Man who stole weed from neighbor dies after attack - initially police won't prosecute saying owner had right to defend property

[KhunLA]

25 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

So you think the penalty for a person trying to pinch a few plants / vegetables is for them to be beaten up so bad that they slowly die over seversl days? 

 

Maybe you should go and live in some strict Muslim country. 

NO ... I think someone who doesn't want to live should be able to die on their own terms, as HE DID.

 

If that's another criminal off the streets, then its a ... WIN WIN

[Barnet1900]

7 hours ago, Deli said:

Intruding, stealing and maybe high on on drugs. Don't take the risk if you cannot live with the consequences. No sympathy.

I can't condone kicking someone who's already beaten but people dismiss the notion that anger comes from fear and a fear that the thief could easily have gone inside his home or been confronted by a weaker member of the family and attacked them.

 

The homeowner probably reacted irrationally but where's the manual on how to confront a grown man who has intruded on your family home?

 

At the end of the day, this would not have happened had the thief not made the decision to take what wasn't his.

[4MyEgo]

2 hours ago, DavisH said:

You can't just kill someone in Thailand that enters (unarmed), into your property. There is no "srand your ground" law here. This is the law. Deadly force could be used if the intruder was armed with a gun. 

Or he was found with a knife in his hand, after he was dead, self defence.

[4MyEgo]

1 hour ago, jak2002003 said:

With your logic I would be able to do anything I wanted to someone that I found on my property? 

 

I could keep them chained up and torture them to death over several months... Because they didn't have my permission to be on my land?. 

 

Dumb 

 

Dumb is your reply, why do people always go to the extreme, I made it short and sweet, but you couldn't fathom what I was on about, and that's ok, you don't get it, I get it, next !

[Andrew65]

In the UK we all rememberTony Martin.

[KhunLA]

15 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

In the UK we all rememberTony Martin.

apples & oranges ...

Schizo shooting someone with a shotgun ... ????

 

[Hammerite]

So as to avoid prosecution and conviction if you are inclined to maim or " off '  an intruder, I suggest the following.

1. On no accounts tell all and sundry that you would kill anyone who entered your home. 

2. Use a  weapon which is an ordinarily  household implement, a meat cleaver eg if you have one in the kitchen. Maybe a golf club!!  Back in blighty iron fire pokers used to be standard!!!  Clearly, in terror you just grabbed whatever was to hand.

3  On no account make an admission of guilt. I recommend " I dunno what happened, I was terrified and fearing for my life.  I just defended myself."

 

[Andrew65]

6 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

apples & oranges ...

Schizo shooting someone with a shotgun ... ????

 

Schizo? Someone defending their property?

(He would have been a national hero in the States).

[KhunLA]

3 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

Schizo? Someone defending their property?

"Martin was diagnosed with paranoid personality disorder exacerbated by depression and that his paranoia was specifically directed at anyone intruding into his home" - wiki

[alex8912]

Elephant in the sisters room. Or Chang.  He smoked waaaay more than weed since he was young. Did webfact check fact?  I doubt it! 

[bubblebob]

I would do the same,  my home is not open for people to come and take what they want that's why I keep a base ball bat handy. If I was living in America I'd own a gun. Purely for protection. I have no sympathy for people trespassing on some ones property. 

[sambum]

15 hours ago, mikebell said:

Or the vicious homeowner has 'friends' in high places.  How can anyone be allowed to beat someone up & not face prosecution!  Banana Republic.

Let's not forget that the person who was "beaten up" should not have been there in the first place! He was there to steal marijuana plants, so what is the homeowner supposed to do? 

A. Tell the burglar "Please stop doing that"

B. Tell the burglar "Please stop doing that or I am going to phone the police".

C. Phone the police and say "I have a burglar in my house and he is trying to steal my marijuana plants. Will you please come and tell him to stop?"

D. All of the above, and ask the burglar to stay put until the police arrive.

E. React as any normal homeowner would do, and try to protect his home and property in the most appropriate way at the time e.g. Grab hold of the guy, give him a hiding, throw him out of the front door and say "Don't ever come back, or it'll be worse for you next time!"

 

I had a friend in the UK (Nanny State) who lived in a flat above his Off Licence ,and heard noises from his shop in the early hours of the morning. He found a burglar in the shop and "gave him a good hiding" and phoned a friend of his who was a Detective Sergeant in the Police, who advised him to give a statement saying that he saw something flash in the burglar's hand, he thought it was a knife, and he was just trying to defend himself.

 

The way I look at it is that in both cases - the one in Thailand and the one in the UK - there is somebody who has broken into your property, "with ill intent", and you should have a right to defend it and yourself in order to control the situation, because to wait for the police to arrive could be catastrophic. .

 

[jak2002003]

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

Dumb is your reply, why do people always go to the extreme, I made it short and sweet, but you couldn't fathom what I was on about, and that's ok, you don't get it, I get it, next !

Wait.... Whaaaat???? 

