Liverpool Lou

Never.

That's because no changes have yet been made, as the OP very clearly states.

No decision has been made.

No, that is not what was reported. There will be talks about it, that's all.

Your right Lou , but this was is a Thai forum , no need to correct every little thing. No need to try to tell me what to post.

Lou , it was the 168 to Chumphon that got him.. very tragic event. I didn't say that it wasn't that train and I didn't say that it wasn't tragic.

You mean the one who has not been thrown out?

It did happen, she was convicted and she got a 15-day, suspended sentence, in addition to a fine.

Your right Lou , but this was is a Thai forum , no need to correct every little thing. There is when the suggestion (in a comment on a forum that has the tendency to bash Thailand unremittingly) is that it is peculiar to Thailand.

Trains in Britain used to have (maybe still have) similar warnings for the extremely stupid.

That is how the law is worded, that is what matters.

.

Totally out of context and as parasitic as all your rubbish Lou. I don't RIP anyone, just used the term as an indicator in this instance. My responding to your comment about "RIPs" was not out of context in any way. You did admonish another poster for not "RIP-ing"!

I agree and have argued this point many times over the years on AN forums, this nonsense, RIP's to total strangers. They could be nasty people, criminals, Pedo's, murderers etc. Why do these people want to do this, it really annoys me. "Why do these people want to do this, it really annoys me". Virtue signalling, that's all, there can be no other reason when they have no connection, whatsoever, with the deceased. That, or they're wannabe clerics!

Don't forget that you're one of those "arguing stupidly about trains"!

How very pedantic of you. Yep he didn't avoid the avoidable death. Odd how accuracy becomes pedanticism over complete inaccuracy here.

Construction companies working on SRT facilities are not supposed to leave exposed construction obstacles or intrusions that could cause injury or fatality in situ. The only person who may have been affected by placing himself in an area in which there was a likelihood of severe personal injury was the Canadian doing something not only prohibited, but stupid. The construction outside the train posed no danger to any other passenger on that train, or that route!

Should it be found that his smoking in an area in which it is banned (i.e. the entire train) contributed to his fall and death then one would expect compensation to be non-existent.

This planet, not just Thailand, so many ways to die ,especially if not careful.

"Good form" isn't really an AN members' trait.

RIPs to total strangers, from total strangers, on a forum that his family is unlikely to know exists (never mind care about the thoughts of its usually vitriolic, anonymous members) are, by definition, pointless apart from for the self-aggrandising, back-patting, virtue signalling RIP-ers.

Er, an avoidable death was the outcome.

Maybe it was the SUN: Maybe it was both: "by Bob Scott Picture courtesy of the Daily Mirror"

The victim, nicknamed Ploy, fairly obviously.

No, she did not "literally get away with murder", she literally got away with manslaughter with diminished responsibility.