Video: Thai cop has both legs broken as drunk motorcyclists ignore nighttime checkpoint

[JonnyF]

12 hours ago, JSixpack said:

 

 

Read the article. It was a legal checkpoint:

 

 

Next issue, could they have stopped?

 

 

Partly correct. They knew it was a checkpoint and could have slowed and stopped. They intended to run it no matter what. The cop wrongly assumed they would slow and stop as they could have. Bad assumption, all in all.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't care what the article says, maybe the author didn't fancy upsetting the local police? I'd rather reach a conclusion from what I see with my own eyes rather than what some "journalist" on a 2 bit website tells me to believe.

 

2 cops at the side of the road in the middle of the night waving a torch is not a legal checkpoint. It's a shakedown.

[wgdanson]

Why was there someone filming it at 2am, just in the right place and time?

[LennyW]

7 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Why was there someone filming it at 2am, just in the right place and time?

Many of the police now have go-pro cameras attached to their uniforms or helmets now....i think you will find this was the cop that was waving the torch at the time.

[Keesters]

20 hours ago, Moonmoon said:

In all honesty, I dont see no check point in this video. The Thai law n police regulation states clearly a check point must have clear visible signs and cones to be set up.

This check point is clearly illegal and the police is just covering their own asses by saying there is permission. 

If one is travelling down at night at moderate speed, it would be hard to see. The policeman was in the dark and waving a small light and the other jump into the bike's way. 

Even if the biker had no license and should be prosecuted for that, it was the policemen that cause the accident.

Total idiots.

Police don't need permission to set up a check point. They need instructions from senior officers.

[lucjoker]

13 hours ago, JSixpack said:

 

 

Read the article. It was a legal checkpoint:

 

 

Next issue, could they have stopped?

 

 

Partly correct. They knew it was a checkpoint and could have slowed and stopped. They intended to run it no matter what. The cop wrongly assumed they would slow and stop as they could have. Bad assumption, all in all.

 

 

 

 

 

to Sixpack: do you still believe everything they write ????

The camera turned into the two directions of the road and to each side .....did you see any road check cones? No, ...so it's an illegal check point ,done by two idiots,1 who stepped in front of a speeding vehikel and nr2 who did the same and tried to cut off the vehikel........they will not do this again (maybe) 

So DONT read the article But look at the viedo.....

[Spectrum2200]

Policeman should be glad it was not a truck

 

[Rimmer]

Some off topic and troll posts have been removed

[CatCage]

Checkpoint or no checkpoint, cones or no cones, it doesn't matter, the bike was going the wrong way and they ignored a lawful request to stop  by a policeman then struck him with sufficient force to break both his legs  

Edited November 10, 2017 by CatCage

[gk10002000]

3 hours ago, LennyW said:

There probably was traffic cones, lights etc. clearly visible......to those driving in the correct direction.

This action took place at the back of the checkpoint against somebody travelling the wrong way.....

no there were not.  The camera frequently pointed down both sides of the street.  Any cone or marker would have been way way down the way.

Edited November 10, 2017 by gk10002000
edit

[Chivas]

Utterly staggering that some seem to suggest it was the Police guys fault.

Bang the kids up extensively and make sure its on the front of newspapers to act as a future deterrant. 10 years should be long enough

[wavemanwww]

15 hours ago, wcoast said:

Maybe your using a different version of Google.
This is a topic of interest to me for years.
Even the WHO states an average of 24,000 per year.
Search Thailand road deaths per year, you'll see a recent glossy BBC article. Or search Wikipedia. 48,000 would put Thailand at #1, but it's #2 after Libya per capita.

Sent from my SM-A910F using Tapatalk
 

Ok I accept 24,000. but again with that high number plus the bereaved relatives friends etc. All these people would fill a football stadium and the oval would be literally filled with 24,000 coffins stacked on top of each other. Thanks

 

 

[johnarth]

looking at the video I would say the guys on the motorbike did not see the cop, they served to miss the cameraman.

[alien365]

14 hours ago, saminoz said:

Nonsense. The police do nothing to stop this stuff in daylight hours when it is a danger to other road users and pedestrians, but more noticeable to their chronic bribe taking.

At that time of the morning,the road was pretty much empty and the two idiots a danger mostly to themselves.

The policeman's actions were incredibly unprofessional, stupid, illegal and very dangerous - as he rightly found out.

I would find it very hard to believe that the supposed "check point" was nothing more than a tea money collection point.

Did the policeman try to stop someone riding dangerously breaking the law? Yes

 

How do you know that this policeman doesn't try and stop things like this during daylight hours? You can't

 

Yes there are a lot of bad cops out there, but I'm not going to lay in to one who was trying to stop someone driving on the wrong side of the road, down the middle of the highway in the dark.

