CRUNCHER

I see a lot of protests directed to the Thai goverment about this subject, but this seems to be the policy of the consulate in Penang, not of the Thai government.

You are right Mario. There are too many people who see anti farang conspiracies everywhere directed from on high. It was the same with King Power.

A friend sent me this:

I've had my own headache with Thailand: My flight on day 30 was scheduled to leave at 11:40PM. The quota-hungry petty bureaucrats said, "You'll still be in our airspace after 12AM! You have to pay the fine for overstaying!" They held me for more than half an hour, and I barely made it to the gate to get on the flight.

I told them at the gate (politely, to avoid further trouble) that I wouldn't be going back to their country ever again for that reason. If the pricks had not been scrounging for every foreign dollar they could extort for government coffers, I might have gone back several times. The Thais were, on average, the nicest people I've met in any country I've been to.

Sorry. Don't believe it. For a start there is no charge for the first day.

There are two wrongs here and neither is an excuse for the other.

First these two are thieves who deserve to be punished. This is no excuse, however, for the subsequent corruption involving definately Tony, almost certainly one or more police officer and possibly staff of King Power and maybe other airport staff.

This corruption, however, is no excuse to offer sympathy to a pair of thieves.

I would also add that corruption is a two way street involving not only a receiver, but a giver. Both are guilty.

I'm confused. So this is a case of someone who got caught stealing and then got con and extorted ?

Perhaps an over simplification, but, in my opinion, a good summary.

I believe they did steal the wallet. When they were taken to the police station somehow, I am not sure how, the Sri Lankan got involved. Maybe he was, amongst other things he acting as a bail bondsman. Whatever, the couple paid him about 8,000 pounds to sort the case out. Presumably some of it went towards the bail. Who and how much he paid off is not known. Indeed as far as I can see there is no evidence that he paid anyone, but it is not an ilogical assumption.

So yes, they got caught stealing, got conned (by the Sri Lankan) and, by extention, extorted (by the police).

Nevermind. So are theycoming back to get money back, file charges?

Think before you post, aswin

He is a UK Government consultant , she is ex UN

Things will be done quietly. No face lost

A little bit of the pot calling the kettle black here. How do you know there will be no fuss or loss of face?

Getting your picture plastered all over Times Online is hardly a no fuss start.

Personally I would like to see them have a go if they still claim they are innocent. But since they preferred to pay 8,000 pounds to the Sri Lankan conman rather than 50,000 baht for a lawyer I am not holding my breath.

This couple are a disgrace...i honestly believed their story when i first read it.

The nerve of some people, even getting their photo taken for the newspaper when they knew they were guilty as sin...

Aahhhh...another Farang Judge who found the 100% truth before a Thai court did.

Thailand isn't short for Farang Judges, that's for sure. This country would fall to pieces if Farang Judges would take care of justice....

LaoPo

Like you Dave I believed their story when I first read it, although I did feel there might be more to the story as per my first post in this thread. As more came out I changed my mind. If still further information comes to light I could well change it back. I hope I am not unreasonably stubborn.

This couple are not being tried before a criminal court and never will be. They are being tried before the court of public opinion. In a criminal court the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt (and long may it remain so); in the court of public opinion it is on the balance of probabilities, a lower standard. Unfair some will say. Perhaps, but that's life; that's reality.

On the other hand a judge in a criminal court has advantages over us. Possibly better CCTV pictures, cross examination of witnesses, the chance to question witnesses himself etc. etc.. He is, therefore, better able to discharge his duty of being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt before convicting or aquitting if he is not.

The consequences of being convicted before a criminal court are much more serious than before the court of public opinion and hence the need for the higher standard of proof. Prison, criminal receord, deportation etc. etc.

In the Ingrams' case there could well be further serious consequences. As he works for the UK Government he could well lose his job or at least have promotion prospects dented. Much the same for his partner. She would never get another job with UN again.Even the risk of such a situaion is an incentive to pay out £8,000.

As to why he should make a fuss when he got home, I can only speculate, but it is not impossible his bosses found out. If he was in a sensitive post he might well have to report incidents overseas. You can bet your socks that the Embassy has to report incidents involving Brits in Thailand to the Foreign Office. Since they are part of the UK Government they might well tell his department. I note it took 2 months for this to become public. Just my speculation I admit, but did he suddenly find himself having to explain to his bosses?

In Pattaya Sukhumvit, when you come in from Laem Chabang. Well before Pattaya Nua. You can't fail it.

Thanks Moo9. I didn't go far enough north. Lesson learnt.

