Two Tourists In Pai Shot By A Police Officer

[PadThaiGuy]

Why would a Police Officer flee after and accidental firing of his weapon?

Shouldn't he have offered assistance to the people that were unfortunatly shot ?

[sriracha john]

Exclusive report from the South China Morning Post / January 29, 2008

by Tom Williams in Pai

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Policeman charged with murdering tourist - so why is he still on duty?

The Thai hill town of Pai, nestled in woodland just over three hours by road from Chiang Mai, has long been a haven for young western backpackers and other tourists, playing host to an annual reggae festival and emerging as a trendy new destination for Thai tourists.

But the festive spirit and laidback innocence of Pai was shattered on January 6 by the sound of pistol shots. The bloodstains left on the road outside the

Be-Bop pub have tarnished the town's reputation.

Witnesses to the killing of 25-year-old Canadian Leo John del Pinto and the wounding of his ex-girlfriend, Carly Reisig, also from Canada, have told of their fears after the policeman who admitted shooting the pair was released on bail.

Sergeant-Major Uthai Dechawiwat was even allowed to resume his duties, despite being charged with del Pinto's murder and the attempted murder of Reisig.

The Canadian government has called on Thai authorities to ensure a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation.

Sergeant-Major Uthai claims he was beaten to the ground by the Canadian couple, said his superior officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Somchai Panya, who is investigating the case.

"After managing to get up, Uthai pointed his service pistol to threaten away both foreigners, but del Pinto tried to snatch the pistol from him. After a scuffle, shots were fired accidentally."

Sergeant-Major Uthai was reassigned to the town of Pang Ma Pha, 70km north of Pai. He could not be reached for comment.

Thai human rights lawyer Somchai Homlaor expressed concerns about the police's handling of the case, saying: "It's a serious crime. Normally, he should be suspended from duty."

Ms Reisig, whose life is now out of danger, tells a different story. Speaking from her hospital bed in Chiang Mai, she claimed that after drinking and dancing at the Be-Bop "a man suddenly hit me for no reason. He was wearing a white shirt and slacks. Leo [del Pinto] yelled, `Nobody hits her!' and pushed him away. The man, Sergeant-Major Uthai, reached for his gun and Leo grappled with him".

The next thing she remembers is "he pointed the gun and shot Leo in the head and then in the chest. Immediately, he turned the gun to shoot me, hitting me on the left side of my chest".

Pai police chief Wanchai Suwanririkate said four witnesses had made statements that the two Canadians had attacked the plain-clothes policeman after he tried to intervene and stop them fighting.

But other witnesses with different versions of events are afraid to be named and too scared to give evidence against a police officer.

One witness was at the nearby P. Daeng noodle restaurant.

"I saw the two foreigners outside fighting and a man in a white jacket arrived at the scene. The woman said, `Leave us alone, we are friends, we can settle the problem ourselves'," he said. "I saw the man in a white jacket pull out a gun and kick the woman. The foreign man went to help the woman and pushed them away [sic]. Then I heard three shots fired."

This version of events appears to confirm a disagreement between the two Canadians, but indicates the first blow was struck by the policeman.

The witness, a Payap University law student in Chiang Mai who declined to give his name, said: "I am afraid to give evidence because the police always protect their people. This is normal in Thailand. I am concerned about my safety if my name is published. I would be in trouble."

Several witnesses said they saw the policeman drinking in several bars that night. A bartender at the Be-Bop pub clearly remembers Sergeant-Major Uthai entering the pub "in a very drunken state at 10pm" - just four hours before the fatal shooting.

The bartender also requested anonymity. Later that night, the officer was seen drinking in the "Don't Cry Bar". However, police chief Wanchai dismissed any suggestion that his officer was drunk. "No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said.

One Pai resident claims "the recent increase in police heavy-handedness in Pai is all about Thai investors pressuring the police to clean up the image of the town".

In an almost parallel case in 2004, a Thai police sergeant murdered two British tourists after an argument at a restaurant in the tourist resort of Kanchanaburi, on the River Kwai.

Thai guitarist Pu Ekkarat, who plays at the Be-Bop, was deeply shocked by the killing. "First of all, they should train the police how to control their temper," the 33-year-old told Canada's Globe and Mail. "Too often they use violence to stop a problem."

Del Pinto was buried on January 18 in his home town of Calgary. His father, Ernie del Pinto, told the Calgary Herald he could never forgive his son's killer.

