Two Tourists In Pai Shot By A Police Officer

[DamianMavis]

What's your excuse for an off duty cop firing two shots into an unarmed rastafarian farang

If the farang is trying to take the gun from him then what do you expect the results to be?

The same would happen in any other country if someone tried to wrestle a gun from a policemans hand.

Chloe.

What you really believe that propaganda about him accidentally firing a SECOND shot into a struggling CORPSE? The first shot was a kill shot, he was dead..... the second one was for what? And the third in a seperate target? Cmon.....

Damian

[Chloe82]

What's your excuse for an off duty cop firing two shots into an unarmed rastafarian farang

If the farang is trying to take the gun from him then what do you expect the results to be?

The same would happen in any other country if someone tried to wrestle a gun from a policemans hand.

Chloe.

What you really believe that propaganda about him accidentally firing a SECOND shot into a struggling CORPSE? The first shot was a kill shot, he was dead..... the second one was for what? And the third in a seperate target? Cmon.....

Damian

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

As for the girl being shot i guess she was still acting herself.

Chloe.

[endure]

You, on the other hand, seem to be a chronic apologist for the actions of a drunken off-duty cop, with a history of firing his gun whilst drunk, and who pumped three shots into two unarmed toursits. Fight or no fight, insults or no insults, - so what?

Is your main message "dear backpackers and others, don't cancel your holiday plans for northern Thailand?"

Tourism will best be served by transparency and justice. And tourists themselves will be best served by having all the facts of the case, and understanding what risks an assault on police officers (I'm referring to the previous occasion, undisputed by anyone, including Reisig herself) might entail in Thai society, rightly or wrongly.

If I were to pull a message out from this, it would be 'be careful; avoid insulting and/or assaulting the police, and avoid fighting in public'. Such behaviour does not deserve bullets, but it's obvious that in Thailand the risk is there (more for Thais than for foreigners, in fact). To deny that potential risk, and to behave as if you're in a country where law enforcement personnel are well recruited and well trained, is irresponsible.

F-o-r-g-e-t R-e-i-s-e-g...for a minute - even though we shouldn't -- but because you are using her as a crutch (and shamefully IMHO)

What's your excuse for an off duty cop firing two shots into an unarmed rastafarian farang - did she assault THIS cop before?

More importantly, may I again ask whether you have any personal or business economic interest in foreigners traveling into or through northern Thailand?

Thaivisa rules:

"1) You will not use thaivisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, referencing prostitution (including bargirls and barboys), referencing suicide, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.

2) Posting another members personal details, photos or web site details is forbidden and will result in being banned. Excessive, aggressive posts against other members, moderators and admin; or flaming will not be tolerated. 'Flaming' is best defined as posting or responding to a message in a way clearly intended to incite useless arguments, rants, and/or for launching personal attacks, insulting, being hateful, useless criticism, name calling, swearing and other bad behavior or comments meant to incite anger."

Please desist from asking about other posters private lives. It's against Thaivisa rules. If you persist in doing so I will be forced to issue a formal warning to you.

[sabaijai]

If I were to pull a message out from this, it would be 'be careful; avoid insulting and/or assaulting the police, and avoid fighting in public'. Such behaviour does not deserve bullets, but it's obvious that in Thailand the risk is there (more for Thais than for foreigners, in fact). To deny that potential risk, and to behave as if you're in a country where law enforcement personnel are well recruited and well trained, is irresponsible.

The more the facts are aired and discussed - especially among the Thais themselves - the more chance there is that the system will gradually change for the better. When speaking about this case, I've overheard several Thais expressing their disgust for the alleged crime, and expressing shock that an off-duty police officer would be carrying a weapon at all.

I agree with your message above in bold. However, I do not put as much stock in the credibility of eye witness accounts as you do.

But you might if you knew most of the witnesses, as I do, and knew that none have known affiliations with either Uthai or the police dept. In court, judges tend to believe eyewitness reports until counter-evidence appears, and, on the other hand, to be sceptical of testimony given by the defendants and plaintiffs in criminal cases.

So if they testify in court, or go on record in the press, you'll still not believe them? So who do you believe? Both Uthai and Reisig have something to gain by presenting stories that put them in the best possible light.

The justice system in Thailand is run on accusation and affiliation, not on facts. There are an infinite number of cases with falsified evidence, lying affiliates, and executed witnesses.

In that case, there's no hope whatsoever that justice will be done, so why bother posting in this thread?

