Kieran00001

32 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

Yes, I read that and addressed it in an earlier post.

When I referred to the first helper, I didn't mean the first police or ambulance worker. They would have arrived some time later I'm sure. 

Try to think outside the parameters.

Yes, its quite possible, a big problem in Thailand is a lack of public awareness resulting in people trying to help in accidents and actually causing further injury.  In fact, not so long ago, EMS were demonstrated to have caused a high percentage of avoidable deaths due to a lack of training in how to deal with spinal injuries.  It took foreign intervention to produce a better training package, which is what happens when a government neglects their essential needs to the point where religious institutes fill in the gaps with their volunteers.

17 hours ago, Moonlover said:

You missed out 'Due to incorrect or poor helmet fit and wearing position'.

 

A correctly sized and securely fitted helmet should not come off in an accident. I've tested mine very thoroughly in that regard and it were to part company with my body, it would have to take my head with it!

Even in Western countries with high quality helmets and good awareness levels, more than 10% come of in accidents, take a look at the helmets here and tje way they are attached, I would be surprised if 10% stayed on.  As for your thorough testing of your own helmet, I expect the motogp rider mentioned above also tested his, perhaps a litle more thoroughly than you, there is always a risk.

4 hours ago, lucifer666 said:

In my experience, crash helmets tend to stay on the head when being worn. Even after an accident.

I'm not going to post it again, if you can be bothered to look through the thread you will find that I posted a study which found that in 12% of motorbike accidents the helmet came off, their study of lots of accidents vs your little experience, hmmm.

8 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

 

the whole thing is the techno age equivalent to a bar room spat. lets face it thailand does have quite a bit of infamy and world reputation for the sex business, trafficking and yes, also known to attract pedo's and locals that are involved in procurement.

 

so if musk was pissed at the stick a metal tube up his xxx that was made on cnn, countering with another vulgarity isn't that harsh.

 

if unsworth called musk a pedo i doubt he'd take any action since he's got bigger fish to fry.  if someone called me that it would enter one ear and exit the other because i too have bigger fish to fry. call me insensitive.  relatively speaking what gets me really upset are all the ripoff taxis refusing to use meter and/or quoting an outrageous fare.

A taxi fare, such big fish you have to fry.

10 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Actually, no, I did not...

 

This case below was not a maritime case, yet Thai police somehow managed to file the criminal charge:
 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/haunting-cctv-shows-thai-prostitutes-11821208

I just read the article and found this little gem.

"Police claim that the reckless and negligent behaviour"

and?  Two directly contradictory legal terms and the Mirror thinks it could be both, hillarious, I suggest you change your reading material!

9 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, unlike you apparently, I'd wait to hear and evaluate the actual evidence and details in the case.... instead of presuming someone guilty pretty much on the basis of nothing other than the outcome.

 

Next time you're rear ended lets hear you call for an investigation rather than put automatic blame on the one who rear ended you, its not like the world over the one who hits from behind is held acountable, is it?  No, lets wait to hear and evaluate the actual evidence and details in the case.

In truth, they may not get a charge of recklessness under maritime law to stick, the offense being based on awareness and foresight of risk and so may only be able to be determined if he has a boat operators licence, so perhaps they will try him for negligence, which would be based on unknowingly taking a risk which they should have been aware of.

9 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Actually, no, I did not...

 

This case below was not a maritime case, yet Thai police somehow managed to file the criminal charge:
 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/haunting-cctv-shows-thai-prostitutes-11821208

 

So I'd say, it's pretty apparent that such a charge is part of Thai criminal law.

 

I'm just guessing, because we're talking about translating Thai legal code into English terms. But they're probably looking at filing under Section 291:

 

 

Same Thai criminal code section was used to prosecute this past local offense:

 

 

 

Negligence is within the Thai penal code, but recklessness is not, they are seperate legal terms defined by degree of foresight of risk, negligence doesn't apply to those in charge of a boat because there is an assumed foresight of risk.  As for, "we're talking about translating Thai legal code into English terms", actually that was done when it was written, its always been bilingual.  Perhaps the journalist who wrote this article translated it themself, and poorly, or just perhaps, this being a maritime offense they are being tried under the maritime offense of recklessness.  It would actually make a lot more sense.

