KhaoYai

I am big enough to accept when I am wrong and it would appear that I am in this case - although its not always quite as clear cut as you might think. It is quite common for cases that have been decided on evidence standards of lower courts to be be succesfully defended at appeal and convictions quashed. I find it strange though, that someone who claims to know that law would state that someone is guilty without sight of any evidence. None of the evidence you have quoted so far is directly related to the assault the girl is claiming. Photos exist of the girl and the Prince standing together - what does that establish? There may be other links of contact between them but I have not heard of any evidence of any sexual activity. That is probably because it does not exist and could very well be the reason why the case is being brought in a civil court rather than it being a criminal case.

Already reported - thanks.

It didn't take you long to descend into petty snubs did it? My reading skills? Perhaps yours would be more applicable - I have asked you to provide the basis of your claim that a lower standard of evidence would be applicable. I am the person who started this thread and I was very clear that it was about the legal aspects of this matter. If you wish to start a thread claiming Prince Andrew is a paedophile and stating he is guilty without evidence - please feel free to do so.

The test in the UK is 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I only spent 1 year on law at University but that is one thing I learned for sure. Can you steer me to the basis of your claim that 'the preponderance of evidence' would apply in the US? Its not a basis I've heard of. Further, I'm fully aware that the case is being brought under civil law but again, not all civil cases are based on 'probability' in the UK - which is why I'm asking about US law.

Are you claiming that photographic evidence of Prince Andrew and this girl having sex exists? I very much doubt that. Mere photos of them together would not be accepted as evidence that an assault took place - not where the test is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. If the test was 'Probability' there is a very small chance that such photos would be accepted. Talking purely with regard to UK law (which is why I'm asked about US law), if a jury was found to have reached a guilty verdict based on probability, they would be dismissed and their verdict refused under judicial direction. Such cases have occurred in the UK where judges have failed to make such directions and in the vast majority of those cases, winning an appeal is almost a certainty. 'He's guilty and she will win in court if it ever gets to a trial' do you have some secret evidence on which to base your statement? Please stick to matters of law not opinion - I have no opinion in this matter as there is, as far as I know, no admissable evidence. In the UK we don't convict people on opinons and even though I'm not familiar with US law, I very much doubt they do either. If a court convicts on the basis of a young girl simply claiming someone sexually assaulted her 20 years ago - we will be in a very sad and indeed, dangerous place. Without direct evidence, I doubt this case will go forward, let alone succeed.

And how does that prove that Prince Andrew had sex with this girl? In no way would that be evidence of the facts - I don't know about the US courts but for this type of case a UK court would work on the basis of 'innocent unti PROVEN guilty' they do not use the test of 'PROBABILITY'. Again, I can't speak for the events that are claimed to have happened on US soil but she certainly was not a minor in the UK where in the matters of sexual activity the age of consent is 16. And your evidence is?

I can't quite work out how Virginia Giuffre (Roberts) hopes to win the law suit she's just issued against Prince Andrew. She claims that the Prince sexually assaulted her on 3 separate occasions, in 3 different locations, 20 years ago. Without trying to attribute guilt or innocence surely the facts are that only 2 people that know if any sexual relations took place between the two. Unless she has retained DNA evidence (let's not go there) from the events then it would seem to me that proving that fact is impossible. I would very much doubt there were witnesses to the said copulation. But, let's imagine that she has some form of evidence, her next problem is proving that it was assault. She was 17 so there's no chance of 'technical rape'. The thing that I have difficulty with, and I would expect a judge would have the same problem, is that she claims it was assault yet she by her own statement, admits it happened 3 times on 3 separate occasions. - the problem with that is surely obvious? 'Ms Giuffre - then known as Virginia Roberts - says she was assaulted at the London home of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, and at Epstein's homes in Manhattan and Little St James in the US Virgin Islands.' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58550197 In no way am I condoning sexual assault of any kind whatsoever but neither do I condone people claiming events took place that wreck peoples lives - seemingly without any evidence. The brown stuff sticks so no matter what the outcome of this case, Prince Andrew will be tainted by it forever. Without some form of evidence, this case would almost certainly not even get a hearing in the UK, what do our North American bretheren think of its chances of being heard in a US court? The point of this post is not to enter into any row regarding the activities of Prince Andrew and I won't be drawn on that - I'm questioning the legal aspects.

