Liverpool Lou

Yes.

you don't understand ...... it is a ridiculous sentence 192 years without suspension....see the joke of it No, it's who doesn't understand; he faced 77 charges, 5 years for each charge and 192 years is not what his actual sentence is, that's 50 years, before any commutation.

Yes, I do. Putting the concept into practice might be an idea, then.

Not quite as "outrageous" as the 77 counts of fraud that he committed. That's the way that judicial systems work worldwide.

Why bother responding? Surely you have something better to do ... although you've done this over 2,000 times. "Why bother responding? Surely you have something better to do..." How about because it's a forum with one sole purpose...to get members to respond to articles? But, ironically, to quote your own words, "surely you have something better to do"?

Kids did not just get "a skimpy meal", 77 children had insufficient meals consistently while he lined his pockets with those 77 childrens' lunch money. 77 counts of fraud.

Yet murderers get less. Really? Those found guilty of a murder get less than five years? Who?

Sounds like he will literally be getting a taste of his own medicine. He could always just go to the prison shop and buy the food he wants, or get a visitor to buy it from the visitors shop or order something specific from an available list the night before, all above board options in Thai prisons. Coffee and doughnuts for breakfast, fast food sent in, fresh fruit given out during the day, all daily occurrences. Sorry to burst the bubble.

The "old lady" was lying, anyone who's actually been in a Thai prison will refute that. How did you get to visit a group of prisoners, or a lone female prisoner, unsupervised, when all prison visiting in Thailand is done through a screen via a phone handset, unless you're the prisoner's lawyer?

Or making monthly repayments of their finance.

Aren't they too busy making guns? No.

There'll have to be 77 charges for the generals, as there were for this person for equity.

He did not get 50 years for "a small lunch". He got five years for each fraud charge, 77 counts of fraud.

If he dies in prison in ten years, he dies in ten years; what do you expect to happen to him, prop him up in a call for the next forty years?

Something wrong with that description?

Nonsense. It is not "virtually impossible for foreigners to get work permits". Opening a business does not require a WP unless that person is actually going to be physically working in that business.

The bottom line beef is no one can show me an invoice except the original seller. If the duty is 10% +7% as stated above, then someone just lined their pockets. I really don't care about the missing $20 or so, but I would like to know who ended up pocketing the money and why there was no invoice from anyone except the original seller for $105. "I would like to know who ended up pocketing the money" You paid Amazon the duty charge, not DHL, so the conclusion isn't difficult to work out.

I ordered a sports massager from amazon, it arrived in bangkok, I was told by customs and excise I had to have a medical certificate from a hospital for them to deliver, within two days Amazon realised the unusual action by customs, immediately sent me a refund and an apology with a £10 voucher for my troubles, they took care of the return which I thought was good service. Note amazon refunds said they had never encountered this before in any other country lol How lovely for you. What has that got to do with my post that you quoted?

Then why did you? I wasn't commenting about why there was no media concern, I was pointing out that the lack of that type of comment was because the circumstances had already been clearly explained. Do you not understand the concept of context?

Such as?

It depends on what you are doing wrong. Why should you have any "legal challenges"?

They don't get a decent wage.

Seems that your beef is with Amazon. When DHL are contracted by a seller to ship a dutiable item from overseas, DHL acts as an agent of Thai Customs and collects the duty and VAT on it's behalf, plus a disbursement charge. All that is clearly itemised on their receipt that is attached to the delivered package. When a seller/Amazon collects the duty at source and it is added to the purchase price and paid up front, as in your case, the seller/Amazon is responsible for that information. DHL Thailand will just deliver as duty paid at source without having access to the details as they did not collect the duty, etc..

you obviously didn't look closely enough Your imagination obviously took over from your rational thought process.

Like you wrongly said before. Absolutely ridiculous.