"How can you possibly forgive a guy like that?" he said.

- South China Morning Post

[kat]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

*Who is Tom Williams in Pai, BTW? Another pseudonym per chance?

Edited January 29, 2008 by kat

[geriatrickid]

One of my naughty thrills is to read the tawdry news about Pattaya. Sometimes one picks up interesting items. In this article, 2 items are mentioned;

1. A senior police office was "drunk" in a bar and misbehaving. He was arrested.

2. The article states that it is against Police regulations to display a holstered firearm while off-duty. http://www.pattayacitynews.net/news_28_01_51_2.html

The story suggests that some people are not afraid to turn in a poorly behaving senior police officer (Lt. Col.) and could explain why the accused officer did not carry a side arm that was visible.

The issue of police officers being on duty and off duty was raised and it is an interesting one at that. Since the injured parties were Canadian and it has been suggested that perhaps they were confused by the sight of the accused in street clothes it may answer some people's curiousity to know how such a scenario is dealt with in Canada. (Putting aside of course that all major urban police departments have a contingent of police officers on duty in street clothes.) Canadian jurisprudence holds that there is no distinction between a police officer on-duty and off-duty. The precedent was set long ago in the case of Regina v. Johnston where the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a police officer is on duty at all times. All other provinces have similar positions. It is why the applicable provincial acts regarding disciplinary procedures apply 24/7. While a police officer can be off duty, he or she can place his/herself "on duty" by taking action as a police officer. There is a considerable amount of jurisprudence to support this. As well, it goes even further as provincial police acts make it incumbent upon a police officer to place him or herself in an active duty position in the event that there is inappropriate activity evident. So basically, the intervention of the accused, in respect to his interceding act itself, would have been acceptable in Canada. As well, the presence of an offduty police man acting as on duty, would not be a foreign concept to a Canadian.

[Khun ?]

(quote)

"I saw the two foreigners outside fighting and a man in a white jacket arrived at the scene. The woman said, `Leave us alone, we are friends, we can settle the problem ourselves'," he said. "I saw the man in a white jacket pull out a gun and kick the woman. The foreign man went to help the woman and pushed them away [sic]. Then I heard three shots fired."

Sounds much more credible against the police now but still plenty of conflicting statements.

Wonder if this is hear say written too.

Seems Carly would of mentioned she was kicked and not punched in the face from a gun weilding person......

Where is Fuen in all this.....

[kat]

Canadian jurisprudence holds that there is no distinction between a police officer on-duty and off-duty. ...

... As well, the presence of an offduty police man acting as on duty, would not be a foreign concept to a Canadian.[/size][/font] [/size][/font]

No, but there certainly is a distinction between a drunk cop and a sober one, in any jurisprudence, innit? I'm sure they have had plenty of time to set up fake hospital results by now, otherwise they would not have mentioned it.

And, I'm equally sure that any police officer who pulls out a gun anywhere in any clothing to detain unarmed civilians, is well past the point of identifying himself as a police officer, something we have not yet confirmed in this case.

[geriatrickid]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning. The police chief has stated that there are "hospital tests" that show Uthai was not drunk. He didn't state that Uthai was not drunk because the chief "says so". The hospital nurse or physician will have to provide a statement regarding the test (time, nature of test etc.) will have to take responsibility for the test.The blood sample would usually be retained. If it is blood, it would be impossible to fake Uthai's blood. Now if you are saying that somehow the nurse, technician and physician will lie about the results, that would be taking the notion of conspiracy onto a different level. Doesn't seem worth for the nurse or physician to lie over this sort of thing. Perhaps it might be best to wait until the results are submitted to the investigators.

As for losing ones rights because he has "fled", well, that isn't in the law. Perhaps you could cite the specific law. I'd settle for EU, Canadian or US law if you can't find the specific Thai law, because I am unaware of the concept that the rights of an accused are vaporized under such circumstances.

What's this about "we have witnesses"? Are you the lead investigator now? Have you interviewed these witnesses? You claim that they seem credible. Maybe they are and maybe they are not. You don't know either way. When one uses such such terms as "we" it suggests that this may not be so much about seeing that justice is done as it is about a personal crusade. Sort of tipped your hand there. I'm just as disturbed by this tragedy as others, but I'm keeping a neutral position until such time as the investigation results are released.

