Two Tourists In Pai Shot By A Police Officer

[Khun ?]

Why apologise about thinking the police guy might of had somewhat of a more believeble story.

Not much doubt with the most recent testimony the guy is a murder but still questionable if it was not a bit of provocation.

Reisigs continued change of stories really gave no other choice or sensible reason to believe otherwise.

Yes everyone that has been to Thailand for more than a few weeks know of the police reputation which

Uthai and the rest of the Pai area police seem to be the thugs and liars that their reputation deserves.

How is it that Carly was in a physical altercation and put on the ground over a dog not being fed, in public no less.

When Uthai interrupted this fight, what was the reason he had to kick her while she was on the ground.

Did she see a small thai guy there and started on him from where Fuen seemed to be subduing her

attacks?

She seems to be more of a loose canon now than I had first thought.

Also seems Leo had more sense about him in what ever altered state of mind all of them were in. This

is in referrence of him trying to disarm a person with a weapon which 99 times out of 100 ends up terrible.

Is some of the new testimony is a bit missing of everything that actually took place. Seems Carly no longer

has stated that there was a struggle over the weapon,,,, how can this be.

Still seems some of the changed story or reporting of her previous story makes it all the more suspicious

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

Danielle,

I know you are not directly in the loop but it would be interesting to hear the reaction of the Canadian government and press to the change of circumstances regarding the arrest of Sgt Uthai. Seems the Pai police department should have a lot of explaining to do. Only with pressure from the Canadian Embassy is it likely anyone will question their actions.

Edited February 8, 2008 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[Danielle]

Danielle,

I know you are not directly in the loop but it would be interesting to hear the reaction of the Canadian government and press to the change of circumstances regarding the arrest of Sgt Uthai. Seems the Pai police department should have a lot of explaining to do. Only with pressure from the Canadian Embassy is it likely anyone will question their actions.

I don't know yet, I'm sorry.

[DavidLeeRoth]

it would be interesting to hear the reaction of the Canadian government and press to the change of circumstances regarding the arrest of Sgt Uthai

there won't be a reaction or press coverage as the story has been forgotten about here.

[kat]

Yeah, thanks a lot to Mr Drummond for this splendid article. Differs amazingly from his first one.

I too, find it so disturbing that the victim has changed her story of events - Press vs Judge. That my friend Mr Drummond is already illegal! The original report she gave to you and the press is completely different to her story in court! She can, by law, be imprisoned just for that - that is an illegal offense. If you don't believe me, ask one of your prosecutor/ highly ranked govt officer buddies who has a degree in Thai law.

My original editorial column on 'sensationalist journalism' now stands firm in relation to Mr Drummonds first article on the incident.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

sen·sa·tion·al·ism /sɛnˈseɪʃənlˌɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sen-sey-shuh-nl-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

1. subject matter, language, or style producing or designed to produce startling or thrilling impressions or to excite and please vulgar taste.

The victim's story changing is the only disturbing thing about that article that you find worth mention?

Well, that and the usual temper tantrums about Drummond.

It comes down to this for me: regardless of how multiple stories have changed all around, Carly's inconsistencies cover up a dirty laundry-style public dispute and culturally inappropriate behavior, and the cop and the official police version cover up a drunken, execution-style hit on two foreigners. According to these new witnesses and the first details of forensics, there was no struggle for the gun, and there was no charging or towering over the cop, because the forensics has proven this as impossible. This was the only linchpin in the police story, and when that is gone they have nothing but a pure and simple execution, full stop. As more evidence emerges, it will be even more significant to note the inconsistencies in the facts, and the story of the police which was corroborated by local police witnesses. Quite instructive, indeed.

This has the potential to be a ground-breaking case because of removed witnesses, and objective forensic evidence. It will be telling in many ways, including the reactions of the public in Thailand. One other poster earlier mentioned the nationality of the witnesses.

If I remember correctly from earlier accounts, at least one seemed to be Thai, but was a student from outside of Pai. They may both be Thai, but not local to the town.

[Claymore]

If Uthai is now charged with serious offenses, is he now also in custody? If not, he is a prime candidate for running in to the rice paddies and disappearing - as so often happens (ok, mostly with accident-prone bus drivers).

I respect the two from Chiang Mai (my guess is they're farang) who stuck it out and recently testified. they risked injury and are still be in danger, even if they're under some sort of protection. They could have easily skirted the issue, but they didn't - and it's a testament to their courage and sense of doing what's right. That's why I seriously doubt they're Thai.

Was Carly's testimony influenced by the two from Chiang Mai? - who gave statements first? and how in touch was Carly and the other two - enough to corroborate their stories? These are some points the defense may mention - in an attempt to show collusion.

Actually they are Thai. This couple did not know Carly but they knew Leo or were acquainted with him because they remembered him ordering a Bob Marley number in one of the Pai bars. According to Andrew Drummond what is now the subject of the investigation is (1) the gun and (2) what did the many police do when they arrived at P'Dang's restaurant after the event. He made a reference to this in an article when he described the evidence of two witnesses as 'uncannily similar'.

