3 hours ago, billd766 said:

Equally, what was the hit and run driver doing out there during curfew hours.

 

Being in the middle of the road during curfew time should mean that she would have been perfectly safe, IF ONLY the driver was not breaking the curfew.

Were they not both breaking the curfew law? 

3 hours ago, Macthehat said:

Dancing ?

Roads are for driving on, not dancing, yet many want to hang the driver. 

On 6/9/2020 at 8:18 AM, LennyW said:

On 6/9/2020 at 8:15 AM, AndyAndyAndy said:

 

First photo is "historic" from Walking street as a reference to her dancing, not from the night of her death?

Indeed, but her and the driver?

Perhaps, before the accident, the driver had a legitimate reason to be out?  The entire country is not banned from being out after curfew, there are many exemptions.

On 6/9/2020 at 8:22 AM, stouricks said:

On 6/9/2020 at 7:03 AM, quake said:

Hit and run, how unusual in Thailand.

Totally excepted behavior in Thailand, disgraceful

R.I.P Lady

It's not excepted or expected, it is ACCEPTED.

By a few, maybe, but not all, so it is not "ACCEPTED" [sic].

28 minutes ago, Bob A Kneale said:

By a few, maybe, but not all, so it is not "ACCEPTED" [sic].

No, it is expected by the few that accept it!    There are a few exceptions!     PML

On 6/9/2020 at 1:01 PM, billd766 said:

If only the driver had obeyed the curfew she would still be alive.

Perhaps he was complying with the curfew and had reason to be on the road.

On 6/9/2020 at 8:33 AM, quake said:

what a nice thing to say.

i doubt she had a big house to live in like you do.

 

 

Will It be different if you were the driver of that truck (Perhaps you would feel that you are the victim after a drunk shows up right in front of your car) ? Curfew or no curfew, street is not a dancing stage for a drunk. Homeless or wealthy still street is not a place for dancing in the middle of night. If the car was an ambulance or other emergency vehicle who would be the victim ? 
in this case, perhaps “one drunk vs another”, but one lost life and one escaped. 

1 hour ago, Leaver said:

Were they not both breaking the curfew law? 

Yes they were.

 

However the vehicle driver knocked down and killed the victim and callously drove away.

 

Which was the greater so-called crime?

 

1 hour ago, Leaver said:

Roads are for driving on, not dancing, yet many want to hang the driver. 

But roads are not meant to allow people to drive on, kill pedestrians and drive away.

 

 

1 hour ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Perhaps, before the accident, the driver had a legitimate reason to be out?  The entire country is not banned from being out after curfew, there are many exemptions.

If the driver had a legitimate reason for being out in curfew, why did they drive away?

 

 

1 hour ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Perhaps he was complying with the curfew and had reason to be on the road.

Then why not stay at the scene?

2 minutes ago, billd766 said:

1 hour ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Perhaps he was complying with the curfew and had reason to be on the road.

Then why not stay at the scene

Maybe because he knew he had just killed someone. Or maybe because he had he was intoxicated and knew that he had just killed someone.

3 minutes ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Maybe because he knew he had just killed someone. Or maybe because he had he was intoxicated and knew that he had just killed someone.

You have answered my unspoken question about whether he was breaking curfew or not.

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Yes they were.

 

However the vehicle driver knocked down and killed the victim and callously drove away.

 

Which was the greater so-called crime?

 

But roads are not meant to allow people to drive on, kill pedestrians and drive away.

 

 

The driver should have stopped.   No argument from me about that. 

 

Has anyone considered the pedestrian could be a fault in the accident?  The pedestrian could have stepped off the kerb without looking, causing the accident, or even been drunk and laying on the road. 

 

Most posts are looking to lay blame on the driver for the accident, solely on the fact he drove off.  The driver could have been drunk or speeding, or both, but maybe some more evidence before attributing blame.  

15 minutes ago, Leaver said:

The driver should have stopped.   No argument from me about that. 

 

Has anyone considered the pedestrian could be a fault in the accident?  The pedestrian could have stepped off the kerb without looking, causing the accident, or even been drunk and laying on the road. 

 

Most posts are looking to lay blame on the driver for the accident, solely on the fact he drove off.  The driver could have been drunk or speeding, or both, but maybe some more evidence before attributing blame.  

The only evidence that can be got is from the vehicle which has probably been cleaned and in a repair shop, from a CCTV camera if there was one working in the area at the time or from the driver or his family or friends.

 

By now any trace of alcohol or drugs in his body will be long gone and been replaced by a fresh lot.

 

Expecting the police to go out and search for the vehicle and driver is a waste of time as there is nothing in it for them. It may be on his conscience but being Thai he won't go and confess his crime, so sadly he seems to have got away with it.

 

Callous bar steward. I hope that if he comes back in his next life the highest he ca expect would be a cockroach and that he will be exterminated by being crush under somebodies shoe. 

