British Man Arrested After Attacking a Tuk Tuk Taxi Driver in Phuket – VIDEO

[stevenl]

8 hours ago, 2009 said:

The tuk tuk driver was telling him to give him money. 

 

It's not his place to do that. He was trying to force money out of him.

 

In that case, there's a due process to follow to get the guilty party to pay up for damage (if there even was any)

 

And maybe the insurance wouldn't pay up because of some fault of the tuk tuk driver, such as no road tax or expired license, in which case nobody is "ponying up", lol

You're way off the mark with both statements.

[2009]

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

1)  The OP does not state that he "demanded" money, it says that he asked for compensation which is reasonable.

2)  You used the word "extortion".   You have no idea whether extortion was used.

It's not reasonable. 

 

Compensation for what? You can't just go around telling people to give you money. 

 

Insurance is there to fix any damage.

 

 

[2009]

58 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You're way off the mark with both statements.

Which ones? Where am I off mark?

[Liverpool Lou]

2 minutes ago, 2009 said:

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

1)  The OP does not state that he "demanded" money, it says that he asked for compensation which is reasonable.

2)  You used the word "extortion".   You have no idea whether extortion was used.

Expand  

It's not reasonable. 

 

Compensation for what? You can't just go around telling people to give you money. 

 

Insurance is there to fix any damage.

No one, as far as anyone here knows, "went around telling people to give him money".

If the motorcyclist damaged his taxi it is perfectly reasonable for him to ask for compensation to repair it whether it is by cash or from the Manc's bike insurer.  Why should the taxi driver have to claim on his insurance for damage by a third party?

[Liverpool Lou]

7 minutes ago, 2009 said:

Which ones? Where am I off mark?

All of it, with the exception of your third paragraph in the quoted post.

[2009]

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No one, as far as anyone here knows, "went around telling people to give him money".

If the motorcyclist damaged his taxi it is perfectly reasonable for him to ask for compensation to repair it whether it is by cash or from the Manc's bike insurer. 

 

There's civilized process to follow to just telling the person to pay up.

 

Did you watch the video?

 

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Why should the taxi driver have to claim on his insurance for damage by a third party?

Nobody suggested this 

[stevenl]

12 minutes ago, 2009 said:

Which ones? Where am I off mark?

No point, you're ignoring your own definition. 

[giddyup]

10 hours ago, 2009 said:

The tuk tuk driver was telling him to give him money. 

 

It's not his place to do that. He was trying to force money out of him.

 

In that case, there's a due process to follow to get the guilty party to pay up for damage (if there even was any)

 

And maybe the insurance wouldn't pay up because of some fault of the tuk tuk driver, such as no road tax or expired license, in which case nobody is "ponying up", lol

And maybe the falangs were unlicenced, uninsured and drunk, who knows?

[Kenchamp]

6 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No one, as far as anyone here knows, "went around telling people to give him money".

 

You have been here long enough to know or you should know that there is a strong likelihood that that''s what happened and that is why things got heated between them. I will concede that nobody knows for sure that extortion was on the tuk tuk drivers mind but that is in my opinion is what most of those guys are about. Dishing out beatings is another.

Yes he was entitled to fair compensation for any damage that was caused but again i doubt that fair was or would ever be on that tuk tuk drivers mind. Opportunity to make money was.

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

5 minutes ago, Kenchamp said:

You have been here long enough to know or you should know that there is a strong likelihood that that''s what happened and that is why things got heated between them. I will concede that nobody knows for sure that extortion was on the tuk tuk drivers mind but that is in my opinion is what most of those guys are about. Dishing out beatings is another.

Yes he was entitled to fair compensation for any damage that was caused but again i doubt that fair was or would ever be on that tuk tuk drivers mind. Opportunity to make money was.

You mean that I have been here long enough to over-generalise, falsely accuse and speculate about extortion from the victim without any evidence at all?  Gawd.

[Kenchamp]

10 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

You mean that I have been here long enough to over-generalise, falsely accuse and speculate about extortion from the victim without any evidence at all?  Gawd.

Call it circumstantial evidence if you like, a bit like you are using in assuming the farang did in fact even hit his tuk tuk or cause it any damage at all. Or did you see the alleged collision? 

[2009]

48 minutes ago, giddyup said:

And maybe the falangs were unlicenced, uninsured and drunk, who knows?

Exactly, hence why there's a due process to be followed.