[Maxi101]

Exclusive report from the South China Morning Post / January 29, 2008

by Tom Williams in Pai

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Policeman charged with murdering tourist - so why is he still on duty?

The Thai hill town of Pai, nestled in woodland just over three hours by road from Chiang Mai, has long been a haven for young western backpackers and other tourists, playing host to an annual reggae festival and emerging as a trendy new destination for Thai tourists.

(snip) ... (snip)

Del Pinto was buried on January 18 in his home town of Calgary. His father, Ernie del Pinto, told the Calgary Herald he could never forgive his son's killer.

"How can you possibly forgive a guy like that?" he said.

- South China Morning Post

No even me won't forgive him that.

But what you think - would they shoot tourist even if they behave and do not drink and are friendly all the time - even once getting offended ?

I am not cynical - just a naive question, because what we have to read in the news about police behaivour the last days - just let the bottom pop out, even for people who are staying quite a while.

maxi

Edited January 29, 2008 by Maxi101

[sriracha john]

Girl who witnessed friend being shot by Thai policeman denies being a troublemaker

- By Owen Williams, Jan 09 2008

Exclusive report from the South China Morning Post / January 29, 2008

by Tom Williams in Pai

Policeman charged with murdering tourist - so why is he still on duty?

*Who is Tom Williams in Pai, BTW? Another pseudonym per chance?

Owen's younger brother?

Edited January 29, 2008 by sriracha john

[kat]

Or maybe his alter ego.

[sriracha john]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning. The police chief has stated that there are "hospital tests" that show Uthai was not drunk. He didn't state that Uthai was not drunk because the chief "says so". The hospital nurse or physician will have to provide a statement regarding the test (time, nature of test etc.) will have to take responsibility for the test.The blood sample would usually be retained. If it is blood, it would be impossible to fake Uthai's blood. Now if you are saying that somehow the nurse, technician and physician will lie about the results, that would be taking the notion of conspiracy onto a different level. Doesn't seem worth for the nurse or physician to lie over this sort of thing. Perhaps it might be best to wait until the results are submitted to the investigators.

As for losing ones rights because he has "fled", well, that isn't in the law. Perhaps you could cite the specific law. I'd settle for EU, Canadian or US law if you can't find the specific Thai law, because I am unaware of the concept that the rights of an accused are vaporized under such circumstances.

What's this about "we have witnesses"? Are you the lead investigator now? Have you interviewed these witnesses? You claim that they seem credible. Maybe they are and maybe they are not. You don't know either way. When one uses such such terms as "we" it suggests that this may not be so much about seeing that justice is done as it is about a personal crusade. Sort of tipped your hand there. I'm just as disturbed by this tragedy as others, but I'm keeping a neutral position until such time as the investigation results are released.

Your pedantic flights of delusional grandeur are only impressive to yourself. In any criminal investigation of the countries you listed, inserting evidence AFTER the fact of blatantly destroying or sabotaging such evidence would not be taken seriously, the same as your so-called defense of it. Your claims to be "neutral" superiority border on the comedic - I am not "tipping" any hand except discussing this case as a viewer, as in "we", as in everyone reading the thread. You are not the chief medical commentator here, nor do you have any more predictive capabilities as to how possible hospital tests would be conducted by the police investigating themselves, than say, forensic scientist Pornthip and others who have already been substantiated on this thread - who, pardon the slight, Chief - have a lot more credibility as to how medical results and evidence are actually handled by the police in criminal investigations of themselves than anything you could possibly blather on about or ever will.

You are a source of entertainment, though.

If the blood specimen was not obtained in a timely manner, it's results are invalid in conjunction with the time of the incident.

The blood alcohol content (BAC) is the concentration of alcohol in blood. It is excreted normally by the body at approximately the rate of 1 gram of alcohol per 1000 grams of blood per hour, thus if a sample is obtained 8 hours following an incident, a "legally drunk" person at the time would show zero BAC for their test result.

As for faking a specimen's results or switching specimens, both are easily conducted in a laboratory.

