Italian expat faces recklessness causing death charge over fatal boat collision

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

10 minutes ago, Benroon said:

haha this is just getting better and better …..

 

Lets start with dead person …..

 

Yes, let's start with a dead person.

 

So if your wife wakes up from bed some night while you're sleeping, goes out to the balcony and jumps to her death, are you automatically a murderer???  Just because she's dead and you're there?

 

In my book, the answer would be no... But perhaps your view is you would automatically be a murderer, just as you assume the farang boat guy is recklessly responsible for a death -- without absolutely no details of just how that death occurred and under what circumstances.

 

Just because the Thai guy is dead doesn't automatically mean the farang guy is recklessly responsible...  He may well be.... But I'd kinda like to see some proof or evidence first.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Enki]

42 minutes ago, Benroon said:

So the oars (still in situ) would be for ?????

If you really need to ask questions like this, I hope you never are at sea alone ...

[Enki]

18 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Exactly my point... "Usually" ought not be the basis for bringing a criminal charge of causing death against someone

Then your point is rather unintelligent. Usually, you bring the one surviving an accident to court. At least that is how it is handled in a civilized world, No idea where you are from.

 

18 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

If the police believe and are saying that the faster moving fishing boat plowed into the smaller, slower moving Thai boat, then they ought to say so... 

They probably did. Or the culprit would not be brought to court, facepalm.

 

18 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Where was the damage to the motored fishing boat... on the front end... on the side... from the articles, there seems to be no mention.

You can see the picture like everyone else can. The culprit ran his boat over the victims boat. 

 

19 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

But if he's guilty, at least give me something to hang that allegation on...

Why? You are reading a newspaper article on Thaivisa.com, that has a link to the more or less original newspaper article, which you obviously did not read ...

 

As long as you are not the lawyer of the culprit, why do you think you have special rights to get special information?

 

You are the one who started here with a thai hating sub thread ... stop continuing making an idiot out of yourself.

[watcharacters]

2 minutes ago, Enki said:

Then your point is rather unintelligent. Usually, you bring the one surviving an accident to court. At least that is how it is handled in a civilized world, No idea where you are from.

 

They probably did. Or the culprit would not be brought to court, facepalm.

 

You can see the picture like everyone else can. The culprit ran his boat over the victims boat. 

 

Why? You are reading a newspaper article on Thaivisa.com, that has a link to the more or less original newspaper article, which you obviously did not read ...

 

As long as you are not the lawyer of the culprit, why do you think you have special rights to get special information?

 

You are the one who started here with a thai hating sub thread ... stop continuing making an idiot out of yourself.

 

Enki,     Did you get out of bed today on the wrong side?     

 

A little "slow down" might be in order.

 

 

[Enki]

9 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

Radar

 

If you invent a radar that can detect a wooden boat, you will be the richest man on earth, and poured over with Nobel Prizes over your ears.

[stevenl]

1 hour 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.

 

Agree the search function on Thai Visa is not really good, but this one did show for me.

 

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

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.

 

 

 

She got off by hiding away until sober and then paying off the family.

[Kieran00001]

30 minutes ago, Enki said:

If you invent a radar that can detect a wooden boat, you will be the richest man on earth, and poured over with Nobel Prizes over your ears.

 

Good grief, we've had them since the 1980's, its called polarimetric radar, and the inventors are neither particularly rich nor Nobel Prize winners.

[Enki]

10 hours ago, harrycallahan said:

He wasn't in a destroyer. They use their eyes.

Last year two american destroyers managed to cross a shipping lane and crash. One crash caused the death of the captain and a few more crew.

Actually I'm not sure if it was three destroyers.

[Enki]

21 hours ago, Aussieroaming said:

I wonder who was actually at fault and whether either had their maritime licence.

In most parts of the world - Germany e.g. being an exception - locals don't need a maritime license. Unless: they carry passengers or operate a commercial vessel.

 

21 hours ago, Aussieroaming said:

One thing guaranteed is that the Italian is guilty unless he was squeaky clean and can prove it.

Exactly. And what is so surprising about that? Oh, you don't know how law in case of accidents that involve vessels, may it be on land or in air or at sea, work?