@scubascuba3 You should make sure of your facts before posting and naming people.

14 hours ago, Leaver said:

Roads are for driving on, not dancing, yet many want to hang the driver. 

Her regular location was Walking st..... roads are also for pedestrians, or do you suggest they are not allowed to cross them? In Pattaya there are mostly no pavements, and the roads are the right of pedestrians too!

 

19 hours ago, billd766 said:

The only evidence that can be got is from the vehicle which has probably been cleaned and in a repair shop, from a CCTV camera if there was one working in the area at the time or from the driver or his family or friends.

 

By now any trace of alcohol or drugs in his body will be long gone and been replaced by a fresh lot.

 

Expecting the police to go out and search for the vehicle and driver is a waste of time as there is nothing in it for them. It may be on his conscience but being Thai he won't go and confess his crime, so sadly he seems to have got away with it.

 

Callous bar steward. I hope that if he comes back in his next life the highest he ca expect would be a cockroach and that he will be exterminated by being crush under somebodies shoe. 

Have you ever considered the possibility that the accident was the pedestrian's fault? 

 

There's some good extortion money in it for the BiB, even more so if a foreigner was driving.  They might spend some time chasing it down.  They need the money at the moment. 

7 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Her regular location was Walking st..... roads are also for pedestrians, or do you suggest they are not allowed to cross them? In Pattaya there are mostly no pavements, and the roads are the right of pedestrians too!

Pedestrians do have a right to use the road, but that doesn't automatically given them the right of way. 

 

Many pedestrians have been at fault in road accidents, particularly children.  Not uncommon for drunk adults to miscalculate distance, speed, and time, when crossing the road in front of oncoming vehicles.

 

The driver should not have driven off, but that doesn't automatically mean the accident was his fault. 

3 hours ago, Leaver said:

The driver should not have driven off, but that doesn't automatically mean the accident was his fault.

It hardly roars his innocence either.

4 hours ago, Leaver said:

Have you ever considered the possibility that the accident was the pedestrian's fault? 

 

There's some good extortion money in it for the BiB, even more so if a foreigner was driving.  They might spend some time chasing it down.  They need the money at the moment. 

Yes I have considered it may have been her fault but rejected it as the driver did a runner. Why? Possibly due to him driving in curfew time, perhaps he was drunk or on drugs. If it was her fault, why did he drive away?

 

There was a report in the BKK Post (I cannot post the link) about a cop sitting in his car when a black Toyota roared past him during curfew hours but he did nothing about it.

 

You keep going on that perhaps it wasn't the drivers fault and perhaps it wasn't but you have not yet explained why he left the scene. Until that is settled my money is on the hit and run driver being guilty.

20 hours ago, jacko45k said:

It hardly roars his innocence either.

Sure, but does not present any evidence of fault. 

Just now, Leaver said:

Sure, but does not present any evidence of fault. 

In my thought, it is evidence of guilt. 

19 hours ago, billd766 said:

Yes I have considered it may have been her fault but rejected it as the driver did a runner. Why? Possibly due to him driving in curfew time, perhaps he was drunk or on drugs. If it was her fault, why did he drive away?

 

There was a report in the BKK Post (I cannot post the link) about a cop sitting in his car when a black Toyota roared past him during curfew hours but he did nothing about it.

 

You keep going on that perhaps it wasn't the drivers fault and perhaps it wasn't but you have not yet explained why he left the scene. Until that is settled my money is on the hit and run driver being guilty.

For all we know, the driver is a drug dealer, or, perhaps he just left a gambling den down the road, or, perhaps he is having an affair with a women near there, or a multitude of many other reasons that does not make him a nice person.  How does any of these show he was at fault in the accident? 

2 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

In my thought, it is evidence of guilt. 

Or evidence he doesn't want to get extorted by the family and police for a crime he didn't commit. 

1 minute ago, Leaver said:

Or evidence he doesn't want to get extorted by the family and police for a crime he didn't commit. 

Hence the crime of leaving the scene... 

11 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Hence the crime of leaving the scene... 

Or an innocent running from criminals looking to commit a crime against him.

 

My point simply is, leaving the scene in no evidence of being at fault in the accident. 

11 hours ago, Leaver said:

Or an innocent running from criminals looking to commit a crime against him.

 

My point simply is, leaving the scene in no evidence of being at fault in the accident. 

Guilty people don't leave the scene, normally no license or drunk or no insurance in RTA's in Thailand.

RIP to the lady.  It's a tough life.  

14 hours ago, Leaver said:

Or an innocent running from criminals looking to commit a crime against him.

 

My point simply is, leaving the scene in no evidence of being at fault in the accident. 

And my point is simply leaving the scene is a crime itself and normally done to evade prosecution. This was an old lady dead in the road, unlikely to be criminals looking to commit a crime against him.