NO, instead, they sadistically grill an innocent businessman, bringing lots of money to the country

Sorry i didn't realise they were sadistic from your words I thought they just looked stern and asked questions.

BTW how would they know you were innocent without the very questions you castigate them for?

.....and should lots of money have made a difference had you for instance slipped into the country, perhaps on the run for a serious offence? Oh and how would they know anything about your money......without asking questions?

Get my drift?

ps: sorry you found some comment of mine ugly and nasty do point out where and I'll amend it.

Maybe you should read my original post again and a little better this time. I never blamed the airport police officers.

I expressed my fear that I was taken away and was scared to death that someone put drugs in my suitcase, especially because they didn't say WHY they took me.

It wouldn't have been the first time somebody was framed and how does anybody explain his/her innocence if they find drugs in your suitcase ?

THAT is why I was scared.

You turn it into an excuse for the officials; I never blamed them.

Read better!

LaoPo

Errr... You accused them of giving you a "sadistic" grilling. Is that not blaming them? Hardly friendly comments. ...and you have to go back 25 years to dredge this up???

Could someone please tell me exactly where on Sukhumvit that the Nissan Service Centre is locatedd? Couldn't find it the other day, but driving in heavy trafic didn't help.

Thanks

It's apparent that some posters do not understand law nor understand that evidence in a court of law is used by the prosecution to prove their case.

It should not be in a proper functioning legal system, although often is the case in Thailand, up to the accused to prove their innocence. It is up to the prosecution to build a case, and prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that the accused is guilty.

That's how it works. They have not been able to do so in this case to my knowledge.

That the couple were not apprehended while leaving the store with the item, that the cctv footage is inconclusive, that the couple were apprehended in the food court in different clothing, that the couple were not found in possession of the item, and many other factors, ensure the prosecution may not have had sufficient evidence to get a prosecution.

Very plausible scenario, hence the subsequent extortion and lack of due process.

Quite simple and any decent lawyer would have p*ssed this case if the prosecutors were even foolish enough to take it to court.

None of us knows how a court would interpret the evidence because none of us is looking at what a court would see. A lot would depend on how the prosecution presents it's case and how it attacked by the defence. None of us can assess the demenour of the witnesses and form an impression of their truthfulness. We don't even have all the facts that might be presented to a court.

For example it appears they were interviewed by police, but we do not know whether or not they were shown the CCTV footage. If so did they admit or deny it was them? If they did admit it was them the CCTV footage would be strong evidence.

The rest is circumstantial.

Sitting at different tables - not usual behaviour

Change of clothing - the exact details of this need further explanation. Did, for example, they have the clothing shown on the CCTV footage in their possession.

Ingram leaving the restaurant instead of going to see what the police wanted with his wife - very odd behaviour.

The stolen property being found along his line of flight.

We simply do not have all the details of the circumstantial eveidence. How this comes out in court could have would have a bearing on the outcome. A conviction is quite possible and so is an aquittal. There would certainly appear to be a prima facie case.

Most of us, myself included, draw our conclusions on less evidence than a court would have, which is just as well as we don't have to decide whether they are guilty or not. At this point in time I am satisfied they did it, but if I got more information I would be quite prepared to change my view. Even if aqitted by a court this does not mean they did no do it. It means the prosecution could not prove it's case.

I give my views based on whether they did or did not do it not whether they are legally guilty or not. Since this is not going to court that will never be known.

Does anyone have any idea why they supposedly threw the wallet in the bin?

Because if they had the idea of retrieving it later, they would not be able to as the cleaners are forever emptying the bins at the airport to make sure some idiot doesn't place a bomb in one like was done years ago by the Pattani crowd.

Having seen his wife approached by police, one possibility for disposing of the wallet in this way is that he wanted to avoid being caught with it in his possession. I.e. getting rid of the evidence. Just my thought.

Whew, i was just in that store last week.

Never again!

Thanks for the warning everyone.

just wondering or am i a little confused - what in hells name are any of the Embassies or more importantly TAT doing about this - seeing that TAT in fact control the tourist police -- have u ever noticed that the tourist police are driving better cars - have smart new looking uniforms - all paid out of the TAT budget - so if this sort of things is inpacting on the tourist sector - which has been suffering numerous down turns and bad publicity why the hel_l is TAT allowing this sort of thing or are they just turning a blind eye -- and how the hel_l can this Sri Lankan embassy gangster be allowed to roam the airports and also work as a so called volunteer translater for the police -- or is this just another amazing case of amazing thailand - i had to laugh earlier when some TV poster was extolling the virtues of this country - was this the sort of thing that he condones - oh well keep the thai smiles going and ummmm TIT --

Apparently the British embassy offered to help and the couple turned them down.

