Someone’s negligence would be caused by either an accident or criminal act.  

10 hours ago, ikke1959 said:

charged with recklessness....... No other charges could be found/made?? Accidents happens sadly this cost a life... But  to charge them is a bit over the top for recklessness.... A cop can cause an accident by not stopping for a zebracrossing and he gets a light sentence, than this boat accident is less severe ..

That seems to be an issue with the sentence the cop received rather than with the charges in this case. 

16 hours ago, Thailand said:

Accimur?

Murcident?

17 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

So if it was not an accident nor a murder was it Suicide by intentional drowning.....

I think in Canada we would call it negligent homicide.  

Dryer owner didn't ensure people were wearing life jackets.  

Did not mandate safety.  Who stands at the back near the prop.

 

Also likely alcohol involved.

Mother got paid, suspects paid bail and out on the loose........all sorted then!

20 wounds to her body but no one was at fault !!! Unbelievable.

In the Post, the police have 124 witnesses including the other 6 on the boat.

 

So where were these other 118 witnesses at the time?

Did anyone expect any other solution due to there being some hiso involved.......

17 hours ago, Lingba said:

It was the Lochness Monster on tour of the Chao Phraya river 

18 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

So if it was not an accident nor a murder was it Suicide by intentional drowning.....

The article clearly states that it was caused by negligence.

 

So not a total accident, but since there was no evidence of 'malice aforehought', not murder either.

 

It's maybe not the form of wording that's might be used by a western police force but I think it's pretty obvious what they're trying to say. 

 

As others have said, in a western jurisdiction this would probably be described as either negligent homicide, or manslaughter.

 

According the link below:

 

Quote

The law states that you can be charged with criminally negligent homicide if your criminally negligent behavior caused the death of another person.

 

On the other hand, the law states that you can be charged with manslaughter if your reckless behavior caused the death of another person.

 

Therefore, the difference between these two crimes is the type of behavior that caused the victim’s death.

Criminally Negligent Homicide vs. Manslaughter: What’s the Difference?

Perhaps as with all misadventures and catastrophes; A series of cascading events leads to injury or death e.g. water conditions -chop, cross chop, alcohol, overloading, no life jackets mandatorily worn, excessive speed for the conditions, Lack of boating experience by captain or crew, lax and lack of crew monitoring passenger safety - standing up while boat is moving, leaning over the side, moving about the boat while underway etc.

The result is the death of a very young, healthy woman.

2 months and this is the outcome!  has everyone gotten their time of T.V.  now can we open and get rid of the Thailand pass!????

19 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

she did not accidentally fall into the Chao Phraya River, but she fell due to someone else’s negligence.

Negligence ? It Was an unfortunate accident , If it wasn't murder or suicide.

So... if according to the Keystone Cops it WASN'T murder NOR an accident... from what exactly did she die then? A natural cause?

 

Let me try and wrap my head around that.

 

A natural cause of death... brought on by being stone-drunk on a shaky boat with no safety precautions in place, then stumbling or slipping, resulting in tumbling overboard and subsequent drowning while being cut up by boat propeller blades.

 

What a scenario! But IF that roughly is what was happening... how on Earth can this NOT be regarded an accident?

 

If I pruned my mango tree and - the moron that I am - sat on thee very branch that I am sawing off, causing me to fall to the ground and break my neck in the process... how else could my death be classified than as being the result of an accident??? Surely wasn't murder. Surely wasn't a "natural cause". A stupid accident, yes. But an accident nevertheless.   

  

19 hours ago, Lingba said:

It was the Lochness Monster on tour of the Chao Phraya river 

Im sure even the monster could' nt survive in that  crappy water

Yeah Yeah. We already knew what the outcome was going to be. 

What then?!

Divine intervention?

 

 

RIP

 

Lets move on.

 

War in Europe

Pandemic

Civil war in Myanmar

Corruption

 

There's so much more than an actress having a very bad day while partying with friends.

Looks like "littering" is the most serious charge. ????

6 hours ago, Henryford said:

20 wounds to her body but no one was at fault !!! Unbelievable.

They haven't said no-one was at fault - they have said no-one intended to murder her.

