Jump to content


Phuket’s courtroom prescription: Legal drama escalates in Swiss assault dismissal


webfact

Recommended Posts

A lot of the farangs on this forum like to play the victim of a perceived racism by the Thais on white people.

 

If you play it smart we actually have an advantage.

 

Harden up, play it smart, use face, money, and win.

  • Confused 3
  • Sad 2
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Outstanding news, the more difficult they can make this creeps life, the more this incident costs him in the way of treasure and public humiliation, the better. Some people forget that ultimately we are guests in this country, and we should all be treating the locals with respect. This guy is a lowlife street thug, and should be treated as such. Utter vermin. 

Are you not worried about defamation laws. He has been proven to be innocent thus far. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NowNow said:

But why did the women return to the scene after leaving?

 

6 minutes ago, NowNow said:

But why did the women return to the scene after leaving?

Maybe with the security guard that the article says she alerted. Or maybe she was enraged and wasn't prepared to let the matter rest. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did he really kick her or was it a nudge to move her on? Why did she return after apologising on the first encounter, also the court initially found in his favour! If he did in fact actually kick her then he should pay the price of assault but somehow I believe there is more to this story! It does seem that he is an angry man if the reporting is factual but again we know how inaccurate & misleading reporting in Thailand can be. We also know the brown envelope scenario!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Niphit emphasised that forensic examinations confirmed Dr Thandao’s injuries.

Lets hope the supreme court take on this case and :Swiss" gets punished.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, riverhigh said:

"Dr Thandao Chandam claims she was kicked in the back by 45 year old Urs. Niphit (her lawyer) emphasised that forensic examinations confirmed Dr Thandao’s injuries."

 

VS..

 

"The court extended the benefit of the doubt to the 45 year old Swiss expat. They (his lawyers) explained that David slipped on the steps and accidentally struck Dr Thandao.

 

Based on Mr. Urs past altercations I doubt very miuch that he slipped. The dog ate my homework defense. Hopefully there are x-rays, etc that can prove otherwise.

 

 

If you ever end up, through whatever sort of unfortunate event, being accused of something, you'll appreciate very much the idea of needing your guilt to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Although this guy appears to be a genuine scumbag, the evidence is not as clear as one would hope in order to convict this guy (on the charge of physical assault/battery). I don't know how a juror/judge could convict on the evidence that we've heard here. It is plausible that he could have slipped and struck her by accident that way, and the real time apology stating as much lends some credence to the idea, even if one is reluctant to believe it because of his character. The fact is, that could have been what happened. It is not beyond a reasonable doubt. His inability to control his anger and ego doesn't make that an implausible event. But other than the disputable accusation of kicking her, I don't see why he shouldn't be charged with assault. There may be no battery, but I believe there absolutely is a case for simple assault (if such a charge exists in Thailand) in his aggressive and threatening demeanor toward her and her friend. I think that should be VERY easy to convict him on. Sometimes lawyers go for charges that require a higher bar of evidence and end up losing, when they could have gone for a lower charge and won. That's what this appears to be IMO.
Of course, all of that is assuming no brown envelopes were floating around....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, smedly said:

i think it likely that some physical contact took place which is technically assault but this is getting ridiculous, apologize and move on

I could be wrong, but I think that since the contact is claimed to have been unintentional, then it wouldn't be considered assault/battery. And there is no clear evidence to show one way or the other, so..... a "he said, she said" argument won't gain traction.
But, as I mentioned in my comment a moment ago, I believe he could still be convicted of simple assault. There is no need for physical contact to be guilty of assault. And from everything I read about it, he appears to be as guilty as ever for that charge.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, webfact said:

But Dr Thandao’s legal eagle, Niphit Intharasombat, isn’t backing down. He’s filing an appeal to the Supreme Court, insisting that the testimonies of Dr Thandao and her colleague, who witnessed the incident, are far more credible than Fehr’s version of events.

 

Hmmm wondering if he is playing with her battered emotions, cause either way, it's cha ching all the way to the bank for him $$$$$$$.

 

As a Dr, she should know better, i.e. how the system here works, he/she who offers most wins IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, portisaacozzy said:

wow,you are going to kick out many many Thi men !!

Yes you are very right but we are guests of this country and must respect all Thais, we are all here because generally Thais are beautiful and caring people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now