[sambum]

2 hours ago, Benroon said:

errrrrr via the pictures ?

 

Those things hanging over the sides - they're called oars - they're even still in place, If they weren't being used they would have been laying down inside the boat.

 

You will also note the lack of engine at the other end.

 

Seriously has school finished early today or something ?

"errrrrr via the pictures ?" What "via the pictures"? I can only see one picture. 

 

The longtail boat has been in an accident has it not? The engine could have been dislodged could it not?. The oars may have been used to move the boat to a safer position as it may have been a danger to other boats in the area, could it not?

 

From a worldwide reliable source:-

 

"The long-tail boat, is a type of watercraft native to Southeast Asia, which uses a common automotive engine as a readily available and maintainable powerplant. A craft designed to carry passengers on a river may include a lightweight long canoe hull, up to 30 metres, and a canopy.Wikipedia"

 

Also:-

Known as the gondolas of southern Thailand, Ruang Hang Yao, which can be literally translated as long-tail boats, come in different shapes and sizes, but they have one thing in common. They all have a long tail, a pole attached to the stern of the boat with a propeller attached to it. With an innovative dual function, this tail is used for both stirring and propelling the boat. 

(That is possibly the long thin pole in the middle of the boat in the picture hmm?)

 

And without getting into a slanging match with you, which will only lead to our posts being removed, please refrain from the childish insults - they are uncalled for and totally unnecessary.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by sambum

[sambum]

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

So the oars (still in situ) would be for ?????

Moving it to a safe place?

[SiSePuede419]

Great! ????

 

Magnifico.

 

 

[Kieran00001]

58 minutes ago, sambum said:

"errrrrr via the pictures ?" What "via the pictures"? I can only see one picture. 

 

The longtail boat has been in an accident has it not? The engine could have been dislodged could it not?. The oars may have been used to move the boat to a safer position as it may have been a danger to other boats in the area, could it not?

 

From a worldwide reliable source:-

 

"The long-tail boat, is a type of watercraft native to Southeast Asia, which uses a common automotive engine as a readily available and maintainable powerplant. A craft designed to carry passengers on a river may include a lightweight long canoe hull, up to 30 metres, and a canopy.Wikipedia"

 

Also:-

Known as the gondolas of southern Thailand, Ruang Hang Yao, which can be literally translated as long-tail boats, come in different shapes and sizes, but they have one thing in common. They all have a long tail, a pole attached to the stern of the boat with a propeller attached to it. With an innovative dual function, this tail is used for both stirring and propelling the boat. 

(That is possibly the long thin pole in the middle of the boat in the picture hmm?)

 

And without getting into a slanging match with you, which will only lead to our posts being removed, please refrain from the childish insults - they are uncalled for and totally unnecessary.

 

 

 

That's not a longtail, its the sort of boat that are often turned into longtails, but that one hasn't been, the long pole you can see is the second oar, the two short poles sticking up are a type of rowlock, and at the back you can see the tiller, if the engine had been ripped off obviously the tiller would have gone with it. Now, if you truely know this little about boats, why on earth are you putting you two cents in?

[Kieran00001]

29 minutes ago, sambum said:

Moving it to a safe place?

 

Its half submerged, have you even seen a boat before?

[impulse]

44 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

That's not a longtail, its the sort of boat that are often turned into longtails, but that one hasn't been, the long pole you can see is the second oar, the two short poles sticking up are a type of rowlock, and at the back you can see the tiller, if the engine had been ripped off obviously the tiller would have gone with it. Now, if you truely know this little about boats, why on earth are you putting you two cents in?

 

Possibly because a lot of those boats have a lawn mower engine in a tiny compartment, attached to a prop that wouldn't be seen in the photo.  I've seen dozens of them on beaches in Thailand.

 

Why would you need a tiller on a rowboat?  How can you row from the middle of the boat and operate a tiller from the back seat?  That "tiller" actually looks more like a motor mount, with the motor knocked off- possibly by the collision.  I'm not claiming to know.  In fact, just the opposite.  I'm hoping to goad someone into posting up actual, verified information instead of conjecture.

