1 hour ago, Sigmund said:

Obviously a never ending battle. For sure, you take down one entire network and there are 10 behind to replace them. Very true. But not to a reason not to do anything starting from the bottom level of trafficking. And in this case it was not a single mom crushed by poverty from south america or africa, but a well established lady with a job that many would envy in Thailand at least.

I'm not so sure - by catching here and making it public any potential avenue of realistic investigation was immediately burned.

I do agree - this was not a 'mum trafficking out of poverty' but it was a young lady carrying 'innocent looking tapestry tote bags' - she surely had no idea at all of the subterfuge she was subjected - clearly naïve enough to understand the risk of carriyng such items for cash for strangers.

BUT... IMO - Authorities had an option to 'chase' this further - see where the trail led - I think they missed a beat on this one.

1 hour ago, Sigmund said:

And if the investigation is done properly, they will surely try to climb up the suppliers and kingpins.

But considering the mule arrested has her family back in Thailand, will she break a deal and give out ? I

for sure would not as these gangs are ruthless.

Thank you. 🙏

I'm not sure it can - they (suppliers / receivers) will have covered their steps carefully, any further steps erased, burned, bleached - whatever you want to call it - a dead end.

I don't think she was a 'mule' - not in the sense that she had an idea of what she was carrying - she simply thought she was carrying 12x tapestry tote bags embodied with Thailand, and someone was willing to pay 8500 baht (I think) for that - its not a huge alarming amount - perhaps the normal going rate to carrying things for others in such circles.

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Call it condescending if it makes you feel better. The reality is your reply simply demonstrates that you're viewing this entirely through the lens of hindsight and your own limited experience.

You seem incapable of separating two completely different things: carrying something known to be illegal, and carrying something you genuinely believe is perfectly legitimate. That distinction is the entire discussion, yet you've bulldozed straight past it because "she had heroin" is the only conclusion you're capable of working backwards from.

As for my "smuggling wife"... thanks for proving the point.

She brings back perfectly legal goods for friends, exactly as thousands of travellers do every day. If Customs decide duty is payable, the duty gets paid. That's not drug smuggling, despite your apparent inability to distinguish tax regulations from trafficking heroin - your repsone is an just an unintelligent attempt at a win rather than to discuss the topic - try harder, or just be smarter, if you can !!! (now you have an example of condescending).

The reality from your posts: You weren't trying to understand the circumstances that allowed this to happen. You were looking for a cheap verbal gotcha. Calling my wife a "smuggler" didn't strengthen your argument, it simply advertised that you'd abandoned it with a cheap-shot.

The irony is that your entire position rests on a rather puritanical fantasy that everyone rigidly follows every customs regulation to the letter. They don't. Flight crews, frequent flyers and ordinary travellers have been carrying items for friends, colleagues and family for decades. That's reality, whether you've encountered it or not - I can't remember the last time I entered Thailand with the correct duty-free amount (usually at least 2 bottles of Whisky !) - careful not to pee yourself at that before calling me a smuggler.

The criminality wasn't carrying a few handbags. The criminality was the organised network that exploited a behaviour that had become so commonplace people no longer questioned it.

If you can't grasp that distinction, perhaps spare us the lecture. You're arguing against the world as you imagine it exists, not the one that actually does.

She was a drug smuggler and she got caught. I always wondered why some people were excused from jurys before the trial started and now I know, Your judgement is clouded due to your wife's occupation, thats fascinating

7 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

She was a drug smuggler and she got caught. I always wondered why some people were excused from jurys before the trial started and now I know, Your judgement is clouded due to your wife's occupation, thats fascinating

"My wife's occupation"... carrying home a handbag for a friend now makes her a drug smuggler in your mind.

That's quite the leap. By that logic, anyone who's ever exceeded the speed limit is a getaway driver.

Your argument relies entirely on pretending there are no shades of grey because they're inconvenient and exposed is your inability to distinguish actus reus from mens rea, substituting nuance with certainty....

