Taiwanese actress hits back at RTP - Thailand's great but your "unclean" police are NOT - tells them to "stop talking trash"

[Lucky Bones]

Only read the headline.

 

She probably made a fair point.

 

Story far too long to examine.????????

[wadman]

26 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Where did the lady state that the Police put a vape in her hands ?

 

The article states they she has claimed this ?...  where did they source that info if no other social or news outlet has this information?.... is it made up? 

... link to the the girl making their statement on her own social media page or wherever she made it ?

 

 

Seems very dodgy as if the Nation have been executing a smear campaign.....

 

 

 

 

Initially her story was posted on Facebook here http://www.facebook.com/taiwantopic

 

Posts are in Thai, but you can click on auto translate. You have to wade through a lot of posts to even get a sense of what's going on. 

 

Allegedly, one of her claims goes like: "she claimed that the police actually took her money, put a vape in her hands and took a photo".

 

That is not the same as she claiming that police "planted" a vape on her. It is likely one of those crime reenactment photos that police are so fond of in Thailand. And as insurance in case it becomes public ("she had a vape! Vaping is illegal in Thailand!") 

Edited January 29, 2023 by wadman

[wadman]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thats exactly what it seems like to me too... 

 

That said: Why is there no clear direct statement from this lady?.... 

 

I’m wondering when the police to obfuscate some more and file defamation charges against the actress. 

 

Can they really file defamation charges against her? Under Thai law they could. But I assume that she was out of Thailand by the time she posted her story on Facebook. If her story is true, it's not defamation under Taiwan law, or what's generally accepted internationally. 

 

So yes, they can file charges against her in Thailand. 

 

But those charges wouldn't hold up outside of Thailand, so I don't see how they can put in a request for interpol to arrest her, and extradite her. 

[Artisi]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

Where did the lady state that the Police put a vape in her hands ?

 

The article states they she has claimed this ?...  where did they source that info if no other social or news outlet has this information?.... is it made up? 

... link to the the girl making their statement on her own social media page or wherever she made it ?

 

 

Seems very dodgy as if the Nation have been executing a smear campaign.....

 

 

 

And it's certainly generating advertising and clicks here - anything to increase the bottom line, "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" 

[Artisi]

37 minutes ago, wadman said:

Can they really file defamation charges against her? Under Thai law they could. But I assume that she was out of Thailand by the time she posted her story on Facebook. If her story is true, it's not defamation under Taiwan law, or what's generally accepted internationally. 

 

So yes, they can file charges against her in Thailand. 

 

But those charges wouldn't hold up outside of Thailand, so I don't see how they can put in a request for interpol to arrest her, and extradite her. 

Don't worry, it's just all p1ss and wind, garbage reporting and unintelligent retaliation from the BIB. 

[jacko45k]

23 hours ago, Derek B said:

27000 baht is buying her a lot of publicity and it is not over yet.

It is getting the police a lot too...

[nigelforbes]

8 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Are you also devastated and beside yourself with grief ??? 

You're actually in the the number 4 slot, only a couple of people are permanently ignored, others get reviewed and reinstated after I think they're become more normal once again, which obviously takes some people much longer than others. The chap before you was more difficult. I've known him for years and years but one day he just flipped and began trolling and wouldn't stopped - I see no reason why I should have to see that nonsense. Even after I sent him to Ignore, he continued trolling by PM.....I mean really! I fear he may never fully recover because he keeps mentioning his new status to everyone, at every opportunity. There have been a couple who made my list where I found out later I'd got it wrong, one of whom I'm quite chummy with now because we both seem to have a similar outlook  and standard for debate. I suppose everyone has their off days, from time to time.

[nigelforbes]

13 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Let us not mince words then - I suspect that the standard fine is laid down, and the police operate a corrupt "dual pricing"system for foreigners for their own benefit.

 

You however, and the tenor of all your posts in this thread supports this conclusion, are quite happy to support open corruption in the police force, whether because as @internationalism has suggested you have links with senior ranks in the RTP, or because for some other reason you feel it justified. I am, far from clutching at straws, happy with my position( far from crazy) which I have held for quite a number of years - I presume you are with yours. 