In light of the footage showing the couple clearly stealing, its fairly obvious why they didn't want the embassy to help settle the matter legally.

Obviously what they wanted was new passports and plane tickets out of Thailand.

As one old Thailand hand told me years ago, there is good and bad in Thailand. The bad is that if you get into trouble you have to pay. The good is that you can pay. Unacceptable, but fact never-the-less.

The footage isnt exactly like watching a Plasma screen so im probably wrong, but didnt she take the wallet round to the opposite side of the stand and leave it there.

Agreed the picture is not very good, but if you watch many times you can make a few deductions. At first the woman seems to put back all the wallets she picked up. The man seems to twice pick up a wallet with his right hand and transfer it his left hand. He then tansfers them back to his right. When the woman walks round to the other side of the counter she is clearly holding one or more wallets. Here I have to make a deduction. Having originally put back all the wallets she picked up, the only logical explanation for her having the wallets in her left hand is that the man passed them to her. In fact she has two wallets in her hand. She puts one down, turns away and puts the other one in her bag.

Note also that both of them are carrying something else in their left hands. Presumably to hide what they are up to.

In Singapore, if you are caught, you are caught. You cannot buy your way out, like these Brits, no matter how much you pay.

In another discussion, I am disapointed to hear that most of the Thai people think that corruption is OK in Thailand. IMHO this is the root of the problem.

You are absolutely right. To stop this sort of thing, in fact to stop corruption in general, will require a major cultural shift in Thailand. (In fact to one degree or another that applies to most of S.E. Asia.)

If faked it is pure propaganda meant to deflect from our ongoing list of KP compaints

leaning towards them losing business, and our disbelief at their total innocence in this matter.

Sorry folks,

I looked again and I don't see anything conclusive that a theft occurred,

and LESS that this same British couple are in the video.

And even less again that 8,000 lbs sterling is warrented for ANYTHING.

Why in hel_l would these two Brits go public like this, if they were REALLY THIEVES?

No reasons at all. Grifters would know it was time to move on quietly.

Maybe K.P. should hire the Killer Ladyboys from Carradine's mystery for their next film.

Anyone who thinks that this video is faked is deluding themselves. She looks younger than the photograph on page 1 post #1 because the camera angle hides her double chin. Notice how the whole incident is so quick, she is in and out in just seconds, he, however stays in the shop and appears to distract the staff at the end of the video.

It seems a lot of people here haven't clicked on the KP letter and read the .pdf file. The security followed him to a toilet where he got rid of the wallet in a toilet bin.

The couple contacted the press in the U.K. because they paid 8,000 GBP in bribes and felt cheated. That is a different matter.

The Thai Police probably couldn't prosecute, and have a case because;

1. The Video footage is not conclusive.

2. The wallet was not discovered 'on' their persons (it was disgarded).

However they could have fingerprinted the wallet (too much effort).

I am not saying that scams do not happen in KP duty free especially the 'free gift' placed in the plastic bag trick. But this case seems conclusive. The couple were thieves and ended up paying the price. 8,000 GBP for a 121 GBP wallet.

Just deserts IMHO.

This video is wortless in court. It shows nothing.

A thief is someone who has the stuff still in his position, not somewhere in the toilet!

Pardon!

Could have put on jackets because air conditioning was up full.

Also if the security guards are in on it every thing they say is suspect.

And it is easy enough to watch two people at ADJACENT tables.

I have taken up two different tables because of carry on baggage.

One gets up to pee, they accost the other

and then someone plants the wallet in the bin to nail the other.

Wait don't all farangs look alike? Mistaken identity

but gotta go through with it rather than lose face backing down...

Reading King Power's letter there is nothing about ADJACENTtables just different tables. There is nothing to say that they had a lot of baggage and this does not show up in the CCTV footage. I agree that changing outer clothing is not that clear, but if it was jackets they are not carrying them in the CCTV footage.

They were kept under observation whilst awaiting police and "as" security guards and police approached the woman the man walked off. If it was you wouldn't you want to see what was happening to your wife? Of course they went to the woman first because she was the one seen putting the wallet into her bag.

If they are all in on it why plant the wallet in the bin, why not just plant on either one of the couple or say you saw the man throw it in the bin? Makes a much stroger case if you are setting someone up.

The KP letter is quite detailed and on what basis can we say it is not true? The silence from the couple, the Times and other media is deafening.

