Italian expat faces recklessness causing death charge over fatal boat collision

[ttrd]

17 hours ago, Aussieroaming said:

I wonder who was actually at fault and whether either had their maritime licence. One thing guaranteed is that the Italian is guilty unless he was squeaky clean and can prove it.

 

 

If not they may use "the bigger boat shall give way for smaller ones principle" if the expat's boat is larger ...

 

Anyway, typical Thai way to come up With a spesific charge prior to the investigation is completed ...

 

Also strange that the expat has already covered the hospital bill and is in negotiation about a one time payment With the Family of the deceast - it therefore indicates a kind of admission - voluntary or otherwise ...

 

Anyway, a sad outcome ...

 

RIP

Edited May 10, 2019 by ttrd

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Sorry me again - ok lets break down your need to pin this on the thai guy. 

 

 

I never ever remotely said or suggested what you say above..

 

I simply said several times over now... if there's some actual evidence and facts that support the farang guy being guilty of a crime, those ought to be detailed/explained. Because they haven't been thus far.

 

How hard is that to understand?

[9653]

Rip the Thai fisherman.

Lots could done, if it could bring back the life of him

[sambum]

17 hours ago, madmen said:

What instruments will detect a wooden boat and send out a screaming alarm ? you cant be serious there is no such thing or the mega ships would be using them instead of running over small boats in shipping lanes

How often do you hear of mega ships running over small boats in shipping lanes? I've never heard of it, which implies that they have some instrument that forewarns them of craft in their vicinity - radar? 

[ttrd]

1 minute ago, Benroon said:

Doesn't anyone need to be 'squeaky clean' to be innocent ? Else they're not innocent.

 

Excuse the pun but you need to stop rowing backwards - anyone who can't see the blatently obvious culprit on here is certifiably nuts !

 

All the anti thais - next time you have a car accident in which you are entirely blameless, how many of you will be leaping out of the car to offer the guilty party cash ? 

When you most likely will end up as the guilty one no matter what - then you are trying to pay Your way out ...

 

This has nothing to do with anti Thais, but rather With the knowledge of how the system often works ...

[GAZZPA]

12 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

I don't see anything in the OP article in the way of facts or description that would give even the slightest clue of who was actually at fault in this boats collision. 

 

And yet, the surviving farang boat guy has been charged with recklessness causing death.  If his conduct really was reckless, how about some facts or evidence that actually supports that notion?

 

In the absence of that, it's just the all-to-commonplace "stick it to the farang" approach...because he/they have money to pay and this is our country, not theirs.

 

There won't be any concrete evidence, he is a foreigner in Thailand, thats enough. Where are the charges bought against the boat operators of all the accidents over the past few years? won't happen, be swept under the carpet and played down as it could "affect"  tourism. i would think all sensible foreigners know this to be true by now right? dont care if people call me a thai basher, its not the case. Those people are just pathetically turning a blind eye, ignoring very obvious facts to kid themselves their decision to invest here was the right one. Anyway, I hope "true" justice is served in this case but I fear the Italian is for the chop no matter, or the very least seriously out of pocket as he pays the family.

[sambum]

30 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Sorry me again - ok lets break down your need to pin this on the thai guy. 

 

So heavy motorized boat stationary at sea (if not you'd like to think the fishing boat couldn't have hit it) - the oared rowing boat poodling along collides with the heavy motorized boat at what shall we say 2mph ? 3 mph, lets say he had a power breakfast and was doing a lofty 6 mph - what injuries do you think could be inflicted at those walking paces that would kill a guy ?

 

Can't wait for this …...

A longtail isn't usually an "oared rowing boat" - they usually have an engine that propels (pardon the pun) them along at a few more knots (2 to 3 mph) than you suggest. And how do you know how big the boat was that he collided with? ("heavy motorised boat"?) 

 

And I'm not taking sides on this, because I (or you) don't know the full details, but the Thai man was 74 years old and maybe his reactions weren't as quick as a younger man's would have been. 