A similar incident in Phuket:

"Phuket Governor Norapat Plodthong on Wednesday said the collision of two speedboats the previous day offshore Phuket stemmed from recklessness and urged the Marine Department to enforce laws and regulations strictly"

56 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

What's your source for that account? Also, in your description above, you're assuming the farang guy was in control of his boat at the time, which may or may not have been the case.

 

Meanwhile, the farang guy isn't facing any charges under maritime law... He's facing criminal charge(s) under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" that probably doesn't hinge on right vs left.

 

Yes, that assumes he was in control, if not then its a different maritime law he breached but its much the same, you must keep watch, all the time.

As for the charge, where did you get that it was under Thai penal code rather than maritime law?  There isn't one mention of the word reckless within the Thai penal code, its not a Thai legal term, while it is the term used in maritime law to describe these kinds of breach, so I think you are wrong.

"under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" "

And I'm pretty sure you just made that up.

19 minutes ago, billd766 said:

How can he close Tesla down? He is not the owner as it is a public company, while he may be the CEO he has a board who can overrule him.

 

He is just a spoilt brat who thinks that he knows it all. 

I think the point was that as a convict he should lose his immigration status, as happens to those who are not billionaires.

33 minutes ago, Jack100 said:

I see incredible similarities between the way Trump operates and a certain Captain Bob Maxwell used to all those years ago .

I hope it doesn't end the the same way . !

It would be quite a fluke, he fell off his boat, there is no indication it was suicide if that is what you are implying, most likely he had a heart attack, but to be honest I hope it doesn't go that way either, much too fast.

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

And what's your source for that account?

Just the damage on the port side, how else could it have happened other than he was crossing from the starboard?

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

yep because civilization can't move forward until we've found a radar that can detect a wooden boat (facepalm)

 

For accuracy, in this rather sad materialistic world the guy who finds the 'cure' to baldness will be that richest man on earth !

We found it about 40 years ago anyway, they've got radar that can detect a log. 

As for the baldness cure, there is a product that will make your hair grow, just no guarantee that it will be on your head, for some its the back of the hands that grow the most, for others its rhe shoulders does that count?

16 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I've never said or suggested the Thai guy was to blame, although since we have zero details on how the crash actually happened, I'm not making any presumptions one way or another.

 

However, even assuming the Thai guy was totally blameless, that doesn't automatically translate into the farang guy being "recklessly responsible" for the death.  Whether the farang guy was "recklessly responsible" would depend on the details of just how the crash occurred, which for now remain undisclosed.

 

Actually I think we know enough.  He ran over a boat crossing his path from the starboard side, that is a breach of maritime law, which states that the boat approaching on the right must maintain its course and speed while the other boat must yield.  To not obey that rule would be reckless operation of a boat, to cause an accident while not obeying that rule would be reckless endangerment of life.

22 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

"I always think it's a sign of victory when they move on the ad hominem." - Christopher Hitchens

 

And that, I might add, is your modus operandi in spades.

As for Hitchins, he just hid behind that phrase, he had it coming the old biggot.

6 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

That's what Vernon wants, but I hope Elon drags it out for years as a hobby. Until Vernon runs out of ways to pay his legal fees.

One day you may become the helpless victim of someone far richer than you, which is not unlikely in Thailand, and I bet you'll be squealling about injustice when it does.

As for running out of legal fees, his lawyer is going to cover that until Musk pays, and this guy has integrity, he will stick with him until the end.  He represented the miners against Thatcher, he has fought against governments many times, he represented Julian Assagne, the victims of Lockerbie, families of soldiers killed in Iraq, he's taken on Shell and McDonalds.  He is more than a little used to fighting against those with endless funding. He's not like you, he doesn't believe money triumphs over what is right, and he also has a long record of winning.

2 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

Methinks dude could use a little break...

 

Go for it if it stops you persisting for a moment frkm attacking people in these most inane ways.

2 hours ago, Wilsonandson said:

Guy just tried to help.