.... thus providing an example of pure intellectual laziness, confusing legal guilt with knowledge and intent. That's precisely why you've spent this entire discussion cementing a lack of intelligent balance.

3 hours ago, Sigmund said:

Let's hope Australia makes an example of the flight attendant and charges her with the maximum jail penalty of their laws. This will discourage others from carrying on, be them thai or other foreign airline staff.

People have got the death sentence for drugs, but it goes on.

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Bearing in mind the drug trafficking context of this thread, your implication was that there are many forums catering to those wanting to smuggle drugs. If that was not what you were implying, then you were gratuitously posting irrelevant off-topic information.

That is ABSOLUTELY NOT what I said nor implied. Simply, you asked for a link showing Thais offering to carry items abroad for money and I supplied it. You clearly didn't believe that Thais who do not know one another have historically and totally willingly long carried items for their fellow Thais for a small fee. I provided a link that shows plenty of examples of that. Don't try and twist things.

On 6/30/2026 at 2:25 PM, ravip said:

Could you let us know which forums you are referring to and where they can be found?

Thai television channel 3 morning news, เรื่องเล่าเช้านี้. Archives of all past editions can be found on the เรื่องเล่าเช้านี้ YouTube.

In yesterday's morning news, at 6:33 AM (You can zoom through to this point in YouTube) there is a lengthy report about this. It was also reported the previous day in an extensive report that showed screenshots of forums with people asking others to carry items for them to Australia.

12 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Don't you think they're better off finding out who the 'leaders' are - who the '12x embroidered textile souvenir tote bags' were supposed to be handed over to ????

It seems in many cases where drug-mules are used - the investigation focuses on them, the low hanging fruit, when there are far greater scope to 'watch them' and find out where the intended drugs are headed and catch those higher up the pyramid.

Catching someone 'carrying something for a friend' - or in this case 'carrying innocent (looking) items' as a side hustle is not catching the criminals - its catching the low hanging fruit for a statistical notch - its 'point scoring' more than it is actual law enforcement.

I do agree - it will of course stop the 'cash for carriage' side hustle that many people use - but that still doesn't catch the criminals who will simply find other means to use mules and stitch other people up.

It is a pity that the Australian officials missed this opportunity.

Seems they were in too much of a hurry to arrest this crew member.

21 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

What a strange post . I never buy duty free, and I never carry hand baggage, but I might indeed "push you out of the way" depends on how slow you are moving grandad. and the other passengers would thank me for it .

In "a life threatening emergency" such as a crash landing the elderly and infirm are a liability, their very presence endangers the lives of others, if they cannot prove they are fully fit to fly, including being able to handle an emergency evacuation they should be denied boarding Same goes for the disabled

Health and safety should never be compromised for fear of hurting somebody's feelings

What nonsense, near all aircraft accidents have few survivors and mostly dead are unrecognizable. More likely to be stuck behind a woman on her phone than a disabled aged person. I have a disabled friend and according to him, if they was an emergency evacuation, he would get left in his corner!

This morning's edition of เรื่องเล่าเช้านี้ had more than 30 minutes further coverage of this case and provided more details about the background. The arrested air hostess had been with Thai Airways for two years and prior to that worked at another airline. She is from Phayao province and not from a wealthy background (as some air crew are). She does not lead a luxurious lifestyle and the room she lives in with her boyfriend looked pretty basic. The local drugs narcotics police have been looking into her background extensively and have found nothing suspicious. Her back accounts have small balances and her lifestyle is fitting with that of her job, and supported her mother in Phayao with 10,000 baht per month. She had apparently joined a Facebook group for Thai air crew willing to carry items abroad for Thais for a fee and this was the first time she had done it. It very much looks like she was an unwitting drug courier and had no idea what she was carrying. That said, she was promised 8,800 baht to take the bags, which the police noted should have raised flags with her as it was much higher than one would expect. The narcotics police are currently looking for those behind it. They know there are Thais involved but there is speculation that these are basically small players and the main players may actually be foreigners.