If you think interviewing eyewitnesses is useless, and have a better alternative, you might try taking that course of action rather than repeatedly posting how you don't believe eyewitnesses. It's not really adding up to much, is it? I don't mean to get personal, I'm just trying to understand how your automatic distrust of all eyewitnesses is helpful in bringing any light to the case. Forensics only goes so far. If everyone's lying, what do we do?

It means absolutely nothing that there are a bunch of local eyewitnesses ready to give court testimony in favor of a local cop.

And, it seems, we have learned so much about the histories, alleged behavior and characters of the two foreign backpackers in this case, but absolutely NOTHING from the local scene on the background details of the local cop who lives in that town. The silence is deafening.

Who is to blame for that? I don't sense any conspiracy of silence in Pai as regards Uthai, plenty of folks here are happy to go on record about him. Everyone I've asked says he seems to be a fairly regular guy, originally from Isan, with a drinking problem but zero history of violence. Incidentally it wasn't Sgt Maj Uthai who fired the warning shot at the concert last year. Of course you won't believe that since it comes from independent eyewitnesses, and all eyewitnesses in Pai are obviously lying ... The lack of info in press reports can only be blamed on the journalists writing the stories, i.e., their failure to make inquiries.

[Chloe82]

It means absolutely nothing that there are a bunch of local eyewitnesses ready to give court testimony in favor of a local cop.

And, it seems, we have learned so much about the histories, alleged behavior and characters of the two foreign backpackers in this case, but absolutely NOTHING from the local scene on the background details of the local cop who lives in that town. The silence is deafening.

Who is to blame for that? I suggest you conduct your own investigation to fill in the gaps left by the journalists who have done little or nothing to find out more about Uthai.

She's good at doing that from the other side of the world, she's not even any where near Thailand. No idea why she insists on whiring on in this forum.

Chloe.

[Boo]

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

can't be bothered to search for the post but a news report claims the autopy stated that the first shot was a killer as was the second.

and fyi location has nothing to do with who can post on this forum.

[Chloe82]

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

can't be bothered to search for the post but a news report claims the autopy stated that the first shot was a killer as was the second.

and fyi location has nothing to do with who can post on this forum.

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

Chloe.

[kat]

^Thank you Boo. I was searching for the same article on the Coroner's report but couldn't find it.

If I were to pull a message out from this, it would be 'be careful; avoid insulting and/or assaulting the police, and avoid fighting in public'. Such behaviour does not deserve bullets, but it's obvious that in Thailand the risk is there (more for Thais than for foreigners, in fact). To deny that potential risk, and to behave as if you're in a country where law enforcement personnel are well recruited and well trained, is irresponsible.

The more the facts are aired and discussed - especially among the Thais themselves - the more chance there is that the system will gradually change for the better. When speaking about this case, I've overheard several Thais expressing their disgust for the alleged crime, and expressing shock that an off-duty police officer would be carrying a weapon at all.

I agree with your message above in bold. However, I do not put as much stock in the credibility of eye witness accounts as you do.

But you might if you knew most of the witnesses, as I do, and knew that none have known affiliations with either Uthai or the police dept. In court, judges tend to believe eyewitness reports until counter-evidence appears, and, on the other hand, to be sceptical of testimony given by the defendants and plaintiffs in criminal cases.

Right, unless the defendant is a cop, and all of the eye witnesses are local people who are dependent on the local economy, which is largely dependent on tourism, and the "goodwill" of the local police.

So if they testify in court, or go on record in the press, you'll still not believe them? So who do you believe?

As I said earlier, testifying in court or on public record in favor of a cop is meaningless, because it costs them no great harm or risk to do so and may actually have a benefit for them. In this case, I don't believe anything or anyone that hasn't been corroborated by both parties or irrefutable evidence. As I also said earlier, there is no great shortage of criminal cases in Thailand in which there has been tampering with witnesses and evidence by the police themselves, and I listed examples already.

The justice system in Thailand is run on accusation and affiliation, not on facts. There are an infinite number of cases with falsified evidence, lying affiliates, and executed witnesses.

In that case, there's no hope whatsoever that justice will be done, so why bother posting in this thread?

If you think interviewing eyewitnesses is useless, and have a better alternative, you might try taking that course of action rather than repeatedly posting how you don't believe eyewitnesses. It's not really adding up to much, is it? I don't mean to get personal, I'm just trying to understand how your automatic distrust of all eyewitnesses is helpful in bringing any light to the case. Forensics only goes so far. If everyone's lying, what do we do?