I think I've learned enough after so many years here to understand that these small foreigner surcharges are part of the system and not something to get upset or excited about, dual pricing exists in many areas, why not in police fines also! I don't view that as supporting corruption, I view that as understand and accepting how things work, there is no benefit on the effort/reward scale where trying to push back against that system is worthwhile.

 

Do I have links to senior RTP? I bought my house because it suited is, was the right price in the right location, it just happened to have been constructed and owned by a police general. Should I have said no, I can't buy the house from you because you were RTP (now retired)...tricky that! And one of neighbours further down the soi is RTP, he and his wife are nice people who have helped us and we have helped them, we've shared many meals together. Should I not do that, just because he is RTP....another tricky one that! In that context, yes, I do have links to RTP, so? 

 

None of the above has much to do with the subject of the OP yet it does indirectly. I'm pretty certain that time will show that the lady in question, ba nam pen tua (sic) and that her accusations were not valid, let's wait and see shall we. In the meantime, I'm willing to keep an open mind regarding guilt or innocence, not so most other posters here....which is really sad.

[xtrnuno41]

Thai police, however, claim that according to her taxi driver and witnesses she was heavily drunk, had illegal vaping equipment, was uncooperative, and her visa was incorrect. Charlene has denied all these statements and said that she had not been drinking, was fully cooperative although admitted there were language barriers, and did not break any laws.

 

Just what you can expect from a spoiled chick. Terrible attitude.

[azt219]

2 minutes ago, xtrnuno41 said:

Thai police, however, claim that according to her taxi driver and witnesses she was heavily drunk, had illegal vaping equipment, was uncooperative, and her visa was incorrect. Charlene has denied all these statements and said that she had not been drinking, was fully cooperative although admitted there were language barriers, and did not break any laws.

 

Just what you can expect from a spoiled chick. Terrible attitude.

I mean, even if she was a spoiled chick etc, does it warrant the 27k THB blackmail?

 

Everyone knows the Thai police extort, they were just called out this time and it's made the news and causing more loss of face, so they're trying anything to deflect blame.  They deserve every ounce of ridicule and disrespect.  

[FritsSikkink]

12 minutes ago, azt219 said:

I mean, even if she was a spoiled chick etc, does it warrant the 27k THB blackmail?

 

Everyone knows the Thai police extort, they were just called out this time and it's made the news and causing more loss of face, so they're trying anything to deflect blame.  They deserve every ounce of ridicule and disrespect.  

She lied about the vaping, she lied about the 2 hours, they have the CCTV it was 47 minutes, she lied about going into a soi to pay money. She never went in to a soi. Her taxi driver said she was very loud in the taxi and thought she was drunk.

Edited January 30, 2023 by FritsSikkink

[nigelforbes]

16 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

She lied about the vaping, she lied about the 2 hours, they have the CCTV it was 47 minutes, she lied about going into a soi to pay money. She never went in to a soi. Her taxi driver said she was very loud in the taxi and thought she was drunk.

Off with her head.

[mikeymike100]

21 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

She lied about the vaping, she lied about the 2 hours, they have the CCTV it was 47 minutes, she lied about going into a soi to pay money. She never went in to a soi. Her taxi driver said she was very loud in the taxi and thought she was drunk.

The cops said they have the CCTV, but haven't as yet published it?

The cops said she lied about the vaping.

The cops said she lied about paying money.

The cops said her taxi driver said she was very loud etc

Now I don't know what happened, but the cops do not have a very good track record of telling the absolute truth, do they?

When the cops eventually publish the unedited CCTV footage we will know?

[ThailandRyan]

46 minutes ago, xtrnuno41 said:

Thai police, however, claim that according to her taxi driver and witnesses she was heavily drunk, had illegal vaping equipment, was uncooperative, and her visa was incorrect. Charlene has denied all these statements and said that she had not been drinking, was fully cooperative although admitted there were language barriers, and did not break any laws.

 

Just what you can expect from a spoiled chick. Terrible attitude.

And you bought the RTP story hook lone and sinker...

[ThailandRyan]

11 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

The cops said they have the CCTV, but haven't as yet published it?