 

Also, I'm still not seeing any information about the time the accident occurred.  Just that it was reported at 10:30.  Which could be hours after it actually happened.  Begging the question about lights.

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by impulse

[Kieran00001]

18 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Possibly because a lot of those boats have a lawn mower engine in a tiny compartment, attached to a prop that wouldn't be seen in the photo.  I've seen dozens of them on beaches in Thailand.

 

Why would you need a tiller on a rowboat?  How can you row from the middle of the boat and operate a tiller from the back seat?  That "tiller" actually looks more like a motor mount, with the motor knocked off- possibly by the collision.  I'm not claiming to know.  In fact, just the opposite.  I'm hoping to goad someone into posting up actual, verified information instead of conjecture.

 

Also, I'm still not seeing any information about the time the accident occurred.  Just that it was reported at 10:30.  Which could be hours after it actually happened.  Begging the question about lights.

 

 

Well, that wouldn't be a long tail either then.  The tiller is clearly visible, have you zoomed in?

 

Row boats that go to sea have tillers, it helps one to avoid dying in a the slightest swell.  And they are operated by tying them while rowing.

 

Clearly you're another one with a wealth of knowledge to bring to this thread. Xx

Edited May 10, 2019 by Kieran00001

[impulse]

24 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Well, that wouldn't be a long tail either then.  The tiller is clearly visible, have you zoomed in?

 

Row boats that go to sea have tillers, it helps one to avoid dying in a the slightest swell.  And they are operated by tying them while rowing.

 

Clearly you're another one with a wealth of knowledge to bring to this thread. Xx

 

 

The image above shows a typical, low budget longtail install.  It is NOT the one from the OP.  See that prop hanging off the back?  That's why it's called a longtail, as in the OP.

 

I had a longtail motor in BKK based on a 200cc lawn mower type engine, and the mount could have easily been knocked off in a collision.

 

Again, I don't claim to know the answer.  But I'm not the one trying to shut down all discussion based on my own conjecture.   

 

In the absence of reliable reporting, I have no problem with the conjecture, since it's the basis of a lot of good discussion.  My objection comes when posters shut down the discussion by holding their conjecture out as irrefutable fact and insulting anyone who disagrees.

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by impulse

[Kieran00001]

16 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

 

The image above shows a typical, low budget longtail install.  It is NOT the one from the OP.  See that prop hanging off the back?  That's why it's called a longtail, as in the OP.

 

I had a longtail motor in BKK based on a 200cc lawn mower type engine, and the mount could have easily been knocked off in a collision.

 

Again, I don't claim to know the answer.  But I'm not the one trying to shut down all discussion based on my own conjecture.   

 

In the absence of reliable reporting, I have no problem with the conjecture, since it's the basis of a lot of good discussion.  My objection comes when posters shut down the discussion by holding their conjecture out as irrefutable fact and insulting anyone who disagrees.

 

 

Ot is hardly conjecture to recognise a tiller darling.

[sambum]

2 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

That's not a longtail, its the sort of boat that are often turned into longtails, but that one hasn't been, the long pole you can see is the second oar, the two short poles sticking up are a type of rowlock, and at the back you can see the tiller, if the engine had been ripped off obviously the tiller would have gone with it. Now, if you truely know this little about boats, why on earth are you putting you two cents in?

I was having  a discussion with somebody else , so why are YOU putting your oar in? (pun "TRULY" intended!)

 

And if that long pole is an oar - how would you use it? Maybe like this? :-

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by sambum

[Kieran00001]

18 minutes ago, sambum said:

I was having  a discussion with somebody else , so why are YOU putting your oar in? (pun "TRULY" intended!)

 

And if that long pole is an oar - how would you use it? Maybe like this? :-

 

 

There are two poles attached vertically which serve as rowlocks, the oars are tied to those.  Have you considered taking a look around this country?  You're disputing their traditional water craft now, can't believe you've never seen them!

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

6 hours ago, stevenl said:

Agree the search function on Thai Visa is not really good, but this one did show for me.