Well actually, it is helpful in posting on this thread if it is going to help others understand what they are up against. It is not up to you alone to decide if what I post here is valuable, unless you make an administrative decision. I think in order to have hope that justice will , be done in Thailand, you will need a lot more than the limits or confines of this board, or local eyewitnesses for that matter. I think it is a combination of what is available, reported with full and open knowledge of the limitations therein and whatever is admitted as "evidence". Please do not confuse or assume that taking any action or no action is either helpful or unhelpful, thanks.

And, I also don't want to get personal, but there is a classic conflict of interest and possible impairment of objectivity when the reporter, location, subject and witnesses are so closely acquainted. It is an issue of professional objectivity, and is why professionals of any sort who are responsible for presenting information to be judged in an impartial manner by the public or anyone are removed from a case, and for very good reason, both on a personal accounting level, and as an issue of public trust.

It means absolutely nothing that there are a bunch of local eyewitnesses ready to give court testimony in favor of a local cop.

And, it seems, we have learned so much about the histories, alleged behavior and characters of the two foreign backpackers in this case, but absolutely NOTHING from the local scene on the background details of the local cop who lives in that town. The silence is deafening.

Who is to blame for that? I don't sense any conspiracy of silence in Pai as regards Uthai, plenty of folks here are happy to go on record about him. Everyone I've asked says he seems to be a fairly regular guy, originally from Isan, with a drinking problem but zero history of violence. Incidentally it wasn't Sgt Maj Uthai who fired the warning shot at the concert last year. Of course you won't believe that since it comes from independent eyewitnesses, and all eyewitnesses in Pai are obviously lying ... The lack of info in press reports can only be blamed on the journalists writing the stories, i.e., their failure to make inquiries.

Yes, or whatever is decided to be presented. Your information on the fired shots into the crowd is helpful, because it now adds a counterpoint which previously stood unchallenged, and lets us know that we cannot accept that at face value and now have to discard it for consideration, in the absence of hard evidence.

She's good at doing that from the other side of the world, she's not even any where near Thailand. No idea why she insists on whiring on in this forum.

Chloe.

When you actually have a point to make, I will be able to address it.

*edit: highlights for clarity within nested quotes; my quotes in pink

Edited January 16, 2008 by kat

[kat]

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

can't be bothered to search for the post but a news report claims the autopy stated that the first shot was a killer as was the second.

and fyi location has nothing to do with who can post on this forum.

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

Chloe.

We actually have conflicting accounts of whether he identified himself as a cop, and on the interaction leading up to the scuffle; he was off duty and not dressed as a cop, pulled out a gun on unarmed civilians, and from accounts on all sides inebriated; not so simple.

[Tolley]

Hard to believe some of the excuses coming up for the cop.

He was by all accounts drunk, off duty and plain clothed and armed which is a bad combination.

Even if there was a scuffle there can be no justification for the shooting of the deceased and his former girlfriend.

If there is any sort of justice and due process this cop will be convicted and sentenced to a prison term.

Unfortunately if recent history is anything to go by nothing much will happend to the accused cop.

Thailand has a very bad track record with these sort of incidents with tourists and regardless of these incidents tourists are still comimg to Thailand. Unless Thailand is adversely affected by such incidents i believe it will continue to ignore or bury such incidents.

I wouldn't place much faith in foreign embassies doing anything about such incidents either.

They are well aware of what goes on and yet at the same time have very little power to do much when push comes to shove.

Short of threatening sanctions of some type they are really powerless to intervene of affect local matters. Sanctions are never ever going to be remotely considered for incidents such as the murder of a few foreigners every now and again.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

I attended university with the wife of a cop. In the minds of family and friends there is an excuse for everything that always makes unacceptable behavior by police acceptable. In the city I come from in the US cops are taken home if found driving while intoxicated rather than prosecuted. The local State Attorney has a dandy excuse why that is acceptable. They would lose their job if they were prosecuted. and we can't have that. He even exonerated a cop for shooting and nearly killing an unarmed truck driver after the truck criver accidently splashed the cop when he hit a puddle. This cop was also off duty and not in uniform. Even after the state equivalent of the FBI used foresenics to prove the shooting didn't happen at point blank in a life and death struggle as alleged by the cop but rather from a distance of 10 feet or more the state attorney prosecuted the truck driver anyway. Fortunately in the US there is a jury system. They didn't buy the cops story. Neither did the state investigators. Some people in any culture believe cops are infallible. They are not capable of seeing beyond their individual loyalties. Its how the system reacts to that belief thats important.