Oh jeez. Is this the latest AV answer to the millions that have had their vaccine without a problem? So when, as the vast majority do, people report either no problems or mild flu-like symptoms etc. You're answer is that we are going to have problems in the future? The overwhelming body of evidence both scientific and real world is that being vaccinated against Covid 19 substantially reduces your chances of being infected. Those who are vaccinated but do get infected have a very high degree of protection from developing severe illness and death. In life, we all have various beliefs and stances - sometimes we are wrong, sometimes we're right. The majority, when faced with evidence, back down and accept they are wrong. AV's on the other hand, simply modify their story. If you don't wish to be vaccinated then at the moment, in most countries, that's your right. However, unless you have scientific, tested proof of your claims, it would be much nicer if you keep them to yourself. If just 1 person reads your claims, is influenced by them and refuses to be vaccinated as a result, they could die if they catch the virus. That said, I agree, we are in unchartered territory but the vaccines, certainly those made in the West, underwent mass trials before being put out. People with far greater knowledge than you or I reviewed the trial data before approving the products. Covid 19 has killed millions and continues to do so but those of us lucky enough to have been fully vaccinated now have a very high level of protection. Just look at the situation in the UK where around 80% of the adult population are now fully vaccinated. I'll quote you some official figures but would firstly state that they are not 100% comparable due to incomplete data but they show a massive difference now that so many of the population are vaccinated. January was the peak of the current wave in the UK and we are now experiencing high infection levels once again due to the delta variant. I've picked 2 comparable dates. The difference between January and now is huge. 7 day average number of infections on 19 January 34,257 7 day average number of deaths on 19 January 1,286 People who had 1 dose of vaccine by 19 January 4,609,740 People who had 2 doses of vaccine by 19 January 460,625 7 day average number of infections on 5 September 36,982 7 day average number of deaths on 5 September 129 People who had 1 dose of vaccine by 5 September 48,279,113 People who'd had 2 doses of vaccine by 5 September 43,455,083 Sources: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations I have not tried to hide anything by using 5 September instead of today - 5 September is the latest date that the averages are available. 1286 deaths down to 129. If that doesn't convince you to get vaccinated, nothing will and I wish you good luck.

Then I doubt you actually read this forum. Yes, most are pro-vaccine but that's reflected in most societies. Pro totalitarian government - now that's where I doubt you actually read this forum. Most posters that I see do not support this government and are highy critical of it.

Do you have a link to that law please?

You clearly have a low regard for your wife - the above sentence would be more suited to a car than a wife. Quite shocked that someone would think about their wife like that to be honest. Perhaps you could visit a dealer and see if they'll take your current 'model' in part exchange?

As far as I know its 60 days with a possible 30 day extension - subject to current quarantine requirements of course. The 6 month Multi Entry Tourist Visa was suspended and I don't think the suspension for that has been lifted yet. As you will no doubt have found, clicking on 'Tourist Visa' on the Embassy website takes you to the Thai language version of the Embassy's home page - not at all helpful, they're just too bloody lazy to actually write a page explaining the situation. You're expected to know that you should be looking here: https://london.thaiembassy.org/en/publicservice/requirements-for-foreigners-travelling-to-thailand-during-covid-19-tra If you're over 50 I believe you can get a 1 year 'retirement visa'. The Special Tourist Visa programme ends at the end of this month if that's what's causing the confusion.

In no way am I supporting Agoda but there is a widely held misconception on that point. It all depends on the agreement Agoda has with the hotel. Some 'deals' are for a set number of rooms available at a particular price. Them being sold out or 'only 3 rooms left' does not necessarily mean they are the only rooms available or hotel is fully booked. However, on the few occasions where I've tried calling the hotel direct, I have found that they are full.

Last Friday In watched a news report from a Covid 19 ventilator ward in the UK. Some of the staff there were working 14 hour shifts trying to keep their patients alive. I believe there were 15 patients on the ward and the doctor got his chart and showed the reporter - all but one were unvaccinated. A made up report? Part of the 'Great Reset'? I'd love the chance to put you in a room with some of these brave doctors and nurses, people that risk their lives everyday trying to keep the rest of us alive. Some of them have sadly lost their own lives...