 

I would hope that if someone is clearly breaking the law a checkpoint would not be needed to pull them over. If the rider was going in the correct direction, and was riding safely then I would object as there would be no reason to pull him over.

 

[JSixpack]

2 hours ago, lucjoker said:

to Sixpack: do you still believe everything they write ????

The camera turned into the two directions of the road and to each side .....did you see any road check cones? No, ...so it's an illegal check point 

1

 

No, a checkpoint doesn't need to have cones to be legal and you don't know of any rule that says that. You must be new around here except like a lot of noobs are eager to show you know all about police wrongdoings. Being less obvious is sometimes a good way to catch lawbreakers. These were caught.

Edited November 10, 2017 by JSixpack

[JSixpack]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I don't care what the article says, maybe the author didn't fancy upsetting the local police? I'd rather reach a conclusion from what I see with my own eyes rather than what some "journalist" on a 2 bit website tells me to believe.

 

2 cops at the side of the road in the middle of the night waving a torch is not a legal checkpoint. It's a shakedown.

1

 

7 minutes ago, JSixpack said:

 

No, a checkpoint doesn't need to have cones to be legal and you don't know of any rule that says that. You must be new around here except like a lot of noobs are eager to show you know all about police wrongdoings. Being less obvious is sometimes a good way to catch lawbreakers. These were caught.

 

 

[JonnyF]

27 minutes ago, JSixpack said:

No, a checkpoint doesn't need to have cones to be legal and you don't know of any rule that says that. You must be new around here except like a lot of noobs are eager to show you know all about police wrongdoings. Being less obvious is sometimes a good way to catch lawbreakers. These were caught. 

 

 

I didn't mention cones. New is a relative term, but I've been riding bikes and driving cars in Bangkok for around 11 years and have been stopped dozens of times. I can tell the difference between a legit stop where they want to issue legit tickets and one of these "couple of low ranking cops trying to make money stops" from about 100 yards away.

 

The legit stops generally have 5 or more officers including a high ranking official. There will often be a couple of police trucks there. Normally in daytime, but at nighttime they are well lit with flashing lights and the road is cordoned off to an extent. There are tables and chairs set up, often some kind of Gazebo for people to take tests and for tickets to be issued or fines paid. The difference between the 2 is stark.

 

These 2 clowns on scooters running into the dimly lit road and waving their torch was a shakedown. If you can't see that, I can't really help you.

 

 

Edited November 10, 2017 by JonnyF

[JSixpack]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

I can tell the difference between a legit stop where they want to issue legit tickets and one of these "couple of low ranking cops trying to make money stops" from about 100 yards away.

 

Oh--well, you know 'cause you know. Well, no point in discussing further. We have a lot such posters here.

 

Quote

The legit stops generally have 5 or more officers including a high ranking official. There will often be a couple of police trucks there. Normally in daytime, but at nighttime they are well lit with flashing lights and the road is cordoned off to an extent. There are tables and chairs set up, often some kind of Gazebo for people to take tests and for tickets to be issued or fines paid. The difference between the 2 is stark.

2

 

Nope, not necessarily, pal. In fact the venerable daily checkpoint in front of the Pattaya police station has no high ranking officials out front, no police trucks, no flashing lights, cordons, tables and chairs, Gazebos or anything else. Just one or at most two lowly ranked cops out there stopping whom they please. And there's no shakedown. I sometimes sit at a nearby bar and watch. No money requested; tickets are issued. You wouldn't know it's a checkpoint until a cop steps out in front you. Yes, of course the police station is right there, but my point is that simple-minded binary thinking doesn't help your case. Just one example.

 

Quote

These 2 clowns on scooters running into the dimly lit road and waving their torch was a shakedown. If you can't see that, I can't really help you.

 

 

Rather, I can't help you, sorry.

Edited November 10, 2017 by JSixpack

[balo]

The boys , if they survive, will just wai in public and then back on the roads again . No jail sentence until they kill someone. TIT. 

 

 

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, JSixpack said:

Oh--well, you know 'cause you know. Well, no point in discussing further. We have a lot such posters here.

 

 

Nope, not necessarily, pal. In fact the venerable daily checkpoint in front of the Pattaya police station has no high ranking officials out front, no police trucks, no flashing lights, cordons, tables and chairs, Gazebos or anything else. Just one or at most two lowly ranked cops out there stopping whom they please. And there's no shakedown. I sometimes sit at a nearby bar and watch. No money requested; tickets are issued. You wouldn't know it's a checkpoint until a cop steps out in front you. Yes, of course the police station is right there, but my point is that simple-minded binary thinking doesn't help your case. Just one example.