Edited January 17, 2008 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[Lilawadee]

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

One who's off duty, drunk and pulling out a gun?

[geriatrickid]

Rather difficult knowing which conga line to join; Three compelling versions of events reported, all of which agree that there was a physical struggle;

A. Reisig said "He was dressed in plain clothes, a white T-shirt Leo shouted at him, 'You can't hit her!' and pushed him away from us Then the man went to his motorbike and got his gun, and Leo tried to get it away from him "They had a struggle for the gun, then the man got control of the gun and stepped back and shot Leo directly in the face "Leo fell to the ground and the man pointed the gun at his heart and fired a second shot Then he turned around to me and aimed for my heart and shot me in the chest.

Andrew Drummond Special to The Nation Published: Wednesday, January 08, 2008

B. Del Pinto stepped up to protect her and pushed the man, Reisig said. When the man later identified as a police officer got up, he had a gun in his hand. He and Del Pinto struggled for control of the weapon

Gwendolyn Richards Published: Wednesday, January 09, 2008

C. A Thai police officer accused of murdering a Calgary man says the fatal shots were fired as the officer fell during a struggle with Leo Del Pinto Original RSS Feed tag:canada.com,2008-01-09:story

3 versions reported each with distinct implications. Which one is accurate?

And now the mystery of the autopsy report. I was surprised to read a conclusive statement as to the bullet wounds, considering that all news feeds clearly state that the autopsy report would not be available for several days following the autopsy. (Information is reviewed and tissue/fluid testing is done in the period following the physical part of the autopsy.) As well, I know that it is against protocol to offer definitive statements before the final report is complete.

A. Family spokesman Ross Fortune says an autopsy has been completed by the Calgary medical examiner, and they expect a final report in the next few days. However, the autopsy has confirmed Del Pinto was killed instantly by a bullet wound to his face. He was also shot in the torso Jan, 16 2008 - 8:10 AM CALGARY/AM770CHQR

B.Autopsy shows both shots would have been fatal

An autopsy carried out in Canada on the body of John 'Leo' Del Pinto, who was gunned down by a policeman in Pai earlier this month has revealed both shots would have been fatal. by Andrew Drummond Special to The Nation

C . CALGARY - An autopsy has been completed on a Calgary man who was shot and killed in Thailand. Coroner Pat Job said an autopsy Monday confirmed that Leo Del Pinto, 25, died from two gunshot wounds.She said there was one bullet in the right cheek and one in the abdomen.

Actual News release given to CanWest news from Medical Examiners Office And available here http://www.dose.ca/news/story.html?id=96e3...77-24cff1024d3a

Note that the actual statement does not claim which wound was fatal, just that he died from wounds. I believe what happened here is that the statement made by a family member was improperly written up as "fact". This was then picked up by Mr. Drummond who subsequently reported the opinion as medical fact when the reality was quite different as shown in item C. Other local news forums have relied on the the initial statement and the Drummond reporting. Certainly, a fatal wound to the face seems more horrific and is in keeping with Fleet Street journalism standards. (Forgive my wonderment, though as "cheek wounds" aren't usually fatal. The damage to the liver and kidneys as reported in the local newsfeed certainly would have been. Some of you might want to consult an anatomical atlas to consider the implications of how the liver and kidneys were damaged though. It's a bit of an angled shot and is not associated with point blank discharge.)

The above examples should demonstrate why one should exercise caution before making hasty assumptions of guilt. If you need a more explicit example consider the mystery of the watch;

As stated in Post #1183 and published here http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2008/0...775646-sun.html Among the items missing are a watch given to Del Pinto. "He never took it off," Fortune said, but he said it's not known specifically when the items went missing.

And yet we have the physical evidence (multiple recent pictures) of Mr. Del Pinto posted here Post #1185 clearly showing Mr. Del Pinto without the watch that is claimed to have never been removed. In fairness, Mr. Fortune does not claim theft.

However, many people have jumped to the conclusion that the watch was stolen from Mr. Del Pinto. Maybe it was or maybe it was sold, lost or broken by the deceased or maybe it was left back at the Thai dwelling. Unfortunately, Mr. Fortune's comment is taken as a definitive statement of fact, of which it is not. It is the statement of a grieving person dealing with a personal tragedy.

