4 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   She was running away with the trolley, even after being asked to stop running .

I do not kick woman off balance , but if a thief was running off with my belongings , I would try to stop them .

Once again, there is no proof that he kicked her again, after she'd wai'd .

I do not agree with violence  , but can understand people stopping a theft and using minimal force to do that .

 

Oh..running away (at full sprint?)-or walking away?

 

You are confabulating.

 

In any event the Norse kick boxer has had to cough up his 30,000 Baht and will,no doubt,think twice before assaulting somebody in the future..

 

(too many fantasy episodes of "Vikings".)

2 hours ago, Eindhoven said:

No need to look for his side of the story, as someone already posted it; she was running away with his trolley.

She was running away from what appeared from her point of view to be an angry screaming giant foreigner 

 

 

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

Oh..running away (at full sprint?)-or walking away?

 

You are confabulating.

 

In any event the Norse kick boxer has had to cough up his 30,000 Baht and will,no doubt,think twice before assaulting somebody in the future..

 

(too many fantasy episodes of "Vikings".)

 

   Its been stated that she was running away , didnt say at what speed , but when people run away from a crime, they usually run as fast as they can .

  BTW, did you get a dictionary for Christmas this year ?

3 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

You are kidding right?

Have you ever seen a supermarket trolley robber (Something unlikely to happen in Thailand)

coming with her car, her mother and her own trolley full of stuff already paid before commiting the theft ?

It doesn't any sense when you think to it even if you have half of a brain.

I wouldn't be surprised if she has a decent job and more money than him to begin with.

The only thing repugnant here is the big viking kicking 2 times a small lady when there is

no any valid reason to do that. 

And please don't try to say you can not stop a small lady with a trolley in a mall when you are

an athletic guy without kicking her, because it doesn't make sense at all, it's unjustifiable violence

 

 

Not kidding. He didn't have time to check if the thief came with her mum or whether she had a good job or whether she had more money than him. He reacted to someone running off with his trolley whilst he was busy with his daughter.

Another one with fake moral outrage....

If I find a burglar in my home, I don't stop to reason with them. 

If it were a small Thai man, would it be ok? What about a large Thai man?

 

There was a valid reason, she made away with his trolley. How far did he have to run to catch her? Remember when you are running, the adrenaline is also being produced. So a swift, short and sharp reaction is not abnormal. If he stood there a gave her a beating, we would all be appalled. 

Doesn't sound like that to me. Seems like an immediate reaction to a thief. I certainly don't see any misogynistic intent. But some despicable characters are really keen to use the 'woman' angle.

The man has a wife and child; who I am sure he loves with all of his heart. So stop this disgusting 'small lady' nonsense. He was dealing with a running thief...the fact that she was a woman has little to do with it.

6 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said:

Oh..running away (at full sprint?)-or walking away?

 

You are confabulating.

 

In any event the Norse kick boxer has had to cough up his 30,000 Baht and will,no doubt,think twice before assaulting somebody in the future..

 

(too many fantasy episodes of "Vikings".)

 

...and she will think twice about running off with someone's trolley.

 

Disgusting that he had to move away with his child to another province because someone STOLE HIS trolley.

13 minutes ago, Eindhoven said:

 

But why should he have to run at all? Why should he have to be completely calm under pressure whilst someone is inconveniencing him?

Why do you, for instance, feel the need to be muscle-bound? Does that mean that we all should be muscle bound and that you are the arbiter of all things normal.

 

I say it's fine that he kicked her up the posterior for stealing his trolley and running away. I might not have done it; but that doesn't mean that I have to condemn him for doing so. Perhaps it is you who needs to think about it.

I am just following common sense and the law. Your name suggests you might be Dutch. If so you would know that violence has to be proportional. We are talking about someone with a trolley. Someone who is unable to get away from someone on foot running. There is just no need to kick. 

 

Do you think she could magically move all the stuff from the trolley to a moving car. How do you envision her escape with a running guy next to her. Her abandoning it is the biggest chance ever (if she were a thief).

 

You feel that because she inconvenienced him it was ok to kick. Now that is why i think im less violent then you. 

 

Your bike case is different there you had to use violence to stop. This case was just not needed. No way (if she was a thief highly unlikely) she would have been able to get away move the stuff while running. No way. So no need for violence. Just run a bit grab the trolley and done. 

10 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   Its been stated that she was running away , didnt say at what speed , but when people run away from a crime, they usually run as fast as they can .

  BTW, did you get a dictionary for Christmas this year ?