[Claymore]

I'm sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning. The police chief has stated that there are "hospital tests" that show Uthai was not drunk. He didn't state that Uthai was not drunk because the chief "says so". The hospital nurse or physician will have to provide a statement regarding the test (time, nature of test etc.) will have to take responsibility for the test.The blood sample would usually be retained. If it is blood, it would be impossible to fake Uthai's blood. Now if you are saying that somehow the nurse, technician and physician will lie about the results, that would be taking the notion of conspiracy onto a different level. Doesn't seem worth for the nurse or physician to lie over this sort of thing. Perhaps it might be best to wait until the results are submitted to the investigators.

end quote

Some naivety here I think if you think a blood sample of the cop will be retained. Will hospital doctors lie? Well they frequently do when big companies in Thailand tell them to. Thats why so many people here work in v polluted work places and lose their claims when they get life threatening chest, and throat complaints. I can also think of many clashes of evidence from opposing pathologists , one or other being retained by a rich party, or police...oy vey

[TAWP]

As for losing ones rights because he has "fled", well, that isn't in the law. Perhaps you could cite the specific law. I'd settle for EU, Canadian or US law if you can't find the specific Thai law, because I am unaware of the concept that the rights of an accused are vaporized under such circumstances.

You should know that the concept of fleeing the seen of a crime/accident is already handled in some countries under some circumstances. See for example hit-n-run with car.

So if a behavior was rampant enough back home they would probably have added that fleeing from your post as an officer in a 'legit' shooting and not calling for backup/ambulance would earn you a whole back of problems - but I've have yet to see it back home.

Not here though, here everyone runs as soon as anything happens.

[TAWP]

Why would a Police Officer flee after and accidental firing of his weapon?

Shouldn't he have offered assistance to the people that were unfortunatly shot ?

Yes, a real cop would.

[DamianMavis]

Geriatrickid... you are so off about so many things.. you dont even know that fleeing the scene totally negates any kind of blood test? (which was not taken, its a bold faced lie) What good is a blood test 10 hours later?! You go on and on about Canadian police.... hey man, I grew up there and lived there my whole life, I NEVER saw these plain clothes cops you keep assuring me are running aound in abundance, perhaps because they were out of uniform I HAD NO IDEA THEY WERE COPS?! And how would I know? How would anyone know? Isnt that the point? Out of uniform cops look like civilians and have no impact on society. Weird path of thinking on your part man..... Impossible to fake the cops blood? Are you serious? You keep thinking in Western terms, here the doctor just has to write a bogus report saying the test came back negative, end of story. There are many examples of medical examiners in trials here saying completely opposite things because they are paid to. You really dont know any of this do you? You are extremely naive..... Claim to be neutral? You are far more fanatical than I.

Why dont you go bother them on the police kidnapping thread too? Over there they are all openly talking about how the Thai police are a total corrupt mafia with nobody defending the police at all, you better get over there and sort them out, obviously everyone is way wrong about the situation in this country, everyone but you.

Damian

Edited January 29, 2008 by DamianMavis

[sabaijai]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

*Who is Tom Williams in Pai, BTW? Another pseudonym per chance?

Yes it's another pseudonym.

Couple of facts wrong in the article. Pu Ekkarat does not play guitar at Be-Bop, never has, and he was not there the night of the incident, even as a customer. Sgt Maj Uthai has not 'resumed his duties' but has been sent to an inactive post in another town, which I understand is a fairly standard police response in situations such as this, as anyone who lives in Thailand knows.

[sabaijai]

Why would a Police Officer flee after and accidental firing of his weapon?

Shouldn't he have offered assistance to the people that were unfortunatly shot ?

Yes, a real cop would.

Sure, in the West, or in a 'civilised jurisdiction' as one member put it.

[Maxi101]

Hey Damian, I raided before about behaviour of tourist in different reality.

Tell you today - after all what's going on ... I just have no words and am shocked.

Mean the other police case too. Once they are going after their own people, you can imagine

how our "status" is sliding down the mud.

Have it been all the years like that - or did I miss something.

maxi

[sabaijai]

(quote)

"I saw the two foreigners outside fighting and a man in a white jacket arrived at the scene. The woman said, `Leave us alone, we are friends, we can settle the problem ourselves'," he said. "I saw the man in a white jacket pull out a gun and kick the woman. The foreign man went to help the woman and pushed them away [sic]. Then I heard three shots fired."

Sounds much more credible against the police now but still plenty of conflicting statements.

Wonder if this is hear say written too.

Seems Carly would of mentioned she was kicked and not punched in the face from a gun weilding person......

A valid point. We also have Carly quoted as saying she can't remember any events before the gun was pulled. It still doesn't make sense to me that Uthai, even while drunk (which he was nearly every night, according to acquaintances and friends), would strike Reisig in the face unprovoked.