[Old Croc]

12 minutes ago, sambum said:

How often do you hear of mega ships running over small boats in shipping lanes? I've never heard of it, which implies that they have some instrument that forewarns them of craft in their vicinity - radar? 

Because you haven't heard of something it doesn't happen?

Might I suggest you check U-tube under ship collisions to give you a broader view of the subject.

More than once, while fishing far out at sea in the boat in my avatar, we found ourselves sitting in the path of a fast approaching ship. (they seem to loom up very quickly at sea). We always started up and moved a hundred meters or so out of their path as they never show any signs of veering around us. They cant turn on a dime even if they did see us. It's up to the small vessel to keep clear of shipping.

None of which relates to the small boat incident with the Italian. . 

[Old Croc]

7 minutes ago, sambum said:

A longtail isn't usually an "oared rowing boat" - they usually have an engine that propels (pardon the pun) them along at a few more knots (2 to 3 mph) than you suggest. And how do you know how big the boat was that he collided with? ("heavy motorised boat"?) 

 

And I'm not taking sides on this, because I (or you) don't know the full details, but the Thai man was 74 years old and maybe his reactions weren't as quick as a younger man's would have been. 

Unbelievable. Why don't you examine the published pictures of the vessels involved and stop babbling.

[stevenl]

48 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I never ever remotely said or suggested what you say above..

 

I simply said several times over now... if there's some actual evidence and facts that support the farang guy being guilty of a crime, those ought to be detailed/explained. Because they haven't been thus far.

 

How hard is that to understand?

Has been clearly explained why the foreigner is at fault.

Just look and read the account of the accident in the previous news article.

[LivinginKata]

51 minutes ago, sambum said:

How often do you hear of mega ships running over small boats in shipping lanes? I've never heard of it, which implies that they have some instrument that forewarns them of craft in their vicinity - radar? 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

18 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Has been clearly explained why the foreigner is at fault.

Just look and read the account of the accident in the previous news article.

 

The OP article in this thread explains nothing in terms of the details of the collision...

 

And in looking back at a prior article from the same news outlet, it's equally or even more lacking in any details.

 

https://www.thephuketnews.com/italian-expat-involved-in-phuket-boat-collision-that-leaves-local-fisherman-74-with-serious-injuries-71101.php

 

If there's some different one you're aware of, why don't you post a link to it.

 

[Farangwithaplan]

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The OP article in this thread explains nothing in terms of the details of the collision...

 

And in looking back at a prior article from the same news outlet, it's equally or even more lacking in any details.

 

https://www.thephuketnews.com/italian-expat-involved-in-phuket-boat-collision-that-leaves-local-fisherman-74-with-serious-injuries-71101.php

 

If there's some different one you're aware of, why don't you post a link to it.

 

Are these news articles written by Thais who speak English or native English speaking people? Because I feel a lot of argument on this forum is based on translation issues more than anything.

 

Small punctuation errors can change the whole understanding of passages of text. the old example of " Let’s eat, Grandma. vs. Let’s eat Grandma."

 

The scope for news stories either from Thai police media liaison to a native english speaking reporter, or Thai police media liaison who speaks a bit of English, or Thai police media liaison speaking to a Thai reporter who self translates, to be misinterpreted is vast. It might be useful to keep that in mind next time you hear weirdness in an English publish news report.

 

But to get the answers you need, why don't you approach the local police or the reporter and news outlet in question to get the answers you seek. You can then enlighten us all here. It will only take a phone call or two.

 

[Traubert]

8 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The OP article in this thread explains nothing in terms of the details of the collision...

 

And in looking back at a prior article from the same news outlet, it's equally or even more lacking in any details.

 

https://www.thephuketnews.com/italian-expat-involved-in-phuket-boat-collision-that-leaves-local-fisherman-74-with-serious-injuries-71101.php

 

If there's some different one you're aware of, why don't you post a link to it.

 

“I am still waiting for the forensic police to conclude their investigation. That may take about a month. "

 

Did this part escape you? Let me try and help.

 

THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED YET.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 minutes ago, Traubert said:

“I am still waiting for the forensic police to conclude their investigation. That may take about a month. "

 

Did this part escape you? Let me try and help.