In one breath, we like say how bloody hopeless the Thai (English) press is.

But in the next breath, we are happy to take what they, plus assorted bloggers and other forums say as gospel, and mount whatever case happens to suit us at the time, based on that "evidence".

Thank god rational people, and those in positions of responsibility, do otherwise.

But then if the good correspondents of TV went in that direction, the input would likely fall by 50% or more.

Maybe not such a bad thing when you think about it

I don't know who you are referring to when you mention rational people, and those in positions of responsibility.

But I do think that you will agree that there is only 2 possible scenarios here.

1. The couple did not steal the wallet, but were extorted of 8000 Pounds to secure their freedom.

2. The couple did steal the wallet and paid 8000 pounds for the prosecutor to decide that there was insufficient evidence to proceed with the case.

I cannot see that it can be anything but a case of extortion or corruption whether they are guilty or not.

You may well be right.

However, if you cast your mind back, this thread started its life as a quite nasty diatribe against King Power.

And no-one has yet mounted a reasonable case against them.

I, for one, have not directed any accusations at the company King Power, but I do see what you mean. The sum of money involved here is chump change to the owner of King Power, really not worth his while.

I do not believe that King Power is involved in this scam, but maybe some employees are. We don't have enough information to form an opinion. The statement from King Power can only originate from what its employees have stated and maybe the security personnel employed by King Power lied.

I do believe that a wallet was stolen, the video is not clear, but I would say that a theft took place. The quality of the video that we have seen is not good - it could be any couple out of so many that I have seen at the airport.

It just seems to me very convenient that the wallet was found in a bin outside a toilet visited by Ingram while being followed by security. If they believed that the two were working together, why didn't they detain both at the restaurant? Why would they allow him to walk off a dispose of the evidence? Note that they did not state that they witnessed him throw anything in the bin even though they were following him.

I believe they were sitting at different tables, which seems odd behaviour, and when they approached the woman the man walked out. You would have thought that if they were inocent and the security guards approached his wife he would have gone over to see what the problem. Walking away like that suggets guilt. If they were being set up you would have expected the security guards to have "seen" him throw it away.

The fact that they were wearing different clothing is also suspicious. This issue also raises the question of correct identity. From reading the various reports it appears that the couple do not deny that it is them in the CCTV footage, but that the footage does not show them stealing. I might be wrong on this. If I am right identity is not an issue and the only issue is did they steal the wallet. Based on the CCTV footage and their subsequent conduct the did steal it.

This one includes some comment from police, but they do not say a lot.

http://www.ttrweekly.com/beta/2009/07/shop...2%80%99s-image/

The picture on my computer is not that good. It looks to me that when they are both on the right side of display shelves the man picks up a wallet with his right hand and transfers it to his left hand. He then puts it back in his right hand and just before the woman moves to left side of the shelves he slips it in her left hand. by this time the woman seems to have put back al the wallets she picked up, but as she comes round to the left side she clearly has a wallet in her left hand. She then seems to put a wallet into her shoulder bag and walk out.

Perhaps someone who gets a better picture on their computer can say if I am right or wrong.

Notice also how the man waits for the woman to arrive before picking up any wallets. They then both pick up and put down several wallets without really looking at them, presumably to mislead any staff who are watching. As a layman I would say they are guilty, that it was well planned and that they had probably done it before. There seems plenty of practice in their actions.

I will say on the CCTV footage alone a good lawyer might raise some doubt at a trial. If the King Power story about them changing clothes, sitting at different seat and the mans going to the toilet where the wallet was found provides a good deal of circumstantial eveidence. In a set up someone would have"seen" him dropping the wallet into the rubbish bin.

As to it being the same couple, again my computer is not helpful. But seeing them together I do not have much doubt it is them. Again at a trial a good lawyer might raise doubts.

As an aside, I hope the newspapers that published one side of the story will nopw print the other side.

I have some experience in dealing with CCTV footage for this sort of thing. Problem is my current computer is not top of the range and add to that loss of quality for internet postings and a lack of a facility to isolate and enhance individual frames means I have to draw inferences that I cannot clearly see. It is necessary to review something like this dozens of times, which I have not done. Each time you pick up something new and then review it several times to see what it means. I have viewed it a few more times since my above post to try and analise small points. The following are of some note:-

1. When they enter the shop they act as if they do not know each other, but a review of the whole suggests they are coneted.

2. They are both holding something in their left hands which obscures what they doing.

3.Ingram in fact puts his right hand to his left hand twice, possibly palming two wallets.