Where is Fuen in all this.....

There are witnesses in Pai now saying that Fuen drove up on a motorcycle and started the fight, which was between himself and Carly, not her and Leo. He was allegedly drunk and appeared to be jealous/angry that Carly was walking with her ex. Don't know how credible these reports are, but they don't come from the police or friends of the police, and, as mentioned in earlier reports, she was seen fighting with Fuen on a previous occasion at an outdoor party.

[Claymore]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

*Who is Tom Williams in Pai, BTW? Another pseudonym per chance?

Yes it's another pseudonym.

Couple of facts wrong in the article. Pu Ekkarat does not play guitar at Be-Bop, never has, and he was not there the night of the incident, even as a customer. Sgt Maj Uthai has not 'resumed his duties' but has been sent to an inactive post in another town, which I understand is a fairly standard police response in situations such as this, as anyone who lives in Thailand knows.

Well the surname is a pseudonym anyway

[DamianMavis]

Hey Damian, I raided before about behaviour of tourist in different reality.

Tell you today - after all what's going on ... I just have no words and am shocked.

Mean the other police case too. Once they are going after their own people, you can imagine

how our "status" is sliding down the mud.

Have it been all the years like that - or did I miss something.

maxi

No actually I believe that it used to be much worse for Thais and is now getting worse for falangs. I am not just referring to police victimising the people they are supposed to be protecting or having their hand in all the activity normally controlled by a powerful mafia. In general in Thailand there used to be much less "accountability". There were way more crimes that had no answer because those that committed them were untouchable (police, military, politicians, rich, whatever). From what I have been told, 20 or so years ago politicians and powerful military and other powers were killing eachother off willy nilly. I have a friend that watched his mothers brains splatter all over the front seat from a submachine gun "hit" from this time. Nowadays I think there is way more accountability and crimes such as the one I mentioned are much harder to sweep under the carpet, no matter how bad you think it is now, Im positive it used to be much worse. This is just my opinion based on who I know and what Ive been told.

As for falangs, I think it used to be much better and is steadily getting worse. Why? I am not educated enough to know. I think it has to do with the higher number of falangs that come here now as opposed to in the past or perhaps the higher number of "bad" falangs which could just be the result of "more people equals more chances of bad people". Maybe it has to do with the too rapid westernisation of Thailand, poor people are no longer so willing to accept their lot in life and feel resentful perhaps. This is all just guesswork and opinion.

People often refer to Laos as Thailand 30 years ago, and that the people there are much nicer. Why the sudden change in attitude from Thais towards falangs? A worthy discussion for another thread.

Damian

[Claymore]

Couple of facts wrong in the article. Pu Ekkarat does not play guitar at Be-Bop, never has, and he was not there the night of the incident, even as a customer. Sgt Maj Uthai has not 'resumed his duties' but has been sent to an inactive post in another town, which I understand is a fairly standard police response in situations such as this, as anyone who lives in Thailand knows.

Just to clarify , if we are all going to nit-pick. There is no claim by the author that Pu Ekkarat was at the Be-Bop that night or was a witness to the killing.

Sgt Major Uthai has not been suspended hence he has resumed his duties - in this case elsewhere.

[Claymore]

There are witnesses in Pai now saying that Fuen drove up on a motorcycle and started the fight, which was between himself and Carly, not her and Leo. He was allegedly drunk and appeared to be jealous/angry that Carly was walking with her ex. Don't know how credible these reports but as mentioned in earlier reports, she was seen fighting with Fuen on a previous occasion at an outdoor party.

Am getting a little bit bored now from these 'witnesses' in Pai. Because witnesses they are not unless they want to give evidence. I am sure there are at least 100 different versions among the local and local ex-pat community and the stories will be getting better in the telling. Should we give the above some credibility.

I don't think so. There are certainly witnesses claiming Fuen and Leo were good friends. All three were going onwards and upwards to another bar at the time.

Carly is not the first person in the world to have a 'lover's tiff'.

Am not surprised Fuen and Carly are staying out of Pai though. Probably get lynched for interfering with the tourist $

[geriatrickid]

Geriatrickid... you are so off about so many things.. you dont even know that fleeing the scene totally negates any kind of blood test? (which was not taken, its a bold faced lie) What good is a blood test 10 hours later?!