 

16 minutes ago, Kenchamp said:

Call it circumstantial evidence if you like, a bit like you are using in assuming the farang did in fact even hit his tuk tuk or cause it any damage at all. Or did you see the alleged collision? 

Good point.

 

We haven't seen any damage yet, nor the collision.

[Pink Mist]

A baiting off topic post has been removed.

[Kenchamp]

Just watched the clip again a few times and from what i can see and hear it's a real shame that tuk tuk driver didn't get more of a hiding or the farangs didn't get away with it. 

 

Not condoning using violence to settle disputes but when dealing with that trash who like to dish it out then.......

[2009]

4 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

All of it, with the exception of your third paragraph in the quoted post.

I don't think so.

 

Feel free to correct me on this points

[Watchit]

4 hours ago, giddyup said:

And maybe the falangs were unlicenced, uninsured and drunk, who knows?

Yes who knows any of the facts for sure. All we have to go on is a short video where it's clear the Thai was shouting and being aggresive and that the thug in the black shirt hit him.

If i had to guess then i would say there was a minor scrape and the Thai demanded exessive money and thought he could imtimidate the farang into paying. Anybody remember the Jetski scams. Same same but different

[BarraMarra]

On 5/12/2023 at 8:01 AM, torturedsole said:

That's not the issue now as the damage should have been dealt with at the time. The falangs had every opportunity to call their insurance company (if there was one, but I doubt it) to settle the matter amicably. 

 

But they didn't, the tuk tuk driver was assaulted and off they went. 

Do you know what will happen if a falang assaults a thai where thais are nearby ? 

[torturedsole]

1 minute ago, BarraMarra said:

Do you know what will happen if a falang assaults a thai where thais are nearby ? 

I'm trying to grasp your point...but, computer says no.

[BarraMarra]

32 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

I'm trying to grasp your point...but, computer says no.

The pack Animals would have surrounded the brits and severely beaten them with any objects at hand. Comprende.

[torturedsole]

Just now, BarraMarra said:

The pack Animals would have surrounded the brits and severely beaten them with any objects at hand. Comprende.

The point that you're trying to make doesn't make sense within the context of my original post. 

[JimTripper]

On 5/11/2023 at 2:04 PM, Crash999 said:

Sucker punch and run. What a brave lad! 

That was a man to man punch. No groups involved, then he left. Not really a sucker punch. The Thai went down and did not respond.

 

The Thais that came in at the end were interfering in a duel between men.

Edited May 14, 2023 by JimTripper

[BarraMarra]

What part do you not understand Torturedsole? Punch a Thai with Thais nearby and you will be set upon like a pack of wild dogs. The Brits were wise to do a runner. Already you can see the pack trying to pull them from their bikes and most of us that have been in Thailand many times would know what the outcome would be.

Edited May 14, 2023 by BarraMarra

[torturedsole]

17 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

What part do you not understand Torturedsole? Punch a Thai with Thais nearby and you will be set upon like a pack of wild dogs. The Brits were wise to do a runner. Already you can see the pack trying to pull them from their bikes and most of us that have been in Thailand many times would know what the outcome would be.

Have a good day. 

[richard_smith237]

On 5/12/2023 at 1:46 PM, Liverpool Lou said:

On 5/11/2023 at 10:40 AM, richard_smith237 said:

Do you believe for a second that the TukTuk driver didn’t ask for heavily inflated damages ?

How do you justify that unreasonable assumption?

Experience of Thailand justifies that assumption... And...  But I agree, it is ‘just an assumption of mine’... 

 

I assume that if a foreigner is involved in an accident with a Taxi / Moto-Taxi / TukTuk that the driver is automatically going to inflate whatever damages that exist in the hopes of making some profit.

 

IF you are not aware this happens Liverpool the next time you are in an incident / accident with a Taxi / Moto-Taxi / TukTuk you’re going to get royally shafted !!!! 

 

Also, Liverpool Lou... in nearly every thread that turns to debate you take the original article as fact in quite possibly the gullible manner... Do you not have the critical thought to recognise that the article itself may not have facts quite right and may have missed out pertinent information ????

 

 

Additionally, also have personal experience of such happening, with a Mini-Van driver (accident his fault)... he was fine, as soon as he saw he’d hit a westerner he was feigning injury...

No of course, you’ll ask if I am a Doctor and how could I possibly know that (or some such typical LL response)... after the Police caught the guy lying he gave up on acting out the injury and was fine. 