The cops said she lied about the vaping.

The cops said she lied about paying money.

The cops said her taxi driver said she was very loud etc

Now I don't know what happened, but the cops do not have a very good track record of telling the absolute truth, do they?

When the cops eventually publish the unedited CCTV footage we will know?

Should have used a plastic bag or a few of them

[ThailandRyan]

41 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

She lied about the vaping, she lied about the 2 hours, they have the CCTV it was 47 minutes, she lied about going into a soi to pay money. She never went in to a soi. Her taxi driver said she was very loud in the taxi and thought she was drunk.

So you want to believe the RTP without them showing the CCTV or body cams, of which according to the general who viewed them they don't show much as the location was just a bit far out. Yet Chuwit has more info from a Thai lady who was also with the Taiwaneese actress and not listed by the RTP.

Edited January 30, 2023 by ThailandRyan

[richard_smith237]

7 hours ago, wadman said:

Can they really file defamation charges against her? Under Thai law they could. But I assume that she was out of Thailand by the time she posted her story on Facebook. If her story is true, it's not defamation under Taiwan law, or what's generally accepted internationally. 

 

So yes, they can file charges against her in Thailand. 

 

But those charges wouldn't hold up outside of Thailand, so I don't see how they can put in a request for interpol to arrest her, and extradite her. 

Agreed....   Nothing has been found true or false at the moment, but the legitimacy of the public claims made by the Taiwanese lady matter little in a Thai Defamation case, IF one were to be filed. 

 

The obvious reason for filing such a case is not to win it, but for the publicity - I don’t put the RTP beyond acting with such hubris with the belief that this may sway the optics. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

58 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

She lied about the vaping, she lied about the 2 hours, they have the CCTV it was 47 minutes, she lied about going into a soi to pay money. She never went in to a soi. Her taxi driver said she was very loud in the taxi and thought she was drunk.

Yes... ALL of that, IF you believe the Police reports and believe the Police have not lied. 

 

IF you are saying the CCTV was 47 minutes... the GrabDrive has already stated he was there for an hour before he left....   It would seem they have not looked at the full CCTV then !!!

 

 

When I’m in a taxi with friends and we’ve had a few, sometimes we are joking, laughing... it can get loud.

I’m not sure how that is possibly an indication that this girl was not extorted for 27,000 baht.  Quite the opposite in fact, being under the influence may have made her an easier mark in the eyes of the police officers at the check-point.

 

Some of the logic behind the obfuscation is remarkably questionable, utterly desperate in fact. 

 

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by richard_smith237

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, xtrnuno41 said:

Thai police, however, claim that according to her taxi driver and witnesses she was heavily drunk, had illegal vaping equipment, was uncooperative, and her visa was incorrect. Charlene has denied all these statements and said that she had not been drinking, was fully cooperative although admitted there were language barriers, and did not break any laws.

 

Just what you can expect from a spoiled chick. Terrible attitude.

Indeed.... 

 

Thai Police Man: Your Visa (stamp) is illegal.... you pay fine.

Taiwanese actress: No its not... I’m not paying a fine.

 

Thai Police... >>>  She was uncooperative....

 

Of course she was, who wouldn't be uncooperative when being extorted !!! 

Edited January 30, 2023 by richard_smith237

[Liverpool Lou]

9 hours ago, Artisi said:

18 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

The police reported that they did.

Therefore it must be true. 

No, of course that's not the case that it must be true but it does seem to be true this time because the RTP are going there to interview the actress and her friends.   I doubt that they'd be putting themselves in the firing line at this stage if they don't have anything to back up their side of the story.   "Therefore it must be true" applies to the Taiwanese woman also, don't forget.

[Liverpool Lou]

16 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

The problem is, its all hearsay? The police are not providing any actual evidence.

Neither is the woman!