The statement that I countered was in respect to the loss of rights, not of the blood test. Blood tests do provide an indication of chemical state, even 10 hours after the fact. You'd be surprised what can be deduced from such tests. IF there was no validity of such testing, I surely would not have been collecting stomach contents from decomposed derelicts for my professors when I had to do my rotation in the butcher shop. If you're right, then, I want my tuition back. I'm not disputing the how DUI/DWI cases or failure to remain at the scene of a vehicle accident. This case however, involves an allegation of murder. Although it doesn't do the accused much good, there is no automatic presumption of guilt or loss of rights. You say there was no blood test, it is a lie. You know this because?

you keep assuring me are running aound in abundance, perhaps because they were out of uniform I HAD NO IDEA THEY WERE COPS?! And how would I know? How would anyone know? Isnt that the point? Out of uniform cops look like civilians and have no impact on society. Weird path of thinking on your part man.....

What I said was that it was not uncommon for police officers to be out of uniform in Canada. You say you have a problem understanding that. Fine. I usually can spot them as can most of my friends. Still doesn't change the original point that out of uniform police are a regular occurrence.

Impossible to fake the cops blood? Are you serious? You keep thinking in Western terms, here the doctor just has to write a bogus report saying the test came back negative, end of story. There are many examples of medical examiners in trials here saying completely opposite things because they are paid to. You really dont know any of this do you? You are extremely naive..... Claim to be neutral? You are far more fanatical than I.

Well, I'm waiting. Please cite the cases so I can be educated. I'm not naive, but I don't think a physician that sits at the top of the prestige hierarchy is going to be predisposed to lie on behalf of someone at the bottom end. I think my assessment takes into acount the realities of social status. In respect to faking a blood test, my point is that it cannot be faked because the blood can be specifically matched to the accused. What do you think they're doing, mixing chili sauce with water and corn starch? When the results are examined, a senior physician will have to take responsibility due to the importance of the case. I don't think he or she will put his career on the line for a jr. copper.

Why dont you go bother them on the police kidnapping thread too? Over there they are all openly talking about how the Thai police are a total corrupt mafia with nobody defending the police at all, you better get over there and sort them out, obviously everyone is way wrong about the situation in this country, everyone but you.

Damian

It's not a question of defending the police for me, but is one of countering obsessive claims of conspiracy and sinister plans. Everytime something goes wrong, people with a grudge come out of the forests to foment and agitate. Has it occurrred to you that maybe just maybe this was a major screw up. There was no conspiracy, no desire to go kill some tourists, but most likely a chain reaction of stupidity, and panic? Most homicides are the products of uncontrolled emotions where people don't think straight.

[LoveDaBlues]

Okay, let's look at this LOGICALLY and see if we can defend the copper.

1) The 2 Canadians WERE drinking heavily; in fact they were drunk (as the police & copper say).

2) The copper only had 1 beer (as the police say); he was NOT drunk.

3) The 2 Canadians WERE having a shouting match/fight (as the police & copper say).

4) The copper asks them to stop fighting; at which point they attack him (copper version).

5) There IS a struggle for the gun the copper pulls. He 'accidently' shoots the Canadian man 2 times......what a stretch....but

okay let's say that is a FACT.

6) At this point....why does a SOBER police officer have to shoot a drunken, unarmed female? Are we to believe that a SOBER male cannot distance himself from a DRUNKEN female with very little effort and call for backup? Oh wait.....I'll answer that.........I forgot.........the female was 'accidently' shot also........oh well nevermind.

Looks like a justified shooting to me.

[kat]

The statement that I countered was in respect to the loss of rights, not of the blood test. Blood tests do provide an indication of chemical state, even 10 hours after the fact. You'd be surprised what can be deduced from such tests. IF there was no validity of such testing, I surely would not have been collecting stomach contents from decomposed derelicts for my professors when I had to do my rotation in the butcher shop. If you're right, then, I want my tuition back. I'm not disputing the how DUI/DWI cases or failure to remain at the scene of a vehicle accident. This case however, involves an allegation of murder. Although it doesn't do the accused much good, there is no automatic presumption of guilt or loss of rights.

You countered nothing. There is no way destroyed, sabotaged, or altered evidence would be admitted as evidence in the countries you sited as an example, especially when there is an attempt to admit it as such AFTER the fact of sabotage or alteration. When the cop ran away from the scene, not to appear until the next day, he effectively denied the official claim of such evidence. It is an absurdity to claim official proof of his state at the time of the incident, when his actions blatantly denied official proof. It is also an absurdity to try and distract from this clear dereliction of duty with pedantic flights of fancy toward international law.

