Two American tourists fined 5000 Baht for 'butt selfie' at Thai temple

[lamyai3]

8 hours ago, Jingthing said:

But the oddest example of coverage I found was in the Bangkok Post where rather just reporting the objective hard real news fact that they are a married couple, they were described as "buddies." Imagine if they were so shy about describing the relationship of an opposite sex couple. You can't imagine it. It would never happen.

The Sunday edition was much more direct, calling them Travis and Butthead and describing their actions as ass-inine. 

[isaanbanhou]

  There appears to be little new information on two California  men arrested 5 days ago for indecent exposure. 

 

Indecent exposure in California (Penal Code 314 PC) is punishable by incarceration up to six months or a $1000 fine. 

 

But perhaps worst of all...a Penal Code 314 PC conviction subjects you to a minimum ten (10) year duty to register as a register as a Tier one California sex offender. (California Senate Bill 384 recently created a three-tier sex registration system that reduced the registration requirement for indecent exposure to ten (10) years. It used to be for life.) www.shouselaw.com/indecent-exposure.html

 

 

Edited December 3, 2017 by isaanbanhou

[sanemax]

2 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

There appears to be little new information on two California  men arrested 5 days ago for indecent exposure.  Indecent exposure in California is punishable by incarceration up to six months or a $1000 fine. 

 But perhaps worst of all...a Penal Code 314 PC conviction subjects you to a minimum ten (10) year duty to register as a register as a Tier one California sex offender. (California Senate Bill 384 recently created a three-tier sex registration system that reduced the registration requirement for indecent exposure to ten (10) years. It used to be for life.)

 

Although they are in Thailand and are thus subjected to Thai laws , people from California who go to Thailand are not subjected to Californian laws

[isaanbanhou]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Although they are in Thailand and are thus subjected to Thai laws , people from California who go to Thailand are not subjected to Californian laws

 Of course, I was merely showing that their boyish prank is dimly viewed and quite seriously punished where they live as well.  

[isaanbanhou]

A couple of interesting articles describing the conditions the two California men are likely experiencing or about to. I am very pleased that the Thai penal system does not appear to favour any race, color, religion or sexual preference in the treatment  of their prisoners. It would appear that prisoners all have equal rights.

 

coconuts.co/bangkok/features/life-behind-bars-ex-prisoners-describe-typical-day-thai-prison

 

http://www.roadjunky.com/1108/immigration-jail-in-bangkok-thailand

 

 

[chickenslegs]

54 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

  There appears to be little new information on two California  men arrested 5 days ago for indecent exposure. 

 

Indecent exposure in California (Penal Code 314 PC) is punishable by incarceration up to six months or a $1000 fine. 

 

But perhaps worst of all...a Penal Code 314 PC conviction subjects you to a minimum ten (10) year duty to register as a register as a Tier one California sex offender. (California Senate Bill 384 recently created a three-tier sex registration system that reduced the registration requirement for indecent exposure to ten (10) years. It used to be for life.) www.shouselaw.com/indecent-exposure.html

 

 

I believe that in California law (as in UK law) indecent exposure refers to genetalia. As far as I know  bottoms are not genitals.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

I believe that in California law (as in UK law) indecent exposure refers to genetalia. As far as I know  bottoms are not genitals.

Watch out.

You're inviting the homophobic argument we've seen before here -- that gay men's butts are different as they're "used" for sex. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, lamyai3 said:

The Sunday edition was much more direct, calling them Travis and Butthead and describing their actions as ass-inine. 

Sounds about right, but I wasn't talking about that.

If people are married, asinine or not, a factual news story doesn't describe the relationship as buddies.

[isaanbanhou]

The two men from California were charged with and admitted to  public indecency or as it is refered to in California  Indecent Exposure

 

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

[sanemax]

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Watch out.

You're inviting the homophobic argument we've seen before here -- that gay men's butts are different as they're "used" for sex. 

Do you disagree with that statement ?

Are gay mens bottoms used for sex and are straight mens bottoms used for sex ?

Do they have the same usage or a different usage ?

 

[BuddyDean]

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Watch out.

You're inviting the homophobic argument we've seen before here -- that gay men's butts are different as they're "used" for sex. 

Child Online Protection Act of 1998 has a different standard.  Community standards would dictate that their photos were not suitable for minors.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, BuddyDean said:

Child Online Protection Act of 1998 has a different standard.  Community standards would dictate that their photos were not suitable for minors.