 

 

Yep, that's the prior article I also had read from the same news outlet, making a total of two from them on this incident that I'm aware of... And neither of them has any meaningful, specific details about when, where, or how the collision occurred that would in any way help determine guilt/responsibility/recklessness.

 

[sambum]

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

There are two poles attached vertically which serve as rowlocks, the oars are tied to those.  Have you considered taking a look around this country?  You're disputing their traditional water craft now, can't believe you've never seen them!

These are the traditional water craft that I've seen in Esan - I believe they are called "longboats", but my wife calls them "dragon boats". I've seen them having races and gazed on in wonder at the physical effort required - especially in the Thailand heat. I've been here for many years now, and never seen the type of craft that you refer to. 

Anyway, this discussion is going nowhere, so before you start to give me more Thai lessons, or detention for not doing my homework, I will say goodnight and have pleasant dreams of life on your ocean wave! 

 

[Mark mark]

On 5/9/2019 at 10:08 PM, Pattaya46 said:

 

On one side you have a not so big but fast fishing boat :

 

On the other side you have a slow low wooden rowing boat !

 

And members asking who hit who ??? 

 

Navigations rules say that the boat overtaking another must change its route to avoid collision, and in crossings a motor boat must give way to less maneuverable boats.

 

We don't know details, but in open sea a motor boat is usually at fault if collision with a rowing or sailing boat.

Yes the rules of the sea are pretty clear, and well tried and tested over many years of History, .... Usually it is very easy to define who is in the wrong.

 

Re Cargo ships hitting Wooden bats in Shipping lanes, ... Well at night the Fishing boats are supposed to show a light, and the cargo Boats have one officer on watch, ... usually watching the Radar, that has a collision alarm, for things that it can see .... and there is supposed to be an AB on watch also, I think ? on some ships at least I think ? ... Who's specific job it is is to look out for fishing boats, while the officer on watch is not .... this does not always happen of course, .... I do believe that as the Cargo ships are tall, so they can see over the horizon, Oh 60k with their radars, re other Cargo ships, and at 20 K say, = 3 hrs before you can hit any thing big, ... some officers on them, have been known to just set the collision alarm, .., and just take a little Kip. ... So they tell me. ? ...

 

Though looking at the Power fishing boat at this time, and having 2 fishers on Board, in the Morning... I would say that they all were looking at the lines ... and not where they were going ! ? ... and well, look at the two boats ... an Engine hidden under the deck in the little wooden boat !!! ... It would be about as big as an egg beater if it was there any way ! ... What are you talking about !!! .... The power boat was probably almost certainly, WELL, in the wrong.

[stevenl]

7 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yep, that's the prior article I also had read from the same news outlet, making a total of two from them on this incident that I'm aware of... And neither of them has any meaningful, specific details about when, where, or how the collision occurred that would in any way help determine guilt/responsibility/recklessness.

 

If you refuse to read and understand there is nothing I can do. And I am not talking about the news article but about the discussion, hence the link to the discussion and not the news article.

It is very clear who is at fault.

Edited May 10, 2019 by stevenl

[LawrenceN]

19 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I think you will find that it actually looks like a long tail WITHOUT a motor, which is not a long tail, by the way.

I see two possibilities: 1) The reporter inaccurately called it a longtail; 2) The editor stuck in a stock photo of a little Thai boat. Or both. We don't really know if the photo shows the actual boat involved in the accident. I don't see much damage. Does anybody have better info from previous reliable reports?

[Old Croc]

I stopped trying to reason with some people on this thread.

It's become clear they are either trolling or incredibly stupid, and there's no point in engaging with them.

[whaleboneman]

16 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

In the old news report.

Why is the damage on the port aft then?

[whaleboneman]

54 minutes ago, LawrenceN said:

I see two possibilities: 1) The reporter inaccurately called it a longtail; 2) The editor stuck in a stock photo of a little Thai boat. Or both. We don't really know if the photo shows the actual boat involved in the accident. I don't see much damage. Does anybody have better info from previous reliable reports?

Zoom in on the photo. The gunnel has been broken port aft. 

[mogandave]

Why is the damage on the port aft then?

Maybe that’s where it was hit?