Edited January 17, 2008 by geriatrickid

[Claymore]

Barry Barry Barry.... what are we going to do with you hmm?! There are more police shootings of falangs than you think, and you really need to ask Thai people what they think of police... I do and not one has ever said anything nice if they said anything at all. I dont know what you keep basing your opinions on but they arent based in reality. I also feel its pretty tactless of you to talk to Danielle like that when you haven been actively working against her interests.

Damian

I have to agree with this. Danielle I am sure will not be taking Barryman too seriously -not if she has searched his posts

[kat]

Actual News release given to CanWest news from Medical Examiners Office And available here http://www.dose.ca/news/story.html?id=96e3...77-24cff1024d3a

Note that the actual statement does not claim which wound was fatal, just that he died from wounds. I believe what happened here is that the statement made by a family member was improperly written up as "fact". This was then picked up by Mr. Drummond who subsequently reported the opinion as medical fact when the reality was quite different as shown in item C.

The above examples should demonstrate why one should exercise caution before making hasty assumptions of guilt. If you need a more explicit example consider the mystery of the watch;

As stated in Post #1183 and published here http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2008/0...775646-sun.html Among the items missing are a watch given to Del Pinto. "He never took it off," Fortune said, but he said it's not known specifically when the items went missing.

And yet we have the physical evidence (multiple recent pictures) of Mr. Del Pinto posted here Post #1185 clearly showing Mr. Del Pinto without the watch that is claimed to have never been removed. In fairness, Mr. Fortune does not claim theft.

However, many people have jumped to the conclusion that the watch was stolen from Mr. Del Pinto. Maybe it was or maybe it was sold, lost or broken by the deceased or maybe it was left back at the Thai dwelling. Unfortunately, Mr. Fortune's comment is taken as a definitive statement of fact, of which it is not. It is the statement of a grieving person dealing with a personal tragedy.

[/size][/size]

The CanWest press release from the Medical Examiner's Office looks like another ambiguously worded and abrupt press release to me. "Coroner Pat Job said an autopsy Monday confirmed that Leo Del Pinto, 25, died from two gunshot wounds." Those words to me say that he died from two wounds, nothing more. It is possible that the family received more extensive explanation from the Coroner's office that are not in the press release as of yet. Anyway, I'm just stating what else is possible besides your explanation.

Danielle, who is a representative of Del Pinto's family and a poster on this thread, has already informed us that the pictures from Facebook of him without a watch were taken before he was given the watch. This makes perfect sense if you stop to think that he was only in Thailand for 2 or 3 days before this accident, and the Facebook account was already set up, with pictures from his first trip last year.

[Girlaboutglobe]

Here's a run down of some high profile murders of Canadians while on holiday in Mexico in the past 2 years...

The Ianiero's, a Canadian couple that was murdered in their hotel in Mexico (http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/mexico-murders/) while attending a family wedding. This story grabbed headlines for a while, as two other Canadian women were briefly sought as suspects by Mexican authorities (they were not charged), and also because there were rumours that the crime was a potential mob hit (they were a wealthy Italian couple involved in businesses and real-estate). After a few weeks, the story disappeared. No one has been charged, and Mexican authorities have not been cooperative. Due to their status, the story is mentioned on the anniversary, but nothing more.

Adam DePrisco, a 19 year old Italian guy found dead by the side of a road (from the same city as the first couple).

(http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.h...f90&k=66186) Apparently beaten to death by a taxi driver and another man after dancing with someone's girlfriend at a nightclub. Mexican's say he was hit by a taxi. Family examines his body in Mexico and see's only head injuries, but when the body is returned to Canada, damage to his back is found, suggesting that things were done to it so it would match the hit-and-run story. Some of his possessions were also stolen. This story was talked about for a couple weeks, but a lot of that had to do with the fact that it happened close to the first murder. No one has been charged, and the story has been forgotten about. Family has basically given up and has moved on.

Jeff Toews, a 34 year old father is found badly injured outside a hotel, and eventually dies. (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...ame=&no_ads) His family says he was beaten to death, Mexican authorities say he fell from a balcony. Story was reported for a couple weeks, then nothing more.

The point here? I hate to be negative, but the chances of Canadian authorities getting involved in the Del Pinto murder, and justice being served are sllim to none. The first case I mentioned created a stir in Canada because of rumours surrounding the case, the victims status, and Canadian police being invited to help investigate. The President of Mexico and Canadian Prime Minister even talked about it!