 

 

Rather, I can't help you, sorry.

Seeing as you clearly have no common sense, I'll help you. 

 

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/new-bangkok-police-chief-enforce-traffic-law-strictly-lifts-traffic-checkpoints/

 

In case that's too complicated for you to read. I'll quote this line to make it really easy for you.

 

However he stressed that there must be a senior police officer on duty at the checkpoint, and prior approval must be sought from the MPB deputy commissioner in charge of traffic before it is set up.

 

Or maybe you know better than Pol Lt-Gen Chanthep Sesawech as well? 

 

 

[Techno Viking]

11 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Seeing as you clearly have no common sense, I'll help you. 

 

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/new-bangkok-police-chief-enforce-traffic-law-strictly-lifts-traffic-checkpoints/

 

In case that's too complicated for you to read. I'll quote this line to make it really easy for you.

 

However he stressed that there must be a senior police officer on duty at the checkpoint, and prior approval must be sought from the MPB deputy commissioner in charge of traffic before it is set up.

 

Or maybe you know better than Pol Lt-Gen Chanthep Sesawech as well? 

 

 

That news article keeps mentioning Bangkok. This fiasco happened 150km away in Laem Chabang, Does a Bangkok Police Chief hold any salt out of his jurisdiction ?

[JSixpack]

56 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Seeing as you clearly have no common sense, I'll help you. 

 

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/new-bangkok-police-chief-enforce-traffic-law-strictly-lifts-traffic-checkpoints/

 

In case that's too complicated for you to read. I'll quote this line to make it really easy for you.

 

However he stressed that there must be a senior police officer on duty at the checkpoint, and prior approval must be sought from the MPB deputy commissioner in charge of traffic before it is set up.

 

Or maybe you know better than Pol Lt-Gen Chanthep Sesawech as well? 

 

 

 

 

Seems you never studied geography back in grammar school. If you're confused about that, then who knows what else? Actually it's you who know better than Pol Lt-Gen Chanthep Sesawech. Obviously he has no common sense.You should inform him that there must be police trucks, flashing lights, cordons, tables and chairs, and Gazebos. Another poster would add "cones." As your driving is only in Bangkok, I guess you just don't know about the way we do things around here in Chonburi--merely think you do. Sorry. Next lame point. 

 

 

[angy]

there is no checkpoint but the motorbike is running in the wrong way so don't need to make a check point to try to stop it but maybe better to don't stand in the middle of the road to do the job 

[saminoz]

6 hours ago, alien365 said:

Did the policeman try to stop someone riding dangerously breaking the law? Yes

 

How do you know that this policeman doesn't try and stop things like this during daylight hours? You can't

 

Yes there are a lot of bad cops out there, but I'm not going to lay in to one who was trying to stop someone driving on the wrong side of the road, down the middle of the highway in the dark.

 

I would hope that if someone is clearly breaking the law a checkpoint would not be needed to pull them over. If the rider was going in the correct direction, and was riding safely then I would object as there would be no reason to pull him over.

 

Not a very clever response.

The cop got hit as he was trying to bring the two guys down using a night-stick or truncheon.  Totally illegal and not called for.

It was not all in the dark, the road was lit (even if not the brightest sodium lamps I have ever seen) and the bike had its headlight on all the time.

Simple matter was that if he had not put himself in harm's way for a stupid prank by two (allegedly) drunk guys on a motorbike, probably none of the three of them would have been hurt (apart from the policeman's loss of face, that is)!

The two bikers were stupid, the policeman was unprofessional and almost Darwinian stupid.

 

[JSixpack]

2 hours ago, saminoz said:

The cop got hit as he was trying to bring the two guys down using a night-stick or truncheon.  Totally illegal and not called for.

 

 

Looks like the cop may have realized they were not going to obey the directive to stop. In that case, I'm not sure his intention to use force is illegal. Maybe you can quote the law on that.

 

Quote

a stupid prank by two (allegedly) drunk guys on a motorbike

 

 

No, it was a lot more than a prank. It was a conscious decision to disobey the law. 

 

Quote

The two bikers were stupid, the policeman was unprofessional and almost Darwinian stupid.

 

 

Partly an accident as the bike swerved unexpectedly, right? Hindsight is 20/20. Yeah, mistakes were made all around to the regret of all involved.

[alien365]

2 hours ago, saminoz said:

Not a very clever response.

The cop got hit as he was trying to bring the two guys down using a night-stick or truncheon.  Totally illegal and not called for.

It was not all in the dark, the road was lit (even if not the brightest sodium lamps I have ever seen) and the bike had its headlight on all the time.

