

Great leadership, again !

Or arresting Chinese tourists for feeding fish!

And then, I have to read this:

http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Tourist-arrested-feeding-fish/63952

How crazy a country can be, of-course, much more important than safety!!!

My thoughts entirely when I read that yesterday - at first I thought it was a joke! You CAN get stoned out of your brain and ride a motorbike into KFC , and CAN totally overload your speedboat and put to sea in obviously very dangerous conditions, but you CAN"T feed the fish!

Brakes failed?

Absolutely hilarious! Didn't realise that there was anybody on Thaivisa with such a fantastic way out sense of humour. You should be on the stage mate, and we could all throw overripe mangos at you - W****R!

I think you should be asked what you want!

I want people to realize that bashing someone just because they behave strangely (for whatever reason) but non-violently (and without threat of violence) should not be accepted in civil society. Have you ever heard of human rights?

He was being violent and had to be restrained. What about the rights of the shoppers that were probably frightened out of their wits? After all, let's be honest, you don't expect to run into a stoned man on a motorbike in KFC, do you?

he was on drugs at the time

Being on drugs does not automatically make someone dangerous, though some drugs may cause a person to be more likely to act out violence than when sober, e.g. ethanol ("alcohol" in beer, wine, spirits). Methamphetamine causes one to not feel tired at all and want to be active and productive, but not necessarily violent. Methamphetamine can make one feel euphoric, in which case the person is less much less likely to want to be violent than when sober, and more likely to want to engage in enjoyable activities.

Don't teach your Grandma how to suck eggs, sonny! I am a "child of the 60's" so don't need a lesson from you on the effects of narcotics! A stoned man on a motorbike in KFC is "automatically" dangerous!

"Most likely" is an extreme exaggeration. His home could be nearby and he may have arrived there without incident, just as hundreds of people drive home drunk after a night of heavy drinking. It is not good to be driving a vehicle whilst being affected by any drug, including legal recreational drugs like ethanol, so he should not have done so and should be punished for that. But was it right for members of the public to detain him and bash him? Based on the facts provided in the article, I don't think it was right.

He should have been asked what he wants. If he wanted to buy some chicken, then they could have served him and he may then have gone home. It's the duty of the police to detain someone for driving whilst under the influence of a drug.

Well, instead of being at loggerheads as if there wasn’t already enough struggle about and find what we can agree on. I’m sure you’ve noticed my concern for him NOT wanting to be injured by my words: “ending up injuring or killing himself or ….” so I don’t know how you reach the conclusion I approve of public beatings, which I don’t think it was, or have I in turn misunderstood you? ‘Battered’ was a play on words, as KFC chicken is battered.

You misquoted me by saying, “physical contact was initiated by the other people “ I said ‘physical struggle”. Struggle is different from touching an out of control person. He started the struggle. It appears you expected security and the public to do nothing about this law breaking person who needed both help and .control. Do you think he would have listened and be talked into compliance? Ask KFC management if it’s KFC policy to serve a completely stoned motorcycle rider inside the restaurant!

Aren’t we bordering on getting into ridiculous petty hypothetical wrangling? From what the article indicates, suggests to me that the security and public had the same concern, that he be restrained before he injure himself or someone else. You can’t win!!! Some TV poster complains because the public stands back and does nothing, but when they do, someone complains!

Have you viewed the video of him? He was physically and mentally out of control. Sure, he needed help. But he needed to be restrained first. It’s not normal to be utterly stoned, and riding shirtless (as the Thais object to that) and helmetless in a shopping mall and KFC. Yeah, we get into “What if’s”, again, such as "What if he’d ridden into a running toddler in the mall?" There would be an outcry then, about nobody stopping him riding, wouldn’t there? It’s a bit like some liberals excusing criminals of any blame and saying they’re only victims of their upbringing.

It’s amazing how people can wrangle and disagree so much on an incident like this. It had a humorous side to it because no one suffered real loss. Who knows? He may have been the winner by avoiding some calamity in his life later through having had this intervention.

Why don’t we lighten up a bit? Then I wouldn’t feel I have to go on and on in defence of my take!! Tonight I’m wondering, “Why do I even bother? Someone may come along and read into stuff not there”

Good post! Especially, ‘Battered’ was a play on words, as KFC chicken is battered."!