The Pai shooting was "just a couple of hippy backpackers, with no jobs and of low social status", who were drunk, got in an arguement, and who go shot in a jungle half way across the world. If the Canadian government can't solve the Mexican murders taking place at crowded resorts when they have full disclosure of information and work closely with foreign ministers, what makes ANYONE realistically believe they can do anything in this case!?

Face it, the story has already been forgotten about here, and very few people knew about it to begin with. The Canadian pedophile arrested in Thailand a couple months ago was news for weeks, yet I only heard about this story on the news once! The messages I see on here calling for family press conferences in Thailand and such are a waste of time. Let the Thai's try to sort things out and hope they do the right thing. Nothing the Del Pinto or Reisig families do to pressure the Canadian government will work, as its not worth the trouble for them to get involved. There is no public outcry among Canadians back home for justice like there was in the case of the Ianiero's, and a handful of friends and family of the victims isn't going to make a difference.

Does anyone on here remember the case of the New Zealander, Steve Miller, who was murdered in Pattaya in April 2006? His girlfriend borrowed $70,000 from him, then had her Thai boyfriend (who he didn't know about, and who is still in hiding), shoot him in the middle of the street. She confessed, was charged with murder, the gun was found in her apartment, and a co-conspirator corroborated the story. It seemed like a cut and dry case. Then she revokes her confession, and says her boyfriend murdered Steve because he was beating her (untrue). Lots of pressure from Steve's family, including press conferences and visits to Thailand, yet the charges were still dropped! Suprisingly, when his family tried to get his money back, it had all disappeared (bribes? hmmmm...) Along with all of his possessions from the apartment, his car and motorbike! This was a straightforward case, with none of the murky details or negative media portrayals of the victims that this recent crimes suffers from, yet justice was not served. The moral of this story? Don't think you, as a friend or family member of a victim, can do a dam_n thing when it comes to a crime committed in Thailand!

It's disgraceful. If there no consequences for killing Canadians overseas then why the he_ll not just go for it, eh? The thing about the Ianeros, WHO WERE AT THEIR DAUGHTER'S WEDDING FOR GOD'S SAKE, is that it wasn't even like they were trying to cover up for a public official, the closest anyone could figure at the time was that the couple walked in on a maid and a security guard robbing their hotel room, who killed them to make good their escape. If something as basic as robbery gone wrong where the only thing worth protecting was Mexico's image as a holiday spot, there's no hope here. Thanks for nothing Ottawa.

[Claymore]

Actual News release given to CanWest news from Medical Examiners Office And available here http://www.dose.ca/news/story.html?id=96e3...77-24cff1024d3a

Note that the actual statement does not claim which wound was fatal, just that he died from wounds. I believe what happened here is that the statement made by a family member was improperly written up as "fact". This was then picked up by Mr. Drummond who subsequently reported the opinion as medical fact when the reality was quite different as shown in item C.

The above examples should demonstrate why one should exercise caution before making hasty assumptions of guilt. If you need a more explicit example consider the mystery of the watch;

As stated in Post #1183 and published here http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2008/0...775646-sun.html Among the items missing are a watch given to Del Pinto. "He never took it off," Fortune said, but he said it's not known specifically when the items went missing.

And yet we have the physical evidence (multiple recent pictures) of Mr. Del Pinto posted here Post #1185 clearly showing Mr. Del Pinto without the watch that is claimed to have never been removed. In fairness, Mr. Fortune does not claim theft.

However, many people have jumped to the conclusion that the watch was stolen from Mr. Del Pinto. Maybe it was or maybe it was sold, lost or broken by the deceased or maybe it was left back at the Thai dwelling. Unfortunately, Mr. Fortune's comment is taken as a definitive statement of fact, of which it is not. It is the statement of a grieving person dealing with a personal tragedy.

[/size][/size]

The CanWest press release from the Medical Examiner's Office looks like another ambiguously worded and abrupt press release to me. "Coroner Pat Job said an autopsy Monday confirmed that Leo Del Pinto, 25, died from two gunshot wounds." Those words to me say that he died from two wounds, nothing more. It is possible that the family received more extensive explanation from the Coroner's office that are not in the press release as of yet. Anyway, I'm just stating what else is possible besides your explanation.

Danielle, who is a representative of Del Pinto's family and a poster on this thread, has already informed us that the pictures from Facebook of him without a watch were taken before he was given the watch. This makes perfect sense if you stop to think that he was only in Thailand for 2 or 3 days before this accident, and the Facebook account was already set up, with pictures from his first trip last year.