You are still confabulating the "facts" as you continue to insist it was a "crime" without any facts and-even more pertinent-you insist that in your fact free existence-violence (committed twice) is therefore justified.

 

Once again he coughed up his 30,000 baht and,hopefully,will never physically attack a Thai woman ever again.

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

I am just following common sense and the law. Your name suggests you might be Dutch. If so you would know that violence has to be proportional. We are talking about someone with a trolley. Someone who is unable to get away from someone on foot running. There is just no need to kick. 

 

 

 

   I dont know about you, but I can hardly run when I wear sandals/flip flops in Thailand .

Thai Females usually wear running shoes .

A Thai Female with running shoes would probably be able to run faster than a felang in flip flops , even if she was pushing a trolley 

I do think a kick/push is justifiable when used to stop a thief escaping  

3 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

That you are looking for his side of the story to somehow justify his actions, suggests to me that your moral compass is in need of recalibration.

 

There is no justification for kicking a woman the way that he did, so stop looking for it; only a bully and a coward kicks a woman, and that’s exactly what this reprobate is. You’ve called this one incorrectly, and would be better served putting your hand up to that fact, rather than continuously diminishing your own credibility defending him.

Never said I was defending him, just stating I don't believe the entire story is being reported.

38 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

It doesn't make any sense when you think to it 1minute even if you have half of a brain.

Aye...there's the rub..

24 minutes ago, Eindhoven said:

 

...and she will think twice about running off with someone's trolley.

 

Disgusting that he had to move away with his child to another province because someone STOLE HIS trolley.

Someone above me made the pertinent statement of only having"half a brain"..if he vacated provinces it was due to actual physical assault and the reputation gained thereby

 

Bye.

47 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

You are kidding right?

Have you ever seen a supermarket trolley robber (Something unlikely to happen in Thailand)

coming with her car, her mother and her own trolley full of stuff already paid before commiting the theft ?

 

It doesn't make any sense when you think to it 1minute even if you have half of a brain.

 

 What if the Family didnt have the money to buy enough shopping ?

Simple solution, take someone elses trolley and if we get caught, just say it was a mistake ?

Maybe the mother was part of it , maybe it was planned .

3 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

That you are looking for his side of the story to somehow justify his actions, suggests to me that your moral compass is in need of recalibration.

 

There is no justification for kicking a woman the way that he did, so stop looking for it; only a bully and a coward kicks a woman, and that’s exactly what this reprobate is. You’ve called this one incorrectly, and would be better served putting your hand up to that fact, rather than continuously diminishing your own credibility defending him.

And you can substantiate what she says is in fact true? For all I know she could have already had bruises on her legs. Why should I believe her? Where is her witness?

5 hours ago, cvs04 said:

Yes he had, you can't leave the Big C supermarket area and go to the KFC without first paying for your items.

Neither was I but according to the defendant he and his daughter were not allowed to have any say in the investigation whatsoever.  They did tell him he could go to court and challenge the plaintiffs claim but he would lose for sure and get 3 years in Jail.  The investigation was based soley on the statement made by the girl.

Now that I can believe ????

6 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

That’s what you’re claiming without providing evidence for your claim. Period. 
 

Again, lots of assertions without any evidence. 

Your right, I don't have any evidence of your level of intelligence. My mistake...

6 hours ago, robblok said:

Personally I would edit things out that people dont want to know. Not sure how it works with editing things out that people want to know.

 

As you say you can't be sure of things so you have to go with the facts that are available. The guy paid (admission of guilt). There was a trolley taken and the guy chased it and kicked (even the perhaps fake but post made by a person that knew him admits this).

 

Question is only does taking a cart away to steal justify a kicking or not ? Or should he stopped her and let the police handle it. There is no question about the fact that he was bigger and stronger and faster (she was pushing a cart). So why the violence why not get hold of the cart and stop and let police handle it or just get the cart back.

 

No need for extra details... all you need to do is wondering if his actions in the most favorable situation (where she was a thief and it was not a simple misunderstanding) were ok or overboard. I thought they were overboard (even if it was a thief) because he could just have stopped her as he was stronger and faster. However I did change my mind a bit about the kicking as the first picks looked really bad and the other ones did not. 

 

But like a poster says that does not mean much still I feel the kicking might not be as violent as i initially thought. 

Another poster informed me that he and his daughter had no say in the investigation whatsoever and that he was told he could take the claimant to court where he would surely lose and face 3 years in jail. If this is in fact true his confession was obviously forced and he had no other choice but to pay.

4 hours ago, Eindhoven said:

 

Keyboard warrior? 

No need to look for his side of the story, as someone already posted it; she was running away with his trolley.