 

You think my view of... not using excessive force upon an intruder onto your land is.......

 

MORE EXTREME..... than your view of.......

 

allowing your wife to attack and maybe kill someone with a  machete.... Because.....everyone has the right to defend their property?  Haha ????

 

You are right.  I don't get it!

[pacovl46]

I'm sorry, but if the guy you're beating up is already at the point where he can't walk or run but has to CRAWL away from you and you're still kicking him then this is excessive force and that's punishable in most countries. 

[Artisi]

7 hours ago, Bangkok Barry said:

Because he used unreasonable force, perhaps. Beating someone so badly that they later die is way over the top. But then, Thais rarely do anything in moderation, especially when it comes to violence. Kicking someone in the head when they're down and helpless is simply caveman savagery, but very common in the Land of Smiles.

And you really believe the usual poor reported stories posted in the media here based on what, the stories related by the family, plus its extremely unlikely the death resulted from the "beating" or didn't you bother reading what transpired well after the event, ie, refusing treatment and food. 

[Artisi]

7 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

The words from a violent mind, who thinks he have the right to take the law in his hands and decide between life and death, just because a person made a break-in.

 

So you don't have any problems with a drug addict entering your house with intent to steal your property and you would be happy to try and subdue this person and wait for the police to arrive sometime within the next day or two, that's if they actually got around to it. 

Do you actually live in Thailand and understand how things actual work or don't work? 

[crouchpeter]

19 hours ago, Artisi said:

Why should they prosecute him? 

Because he killed a man!!!

[crouchpeter]

18 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

I have to disagree with you, as I believe the blame lay solely on the intruder, I mean you know that you wouldn't risk going onto a neighbours property at night or any other property for that matter.

 

It's called trespassing and the intruder was out to steal, regardless if it was ganja, his intention was clear, a good beating should have made him learn a lesson, in my days, the cops would do it.

 

The fact that he refused medical treatment when it was to be administered, shows to me that he is incapable of accepting things for what they are and has a problem mentally.

 

He is lucky my wife didn't catch him in our yard as she wields a manchette pretty well and won't think twice about using it.

 

As for the relatives, well to me, it shows that they are only after money as they can't see past their own noses, the guy was in the wrong place at the wrong time and unfortunately got a beating which medical treatment could have sorted, however he refused it, so there is no manslaughter case to be answered and no compensation to be made in my opinion.

 

Everyone has a right to defend their property and this sends a clear message and is within his rights in my opinion.

I'd be worrying about my wife, if I were you!

[wadman]

13 hours ago, Nsp64 said:

Police threatened the homeowner with a month in jail but reduced it to a 500 baht fine . Now why doi you think they did that?

Now they are warning the relatives of the thief to leave it alone .

The whole thing stinks of bribery .

It wasn't the homeowner who was threatened with 1 month of jail and eventually fined 500 baht.  It was the thief!

 

"He was apprehended by local officials and taken to the Wang Sam Mo police who fined him 500 baht for fighting and let him go though he was initially told he'd have to spend a month in jail.

 

He went home and no one knew that he was coughing up blood after he was badly bruised. He couldn't walk and stopped eating."

[wadman]

7 hours ago, Russell17au said:

There are several things with this story that a lot of ASEAN Now lawyers do not understand and are ignoring what happened. Firstly this man was an intruder and he was assaulted by the property owner. HE WAS NOT KILLED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER. He left the property alive under his own power and 2 weeks later he went to hospital and he REFUSED the medical treatment and he decided to leave the hospital. After this he died. What happened between the time of the assault and his death? Nobody knows and nobody has made any statement to this at this time. Where was his loving family in the 2 weeks between the assault and him refusing treatment at the hospital? Why didn't his loving family make sure he had the treatment that would have saved his life? Anything could have happened to this man in the 2 weeks between the assault and his death that could have saved his life or even sped up his death. The only thing that any court in any country could find would be assault by the property owner and give him a fine because of the time from the assault to his death he could have done various other crimes and nobody knows about them. Plus the refusing by him of the medical treatment which contributed to his death

November 15 at 10 pm: The thief broke into the homeowner's place.  He was then apprehended by local officials who brought him to the police station.  The police fined him 500 baht, and then let him go.  Clearly the thief wasn't that visibly hurt to the point where the police even thought about taking him to the hospital.

 

November 23:  "he went to hospital and was admitted for several days but left after refusing to be fed via a nasal tube."  Even the thief himself didn't think it necessary to seek medical help until 1 week later.

 

December 1: That's when the thief died.  At home, after checking himself out of the hospital.

 

The thief broke in, in the dead of night with some very nasty intentions.  He didn't show any serious injuries afterwards, didn't seek medical help until 1 week later, left after "several" days in the hospital. 

 

Given all this, the onus is entirely on the family of the deceased to prove that the homeowner was responsible for his death in an UNREASONABLE way (i.e. by using an unreasonable amount of force).  The fact that the homeowner MAY have kicked him a few times is not unreasonable imo. 