Canadiamn govt reaction here

www.andrew-drummond.com/2008/01/16/either-bullet-would-have-killed-canadian-backpacker-jan-16-2008/

Sensible post by Kat. Historically corpses in Thailand are often cleaned of things which they cannot take on to the next life. Its a small issue here, but to a grieving family quite important. Seems to be little contradiction between what the the family and Medical Examiner's Office are saying.

[meadish_sweetball]

Please stay focused on the shooting in Pai to avoid the thread going off topic.

[Claymore]

You take a highly realistic view which is not at variance with much of what I have been saying. But I would like to ask you this. Would you just roll over and do nothing, if your son or daughter was shot dead by a policeman in suspicious circumstances in Thailand or Mexico? I think the families should try their best to get their government working on their behalf asking questions and demanding answers. Even if it's a long shot, nobody else is going to going to pressure the Thai authorities to investigate properly".

Absolutely right and it worked for the families of Vanessa Arscott and Adam Lloyd in Kanchanaburi even if people on this site believe the policeman Somchai Wisetsingh is now free - which is doubtful.

[Claymore]

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

If a bullet enters your cheek and exits the back of your head Chloe its going to be fatal. Try it.

[Artisi]

Please stay focused on the shooting in Pai to avoid the thread going off topic.

"off topic" that's a bit of an understatement isn't it with all the rambling and raving going on. For one I would like to see some hard facts and not all the bush-lawyers and ïnvestigators" putting in their 50c worth to something they know SFA about.

[canuckamuck]

I find it fairly arrogant to add this level of guilt to the familes; that they are somehow not doing enough. It is certainly their choice how to live and deal with their loss. When you guys go through this you can do as you please.

[DamianMavis]

What's your excuse for an off duty cop firing two shots into an unarmed rastafarian farang

If the farang is trying to take the gun from him then what do you expect the results to be?

The same would happen in any other country if someone tried to wrestle a gun from a policemans hand.

Chloe.

What you really believe that propaganda about him accidentally firing a SECOND shot into a struggling CORPSE? The first shot was a kill shot, he was dead..... the second one was for what? And the third in a seperate target? Cmon.....

Damian

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

As for the girl being shot i guess she was still acting herself.

Chloe.

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

can't be bothered to search for the post but a news report claims the autopy stated that the first shot was a killer as was the second.

and fyi location has nothing to do with who can post on this forum.

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

Chloe.

"An autopsy carried out in Canada on the body of John 'Leo' Del Pinto, who was gunned down by a policeman in Pai earlier this month has revealed both shots would have been fatal.

The Medical Examiner's office in Calgary, Alberta, has completed a report which says he was killed instantly by the bullet to his head.

But the second shot pierced both his liver and kidney and would also have been fatal."

Wow, ya dont bother you with something as irrelevant as the facts, that has nothing to do with how you obviously base your opinion. You were WRONG, due to your lack of reading skills since the coroners report said the first shot KILLED Leo which you missed and argued against. How about you dont bother arguing at all if you cant even be bothered to properly read the information posted here?

Come to think of it, everyone arguing in favor of the cop has the same reading definciency and contiuously misses vital information, Permanent_Disorder, Barryman and you all do it, you only intake half the information and then start spouting untruths when the real information is posted for everyone to see clear as day.... strange. That's fine, but when someone points out the info you missed to contradict your statements you'd think you guys would be big enough to change what you were saying, but instead you just say "WHO CARES"!

Damian

Edited January 17, 2008 by DamianMavis

[Jai Dee]

OK people, settle down please and stay on-topic without getting argumentative.

[DamianMavis]

Ahh my post was deleted, I'll say what I wanted to say in a more non "making fun of way".

It doesnt matter where the bullet enters, it is the path of travel and the exit spot that are important. People are assuming that an entrance wound of the cheek means the gun was held 90 degrees against the cheek and travelled straight through and out the other cheek I guess, in fact the bullet can enter the cheek and pass through the brain causing instant death which is what obviously happened here.

Damian

[sabaijai]

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

One who's off duty, drunk and pulling out a gun?

Especially one who's off duty, drunk and pulling out a gun.

It appears that no one in the heat of those moments used caution or even common sense.

[BarryMan]

Thank you to everyone who has expressed condolences or apologetic sentiments regarding the post I made earlier.