 

THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED YET.

 

Except, I'm not one of the many here who seem to have already presumed the guy is guilty...

 

I'm one of the few asking... where's the proof, where's the evidence, where's the facts?

 

Unlike others here, I'd actually like to hear/know the results of the supposed investigation and its details, before presuming the guy guilty.

 

That's the job of the supposed news media here, if they were actually doing their job.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Traubert]

You're not entitled to any. It's sub-judice. The court will be the first to hear the evidence and facts.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 minutes ago, Traubert said:

You're not entitled to any. It's sub-judice. The court will be the first to hear the evidence and facts.

 

If the police are going to seek a legal criminal charge against the guy, as they are doing, they have to have some basis for doing so. They can't just wake up in the morning and say, OK, we're going to charge this guy, even though we have no proof or evidence as yet to support the charge....

 

And if they have some evidence or proof, normally, that's going to be explained in the news reports where the police publicly announce they're seeking a criminal case...long before the case ever makes it to court where perhaps even more details will be hashed out.

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Kieran00001]

8 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Except, I'm not one of the many here who seem to have already presumed the guy is guilty...

 

I'm one of the few asking... where's the proof, where's the evidence, where's the facts?

 

Unlike others here, I'd actually like to hear/know the results of the supposed investigation and its details, before presuming the guy guilty.

 

That's the job of the supposed news media here, if they were actually doing their job.

 

 

 

The investigation is on going, why would you expect the results already?

 

As for evidence, its very simple, he hit the boat on the starboard side, you really dont have to know much maritime law to know what that means and thus be able to presume his guilt.

Edited May 10, 2019 by Kieran00001

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Just now, Kieran00001 said:

As for evidence, its very simple, he hit the boat on the starboard side,

 

Where has that detail been reported?

 

[Enki]

19 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

I don't see anything in the OP article in the way of facts or description that would give even the slightest clue of who was actually at fault in this boats collision. 

 

And yet, the surviving farang boat guy has been charged with recklessness causing death.  If his conduct really was reckless, how about some facts or evidence that actually supports that notion?

 

In the absence of that, it's just the all-to-commonplace "stick it to the farang" approach...because he/they have money to pay and this is our country, not theirs.

 

You seem not to know much about law. Particular marine law. 

1) if in an accident someone is killed, obviously the other party is brought to court. It is the responsibility of the court to decide if the other party is guilty ... not the responsibility of the investigating police officer

2) the victim was a fisher boat ... likely he did what fisher boats do: fishing

 

As an exercise to you I leave it to you to find out who had "the right of way."

 

Ah, and before you run all mad at me: it is your _funky_ responsibility to make sure you not injure or harm anyone, regardless of right if way or other regulations. The culprit above failed on that. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, Enki said:

You seem not to know much about law. Particular marine law. 

1) if in an accident someone is killed, obviously the other party is brought to court. It is the responsibility of the court to decide if the other party is guilty ... not the responsibility of the investigating police officer

2) the victim was a fisher boat ... likely he did what fisher boats do: fishing

 

As an exercise to you I leave it to you to find out who had "the right of way."

 

Ah, and before you run all mad at me: it is your _funky_ responsibility to make sure you not injure or harm anyone, regardless of right if way or other regulations. The culprit above failed on that. 

 

What time of day or night did the collision occur? What was the visibility at the time?  If it was dark/night, did the two boats have lights?  Etc etc....

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Kieran00001]

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Where has that detail been reported?

 

 

In the old news report.

[Kieran00001]

12 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

What time of day or night did the collision occur? What was the visibility at the time?  If it was dark/night, did the two boats have lights?  Etc etc....

 

 

It happened in the morning, it was reported at 10:30 am, visibility was fine, no need for lights.

 

Before asking aymore rubbish questions, have you considered reading the articles?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

17 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

It happened in the morning, it was reported at 10:30 am, visibility was fine, no need for lights.

 

Before asking aymore rubbish questions, have you considered reading the articles?