Some people don't understand or appreciate such subtlety, however, and my own offering about "the poor young man who is not at all to blame for anything as he was on drugs at the time and needs help, not punishment?" also appears to have fallen on stony ground! (Or should that read "stoned ground"?)

"It’s a bit like some liberals excusing criminals of any blame and saying they’re only victims of their upbringing."

Absolutely correct, and to be honest, if someone wants to get stoned or drunk or whatever you care to call it, I have no problem with that, but if they then need to be restrained because they become violent and a danger to other people and themselves, then they do become a problem, and it needs to be taken care of. This incident did indeed have a humorous side to it, and I am happy that it ended up on a slightly happier note than it could have been!

I didn't realise that, but why would it be accepted as proof of ANYBODY'S income if there is no name on it?

It's not accepted as proof of income, even it did have a name it is still not proof of anything other than the person has a bank account.

dick dasterdly is talking from his anus.

That's what I thought!

He wasn’t “bashed” or “assaulted”, but brought under control and restrained. He brought his injuries, which were minor, upon himself.

The article says he was "battered". That is similar to being "bashed" isn't it?

He initiated the physical struggle. Here are a couple of quotes from the article: “…he refused to give himself up quietly as a mob of people tried to restrain him” and “Security and members of the public tried to grab him but he started to fight”

"refused to give himself up quietly" indicates that he was loud, protesting against being detained. He wasn't holding a knife or gun and trying to rob the shop or anyone else. The physical contact was initiated by the other people - only when they physically grabbed him he responded physically. You would probably respond physically too if grabbed by a group of people without your willingness to be subjected to it, regardless of whether you were sober, drunk or high.

If allowed to continue afterwards on ‘his merry way’ on his motorbike, he most likely had ended up injuring or killing himself or a member of the public, fatally overdosing, or done in by Khlong.

"Most likely" is an extreme exaggeration. His home could be nearby and he may have arrived there without incident, just as hundreds of people drive home drunk after a night of heavy drinking. It is not good to be driving a vehicle whilst being affected by any drug, including legal recreational drugs like ethanol, so he should not have done so and should be punished for that. But was it right for members of the public to detain him and bash him? Based on the facts provided in the article, I don't think it was right.

He should have been asked what he wants. If he wanted to buy some chicken, then they could have served him and he may then have gone home. It's the duty of the police to detain someone for driving whilst under the influence of a drug.

I think you should be asked what you want! Are you perhaps a friend or a relative of the poor young man who is not at all to blame for anything as he was on drugs at the time and needs help, not punishment?

Sorry to take so long to respond - my modem was destroyed (yet again...) by a distant storm.

I provided proof of income details, so gave them copies of my Thai bank ATM card. Easy to replace and only costs 100 bht.

I still don't think it's a good idea to give a copy of your ATM card to ANYBODY!

I wouldn't get overly concerned about the ATM card Sambun as the Thai ones don't have your name on them so really are useless as proof of anything.

I didn't realise that, but why would it be accepted as proof of ANYBODY'S income if there is no name on it?

Thailand shows its true colours.

Despicable and corrupt to the core.

Winnie

How so? The fact that they brought it up again after 4 years instead of sweeping it under the rug clearly tells a different story. He will miss the new date again and after that it will be an arrest warrant which forces him to join Thaksin.

The fact that they brought it up again could be cynically interpreted as "the brown bag needs a refill"

My God, this young man. Khun Yorvidhya killed a policeman who had a family.... who was on duty early in the morning and the "Red Bull" grandson smashed directly into the back of the motorcycle with his new Ferari sports car...didn't even stop but continued to drive the car to his gated housing compound. No compasion what so ever. And the police department does not have the balls to take action??? When he does show up, I can predict "Boss" will go to the temple to be a monk and ask for forgiveness.

We farng and Thais all can take action by not boycotting Red Bull products.

Think you mean "farangs" mate! And do you not mean "by boycotting Red Bull products"?

Throw his Father and Mother in jail and see what family loyalty will do then.

When he comes to face the music then release them.

Targeting relatively-innocent parties such as Mum & Dad is despicable in most civilized countries, so leave them out of it.

Besides, from the perp's lack of morals, I don't think that he would give a toss about his parents anyway,

I think he will probably give a toss about his parents if the supply of baht dried up!

Spoilt brat anyway. so his parents are also partly to blame.