You are the only one who seems to need an explanation on this point, but I am not talking about their right to use such evidence as in UN human rights covenants. I am talking about rights as in privilege and credibility of common sense ideas about justice, fairness, and plain old ordinary police work, so as not appear as the principals of a kangaroo trial in a kangaroo court.

Any police department anywhere, that would seriously claim "hospital tests" as evidence a full night after a police officer has fled the scene of a double shooting, would lose all credibility anywhere else in the world but Thailand, and in your rationale it would seem.

[kat]

Quote Geriatric Kid: "Well, I'm waiting. Please cite the cases so I can be educated. I'm not naive, but I don't think a physician that sits at the top of the prestige hierarchy is going to be predisposed to lie on behalf of someone at the bottom end. I think my assessment takes into acount the realities of social status. In respect to faking a blood test, my point is that it cannot be faked because the blood can be specifically matched to the accused. What do you think they're doing, mixing chili sauce with water and corn starch? When the results are examined, a senior physician will have to take responsibility due to the importance of the case. I don't think he or she will put his career on the line for a jr. copper."

Read the thread. These cases have been quoted throughout, as well as a list of credible researchers and academics in Thailand who have written extensively on the connections between corruption, the illegal economy, the police force, judiciary and larger bureaucracy in Thailand. It is worth making an effort to familiarize yourself with these cases and body of work before assuming superiority.

[DamianMavis]

Seriously Gerrykid, the information is all there, just go read it, I did. The police doctor will do and say whatever they need to do to keep cops out of jail, this should be obvious. Whos going to check thier results?! There is no one! This isnt North America! You talk about some esteemed doctor not willing to put his rep on the line by lying.. AGAIN with the western thinking. That is NOT how it works here. The only time evidence of this sort is serious is when that special invesitgative team does it (the one the cops keep threatening because they CANT pressure them to lie). I forgot the womans name and her association but its in the links. If youre going to argue things like this you should at least read all the information that your "debate opponents" have so you dont look so naive.

Damian

[TAWP]

Okay, let's look at this LOGICALLY and see if we can defend the copper.

1) The 2 Canadians WERE drinking heavily; in fact they were drunk (as the police & copper say).

2) The copper only had 1 beer (as the police say); he was NOT drunk.

3) The 2 Canadians WERE having a shouting match/fight (as the police & copper say).

4) The copper asks them to stop fighting; at which point they attack him (copper version).

5) There IS a struggle for the gun the copper pulls. He 'accidently' shoots the Canadian man 2 times......what a stretch....but

okay let's say that is a FACT.

6) At this point....why does a SOBER police officer have to shoot a drunken, unarmed female? Are we to believe that a SOBER male cannot distance himself from a DRUNKEN female with very little effort and call for backup? Oh wait.....I'll answer that.........I forgot.........the female was 'accidently' shot also........oh well nevermind.

Looks like a justified shooting to me.

Don't forget the 'not calling for backup or ambulance afterwards and fleeing'.

[sabaijai]

"No, he was not drunk. He had only one can of beer that night. We did hospital tests. The foreign man was very drunk but the test shows Uthai was not drunk," he said. (The Police Chief)

This is like frickin' kindergarten: 'no he's not drunk because we say he wasn't drunk; the dead guy was more drunk'. They lose their RIGHTS to assert anything of the sort with any credibility because the cop left the scene. I can't believe they have the nerve to try and make assertions to his sobriety based on that action. What a bunch of jokesters.

Now we have other witnesses, who seem very credible, or at the very least as credible as Uthai's witnesses, although I would argue more so because statements in opposition to the police are much more risky, and credible reasons as to why they will not step forward.

*Who is Tom Williams in Pai, BTW? Another pseudonym per chance?

Yes it's another pseudonym.

Couple of facts wrong in the article. Pu Ekkarat does not play guitar at Be-Bop, never has, and he was not there the night of the incident, even as a customer. Sgt Maj Uthai has not 'resumed his duties' but has been sent to an inactive post in another town, which I understand is a fairly standard police response in situations such as this, as anyone who lives in Thailand knows.

Well the surname is a pseudonym anyway

'Tom' may not be the best reporter around but he if he wants to remain anonymous, let's not blow his cover.