I wholly disagree with your statement. This statement about never hitting a woman is oft repeating nonsense.

Not all women are helpless creatures, unable to defend themselves. I know a few that could make mincemeat out of most of the posters here.

Kicking a running thief up the butt doesn't seem to me to be the actions of a violent man; but a controlled response in a moving situation.

Some people are waaaaay too keen to be judgemental.

 

 

 

You are, of course, perfectly entitled to disagree with any statement that I make.

 

You are also perfectly entitled to think that it is acceptable to use physical violence against a woman; that is simply a matter for your own conscience.

1 hour ago, Eindhoven said:

 

 

Not kidding. He didn't have time to check if the thief came with her mum or whether she had a good job or whether she had more money than him. He reacted to someone running off with his trolley whilst he was busy with his daughter.

Another one with fake moral outrage....

If I find a burglar in my home, I don't stop to reason with them. 

If it were a small Thai man, would it be ok? What about a large Thai man?

 

There was a valid reason, she made away with his trolley. How far did he have to run to catch her? Remember when you are running, the adrenaline is also being produced. So a swift, short and sharp reaction is not abnormal. If he stood there a gave her a beating, we would all be appalled. 

Doesn't sound like that to me. Seems like an immediate reaction to a thief. I certainly don't see any misogynistic intent. But some despicable characters are really keen to use the 'woman' angle.

The man has a wife and child; who I am sure he loves with all of his heart. So stop this disgusting 'small lady' nonsense. He was dealing with a running thief...the fact that she was a woman has little to do with it.

A couple of points about your remarkable rant.

 

Firstly, how did you manage to draw a simile between this trolly incident and finding a burglar in your home ?

 

Secondly, trying to diminish another person’s view on violence against women by labeling it as “fake moral outrage” merely serves to confirm the extent of your acceptance of this cowardly act.

 

Lastly, when you resort to calling people who’s views don’t coincide with your own ‘despicable’ and their views ‘disgusting’ you simply devalue your own opinions. I don’t know where all your anger comes from, but it might be time to try applying a bit of management to it.

 

Your closing gambit is indeed a classic  ….. “the fact that she was a woman has little to do with it”  when in actual fact, it has absolutely everything to do with it   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

31 minutes ago, BobinBKK said:

Another poster informed me that he and his daughter had no say in the investigation whatsoever and that he was told he could take the claimant to court where he would surely lose and face 3 years in jail. If this is in fact true his confession was obviously forced and he had no other choice but to pay.

No it just means that the facts dont support his case. Why is it you believe this so called friend without proof ?. I mean he states 6000 bt of groceries and car keys. If you look at the picture of the cart at the big C i find it really hard to believe there is 6000bt in there (unless it was expensive alcohol).

 

Not a forced confession at all just showing that assault like this without first talking is just not done. 

 

In the interview the woman is talking about a big foreigner running and shouting towards her and then she starts to run. I find her story more believable then the foreigners. Also there is bruising on 2 legs showing it was not just 1 kick like some seem to believe. 

 

Anyway ill say it again even IF this lady was a thief violence was not needed. The guy was faster (he had running shoes on and was running without a trolley vs running with a trolley and being a lot smaller). The guy was much stronger (so the lady was no threat just grabbing the trolley would have ended this whole show. 

 

Still unsure about the friend that knows him for 5 years.. seen too many forum trolls to believe him straight especially as the shopping does not look like the 6000 mentioned. 

2 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

You think it is reasonable to kick women-who are not offering you violence?

The facts as stated is that he accosted her,kicked her,then got a wai and kicked her again.

Which cost him 30,000 baht.

 

 

I think it is reasonable to kick someone who has stolen from you. The fact that it was a woman has little to do with it. The prisons are full of women too. 

This one grabbed a trolley without even calling her mum to see where she was....and then ran when challenged. A kick is entirely reasonable behaviour....and a wai means nothing. Now if she 'grapped' him(knelt before him and prostrated herself) and then he kicked her, that would be another story. But this is not the case. His belief is that she stole it and ran.

 

1 hour ago, BobinBKK said:

Your right, I don't have any evidence of your level of intelligence. My mistake...

Making personal insults to people merely demonstrates any lack of evidence of your own level of intelligence.

 

P.S. It should be you’re right, not your right; another one of your mistakes I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

8 hours ago, cvs04 said:

According to him he shouted for her to stop and she made a dash to get away.

Still odd that he chose to kick her (twice), rather than catch her up and take the trolley from her - don't you think? 