 

Negligence, which they've described it as, implies someone was at fault.

It would appear all those years of Scotland Yard training are going to waste, on the brilliant minds of the RTP. 

3 hours ago, tingtong said:

What then?!

Divine intervention?

No, as quite clearly stated, negligence.

 

At least three people have been charged with "negligence causing the death of another person" (or "recklessness causing death" depending on which report you read).

 

They and others have also been charged with giving false statements to the police and destroying (or concealing) evidence.

18 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Amid the spectacle of this whole case, are the police really recommending that prosecutors charge one or more of the abovementioned suspects with LITTERING?   Really?

 

Does anyone ever get charged with littering in Thailand?  OUCH!  That one's gonna hurt!!!  -(

 

They are trying to get them for throwing evidence overboard (in a deliberate attempt at concealment) and apparently this is the only charge that fits.

 

 

This is not likely to resolve public concern because

 

1 - it is still nor explained why she drowned despite being a good swimmer. Autopsy as far as I know did not indicate whether the large wound on her thigh would have affected her ability to swim (e.g. caused enough blood loss to make her pass out, or sever tendons etc such that she could not properly move her leg). Though a good forensics expert should be able to tell that, no info was given to that effect that I ever saw.

 

2 - the cause of that large wound remains unexplained. The police seem to be saying it must have been the propellor of the boat simply because they can't (or won't) find another explanation but (1) propellor wounds are usually multiple, parallel cuts, not a single deep gash and (2) one does nto get sucked into the propellor of a boat after falling off the back if the boat was travelling fast, which is what was claimed. Now of course the statements of the people on the boat have changed multiple times, and are generally unreliable, so maybe they lied when they said the boat was going very fast when she fell off it - but then why would she have fallen? Supposedly the fall occurred because the boat  was going at a breakneck speed and veered suddenly. That can certainly cause someone to fall in the water, but should not cause them to hit the propellor. Unless the boat then doubled back and ran that person over, or bumped into them.

So it's the old classic verdict is it?  Suicide? 

 

Hmmmm.

 

How convenient.....

 

Move in now..nothing more to see....

 

 

 

 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

They are trying to get them for throwing evidence overboard (in a deliberate attempt at concealment) and apparently this is the only charge that fits.

 

 

They seemed to have addressed the concealing evidence part in one of the other charges included in the long list cited in the news report here...

 

" various charges, ranging from negligence causing the death of another person, giving false statements to the police and destroying evidence to operating a vessel without a licence, littering and using a vessel with an expired license."

 

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

They seemed to have addressed the concealing evidence part in one of the other charges included in the long list cited in the news report here...

 

" various charges, ranging from negligence causing the death of another person, giving false statements to the police and destroying evidence to operating a vessel without a licence, littering and using a vessel with an expired license."

 

I think the destroying part may have to do with concealing the boat and thoroughly cleaning it before the police could examine it, as that indeed destroyed evidence.  Ditto the removal of pictures of her swimming etc that were deleted from her instagram account, ditto destroyed.

 

The alcohol bottles and glasses tossed overboard weren't destroyed, and were later recovered, so I think that is where the "littering" part comes in.

On 4/26/2022 at 5:45 PM, snoop1130 said:

After two months of extensive investigation, under the glare of public scrutiny, police announced today (Tuesday) that they have concluded that TV actress Nida Patcharaveerapong, aka “Tangmo” died of suffocation from drowning and that she did not accidentally fall into the Chao Phraya River, but she fell due to someone else’s negligence.

Translated:

Hi-Sos are involved and therefore this will never be resolved and a "somebody" might be blamed for something illegal. 
Now - if a commoner was involve?  This would have been an open and shut case.

Natural Causes.   

 

Can happen at any age......my friend cheated on his wife, stole gold and money.....and he also died of natural causes.   

 

nothing to see here. 

8 hours ago, MrJ2U said:

RIP

 

Lets move on.

 

War in Europe

Pandemic

Civil war in Myanmar

Corruption

 

There's so much more than an actress having a very bad day while partying with friends.

She hardly had a "very bad day".  She is dead, probably through no fault of her own.