 

Both articles I've read here say it was reported at 10:30 am, but make absolutely no mention of how much earlier the collision had occurred.

 

If you have or have seen something more specific in terms of details, please post a link to it here....

Edited May 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

For those making assumptions here, think back to the recent case of the Thai B movie actress who was driving and hit and killed a police officer who was  sleeping in his car somewhere along the side of the road one night....

 

As best as I recall, she got off the criminal case almost entirely on the basis of temporarily going to a temple to be a nun for a brief time.

 

In these kinds of cases here in Thailand, the early lodging of a criminal charge often seems to be an incentive for the surviving party to reach a financial settlement with the deceased, regardless of the varying levels of fault that may be involved... Because the victim is dead, and someone needs to pay for it, since Thai society clearly won't. And  then the criminal case manages to disappear or get resolved with little penalty, other than the separate payouts having been made.

 

 

[losworld]

i have always wondered about these longtail boats i am by no means a maritime expert but is this not a poorly designed boat for sea travel?  long, narrow and top heavy at the front?

[Aussieroaming]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Maritime licence, LOL.

Since when was a licence required for cars, m'bikes or boats for a farang to hire in LOS?

At least you probably got the last sentence right.

No I think I got my facts straight, you get yours straight before posting drivel.

 

Let me enlighten you to the legal requirements that the Italian operator jopefully abided by.

 

To operate a Thai-registered vessel, a Thai boating licence is necessary. The following documents are required:

• A passport
• Letter of residency from the Immigration Bureau or the person's Embassy in Thailand
• Medical certificate
• All relevant licences and documentation showing foreign licences and experience (for example a seaman's book)

It may be possible to transfer a foreign sailing licence without sitting a test. All papers verifying past experience should be brought to the Harbour Office for consideration. If a test is necessary, some of the papers may be in English but it is advisable to bring a translator to the exam.

 

[Aussieroaming]

2 hours ago, ttrd said:

If not they may use "the bigger boat shall give way for smaller ones principle" if the expat's boat is larger ...

 

Anyway, typical Thai way to come up With a spesific charge prior to the investigation is completed ...

 

Also strange that the expat has already covered the hospital bill and is in negotiation about a one time payment With the Family of the deceast - it therefore indicates a kind of admission - voluntary or otherwise ...

 

Anyway, a sad outcome ...

 

RIP

Agreed it is tragic. I'm not sure whether the Italian was trying to be morally responsible or felt culpable. Tough situation to find one self in

[Aussieroaming]

2 hours ago, Benroon said:

Doesn't anyone need to be 'squeaky clean' to be innocent ? Else they're not innocent.

 

Excuse the pun but you need to stop rowing backwards - anyone who can't see the blatently obvious culprit on here is certifiably nuts !

 

All the anti thais - next time you have a car accident in which you are entirely blameless, how many of you will be leaping out of the car to offer the guilty party cash ? 

If the culprit is obvious then why is there an ongoing forensic investigation to determine who was at fault. Row your own boat backwards pal.

[animalmagic]

8 hours ago, mogandave said:

19 hours ago, madmen said:

What instruments will detect a wooden boat and send out a screaming alarm ? you cant be serious there is no such thing or the mega ships would be using them instead of running over small boats in shipping lanes

 

Radar

 

Yes and no.  Radar can be grouped into three types - 

1. Navigational
2. Search
3. Attack

Shipping generally uses only the first category, and that is designed to pick up large lumpy things called rocks or land, or large metallic objects called buoys or ships.  The wooden boat would not have provided a large radar signature due to its minimal height and size.

The speedboat bow impacted the port side near to the stern therefore the wooden boat had right of way, whether using an engine or oars and the collision can be blamed squarely on the speedboat.  In any event the speedboat had the speed and maneuverability to avoid a collision unless blind or totally reckless. 

There are the International Rules for the Prevention of Collision at Sea (catchily referred to as the IRPCS in nautical circles) which govern these matters.

From every collision at sea that I have personally responded to or investigated the circumstances and regulations would lay the blame on the speedboat driver in this case.