Another posted stated, turn wanting front and BACK of his amt card,,!? that REEEKS of nefarious purposes,, 1,, there's no need for the front,, let alone the security code on the back,,, years ago credit card companies told me never hand out your credit card to a waiter or such at a store, restaurant, etc,, as that was EXACTLY how your account would be compromised,, the waiter, etc would then sell that info,, they told me that was the most common way for your card to be compromised,, in fact they told me if a waiter or clerk ever turn your card over to look at the back to immediately contact their manager,, so with this new info they now know where Joe Farlang hangs out,, how much he has in his account etc, etc,, that's very very scary info for corrupt officials say a policeman to have, as they have been known to kidnap wealthy individuals and ransom them,, this pertinent info just narrows their field down to certain individuals,,, I mean why bother extorting someone who has little money, let's find someone who does,

That was my post, and I agree,

I pointed out why this was not a good idea (from my POV), but the 'rules' change so regularly (and depending on the person involved) - I quickly realised it was a pointless discussion. Far better to just provide the photocopies and cancel the card.

And somehow get someone to bring a replacement card out here for you from your home country, or pay a substantial amount of money for it to be sent here by courier?

Sorry to take so long to respond - my modem was destroyed (yet again...) by a distant storm.

I provided proof of income details, so gave them copies of my Thai bank ATM card. Easy to replace and only costs 100 bht.

I still don't think it's a good idea to give a copy of your ATM card to ANYBODY!

"No charges have yet been laid in the matter as no one has suffered any loss."

Unbelievable! "Endangering life while under the influence of drugs" might be one, and I am sure that the BIB could find a few more if they REALLY thought about it, or has the brown envelope been passed on already?.

Looking at the guy, I seriously doubt he is coherent or sophisticated enough to manage a "brown envelope" transaction.

And, quite honestly, I don't think I would be all that surprised to see a perfectly sober Thai drive their motocy into KFC and place an order. Okay, sure, that is a bit of a stretch, but the standard of driving here is quite different from what I am accustomed to. Seeing the video, it is amazing that he was able to drive without causing harm, so that was a bit of good fortune. Having never done yaba or anything like it, I cannot speak to how it affects one's ability to drive.

Finally, regardless of the fact that it appears he caused no real damage or harm driving into the mall, once they get the blood work back on this guy, he is definitely going to be serving some time for the use of yaba. At a minimum, they place you in holding with a crowd of other yaba users, with no phone or other outside contact, until you dry out, then you are placed on probation. So, yeah, he is not happy.

So, are you clued up on the sentencing here, or just talking <deleted> ?

Just like the '500 baht, slap on the wrist' brigade.

It amazes me, that Thai jails are so overcrowded, when all the the legal beagles on here know, that all you have to do is, pass over a brown envelope, and guarantee your freedom.

I bet Mr T. wishes he thought of that, instead of being exiled in Dubai.

Unfortunately, the "500 baht, slap on the wrist" scenario does happen, and brown envelopes do change hands - and I do KNOW that. And although I am not in possession of any facts or figures (so don't ask for any!) I would have a guess that a great number of the Thais in Thai prisons do not come from wealthy families.

"No charges have yet been laid in the matter as no one has suffered any loss."

Unbelievable! "Endangering life while under the influence of drugs" might be one, and I am sure that the BIB could find a few more if they REALLY thought about it, or has the brown envelope been passed on already?.

Looking at the guy, I seriously doubt he is coherent or sophisticated enough to manage a "brown envelope" transaction.

And, quite honestly, I don't think I would be all that surprised to see a perfectly sober Thai drive their motocy into KFC and place an order. Okay, sure, that is a bit of a stretch, but the standard of driving here is quite different from what I am accustomed to. Seeing the video, it is amazing that he was able to drive without causing harm, so that was a bit of good fortune. Having never done yaba or anything like it, I cannot speak to how it affects one's ability to drive.

Finally, regardless of the fact that it appears he caused no real damage or harm driving into the mall, once they get the blood work back on this guy, he is definitely going to be serving some time for the use of yaba. At a minimum, they place you in holding with a crowd of other yaba users, with no phone or other outside contact, until you dry out, then you are placed on probation. So, yeah, he is not happy.

Agree with what you are saying, it's just the statement by the RTP chappie that is misleading as always!

Just one small point though - the brown envelope needn't necessarily come from him - Daddy might have a stash of them for such an emergency!.