This is just a topic for Musk haters to hate on.

But he didn't just try to help, you wouldn't even know about it if he hadn't gone public with it, tell me, how many other designs do you know about, there were several others who also put their designs to them, but quietly and so you've not even heard.  Musk shouted about his, and then when they chose tried and tested cave rescue equioment over his untested prototype, he called him a pedo, he's a big baby and I think you know that really.

As for your post, a few twitter supporters on Musks side, and your point is?

27 minutes ago, KneeDeep said:

 

 

Nearly true, but not quite;

 

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/musk-reignites-pedo-controversy-practically-begging-to-be-sued-guess-what-Gb0dyVH2RUSelfDi8K-YjA/

 

On the 6th of August, a letter was sent to Musk informing him that they were preparing to issue proceedings. An opportunity for Musk to settle the case in advance.

 

He did nothing of the sort, other than to make more stupid statements three weeks later, asking why Unsworth hadn't sued him. Again, making the suggestion that Unsworth was what he suggested.

The next day Unsworth's lawyer stated they were finalising the libel complaint.

So there were no legal proceeding beforehand, just a notice.

Musk isn't looking as intelligent as some would like to believe.

 

A letter of intention to sue following faiure to compensate would be the normal first step in initiating legal proceedings, without it they would not be able to sue them, you have to give them the chance to settle first, so it could be said that it had begun feom the moment he ignored the letter.

And considering his recent moves to devalue his share prices, I wouldn't assume this is not all a well calculated plan to do the same.

12 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

So you always wanted a boat and could never afford one?

 

Desperate much?

21 minutes ago, sambum said:

 

 

To be honest, the "kolae" looks substantially different to the "prowed" boat in the picture above. I would also suggest that the kolae looks more like a craft that would be used in forest rivers collecting firewood rather than at sea collecting the oceans' bounty!

 

And I only put in the photos and narrative re the "dragon boats" to let you know that I have been to other parts of Thailand rather than just the "tourist traps" However, as I have only been to the South of Thailand once on a visa run, and am in no hurry to get back, that would possibly explain why I have never seen a kolae! 

 

And to save you the trouble of further explanation of maritime facts and fiction (e.g. the difference between a boat and a ship etc) I suggest that this discussion has run its course (in much the same way as a young man was found dead in his car on Koh Samui, and there were more posts arguing what type of car he was in than the reasons for his death!), so let's get back on topic, and RIP to the old man - regardless of whose fault it was, at that age he didn't deserve to go that way.

 

Both the same category of boat, and by the way, that is the sea, you can tell by the type of tree, which only grow in salt waters.

12 minutes ago, Sealbash said:

The types of comments I am referring to should be absent no matter the nationality of the accident victim.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I agree, they're a disgrace and in my opinion shouldn't be allowed, but that is not my call.

2 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

You could be right but why would an apparent experienced rider who reportedly had a Triumph Bonneville by a previous poster, and had a wife ,again reported by an earlier poster,  be driving  a Wave, on the wrong side of the road , with no helmet on at 3 am  without his wife ?

Well, that's not any of your business, is it?

1 minute ago, IssanMichael said:

Looking at the original article and the photos of the bike and helmet, which are somewhat further up the road, it looks like the helmet is in perfect condition, no sign of damage, also the strap looks as if it is done up, i would think that the helmet was not being worn at the time of the crash. If the medics took it off it would be near the person, and if he was wearing it, it would be damaged. Hope he recovers fully.

 

Or a poorly fitting helmet.

2 minutes ago, Puccini said:

Musk called me and whom pedos?

Do you not know what I means?  He called all single men who visit Thailand pedos.

15 minutes ago, malibukid said:

i had an accident in a hotel recently in L.A.  no apologies from the mgt. not gift basket.  i am suing them.  injury and insult.  they could have avoided the law suit with a simple we are sorry, how can we help.  i understand this suit. to  these billionaires and corporations $$$ is the only thing they understand.  kick them where it hurts.

It would depend on how your accident occured and whether or not the hotel is to blame in some way, I'll be damned if I will appologize for something which is in no way my fault whether it occurs on my property or not.