4.When the woman moves from the right to the left she appears to be holding a wallet, but in fact it is two. She puts one down on the shelf and is still holding one.

5. Ingram, at the end of the footage, appears to be attempting to distract staff.

The more times I look at this, and I still need to see it more, the more I am convinced that these two are an experienced pair of shoplifters. they even had their escape plan - it just didn't work.

The picture on my computer is not that good. It looks to me that when they are both on the right side of display shelves the man picks up a wallet with his right hand and transfers it to his left hand. He then puts it back in his right hand and just before the woman moves to left side of the shelves he slips it in her left hand. by this time the woman seems to have put back al the wallets she picked up, but as she comes round to the left side she clearly has a wallet in her left hand. She then seems to put a wallet into her shoulder bag and walk out.

Perhaps someone who gets a better picture on their computer can say if I am right or wrong.

Notice also how the man waits for the woman to arrive before picking up any wallets. They then both pick up and put down several wallets without really looking at them, presumably to mislead any staff who are watching. As a layman I would say they are guilty, that it was well planned and that they had probably done it before. There seems plenty of practice in their actions.

I will say on the CCTV footage alone a good lawyer might raise some doubt at a trial. If the King Power story about them changing clothes, sitting at different seat and the mans going to the toilet where the wallet was found provides a good deal of circumstantial eveidence. In a set up someone would have"seen" him dropping the wallet into the rubbish bin.

As to it being the same couple, again my computer is not helpful. But seeing them together I do not have much doubt it is them. Again at a trial a good lawyer might raise doubts.

As an aside, I hope the newspapers that published one side of the story will nopw print the other side.

I agree that there is not one shred of evidence that King Power as a company are involved in these scams, but it is obvious that their staff are. By now they must have knowledge of this involvement. One would expect that a company that depends on tourists for their profit would be a bit more proactive in addressing this problem. Their laid back attitude, i.e. what happens after the victims are handed over is beyond their control, is, to say the least, a little disappointing.

Kitsch22 They were not released as you said, they were brought to a hotel until their money came in. Were you under the impression they were doing all this willingly?

They were bailed, according to the Sunday Times. They were detained on the night of Saturday 25 April and held in police custody until the morning of Sunday 26 April when they met the fixer from Sri Lanka who arranged bail in the sum of 100,000 Baht. Thereupon they were allowed to leave and were accommodated in an hotel. Although the police retained possession of their passports it is unclear whether or not residence at the hotel was a condition of their bail. What is clear is that they were sufficiently free to be able to walk out of the hotel on Monday 27 April and travel to the British Embassy and then (apparently) return voluntarily to the hotel after that. They flew back to UK on 1 May.

No "kidnapping" there; just extortion.

Kidnapping might be a strong word, but if they were completely free to come and go why did the need to "sneak" out of the hotel. There arre a lot of things in this story that are not clear and a lot that needs greater explanation.

The Foreign Office said consular officials had offered to raise the case with the Thai authorities at the time but had been asked by the couple not to intervene.

This happened at the "Foreign Office" in England, once the couple has found their way home. They obviously realized that this was more "Jack Schitt" because it would amount to nothing / solve nothing and in all likelihood nothing more than blowing smoke up their <deleted>.

Thats not the way I read it. Says "consular officials" offerred help "at the time".

This story starts when they were about to board the plane. There is a lot missing.

Did they go into KP?

Did they go into the section that had the alleged stolen property?

Did they pick it up to look at?

Did they in fact buy it?

Did they buy anything else?

Was the wallet in their possession when they were detained?

Who made the complaint to the security guards/police?

What was the eveidence? etc etc.

Why were this couple vicimized?

After the arrest the story is odd to say the least. The "sneaked" out of the hotel on 27th, went to the embassy, but did not want the Thai authorities contactd. Why? again Why?

They were not released for 3 (?) further days. What happened during this time? Where were they? Did they "sneak" back into the hotel?

I understand that usually embassies cannot do much for people arrested for crime and kept in police station/prison except get a local lawyer. However, when people are illegally detained in a hotel, have their passports confiscated and are blackmailed for huge sums of money there are thing the embassy can do.

I am not saying that this couple have not been set up and treated badly, but I think there is a lot more to this story than has come out so far.

Sorry Sailfish, something in another thread reminded me I should have updated this thread. Actually I do no know much.

The development is cancelled. A number of buyers have been to court and have got orders saying that the land must be sold and buyers (of Grand Peaks)are to have their down payments refunded with interest. Apparently Saha are working on this. I do not have a time table, but I think repayments should be made by this summer.

Do not know current progress.