Very sad for the air hostess to end up in this situation. It looks like her eagerness to supplement her income is going to result in terrible consequences.

3 minutes ago, SBNZ said:

They know there are Thais involved but there is speculation that these are basically small players and the main players may actually be foreigners.

Of course they will.......

20 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

I know , but they should , those higher up the chain are not as stupid as the idiots who carry the stuff through customs it is a waste of money to pursue this matter any further

I disagree.

Those "higher ups" can sometimes be caught. All leads should be investigated.

You've seen how cold cases are solved, sometimes decades later, and sometimes due to the development of technology, most notably DNA, in recent years.

You've probably seen people released from prison, sometimes decades later, for wrongful imprisonment, due to the same technology.

Police are paid by the government to do police work. They don't just give up on a case because they think the "higher ups" are smart than them. If that was the case, they would never catch any serial killers, terrorists, rapists, armed robbers, scammers etc.

Regardless she broke work policies

Can anyone show me which Airline allows you to "courier" private items during your work time , no they don't

She should be dismissed

15 hours ago, ravip said:

People have got the death sentence for drugs, but it goes on.

Ummm not in Australia,she will be lucky to do 12 months

Her time in remand counts , so by the time she faces trial in 2027 she probably will be released

Will cost her a lot though , her job , lawyers fees , but.. but...think of the experience she will get meeting all those big fat women in there ...and her English will be better ,

19 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

How quick you think the Thai police would have issued his name or her and photo if he or her stepped off a thai Airways flight into the kingdom. He or she would have 10 Cops all pointing the finger at her with the drugs laid out on the Table. Obviously its bad publicity for Thai Airways so they will want it kept out of the press.

Dunno. I wondered the same - if charged why not named? But it appears the French woman who was caught smuggling drugs has also been charged, but also not named. Maybe they don't publish the names until they appear in court?

20 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Call it condescending if it makes you feel better. The reality is your reply simply demonstrates that you're viewing this entirely through the lens of hindsight and your own limited experience.

You seem incapable of separating two completely different things: carrying something known to be illegal, and carrying something you genuinely believe is perfectly legitimate. That distinction is the entire discussion, yet you've bulldozed straight past it because "she had heroin" is the only conclusion you're capable of working backwards from.

As for my "smuggling wife"... thanks for proving the point.

She brings back perfectly legal goods for friends, exactly as thousands of travellers do every day. If Customs decide duty is payable, the duty gets paid. That's not drug smuggling, despite your apparent inability to distinguish tax regulations from trafficking heroin - your repsone is an just an unintelligent attempt at a win rather than to discuss the topic - try harder, or just be smarter, if you can !!! (now you have an example of condescending).

The reality from your posts: You weren't trying to understand the circumstances that allowed this to happen. You were looking for a cheap verbal gotcha. Calling my wife a "smuggler" didn't strengthen your argument, it simply advertised that you'd abandoned it with a cheap-shot.

The irony is that your entire position rests on a rather puritanical fantasy that everyone rigidly follows every customs regulation to the letter. They don't. Flight crews, frequent flyers and ordinary travellers have been carrying items for friends, colleagues and family for decades. That's reality, whether you've encountered it or not - I can't remember the last time I entered Thailand with the correct duty-free amount (usually at least 2 bottles of Whisky !) - careful not to pee yourself at that before calling me a smuggler.

The criminality wasn't carrying a few handbags. The criminality was the organised network that exploited a behaviour that had become so commonplace people no longer questioned it.

If you can't grasp that distinction, perhaps spare us the lecture. You're arguing against the world as you imagine it exists, not the one that actually does.

Its not uncommon to stash a few bags of heroin in a Teddy bear sow it back up and give it a child. Unless the Teddy is put trough an X-Ray.