I guess its a waste of time but these conspiracy theorists really need to see a doctor. I'm sure there are thousands more but over the years I've seen stories that are simply rubbish and its just so difficult to understand how any rational person could even consider believing them. Perhaps the most common: ... Coronavirus is all part of the 'Great Reset' - designed to put us mere mortals back in our place. (Seems to fall apart on many fronts including the fact that it requires nations that are sworn enemies to conspire) Coronavirus is spread through the 5g network. Covid 19 vaccines kill thousands. The vaccines include a microchip that tracks you. Jeez, there was even a fella on UK TV that said if he got Covid he would absolutely not go to hospital because he had proof that the doctors and nurses were killing patients. Then there was a story circulating on social media with a convincingly realistic news-site post stating that the first participant in the Oxford/AZ vaccine trials had died - until that is, she appeared on national TV alive and kicking. What is wrong with these people - do we have a vaccine against stupidity yet? Mind you, they'd refuse to take it.

I don't take any of that for granted - I take it as a load of rubbish and any rational person, fortunately the vast majority of us that I have no doubt you think are mis-informed, would also think the same.

'The Plan'..................................................yawn!!! Are there any 5g transmitters near you? Complete load of tosh! On what basis do you claim, 'the vaccinated people think they are invulnerable to Covid'? I'm double vaccinated and have no notion that I'm fully protected. I listen to the reports and can read the stats - I'm fully aware that I am not totally protected - that has been fully publicised. However, I know from real world figures in my home country (UK) rather than your conspiracy based rubbish that being fully vaccinated, if I do get infected, I am far less likely to get seriously ill or die. Anything that helps the virus spread is a threat to others and that includes vaccine refusers. Try telling your tale to the doctors and nurses that have to treat Covid patients. The less patients they see, the less at risk they are.

Yes and even if it doesn't become a requirement for visas etc. - just try walking around in your locality if it gets out 'the foreigner' refused the vaccine. That said, life's going to get more difficult (much more far reaching than simply restaurants) for those refuse the vaccine no matter where you live so excercise your rights by all means but don't moan when you suffer the consequences.

100 baht, never went near a clinic.

Whilst I appreciate that its do-able, some of the items you mention are not immediately available - you have to do some searching to find the details. For example, you mention that the hotel send you the web address where you can book the tests. That information is not on the COE website. Someone like myself who has no choice has to find that information - I doubt many real tourists will be prepared to do that much work. Especially when they find they are going to be tracked and, according to a friend who lives on Phuket, the place is pretty much dead. If they want genuine tourists back they are going to have to make things a lot easier to navigate. That said, the company that provides the all inclusive packages appear to do all the legwork for you and they have good reviews on Tripadvisor - I just wonder how many people have actually found them. I've read on here and my friend confirms that the majority of those arriving on Phuket are expats, Thai's or people like myself who have family connections in Thailand. That's not really a boost to the country's economy, all its done is take away some of the ASQ business from Bangkok and Pattaya hotels. A small boost for Phuket but no real difference to the country as a whole.

I was aware of the 21 day requirement but reading through some of the announcements it seems that only direct flights are eligible. My wife's flight is actually from Manchester to Bangkok but it can be changed to Phuket. However, both flights include a transit in Amsterdam. I don't know if transit is allowed or not - do you? As far as I know, no airlines fly directly from Manchester to Phuket - they all include transits. Update: If I'm reading the rules correctly, as long as the passenger flies from an approved country and transits through a country that's also on the approved list, that's OK........I think.

I'm not in Thailand and of course not all women do this but it is quite common. Some do it because they are simply 'farang milking', others may do it because of pressure from their family and others are simply reckless. Whatever, it happens and those who pay for a car and register it in their wife's/girlfriends name thinking all is well, should be aware of it. I speak from personal experience by the way. My ex wife put a car I paid for 'in the bank' - at the time I didn't even know it was possible. If I'd known, no way would it have gone in her name. Fast forward a few years and a divorce later, she has no car and no money - for all I know she may even still owe the bank monry too.