 

Facing an intruder 1 on 1 in the dead of night is a very scary situation.  You don't know what weapons the other party has, how big he is, how a good a fighter he is.  I myself would have clubbed him over the head with a baseball bat first, just to make sure that's it's me getting him and not vice versa.

[bendejo]

Refused medical treatment.

And what kind of mischief did he get into between Nov. 15 and Dec. 1st?

Maybe got some additional whoopass due to another of his stunts.

No case.

 

 

[jacko45k]

12 hours ago, paul1804 said:

firstly stealing & then refusing medical help.

He did not refuse medical help. I read he refused forced feeding. Sufficient force to evict him from the property was all that was required, grievous bodily harm was not needed. Handing out the right to kill every kid who climbs your wall to get their ball back is taking it too far.

Looks like a great anti-weed argument this thread!

[jacko45k]

12 hours ago, firemans35 said:

Seems after reading comments for both sides what we should be asking discussing is if the crime of stealing from someone justifies the punishment received.

Take it a step back... does a person have the right to prosecute, convict and exact punishment on a trespasser? Sufficient force to protect ones property and family is no argument. This was some drugged up fool stealing leaves from your garden... like the local kids scrumping apples!

[jacko45k]

9 hours ago, Billy Bloggs said:

AND if the thief had stayed in hospital he probably would not have died.

Probable and maybes... had he not been overly beaten I suspect he would not have died either. 

[Gknrd]

I have read that in California in the growing area there are killings all the time. A few years ago it was called the killing fields.  If there is money involved best to avoid.. 

[hotchilli]

22 hours ago, webfact said:

On 23rd November he went to hospital and was admitted for several days but left after refusing to be fed via a nasal tube.

In this case the police are correct..

he died after being admitted to hospital and refusing treatment.

[4MyEgo]

6 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

Wait.... Whaaaat???? 

 

You think my view of... not using excessive force upon an intruder onto your land is.......

 

MORE EXTREME..... than your view of.......

 

allowing your wife to attack and maybe kill someone with a  machete.... Because.....everyone has the right to defend their property?  Haha ????

 

You are right.  I don't get it!

Ok, can you imagine that it's dark, your asleep, you hear a noise, you go outside, you see someone on your property, who knows what time it is, what would be your reaction be.

 

I know mine wouldn't be, can I help you, or would you like to help yourself, perhaps you would like a leg up to our daughters bedroom window where they are sleeping, maybe the keys to our car, no, raping my wife, then our daughters, then killing us all and taking off with our car, hmmm, would you like that with one lump of sugar or two.

 

Let's put it this way, if someone is on our property without an invite at night when out gates are locked, they are not there with good intentions so if I beat the <deleted> out of them, or killed them, I wouldn't think twice about defending our family and property.

 

Lets put it another way, the intruder would prefer my beating or death at my hands as it would be quicker than my wife's.

 

Not interested in laws in any country, and if I had to deal with the consequences of it after the fact, then so be it, as opposed to standing there asking questions to someone who is on our property, uninvited and with who knows what intensions.

 

Yes we certainly didn't grow up with silver spoons in our mouths, we grew up in the real world, seen more than most and can understand the difference between an invited person to an intruder at night.

 

If you can't understand the above, then offer your intruder a cup of coffee when he turns up, because waiting for the keystone cops here will be too late.

 

 

[4MyEgo]

3 hours ago, crouchpeter said:

I'd be worrying about my wife, if I were you!

Let's just say she's got my six.

[jacko45k]

16 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

perhaps you would like a leg up to our daughters bedroom window where they are sleeping, maybe the keys to our car, no, raping my wife, then our daughters, then killing us all and taking off with our car, hmmm, would you like that with one lump of sugar or two.

Did you wake up in Los Angeles rather than Udon Thani perhaps?

[Gottfrid]

3 hours ago, Artisi said:

So you don't have any problems with a drug addict entering your house with intent to steal your property and you would be happy to try and subdue this person and wait for the police to arrive sometime within the next day or two, that's if they actually got around to it. 

Do you actually live in Thailand and understand how things actual work or don't work? 

Yes I live in Thailand, since approx. 20 years. The question is not if I live in Thailand. The big question is if you understand what I posted and can take that to you without twisting it to something it is not meant to be.

When did I say that I have no problem with drug addict entering my home?
When did I say I would be happy to subdue him?

Also, you know that it does not take 1 or 2 days for the police to come. If you don´t, you do not live in Thailand or own very poor knowledge. 

This is what I have been opposing:

The need and approval of member on this forum to use deadly force on a person already on the ground.
 

If a person is already on the ground, you really do not need to do much for him to stay until police comes. I my world it would be ok with a quick and precise punch on the chin to put him to sleep. He wouldn´t die of that, but kicking a person already down on the ground is out of the question.

Now, you can try to read and understand before twisting the information to your advantage.