I have no idea what you're talking about now. The couple have been posting their NON-SEXUAL travel butt shots for a long time on instagram. They had no legal problem with that in the USA. You're tripping if you think such shots are porn. They are no such thing. I'm not saying it was great art either. But you're just playing games now, basically talking out of your ass with your post above.

[BuddyDean]

Nudity may be considered obscene if it is distributed to minors.  IOW, don't give your old copies of Playgirl to a minor and if you do it online; you are in a heap if trouble.

Edited December 3, 2017 by BuddyDean

[isaanbanhou]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I have no idea what you're talking about now. The couple have been posting their NON-SEXUAL travel butt shots for a long time on instagram. They had no legal problem with that in the USA. You're tripping if you think such shots are porn. They are no such thing. I'm not saying it was great art either. But you're just playing games now, basically talking out of your ass with your post above.

The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) requires that K–12 schools and libraries in the United States use Internet filters and implement other measures toprotect children from harmful online content as a condition for federal funding.  If I have no idea what some one is talking about my first reaction would be to try to get the knowledge I was missing.  Other's first inclination appears to be confrontation and insults.

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) requires that K–12 schools and libraries in the United States use Internet filters and implement other measures toprotect children from harmful online content as a condition for federal funding.  If I have no idea what some one is talking about my first reaction would be to try to get the knowledge I was missing.  Other's first inclination appears to be confrontation and insults.

So what? Not a legal issue for non-sexual butt photos. You're just making up OFF TOPIC problems that don't actually exist. Everyone gets that this married couple totally messed up big time in what they did in the context of THAI culture. But back home, there really wasn't any legal problem with what they were doing.  

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, BuddyDean said:

Nudity may be considered obscene if it is distributed to minors.  IOW, don't give your old copies of Playgirl to a minor and if you do it online; you are in a heap if trouble.

Isn't that special ... has NOTHING to do with this case and has NOTHING to do with what they were doing before in the U.S. either.

[lamyai3]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Sounds about right, but I wasn't talking about that.

If people are married, asinine or not, a factual news story doesn't describe the relationship as buddies.

Sunday's reportage:

Travis and Butthead

A San Diego, California, couple visited Wat Arun, but the question was: A couple of what? Gay Travis and Joseph Dasilva whipped down their drawers, took selfies from behind and posted the ass-inine photos on their Instagram account, traveling_butts. (Now deleted.) Police caught up to them at the airport before they could catch their flight to Cambodia and do it again. The duo thought they were in for a gay old time, laughing at police and smirking at the airport staff. Then they tried the old “I’m American, you can’t do this to us”, which was when everyone else except them got to laugh. First fine was 5,000 baht each for the Wat Arun incident, with more to come, and our American friends are definitely not laughing any more.

[isaanbanhou]

In fairness to the men from California I read that it is not against the law to walk around naked in public in San Francisco.

 

 "Public nudity has been in the news lately in San Francisco, as several men have been walking around the City, primarily in the Castro district, completely nude. You cannot watch the evening news without some sort of coverage of the event." https://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/09/09/weird-laws-nudity-legal-in-san-francisco

 

On the other hand the State of California affords legal defence to accused even if they are "undocumented" , an attorney in Thailand will have to be paid privately.  I would think that being jailed at the present time would hinder their ability to be well represented.

 

What is for certain is that the men are  getting a taste of what they can expect if they can not extricate themselves from the situation they are in.  I am sure the quality of food, the communal hygiene facilities and the sleeping arrangements will make this vacation in Thailand memorable. But then I wouldn' t want to spend time in an immigration detention center in California either.

 

[Jingthing]

36 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Sunday's reportage:

Travis and Butthead

A San Diego, California, couple visited Wat Arun, but the question was: A couple of what? Gay Travis and Joseph Dasilva whipped down their drawers, took selfies from behind and posted the ass-inine photos on their Instagram account, traveling_butts. (Now deleted.) Police caught up to them at the airport before they could catch their flight to Cambodia and do it again. The duo thought they were in for a gay old time, laughing at police and smirking at the airport staff. Then they tried the old “I’m American, you can’t do this to us”, which was when everyone else except them got to laugh. First fine was 5,000 baht each for the Wat Arun incident, with more to come, and our American friends are definitely not laughing any more.

Link please. That is required when you post writing when it is not your own. 

Dude, that isn't a hard news item. That's a humor/commentary piece. I was talking about a hard news item where a married couple was described as buddies and they never mentioned they were married. Apples and oranges. Again, the content of your unsourced item doesn't relate to what I was talking about. 

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[lamyai3]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Link please. That is required when you post writing when it is not your own. 