My wife will be flying back to Thailand in early October. We are still trying to decide whether she stays in ASQ in Bangkok or takes advantage of the Phuket Sandbox scheme (or even Hua Hin if that gets confirmed). Firstly, I have to state that if it wasn't for the fact that my wife (and later myself) have to travel between the UK and Thailand, I really wouldn't bother. Its hardly surprising that there have been far fewer arrivals in Phuket than expected. We are in unchartered territory so I expected a few more things to do than just booking flights but I doubt many real tourists would be prepared to go through the hassle I'm experiencing at the moment. There are problems in the entry process in general and some specific to Phuket. In general: The Royal Thai Embassy in London insists on calling the Sandbox hotels AQ instead of SHA plus but that's by the by - they also rattle on about quarantine packages and provide links to providers - at least one of which doesn't work. One provider, Agoda, for some strange reason lists prices of ASQ stays in Bangkok etc. as an all in one package that includes testing. For the Phuket Sandbox hotels there is no mention of testing being included. How is a traveller supposed to decide on the best package for them if they find there are additional costs to face later? Back to the Embassy, as I understand it, being a Thai national, my wife doesn't need the $100,000 covid insurance for ASQ but she does for the Sandbox scheme. The embassy states that Thai nationals require the insurance and steer you to the Thai General Insurance Association website https://covid19.tgia.org/ . There you select 'For Inbound Travellers' then 'Buy Now' where you are presented with some questions, one of which is some options regarding your visa status - there is no provision for Thai nationals. Another question asks how long you require the insurance for - the minimum being 30 days. Why would a Thai national need to pay for 30 days of insurance when the Sandbox is 14 days? In any case, the visa status question prevents you from completing that section for a Thai national. So how do I get my wife insured? We are trying to compare costs between ASQ and SHA and finding it pretty difficult to say the least. When I checked for insurance for myself last year I seemed to remember it wasn't as bad as I expected but the website has now changed - whereas you simply had to list your age to get a quote, you now have a whole section of personal details to complete. I've read on here that ther COE process has changed since last year and presumed it was for the better - compared to the hash of things they made of it last year. Now it appears there are 4 steps to obtaining COE and from reports I've read on here, it can take 3 to 4 weeks to obtain. Tourists are used to going online, comparing a few prices followed by a more or less one step booking - I really can't see them mucking around with all this - I have no choice or I'd just simply give up. In my honest opinion, most would be visitors will take a look at what's involved and decide on somewhere else. So rant over what I'd like some help with is: 1. Given the tgia website doesn't appear to accommodate Thai nationals (despite a statement on it saying its required), how do I get a price for/obtain insurance for my wife. 2. I've found one website that appears to give prices for all inclusive packages to Phuket, does anyone know of others? 3. Has anyone been through the same process? Any pointers? 4. As per a different thread, does anyone know if there are any flights running from Phuket to Bangkok? Incidentally, the website I found that lists 'all inclusive packages' for Phuket is called Royal Vacation. The deals seem too good to be true - they include Hotel Accommodation, COE Service, Covid 19 Insurance, One Way Transfer, 3 Covid Tests. The prices start at 24,160 baht!!! Has anyone any experience of this company? https://royalvacationdmc.com/phuket-sandbox-all-in-one-packages/?https://royalvacationdmc.com/phuket-sandbox-all-in-one-packages/&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIj4Gcvrry8gIV2d_tCh3ZSAlkEAAYAiAAEgLU2_D_BwE

Yeah and watch her go off and 'put it in the bank' (collateral for a loan) like many do. No thanks.

I don't think there is such a thing as a residence certificate - its a confirmation of address and most of us obtain them in letter form from our local immigration office. 'Certificate' implies some form of legal status and their would only be one format - obtained via an application process. They are issued based on information provided by yourself and in many, if not most cases, there is no check on that at all - making it all just another waste of time created by Thai bureaucracy. I have no doubt that every I.O .has its own rules and whims but all I had to do for my confirmation of address was show a 12 month visa, in my case a multi non o, a copy of a lease and my 'landlord's' details. I don't actually have a lease and at that time, no usufruct either so I simply downloaded a free lease copy (in Thai & English) from the internet and completed it. I took that, copies of the registered house owner's tabien bahn and ID card to Korat Immigration and after making a 500 baht donation, walked away with my letter. One thing to note: the confirmation given is specific to the purpose you state you want it for and that's written on it. As I can't read Thai I had no idea and had to return to Korat to make another 'donation' in order to get a confirmation to open a bank account.