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

[Dan O]

4 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

Directly reporting to the police that the police are corrupt, extortionists and liars, might not be such a good idea?

Leaving the country then reporting it on social media seems a good idea?????

Reporting this type of behavior on social media seems to be the only way to gain the attention needed to obtain a reaction, although the admissions and solution is still less than appropriate.  

[Puccini]

Police has allegedly admitted the extorsion.

 

 

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, Puccini said:

Police has allegedly admitted the extorsion.

 

 

 BP article listed the apology for not confiscating the value pen and then releasing the actress.

 

They acknowledged that the evidence seems to supporting the internet suspicions seem to be correct. Thats not an admission or apology but a non admission admission.

 

Soon don't be surprised that it turns out as a misunderstand and that the officer collected the 27000 baht fine for the vape pen but calculated the amount incorrectly. 

[Lorry]

12 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

How do they know she was drunk, did they breathalyse her ???

She couldn't even string 5 words together into a decent Thai sentence!

Obviously completely drunk

[Artisi]

9 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Yes, I know.  That was made public just a few hours ago and, of course, I accept it on face value.  All I was asking for was fair consideration being given to both sides at a time (pre that announcement) when neither party had produced any evidence. 

Trying to be fair, that sounds about right - after accusing her of being a drunk etc, 

[Puccini]

16 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

...she has produced no evidence, whatsoever, that her story is 100% true...

Is this the infamous "guilty until proven innocent"?

[nigelforbes]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

Trying to be fair, that sounds about right - after accusing her of being a drunk etc, 

Do you know if she will be charged with bribing a police officer?

[Puccini]

17 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

Do you know if she will be charged with bribing a police officer?

An unmentionable (forum rules) news source reported that police talked about the police "extorting" the money", not about Charlene bribing the police. From a legal point of view, this is probably an important difference.

[nigelforbes]

3 minutes ago, Puccini said:

An unmentionable (forum rules) news source reported that police talked about the police "extorting" the money", not about Charlene bribing the police. From a legal point of view, this is probably an important difference.

Yes I saw that and tried to post it but others had different ideas! Just so you know, apparently it's OK to say Bangkok Post, you just can't link or post anything from them, so, Bangkok Post, Bangkok Post  Bangkok Post! ???? I posted this in another thread, I think this is how it ought to have been played and how I might want to play things, if in her situation....all theoretical of course and ignores the emotional/situational aspects:

 

A better approach of course might have been to say oops, I'm sorry, I didn't know vaping equipment is illegal in Thailand (which is true), of course I should be charged (which is also true)...let's go. At the station, the coin may drop with more senior people, hmm, this is the first person we've ever charged for this crime, perhaps we should let her go. Or, in court the judge may have the same reaction, if indeed a lawyer in the meantime didn't intervene. There's no extortion, there's no bribery charge and the fine would likely be less. 

 

 

[Puccini]

Whereas it does not seem to be a crime to be drunk as a passenger in a taxi, according to an unmentionable (forum rules) news source the storyline about Charlene being drunk when she was stopped at a police checkpoint appears to be as follows:

 

1. Charlene was not drunk.

 

2. The police persuaded the taxi driver to say that Charlene was drunk

 

3. The taxi driver said that Charlene was drunk.

[Puccini]

7 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

...Just so you know, apparently it's OK to say Bangkok Post...

Thank you for that, but with the newspaper you mention I would be afraid of being sued by them for violation of their intellectual property rights or whatever it is called. The stern legal warning they had on their website when, some years ago before they subsequently temporarily went behind a paywall, is indelibly impressed upon my memory.

 

My unmentionable source was The Nation and I might take the risk of mentioning that name.

[Salerno]

38 minutes ago, Puccini said:

My unmentionable source was The Nation and I might take the risk of mentioning that name.

You can quote and link to The Nation.

[xtrnuno41]

21 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

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 !!! 

You forgot a point She was heavily drunk !

Have you ever seen anyone like that, being rational or capable to say or do anything?

[nigelforbes]

3 minutes ago, xtrnuno41 said:

You forgot a point She was heavily drunk !

Have you ever seen anyone like that, being rational or capable to say or do anything?