40 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Its not uncommon to stash a few bags of heroin in a Teddy bear sow it back up and give it a child. Unless the Teddy is put trough an X-Ray.

When travelling through an airport these days, I don't think there's a single item that 'doesn't' go through a 'scanner'....

We used to get my son's powdered milk (backup for flights) checked all the time.

On 6/30/2026 at 1:02 PM, Bday Prang said:

I think the air stewardess jobs were traditionally sought after by the daughters of "semi" influential wannabees the daughters of those with real influence can aspire to the premiership nowadays, so they would understandably hardly be interested in serving crap food to plebs in cramped conditions.

On 6/30/2026 at 1:04 PM, Liverpool Lou said:

I'm very happy to be proved wrong with whatever back up you've got in relation to influential family members wanting to be ait hostesses.

To prove or disprove your point try marrying one. I can recommend it.

9 hours ago, SBNZ said:

Very sad for the air hostess to end up in this situation. It looks like her eagerness to supplement her income is going to result in terrible consequences.

Yet the english chavs who have been getting caught with merely weed in their suitcases are not extended the same sympathies ! Racism or what ? .

7 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

Ummm not in Australia,she will be lucky to do 12 months

Her time in remand counts , so by the time she faces trial in 2027 she probably will be released

Will cost her a lot though , her job , lawyers fees , but.. but...think of the experience she will get meeting all those big fat women in there ...and her English will be better ,

Of course. How can you be wrong?

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

When travelling through an airport these days, I don't think there's a single item that 'doesn't' go through a 'scanner'....

We used to get my son's powdered milk (backup for flights) checked all the time.

Yes and of course course true for air crews and airside workers. Having worked airside I can confirm workers and aircrew get a thorough going over. I can say though given how some air crews of a certain nationalality seem to be completely ignorant of the rules that I assume security in their won country is pretty lax.

On 7/1/2026 at 5:05 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Of course she will - but you are posting with 20/20 hindsight and presenting it as wisdom - as already highlighted - this behavior were already in place and very normalised - as shown by the FaceBook excerpt shown by Airlee's post - this behavior was quite normal, had being going on for years - its very likely the young lady had picked up this side-hustle to carry items from other crew who were more senior and had been doing the same for years...

...Not as 'drugs mules' of course, but a simple side hustle, brining in luxury items, carrying things to order for others, 'harmless' and legal items - this girl was stitched up by a criminal gang - naive yes - criminal no (depending on the size of stick up yer jaxie)..... And tends of thousands (if not more) of flight attendants have been doing the same around the world for decades.

There is a big difference between carrying some luxury items for friends and acquaintances that you have purchased yourself and know exactly what's in them, to carrying random items that a stranger on Facebook has sent you.

Even if she didn't know what was hidden inside, she was incredibly naive and must have known the risks involved.

A Thai Airways flight attendant arrested in Australia on suspicion of smuggling heroin may avoid prosecution if investigators find she had no criminal intent and was tricked into carrying the drugs, Thailand’s narcotics chief said.

"If Australian authorities can prove that she had no intention of committing the offence and was tricked, she may not be prosecuted," ONCB Secretary-General Suriya Singhakamol said.

"At this stage, it is still too early to determine the extent of her involvement."

Thai authorities said they have been investigating the trafficking network since 2025. In recent raids, officials seized 8kg of heroin hidden inside a hanging fabric organiser, nearly 10kg concealed in winter jackets and coffee packages destined for Australia, and another 6.23kg hidden in a pink silk outfit intended for Taiwan.

Investigators believe the 26-year-old attendant, identified only as Mina, may have been part of a social media “carry-for-hire” group, where travellers sell unused baggage allowance to others. The ONCB warned that traffickers monitor such groups to find people they can exploit as couriers.

Thai officials said they have identified suspected organisers and intended recipients in Australia and are coordinating with the Australian Federal Police.

#ThailandNews #Australia

https://www.facebook.com/share/1GDArmDmPR/?mibextid=wwXIfr