 

 

So.. the assumption I have made is not unjustified at all... and what justifies that assumption ??? Experience.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

On 5/13/2023 at 4:46 AM, 2009 said:

On 5/13/2023 at 2:58 AM, Liverpool Lou said:

1)  The OP does not state that he "demanded" money, it says that he asked for compensation which is reasonable.

2)  You used the word "extortion".   You have no idea whether extortion was used.

It's not reasonable. 

 

Compensation for what? You can't just go around telling people to give you money. 

 

Insurance is there to fix any damage.

 

Liverpool Lou takes the Media Reports as absolute fact - any time such information is disputed because the information incomplete etc he starts arguing as if there is no other truth than exactly what was reported with the exact wording and no other interpretation is valid. 

His lack of understanding shown in these discussions borders on the obtuse and presents the impression of someone right out there on the spectrum struggling to deal with any opinion other than the one reported. 

 

 

For most others..

- Its perfectly feasible to imagine that the TukTuk driver was not the measure of calm.

- Its perfectly feasibly to imagine that the TukTuk driver was not fair with his compensation requests.

- Its perfectly feasible to imagine that the TukTuk driver request was more of a demand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

On 5/12/2023 at 10:01 AM, torturedsole said:

That's not the issue now as the damage should have been dealt with at the time. The falangs had every opportunity to call their insurance company (if there was one, but I doubt it) to settle the matter amicably. 

 

But they didn't, the tuk tuk driver was assaulted and off they went. 

IF, as many are suspecting that the TukTuk driver was not behaving in an amicable manner things become very difficult. 

Now, regardless of individual anecdote [i.e. I rode a TukTuk last week and never had a problem] we know that in these areas TukTuk drivers / Win riders / Taxi drivers have a remarkably volatile reputation, a reputation which is highlighted in numerous news reports of how fast they are to turn to aggression and violence. 

 

It's not an unreasonable stretch of the imagination assume that in this case the TukTuk driver behaved in a manner befitting their general reputation - there is no proof course, but neither do we have proof of any damage.

 

In such circumstances I would be extremely surprised IF the TukTuk driver were the perfect measure of calm and politeness, in such circumstances I would be extremely surprised IF the TukTuk driver wasn’t asking for significantly elevated damages in an agitated aggressive manner.

 

 

Even IF the British Guys motorcycle had full insurance - its unlikely it was 1st class (as scooters generally do not have this), so there would be no insurance agent to mediate, additionally, even IF this was a car with 1st Class insurance, the insurance agent would still take time to get there and these situations when getting heated to not have the luxury of time before they escalate. 

 

I was involved in a collision (girl trying to overtake me in a multistory carpark - hit the side of my car), within 15 mins there were about 20 of her colleagues (male and female) in the carpark.... some of the guys getting angry and blaming me. This was in Bangkok at an office building so the Thai’s were ‘clean cut office guys’ and didn’t really look threatening... its different when guys on the street start getting angry.

I told them insurance is coming and sat in the car to wait- that was the only way to de-escalate. 

 

In this case - IF the TukTuk driver is getting irate, its very difficult to de-escalate.

I suspect, IF it was the case that the TukTuk driver was getting irate, the only way to de-escalate and avoid conflict was to just excape and get out of there....   So, condoning hit and run ???... In this case, yes, because the outcome could (and clearly was) worse without 20/20 hindsight course of action. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by richard_smith237

[SAFETY FIRST]

10 hours ago, JimTripper said:

That was a man to man punch. No groups involved, then he left. Not really a sucker punch. The Thai went down and did not respond.

 

The Thais that came in at the end were interfering in a duel between men.

Big man bashes little man then runs away, he's a coward. 

 

It's strange how some members here think that it's OK to punch people (attack) in the street. 

 

This is NOT NORMAL. 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by SAFETY FIRST

[gerritkaew]

I see a lot off thai people kicking at the bike drivers, do they get arrested to?

 

[fredwiggy]

On 5/11/2023 at 2:21 PM, Neeranam said:

Yanks use guns, and they can't take them here, that's why. They are too coward to try and have a fist fight ???? 

Brits aren't Yanks, and Yanks for the most part, do not need guns and will use fists to fight, unlike most here, who use machetes and 4 or more against one. Hitting someone over a small matter is childish, and ignorant here, as they were lucky to get away. Gives the expats here a bad name, as many will lump people together based on where they come from.

[Jackbenimble]

On 5/12/2023 at 5:14 PM, Liverpool Lou said:

The entire thread, including the massive, bold headline, is about his being arrested, didn't you read any of it?

why bother to even comment then BinDipper?