[richard_smith237]

4 hours ago, nigelforbes said:

You're actually in the the number 4 slot, only a couple of people are permanently ignored, others get reviewed and reinstated after I think they're become more normal once again, which obviously takes some people much longer than others. The chap before you was more difficult. I've known him for years and years but one day he just flipped and began trolling and wouldn't stopped - I see no reason why I should have to see that nonsense. Even after I sent him to Ignore, he continued trolling by PM.....I mean really! I fear he may never fully recover because he keeps mentioning his new status to everyone, at every opportunity. There have been a couple who made my list where I found out later I'd got it wrong, one of whom I'm quite chummy with now because we both seem to have a similar outlook  and standard for debate. I suppose everyone has their off days, from time to time.

I just ignore the people I want to ignore....    they don’t need to go on an ignore list or anything...  

If I don’t want to get ‘trigged by someones post’ I can just ignore it. 

 

 

It may say something for my maturity levels but I find it quite amusing to verbally spar with people I disagree with...   Mods don’t like it sometimes though. 

 

I also find it highly amusing when some guys state... ‘Right thats it, you are on my ignore list’... as if thats some how a ‘win’ and they’ve snuck in the last word in etc.....      I never understood that response.

 

If someone wants to ignore another person, just do that...  why even bother telling them about it ?

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

17 hours ago, billd766 said:

18 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

The police reported that they did.

So we have to accept the word of the police?

 

That still makes it one sided and biased,

So we have to accept the word of the alleged drunk, obstreperous woman and disregard everything the police claim?  Doing that isn't one-sided and biased?

 

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Liverpool Lou

[Sydebolle]

On 1/29/2023 at 7:22 AM, bamnutsak said:

In 1998 a change was made so that the RTP report directly to the PM. Up until then they did report to the Minister of the Interior.

 

So Prayut is the PM, the Defense Minister and the top cop. Handy that.

Every day is school day, did not know that. So police (and the sub-ordinating immigration) is in the responsibility of the top banana? Nothing else to do it seems and the interior minister has more free time for other activities then ???? 

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Neither is the woman!

To be fair... what evidence can the woman provide ??

 

There were reports that her compatriots had recorded the ‘incident’ but were forced to delete their recordings....  others have pointed out that these deleted recordings may be present in a ‘deleted items’ folder.

 

The GrabDriver was apparently there standing by for an hour....  why so long?... this was not a simple, check-and-on-your way stop... It took over an hour...  What was going on for that hour if the Police were not charging the tourists with anything ?

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

So we have to accept the word of the alleged drunk, obstreperous woman and disregard everything the police claim?  Doing that isn't one-sided and biased?

IF you are calling her ‘drunk and obstreperous’ then aren’t you already accepting the claims made by the police ????

 

After all there are also reports that the Taiwanese lady states she was not drunk and was cooperative although there were language difficulties. 

 

 

In attempting to be balanced... I doubt she was completely sober at that time, I also doubt she was fully cooperative, who would be?... But I also doubt the police were carrying out an innocently intentioned ‘check’ and there was no extortion....  (my bias is playing a part here in both sides). 

 

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

24 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

So we have to accept the word of the alleged drunk, obstreperous woman and disregard everything the police claim?  Doing that isn't one-sided and biased?

IF you are calling her ‘drunk and obstreperous’ then aren’t you already accepting the claims made by the police ????

No, I'm accepting one of their claims, not all of them...yet.

[mikeymike100]

29 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Neither is the woman!

You are correct, but the cops have the evidence, the CCTV footage?

The girl doesn't have anything.

 

[Liverpool Lou]

18 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

30 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Neither is the woman!

To be fair... what evidence can the woman provide ??

To be "fair", you're suggesting that because she cannot provide any evidence she should just be believed?  Really?  

 

Maybe she would have more credibility in some eyes if she had reported the alleged extortion while she was here instead of waiting until she was out of the country.   Maybe the real story will come out (either side's) after she and her friends have been interviewed by the police who are now gong to Taiwan for that purpose.  Would the RTP risk the consequences of not being able to back up their version of the events with the associated publicity of going to Taiwan if they weren't sure of their case?

[Liverpool Lou]

7 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

38 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Neither is the woman!

You are correct, but the cops have the evidence, the CCTV footage?

The girl doesn't have anything.

Apparently, yes, so  I wonder how much she's looking forward to her and her friends' being interviewed in Taiwan by the Thai police?