Simple matter was that if he had not put himself in harm's way for a stupid prank by two (allegedly) drunk guys on a motorbike, probably none of the three of them would have been hurt (apart from the policeman's loss of face, that is)!

The two bikers were stupid, the policeman was unprofessional and almost Darwinian stupid.

 

I didn't know it was illegal for police to try and stop someone who is breaking the law. I might just drive on the wrong side of the road tomorrow then as long as there are no authorised police checkpoints

[dinsdale]

On 11/9/2017 at 6:17 PM, wcoast said:

 

On 11/9/2017 at 5:57 PM, wavemanwww said:

Nope 48,000 as per my last Google search, But lets say your right 28000. That's a  lot of sad family members and friends would you not agree? Fill a football stadium annually!!!!!!!

Maybe your using a different version of Google.
This is a topic of interest to me for years.
Even the WHO states an average of 24,000 per year.
Search Thailand road deaths per year, you'll see a recent glossy BBC article. Or search Wikipedia. 48,000 would put Thailand at #1, but it's #2 after Libya per capita.

 

The thing about this is that in Thailand to become a road death statistic you have to die within a 24 hour period. Have an accident on the road, die two, three, ten days later for example you will not be counted as a road death. The figures here are absolute nonsense with the death toll being way higher than the 'official' figures. 

[Dumbastheycome]

2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The thing about this is that in Thailand to become a road death statistic you have to die within a 24 hour period. Have an accident on the road, die two, three, ten days later for example you will not be counted as a road death. The figures here are absolute nonsense with the death toll being way higher than the 'official' figures. 

What  is  worse is  the number  of  people  who  do  not  die   but are  disabled, often horrifically,  but  survive   in  circumstances less  befitting  the  circumstances  now  provided  for  the  protection  of   dogs.¬

Yes,  they  are  eligible  for  a  Thai  disability   pension  but  that  is  often   applied  for  and  expended   by  the  "carer"  on  anything  but  the  eligible  individual.

The  saddest  aspect  of  the  application  in   compliance  with International   expectations re'  WHO  or  other is  that   Thailand   fails  to effectively target  the  massive  amount  of  finances that  provide  the   facade  of  compliance for  social  assistance despite   it  is  unique in  many ways   for  that  social   expenditure in SEA.

Yet  that  also   demonstrates  the   falsity  of    such  directives from  International   sources.

There  is   to  much   reliance  on  statistical  verification   rather  than   social   outcomes.

To  the  degree that  eligibility  is  often   corruptly attained while  those   that   should  be  eligible  are  often   overlooked  or  denied!

It   could  easily  be  shown  that road  safety  and  the  "policing " of  the  law  pertaining  to it is  a low  priority .

And  the  application  of any  laws that   relate  to  "accident" are   lucrative by   comparison  to  the  subsidized  "  illness"  situation.

Both  ends  of  the   accident  spectrum  of involvement  are  at  cost to  the  victims,  innocent  or  not.

While  the  social  health   arena  is  well   covered  by  subsidy  the  accident  spectrum   could  easily  be  shown  to   offset  the   financial impact as well as  providing  a  convenient   extortable   out   of   court  scenario for   certain  agencies often  applied  in  the  unjust  direction ! 

That   coupled  with  the   fatalistic  attitude   of  those  that  habitually defy  risk makes  for  a   very   dangerous   ongoing   situation   on the   roads  of  Thailand.

 

 

 

 

 

[01322521959]

The BIB here act with no training that I can see. From directing traffic to these so called checkpoints. I've seen police run out into the road to stop bikes sometimes causing the biker to crash. Don't they have any training on safely stopping a vehicle? Not surprised this happened. Mainly due to the incompetence of the powers that be. 

[Stargeezr]

Yes Where are the pylons and flashing lights that show there is a check stop. Even a police car

with flashing lights? Makes no sense. Those two riders on the bike appeared to be injured and

likely unconscious  for the period, the camera man video taped them. Drunk and going the wrong

way, is a great excuse for travelling so fast.

Geezer.

[lucjoker]

21 hours ago, JSixpack said:

 

No, a checkpoint doesn't need to have cones to be legal and you don't know of any rule that says that. You must be new around here except like a lot of noobs are eager to show you know all about police wrongdoings. Being less obvious is sometimes a good way to catch lawbreakers. These were caught.

yes ,i'm a newbie ,only 15 y here .

I dont want to show off and never did , i'm impressive enough as i am .

I saw them dead on the curbstone , nobody cared for them ,and you think they walked away by themselves ???/ Maybe you did not see the video ,or are you blind as well?

No you just want to have a discussion , .....and i just put you on my unwanted list .....