4 hours ago, Eindhoven said:

 

 

Not kidding. He didn't have time to check if the thief came with her mum or whether she had a good job or whether she had more money than him. He reacted to someone running off with his trolley whilst he was busy with his daughter.

Another one with fake moral outrage....

If I find a burglar in my home, I don't stop to reason with them. 

If it were a small Thai man, would it be ok? What about a large Thai man?

 

There was a valid reason, she made away with his trolley. How far did he have to run to catch her? Remember when you are running, the adrenaline is also being produced. So a swift, short and sharp reaction is not abnormal. If he stood there a gave her a beating, we would all be appalled. 

Doesn't sound like that to me. Seems like an immediate reaction to a thief. I certainly don't see any misogynistic intent. But some despicable characters are really keen to use the 'woman' angle.

The man has a wife and child; who I am sure he loves with all of his heart. So stop this disgusting 'small lady' nonsense. He was dealing with a running thief...the fact that she was a woman has little to do with it.

Obviously you didin't understand my post

of course he had no any possibility to analyse all to see if it was a thief or not

i was talking about us, with all the elements given in the article, it was obvious

she wasn't a thief, but nevermind

just out of curiosity when was the last time in Thailand where a thief was complaining to

the police about someone catching him\her ?

I am afraid you don't live in Thailand, or at least you don't know the country very well

again nevermind

He was able to catch her quickly and quick her even more quickly

that means he was able to catch the trolley easily without quick the girl 2 times

this guy has an evident violence problem, and reading your previous posts you have

the same problem, so i am not really surprised by the fact you are defending him.

And unfortunately, judging by few others posts from others members, it seems you are not the only one 

4 hours ago, robblok said:

I am just following common sense and the law. Your name suggests you might be Dutch. If so you would know that violence has to be proportional. We are talking about someone with a trolley. Someone who is unable to get away from someone on foot running. There is just no need to kick. 

 

Do you think she could magically move all the stuff from the trolley to a moving car. How do you envision her escape with a running guy next to her. Her abandoning it is the biggest chance ever (if she were a thief).

 

You feel that because she inconvenienced him it was ok to kick. Now that is why i think im less violent then you. 

 

Your bike case is different there you had to use violence to stop. This case was just not needed. No way (if she was a thief highly unlikely) she would have been able to get away move the stuff while running. No way. So no need for violence. Just run a bit grab the trolley and done. 

Even in the bike case, his action was not the most intelligent

if the thief had fallen under the taxi wheels and died

you can imagine the drama, all of this for a bike? 

When you use the violence as the answer for all the situations

one day or another it will end very badly

3 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

 What if the Family didnt have the money to buy enough shopping ?

Simple solution, take someone elses trolley and if we get caught, just say it was a mistake ?

Maybe the mother was part of it , maybe it was planned .

Total rubbish

so you take a random trolley and you have by miracle all the stuff you wanted?

Even if a Thai gives me his trolley, i don't want it.i have no use of 5 liters of palm oil

24 eggs and a box of mama noddles.

So she has the money to buy a car and to pay all the stuff in her trolley

but she wants more, she has no more money and when she is in the mall she thinks

''what about to take this trolley in front of  KFC, maybe i could find some juicy loot in here?''

And of course when she is caught, the first thing she does is going to file a report to the police

because it's what all the thiefs do, particularly the ones working in a family mafia trolley robber style

specialised in a thai mall ?

seriously mate...

4 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 Its been stated that she was running away , didnt say at what speed , but when people run away from a crime, they usually run as fast as they can .

If a Thai guy 2 X my size obviously angry after me (For an unknow reason from my point of view at the moment)

start to run in my direction screaming something i don't understand, my first idea will be probably to run in 

the opposite direction as fast as i can, not to wait him and try to understand why he is angry, what he is

saying or if he is just drunk or a yaba user.

You can not explain\understand something is you are wounded or killed first

And i am not a small woman nor a coward, so I can perfectly understand her reaction

thais arent stupid...she wanted 30k, so asked for 40k to have room to come down, while still getting what she wanted, and the guy walks away feeling he got a deal...

Several trolling posts, including one posting a person's personal email address in violation of forum rules, have been removed.

13 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Making personal insults to people merely demonstrates any lack of evidence of your own level of intelligence.

 

P.S. It should be you’re right, not your right; another one of your mistakes I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Not a mistake, it's called intentionally mocking "YOUR" personal insults. Go back and read "YOUR" own posts...

20 hours ago, BobinBKK said:

Your right, I don't have any evidence of your level of intelligence. My mistake...

My “level of intelligence” is pretty irrelevant. Doesn’t change the fact that you’re making assertions without having any evidence for it.