Dude, that isn't a hard news item. That's a humor/commentary piece. I was talking about a hard news item where a married couple was described as buddies and they never mentioned they were married. Apples and oranges. Again, the content of your unsourced item doesn't relate to what I was talking about. 

I mentioned the source previously so it will be evident why a link isn't possible 

[Jingthing]

20 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

In fairness to the men from California I read that it is not against the law to walk around naked in public in San Francisco.

 

 "Public nudity has been in the news lately in San Francisco, as several men have been walking around the City, primarily in the Castro district, completely nude. You cannot watch the evening news without some sort of coverage of the event." https://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/09/09/weird-laws-nudity-legal-in-san-francisco

 

On the other hand the State of California affords legal defence to accused even if they are "undocumented" , an attorney in Thailand will have to be paid privately.  I would think that being jailed at the present time would hinder their ability to be well represented.

 

What is for certain is that the men are  getting a taste of what they can expect if they can not extricate themselves from the situation they are in.  I am sure the quality of food, the communal hygiene facilities and the sleeping arrangements will make this vacation in Thailand memorable. But then I wouldn' t want to spend time in an immigration detention center in California either.

 

Indeed. The consequences already have been significant and it's likely only the beginning.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

I mentioned the source previously so it will be evident why a link isn't possible 

Not explicitly, you didn't.

Again, that wasn't a NEWS item which is what I was talking about. Duh.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[lamyai3]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Again, that wasn't a NEWS item which is what I was talking about. Duh.

It was in the news roundup provided in today's paper, the same paper you originally referenced.  

Edited December 3, 2017 by lamyai3

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

It was the news report provided in today's paper. 

That is not a news item. Maybe you're ignorant of the different types of articles in the press. Just because something is in a newpaper, doesn't mean it is a news item.

I was referring to hard news item where the relationship of the men was described only as buddies. Not only was gay not mentioned, but the relationship was defined as buddies. That was very odd. 

I realize this arrest isn't because they are gay but they are gay and they are MARRIED, so there is no "closet" needed in the hard news coverage of their situation. They're married (and seemingly at this time ... they're screwed).

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[lamyai3]

Just now, Jingthing said:

That is not a news item. Maybe you're ignorant of the different types of articles in the press. 

Same paper. You were commenting on how the paper characterised their relationship, I provided a newer commentary from the same paper. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Same paper. You were commenting on how the paper characterised their relationship, I provided a newer commentary from the same paper. 

I was talking about hard news. Your post wasn't that and wasn't pretending to be that. 

 

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[lamyai3]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I was talking about hard news. Your post wasn't that and wasn't pretending to be that. 

 

No, your original post mentioned "coverage", I responded by providing more recent coverage in the same paper.

 

Obviously it was going to be in the news roundup section when it's the Sunday paper, and given there have been no new developments in the story. I also posted it without comment, just to show the different reportage given within the same newspaper, so stop shooting the messenger. If you don't like the article take it up with them directly. 

[isaanbanhou]

12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Indeed. The consequences already have been significant and it's likely only the beginning.

 

One can only hope this is the end of the beginning of their personal crisis

 

•  Forum Home  Thailand Local Forums  Pattaya Forum   Pattaya Remand Prison

An excellent thread about visitation with the incarcerated in Thailand.   Perhaps one of the very senior posters would like to see if he could in some way make these men's stay in Thailand more comfortable.  

 

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

 

One can only hope this is the end of the beginning of their personal crisis

 

•  Forum Home  Thailand Local Forums  Pattaya Forum   Pattaya Remand Prison

An excellent thread about visitation with the incarcerated in Thailand.   Perhaps one of the very senior posters would like to see if he could in some way make these men's stay in Thailand more comfortable.  

 

Clever baiting attempt. 

I don't like or relate to these guys just because they are gay and/or American and I'm nowhere near where they are locked up, even if I was personally interested. But kudos to any good samaritans that do visit strangers in prisons anywhere in the world.

I just don't want anyone, including them, to experience a long time in prison for the type of mistake that they did make. 

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

16 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

No, your original post mentioned "coverage", I responded by providing more recent coverage in the same paper.

 

Obviously it was going to be in the news roundup section when it's the Sunday paper, and given there have been no new developments in the story. I also posted it without comment, just to show the different reportage given within the same newspaper, so stop shooting the messenger. If you don't like the article take it up with them directly. 

You misunderstood my point about that news item.

In the types of items you posted, anything goes.

In a hard news item that presents itself as accurate and FACTS based,  calling a married couple buddies without mentioning the marriage is basically a FAIL. 

Edited December 3, 2017 by Jingthing