Liverpool Lou

How would that benefit individual police officers with debt? You're not seriously suggesting that people with private debts (police officers) should have those debts paid off for them using the proceeds of fines or the sale of impounded vehicles, are you?

That's interesting, where has that study been published?

Why does anyone need to get ready for that? Have there been historical reports of police/immigration officers extorting those with retirement extensions because they know that they have money in the bank or are you just having a Thai-bash?

Where's the video?

He is the manager of the property, presumably employed by the owners, how is charging an entry fee illegal?

Punishing the masses? What? They've closed KSR for a few days, that's all, a tiny minority of people are affected very temporarily!

Absolutely right.

...and her grandfather!

You expect the authorities to ignore the fact that the most recent documentation that shows her to be infected with Covid?

She has tested positive for Covid, why would she even consider going to see her very old, frail and not in good health. grandfather until she is cleared?! Does she (or you) know nothing about Covid risks to the elderly and infirm?

I agree under the majority of circumstances BUT if a trial date is set, he has the right to attend. If he choses not to attend then the trial should (?) be able to go ahead. Similary earlier in this case his lawyers had to petition the court for a delay of trial based him not being able to attend due to a) illness and b) travel (thats my recollection anyway I have not checked that). They should try him in absentia in my view and then let his legal team fight it out and let the press report on it, so the poeple can see "justice" at work (whether his rights be impeded or not). Of course it says with reason that I know nothing about the law. I know even less about Thai law but as everything else seems to be allowed by the judiciary and the government here (do we still have an emergency decree?), why not this? I presume the judiciary and government may not want him to stand trial for their own reasons whatever they may be. "...if a trial date is set, he has the right to attend. If he choses not to attend then the trial should (?) be able to go ahead". A trial date has not been set and will not be set until he can attend. As he is considered innocent until convicted, like it or not, it is his rights that have to be upheld and his right is to be there at his trial, it is not the court's right to hold the trial without the defendant that has to be upheld because there is no such right enjoyed by the courts. "...earlier in this case his lawyers had to petition the court for a delay of trial..." That is incorrect, a trial date has never been set, what you're referring to were requests from his lawyer to delay meeting with the police for him to be questioned, requests that the police agreed to. "They should try him in absentia in my view ... so the poeple can see "justice" at work" There is no option in Thai law for that to happen so the feelings of observers are irrelevant. Trying anyone (except corrupt politicians) in absentia in this country is a direct contravention of the process of justice in criminal cases so what the people would see would be a contravention of an innocent (until proven guilty, remember) defendant's rights.

In what way would such a trial be illegal. The defendant has the right to be present at the trial. If he chooses not to attend that is his choice. The trial would still be 'valid'. No, it would not be valid, if it was it would have happened already. Trials in absentia do not happen here except for trials involving politicians charged with corruption who have done a runner. To hold a criminal trial without the defendant being present goes against a defendant's basic right to be there for the trial and would present huge problems in terms of justice being done and any verdict. It is not a matter of the trial going ahead without him if he chooses not to attend, that does not happen.

Bang off an irate letter to "INN", then, give them a piece of your mind even though the first reference to nationality in the headline is "Thais", not foreigners, there's no suggestion of xenophobia there!

So you can see all those people sitting down at the back of that room obscured by those standing in front of them all with their faces hidden by masks? What vision you have.

Sound like a good way forward. Do the trial without him and then let him come back (aye I know will not happen) and appeal. What would be the point of holding an illegal trial resulting in a conviction that could not be upheld? He wouldn't need to appeal!

Thaivisa didn't write the article or the headline!

Thaivisa re-publishes aggregated news from other sources and cannot alter those articles and the original report in Thai, essentially, says the same thing in its title. Zenophobia doesn't come into it as far as Thaivisa is concerned.

That was introduced about four yeas ago and usually only applies to politicians charged with corruption who have fled the country. Defendants in criminal cases in Thailand have the right to be present at their trial and a trial and conviction in their absence could be overturned later.

This. Experienced this from SCB in 2010 at a local branch in South Pattaya. Me: I would like to open an account here. SCB: No sorry sir, we don't open accounts to foreigners at this time. Me: So you're saying I can't open an account and xfer 16 Million baht here? SCB (her eyes wide opened, she blinked): Sorry? How much you said, sir? Me (repeating very slowly on purpose): Sixteen million baht. SCB: One moment sir. She rushed to the back spoke with the branch manager on duty on time for a minute or two, every 15 seconds or so they kept glancing in my direction presumably to make sure I didn't leave their premises. 30 minutes later my account was opened at that SCB branch. 4 days later the money was wired into that account. So nothing to do with the money, then. The account was opened for you without any transfer, never mind "B16m".

Me personally? No. https://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/crimecourtscalamity/2020/12/24/expat-says-bank-denied-him-entry-due-to-covid-19/ Why didn't you highlight this rather relevant part of the old link that you appear to have posted just to have a dig at Krungsri?... "The Bank of Ayudhya’s call center said that the company does not have any policy to bar foreigners from using its services. “We don’t have any policy that discriminates against customers. It could have been a misunderstanding since he does not speak Thai,” the operator said, adding that the headquarters will look into the matter. Zimenkov said he has not left Thailand since Dec. 2019. Since he does not speak Thai, the expat said it was possible that a miscommunication had transpired".

Yes, when opening a bank account, why would the bank want to know where you live? He didn't say that a bank wouldn't want to know where the applicant lives, there are other ways to show that information that do not require a residence certificate from immigration.

No, not necessarily, depends on the bank and the branch. I have accounts with five banks and have never needed an immigration residence certificate to open any of them, BBL, Kasikorn, KTB, Krungsri or UOB.

Sounds suspiciously like the UK test could have been wrong, but, of course, that's never a possibility on this forum when Thailand is involved, eh?

because its a street and area renowned for filipino hookers and it happened at 20am. not saying she is a hooker, but chances are likely. What? You said that it was "odd" that she was there at that time but if the street is so renowned for that activity and she is a Filipina what makes it "odd"?! And, what if she is a prostitute, how does that affect the fact that she was a victim of a robbery?

55555! You can't seriously think that banks don't make high risk investments?!