No no no, the herd says she was stone cold sober, tee-total in fact, the alcohol angle was merely a deceptive story planted by the crooked police in order to destroy her pure as the driven snow character....how could they.

[petermik]

24 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

No no no, the herd says she was stone cold sober, tee-total in fact, the alcohol angle was merely a deceptive story planted by the crooked police in order to destroy her pure as the driven snow character....how could they.

Looks like the police have been made to look foolish once again......

 

[Artisi]

30 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

No no no, the herd says she was stone cold sober, tee-total in fact, the alcohol angle was merely a deceptive story planted by the crooked police in order to destroy her pure as the driven snow character....how could they.

Just as you did. 

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, xtrnuno41 said:

You forgot a point She was heavily drunk !

Have you ever seen anyone like that, being rational or capable to say or do anything?

She wasnt drunk according to news reports. The police coerced the taxi drive to say that to cover the extortion

[internationalism]

"BREAKING: Seven police officers at Huay Kwang checkpoint have been transferred on Tuesday to inactive post and will possibly face criminal charges for extorting money from Taiwanese actress Charlene An on Jan 4."

https://www.facebook.com/KhaosodEnglish/posts/pfbid035zwAZRT2P9qEPQ46NdptWwHVrbDsAP8xwbKtyY3AJiuKkkjL5wXZekKsH59LtVjEl

[Artisi]

35 minutes ago, internationalism said:

"BREAKING: Seven police officers at Huay Kwang checkpoint have been transferred on Tuesday to inactive post and will possibly face criminal charges for extorting money from Taiwanese actress Charlene An on Jan 4."

https://www.facebook.com/KhaosodEnglish/posts/pfbid035zwAZRT2P9qEPQ46NdptWwHVrbDsAP8xwbKtyY3AJiuKkkjL5wXZekKsH59LtVjEl

if true, that's great and certainly scuttles the nonsense regurgitated by some of the experts here.  

[Liverpool Lou]

7 hours ago, Artisi said:

16 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Yes, I know.  That was made public just a few hours ago and, of course, I accept it on face value.  All I was asking for was fair consideration being given to both sides at a time (pre that announcement) when neither party had produced any evidence. 

Expand  

Trying to be fair, that sounds about right - after accusing her of being a drunk etc, 

I didn't accuse her of being drunk, her Grab driver and the police did, I just commented on that.   Get your facts right.

[richard_smith237]

3 hours ago, xtrnuno41 said:

On 1/30/2023 at 7:57 AM, richard_smith237 said:

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 !!! 

You forgot a point She was heavily drunk !

Have you ever seen anyone like that, being rational or capable to say or do anything?

Who said she was ‘heavily drunk’ ????

 

It is stated that the GrabDriver reported that she was drunk and loud in the GrabCar (before they were stopped). It has since been suggested that he was ‘coerced’ in to stating that. 

 

This was one of the many of the points used by the police to muddy the waters in their smear campaign to tarnish the reputation of this lady in a very poorly executed attempt to ‘save face’ and protect themselves. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

6 hours ago, nigelforbes said:

Do you know if she will be charged with bribing a police officer?

Being extorted is not the same as ‘offering a bribe’....   she was the victim not the instigator. 

[Liverpool Lou]

6 hours ago, Puccini said:

22 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

...she has produced no evidence, whatsoever, that her story is 100% true...

Is this the infamous "guilty until proven innocent"?

Did I ever say that she was guilty?  No, I did not.

What I posted was accurate, she produced no evidence whatsoever backing her story, still has not (and no need to now) but she did lie which cast doubt on her version; remember that lie that she had spoken to Interpol about her complaint! 

 

That the RTP have now admitted wrongdoing has been favourable to her and I'm happy that the guilty parties have been identified. 

[Lorry]

5 hours ago, nigelforbes said:

A better approach of course might have been to say oops, I'm sorry, I didn't know vaping equipment is illegal in Thailand (which is true),

Sometimes I have to tell friends who come as tourists that vaping is illegal. The reaction is always incredulity. They don't believe me.

 

But, yes, someone should have told them "you can smoke weed, but you cannot vape".