BarryMan: I'm not going to jump to conclusions about Thailand entirely based on what people say in this thread. While this thread is informative about people's attitudes, I realize that anyone can form their opinions based on any number of unknown factors. That goes both ways.

Canuckamuck: I understand that often people discuss and debate with a certain detachment from the human factors of the subject. I hope nobody censors themselves for my sake. When I made my post I wasn't trying to get people to be quiet about their opinions. It's hard to explain. I wanted them to realize that maybe they should *rethink* some of those opinions, because they had become detached to the point of some of their judgments being formed without taking into account relevant human factors.

Dear Danielle,

Thank you for your reply, and I'm glad that you -- a family member thousands of miles away -- are not going to jump to any conclusions about Thailand or how the Thai side will handle this case. As you have seen from dozens of posts here, there are many expats here who lack that sense of balance and fairness.

I wish you and your family the best in terms of getting the answers you seek and a thorough investigation to follow.

Best regards,

Barryman

PS While I was going to write a response to Mavis's two latest insulting posts targeted directly towards me, I noticed a moderator asking to quiet this sort of thing down -- and rightly so. I'll only say that if Mavis cared to read what I've written, he'll see that I'm looking to get to the truth, but that I do not have a reflexive bias towards the testimony of Thai people on the ground as has been reported. I have mentioned multiple angles on this case and it would be a complete mistruth to suggest that I have been championing one version of events in favor of another. I'm just trying to come to the most logical course of events based BOTH on eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence.

[sabaijai]

In this case, I don't believe anything or anyone that hasn't been corroborated by both parties or irrefutable evidence.

Then you have higher justice standards than any court system I've ever heard of. In the absence of counter-evidence, the testimony of eyewitnesses unrelated to the defendant or plaintiff is usually admissable. 'Irrefutable evidence' (I suppose you mean physical evidence?) is not a requisite. I understand that you think everyone in Pai is somehow biased, but I'm fairly certain a visit to Pai and discussions with the locals would soon convince you there's no conspiracy of silence, no fear of losing tourism (it's had no noticeable effect so far, and many in Pai would like to see less tourism at any rate) etc. In the meantime all you have to go on, Kat, is news media and ThaiVisa.com, unfortunately, and virtually everything you read from either source comes from eyewitness reports. There's the scant forensics from Canada; one hopes more details are forthcoming from that source, but they will tell us little or nothing about potentially relevant events leading up to the firing of the gun.

As for my acquaintance with any of the witnesses, I'll acknowledge that in any feature articles I may write (I'm not doing any news stories. I'm not a news reporter and never have been). It's the human interest aspect of the events that interest me most, as a writer, although as a concerned resident of Thailand, I'm also following the search for facts and like everyone else, I would like to see justice served.

[Andiamo]

The first was a killer? i thought the Canadian coroner said one was in the cheek, a little different from a fatal shot.

can't be bothered to search for the post but a news report claims the autopy stated that the first shot was a killer as was the second.

and fyi location has nothing to do with who can post on this forum.

Who cares, you try and take a gun from a cop and your going to get shot. Simple enough.

Chloe.

Well most people here obviously DO CARE, otherwise we would not be following this thread and hoping to see justice done.

As far as I am aware, and I stand to be corrected, it has not yet been established that "anybody did try to take a gun from a cop" due to the conflicting reports.

Edited January 17, 2008 by Andiamo

[Arkady]

Sensible post by Kat. Historically corpses in Thailand are often cleaned of things which they cannot take on to the next life. Its a small issue here, but to a grieving family quite important. Seems to be little contradiction between what the the family and Medical Examiner's Office are saying.

Unfortunately, this despicable practice is common in Thailand (and in other poorer Asian countries) and they have been many reports of rescue workers rifling through the possessions of the dead and even robbing survivors after accidents. However, it is not a small issue if the victims are influential people. When a Lauda Air flight crashed soon after take off from Don Muang (now Meuang!!), killing all on board, some of the Queen's ladies-in-waiting with their families and friends were amongst the victims. A huge stink was made when it was somehow found that jewelry and valuables had been stolen while salvage was still going on. A large force of police suddenly arrived, cordoned off the area and wouldn't let any one leave for many hours while they searched all the rescue workers. A lot of valuables belonging to the VIPs were recovered and a number of charitable foundation workers (Ruam Pattana etc, commonly referred to as bodysnatchers) were arrested. I don't know what happened in the end to the recovered valuables of passengers other than VIPs.