CorpusChristie

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Talk about a strange world view.. like you cant let a 12 year old be alone for a bit. I guess some people really do love violence. Need to punish others.

  Its really not a case of either loving violence or the need to punish people (although we've seen a fair amount of that in this thread with people making suggestions of what they would do to him "If that was my wife" and what extreme punishment he should face) , this is a case to stopping a thief in their tracks 

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Not often that I agree with Trans.

 

Yes I mean the guy was bigger and not pushing a trolley. He could have overtaken her running stopped the trolley and be done with it (maybe get security involved). I don't see how a big guy could not have stopped this trolley without violence.

 

So the woman was not innocent but certainly did not deserve what she got.

  Maybe we could do a survey .

All get our female other halves to get a trolley full of shopping in a car park and see whether she can run away without us catching her ?

4 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

That you are looking for his side of the story to somehow justify his actions, suggests to me that your moral compass is in need of recalibration.

 

There is no justification for kicking a woman the way that he did, so stop looking for it; only a bully and a coward kicks a woman, and that’s exactly what this reprobate is. You’ve called this one incorrectly, and would be better served putting your hand up to that fact, rather than continuously diminishing your own credibility defending him.

   If a thief is running off with your belongings and car keys , with the potential to drive off in your car , and they refuse to stop running , even after you have asked them to stop .

  Then, IMO, its quite justifiable to push them over to make them stop running .

3 hours ago, cvs04 said:

This guy is a customer of mine and has been for 5 years. I've always found him to be placid and a very nice guy. I spoke with him yesterday.

 

Whilst I don't condone the way he handled the situation it would appear there is far more to this story than meets the eye.

 

He had just finished his shopping in Big C and was with his daughter who is about 12. They went for a kfc and put the trolley to one side whilst they queued and ordered food.

 

Distracted whilst ordering food he turned round to see the woman walking away with his trolley which had 6000 baht, already paid for, worth of goods he'd just bought plus his car keys etc etc. As far as he was aware it was the only trolley there so not sure how she made a mistake and thought it was hers.

 

He shouted her to stop and she started to run with the trolley. He gave chase and booted her up the backside to stop her. Maybe she turned and he caught her hip instead or maybe the bruise was from something else unrelated.

 

The tourist policeman is somewhat notorious amongst the farang community here shall we say.

 

I believe neither he or his daughter were given any opportunity to speak during the Police interview. He was told if he tried to challenge the plaintiff in court he would get 3 years in jail unless he paid her off. The cctv footage apparentely looked to be cut and didn't show the event as it unfolded.

 

If he had been a Thai man in this situation I suspect it would be the girl being charged. However it's a farang and whenever that happens there's a big story, the farang loses some money and then defamed in the media. Remember it's always the farangs fault unless there is a nearby Burmese they can pin it on instead.

 

 

  Does he accept that it was a genuine mistake of taking the wrong trolley , or does he think this was deliberate attempted theft ?

   It seems rather odd that she began running , if someones coming from behind you in a car park trying to get your attention , the normal reaction is to stop and see what they want 

1 hour ago, FritsSikkink said:

From the original story:

"She said she wai-ed in apology but the foreigner then kicked her in the other leg. 

She left to get her mother but by the time she returned the foreigner had paid up and left the store as if nothing had happened. "

  I would question that version , Him going back to the KFC with his trolley , finishing whatever he was doing in KFC and then going back to scan and pay for the goods in the trolley took the same amount of time for her and her mother to walk from the car park back to the store ?

  The former would take about 20 minutes. the latter would take about 1 minute .

34 minutes ago, transam said:

I agree, even if the bird was nicking his stuff, assaulting a bird is not the answer, a verbal lashing works well for the "face" loss...

  If she was running away and refused to stop , there may have been no other option than to use physical force to make her stop .

10 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

I make a mental note never to buy anything that is advertised on sites like this and FB.

  Thats how sites receive an income though .

With no advertisements , sites like this wouldn't exist , unless we paid money to use these sites .

Advertisers pay sites to advertise > Readers buy the product> Advertiser makes a profit and gives money to the site in ways of advertising . 

2 hours ago, Berkshire said:

They still haven't figured out who did this.  But if the bomber(s) turn out to be white nationalists, Proud Boys, or some other Trump supporting group, I'll bet Trump won't condemn them.  Trump never criticizes his hardcore supporters, regardless of how heinous the act.  He might even cease on it...."Re-elect me or more bombs will go off!"

  Its better to wait and find out who did it and then also wait to see whether Trump condemns them .

No need to wait to Trump to comment though, may as well make up some quotes by him ?

The chances of Trump saying what you predicted are practically non existent 

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

You, not we!

  Also applies you you , unless you are exempt from the rules , which you cannot be 

8 minutes ago, david555 said:

Looking to your activity record ...you are quit buzzy now ....Christmas time ...????

 

Why should our side "mute " ...????

  No need to get personal , but as you ask , I've had quite a pleasant last few days with my Chinese/Thai Uni going Female freind  .

  Shes Buddhist, so , not really into Christmas  , anyway , lets get back on topic 

8 minutes ago, Hi from France said:

Very important question, when you know Brexiteers used to obsess about fish swimming 300 kilometers away from the Scottish coast. 

 

Do you know how much of the country is owned by oligarchs, corporations and bankers? I'm not talking about a faraway sea 300 km away, but about Englands mountains green. 

  You kind of sound like Europeans wanting to take over the UK .

4 minutes ago, david555 said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/12/25/pressure-builds-boris-johnson-allow-scrutiny-eu-uk-deal/

 

Pressure builds on Boris Johnson to allow more scrutiny of EU-UK deal

'A Treaty is for decades, not just for Christmas'

By Lucy Fisher, Deputy Political Editor 25 December 2020 • 6:54pm

 

Pressure is growing on Boris Johnson to delay Parliament’s ratification of the UK-EU trade deal until next month and allow Tory Brexiteers sufficient time to scrutinise the legal text....

 

 

   Its Christmas and the New Year . 

Time to take a break and get on with it in a few weeks time .

Lets all have a break from it and continue in January 

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

No, that is not what “cannot” means. 
 

Restricted means there are restrictions but it is possible. 
 

Cannot means it is not possible. 

  Working in Thailand in numerous jobs , the vast majority of jobs is restricted to Thais only , which means its not possible for foreigners to do those jobs .

  Can foreigners work in 7/11 . Can foreigners serve drinks/work in bars that they own ?

Nope, cannot/restricted 

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Ah, such reasoning

  If you cannot do something , that means its restricted .

Please dont tell me that you teach English? 

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Not the point I was making. 
 

You said “cannot” not “is restricted”. 

  Yeah like, cannot work in any job they want (like in the UK) , working in Thailand is restricted, as in, cannot work in any job you want to do, like, in the UK 

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes, that was my point

 

Sheesh...

   For Countries to enter the Eurovsion song  contest these days, the Countries just have to show the contest live on National television .

  Im not too sure about the 1950's and 60's .

Different World back then