[richard_smith237]

14 hours ago, Dan O said:

 Soon don't be surprised that it turns out as a misunderstand and that the officer collected the 27000 baht fine for the vape pen but calculated the amount incorrectly. 

I hope the BiB don’t read this... You have just given them an excellent idea to turn this around. 

 

“after carrying out a full investigation we found our offices to have performed a search at a police checkpoint. Upon finding illegal vaping paraphernalia the subject was fined 2,700 baht - however, due to language difficulties the subject paid too much, they departed the scene before we could provide them with a receipt of their fine” !!!!   (satire). 

 

 

The point must also be noted that the Police have announced that this check-point was not in fact a legal check-point and had been set up without the correct authorisation. 

I wonder how many check-points are set up around the city on a whim of the local boys in brown to try and raise revenue.... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nigelforbes]

3 minutes ago, Lorry said:

Sometimes I have to tell friends who come as tourists that vaping is illegal. The reaction is always incredulity. They don't believe me.

 

But, yes, someone should have told them "you can smoke weed, but you cannot vape".

There are plenty of unique aspects to life here which if you aren't aware will land you on trouble, les majeste and defamation being two.

[richard_smith237]

6 hours ago, Puccini said:

22 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

...she has produced no evidence, whatsoever, that her story is 100% true...

Is this the infamous "guilty until proven innocent"?

Liverpool Lou sometimes forgets he’s on a forum and seems to believe he’s in a courtroom and that we can only discuss proven facts and notarised statements...  

 

Opinions based on experience and interpretation of reports should not be presented because they can’t be backed up with evidence. 

 

As such we see that LL rarely discusses the actual events or topic at hand but instead seems to police the forum and tell posters that their opinion is wrong because they have no evidence or actual proof !!... 

 

Sometimes he is right of-course and he calls out posters with ridiculous and outrageous claims. 

Other times he’s almost deliberately obtuse and operates outside of the grey-area in which most events and discussions take place. This grey area seems completely elude him. 

 

We’ve seen a perfect example of this in this topic when to many of us it was inconceivable that the Police were not lying... but without any clear evidence LL repeatedly suggested that as our opinions could  not be backed up with proven facts we were incorrect to present them.

 

It turns out the cynicism and opinion many of us presented couldn’t have been more true - a discussion forum, not a court-room !!!

[Liverpool Lou]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

As such we see that LL rarely discusses the actual events or topic at hand but instead seems to police the forum and tell posters that their opinion is wrong because they have no evidence or actual proof !!... 

I have never told any poster that their opinion is wrong.  If you can quote one opinion that I have said needs evidence for it to have any standing then quote it here.    I have suggested that many posters who make inaccurate assertions without evidence or facts are making unfair assertions.  Assertions are not the same as opinions.

 

The way that I respond to posts is up to me, that you interpret it as "policing" is just your opinion but not all of us want to post several paragraphs of mostly irrelevance to try to make a point and even fewer of us want to read those lengthy posts.  If I disagree with a post I have the right on this forum to say so, regardless of what you think.  I also have the right to not have the same opinion as every other sheep on this forum.

[Liverpool Lou]

31 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Liverpool Lou sometimes forgets he’s on a forum and seems to believe he’s in a courtroom and that we can only discuss proven facts and notarised statements...  

 

Opinions based on experience and interpretation of reports should not be presented because they can’t be backed up with evidence. 

 

As such we see that LL rarely discusses the actual events or topic at hand but instead seems to police the forum and tell posters that their opinion is wrong because they have no evidence or actual proof !!... 

 

Sometimes he is right of-course and he calls out posters with ridiculous and outrageous claims. 

Other times he’s almost deliberately obtuse and operates outside of the grey-area in which most events and discussions take place. This grey area seems completely elude him. 

 

We’ve seen a perfect example of this in this topic when to many of us it was inconceivable that the Police were not lying... but without any clear evidence LL repeatedly suggested that as our opinions could  not be backed up with proven facts we were incorrect to present them.

 

It turns out the cynicism and opinion many of us presented couldn’t have been more true - a discussion forum, not a court-room !!!

That's just your opinion!

[nigelforbes]

10 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

That's just your opinion!

Just say no to sheep.