The evidence of the Pai witnesses is at total variance with what the young couple told the DSI in Bangkok last week which Drummond witnessed. Moreover they appear to be claiming Carly was fighting Leo.

Carly, says Drummond, does not appear to have deliberately lied, but she could have been more helpful. When she was asked if she was fighting Leo, she simply denied it. She did not add that she was fighting Fune. The other contradiction is that she initially said she was shot first then it was Leo which is contrary to the story now.

However the Chiang Mai witnesses would be more credible. They claim they were intimidated by the police so they left. If anybody's testimony is being influenced it is much more likely to be that of the witnesses in Pai.

[Claymore]

Yeah, thanks a lot to Mr Drummond for this splendid article. Differs amazingly from his first one.

I too, find it so disturbing that the victim has changed her story of events - Press vs Judge. That my friend Mr Drummond is already illegal! The original report she gave to you and the press is completely different to her story in court! She can, by law, be imprisoned just for that - that is an illegal offense. If you don't believe me, ask one of your prosecutor/ highly ranked govt officer buddies who has a degree in Thai law.

My original editorial column on 'sensationalist journalism' now stands firm in relation to Mr Drummonds first article on the incident.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

sen·sa·tion·al·ism /sɛnˈseɪʃənlˌɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sen-sey-shuh-nl-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

1. subject matter, language, or style producing or designed to produce startling or thrilling impressions or to excite and please vulgar taste.

I will pass your thanks along. But rather think Andrew Drummond will not be that impressed. It pretty much supports the first one which in fact was just an acount by Carly Reisig on what her memory of the incident was. Whether it has turned out partially wrong or not he was merely reporting what she said.

Some people may indeed see your collection of ill-researched and fictitious stories in the foreign press as 'designed to produce startling or thrilling impression or to excite vulgar taste'.

[A_Traveller]

The other contradiction is that she initially said she was shot first then it was Leo which is contrary to the story now.

Is it? The claim seems to remain that she was shot first, then two separate shots at Leo, making three shots in all, or am I misreading.

Reisig told the court ... As I fell he shot me just below the chest. "I looked up and saw Leo was shouting 'Stop! Stop!' He had his hands in the air. The policeman fell back over a motorcycle then recovered and he fired twice. After the first time Leo put his hands to his stomach and went down. Then he shot down at Leo as he fell."

Regards Edited February 8, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Danielle]

I thought all the previous stories said that Leo was shot first, then Carly. Now the story is Carly was shot first, then Leo.

Someone tell me if I am misunderstanding?

[A_Traveller]

The initial reports all stated a variation of the Leo being shot twice and the Ms. Reisig being injured by a gun shot. therefore they could be read that way, however, the reconstruction did show something odd, which I commented upon then, though some discounted it, that the two parties were some distance apart. This now may make sense given the new information. I also notice, looking back, that the 'exclusive' interviews seem to imply that Ms. Reisig was saying she and Leo were not fighting, which again seems now to be true.

Regards

PS On further research I find a report from the Calgary Sun where Ms. Reisig is quoted as being shot second, with the third shot, which I've added below for clarity.

Edited February 8, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Claymore]

I thought all the previous stories said that Leo was shot first, then Carly. Now the story is Carly was shot first, then Leo.

Someone tell me if I am misunderstanding?

No you are right. She she told a journalist at first that Leo was shot first. Now she has told the DSI it was her that was shot first. She also told that story to the court. Carly Reisig was commissioned to do the interview which Andrew Drummond included verbatim in his story I believe.

The fight in the a bar earlier (by months) followed by her pushing a policeman occurred after an Israeli tourist made a remark about farang women going with 'shitty Thai men'. At least that is what she told the National Human Rights Council . The NHRC saw no relevance in it.

[A_Traveller]

^ And I'm wrong, mea culpa, a report in the Calgary Sun included this

Reisig said ... "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." Reisig then blacked out, with a bullet lodged in her chest, just 2.5 cm from her heart. "When I came to, I saw Leo lying dead on the road beside me," she said. "I can't believe my best friend is dead and I've got a bullet right beside my heart."

Regards Edited February 8, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Claymore]

Why apologise about thinking the police guy might of had somewhat of a more believeble story.

Not much doubt with the most recent testimony the guy is a murder but still questionable if it was not a bit of provocation.

Reisigs continued change of stories really gave no other choice or sensible reason to believe otherwise.

Yes everyone that has been to Thailand for more than a few weeks know of the police reputation which

Uthai and the rest of the Pai area police seem to be the thugs and liars that their reputation deserves.

How is it that Carly was in a physical altercation and put on the ground over a dog not being fed, in public no less.

When Uthai interrupted this fight, what was the reason he had to kick her while she was on the ground.

Did she see a small thai guy there and started on him from where Fuen seemed to be subduing her

attacks?

She seems to be more of a loose canon now than I had first thought.

Also seems Leo had more sense about him in what ever altered state of mind all of them were in. This

is in referrence of him trying to disarm a person with a weapon which 99 times out of 100 ends up terrible.

Is some of the new testimony is a bit missing of everything that actually took place. Seems Carly no longer

has stated that there was a struggle over the weapon,,,, how can this be.

Still seems some of the changed story or reporting of her previous story makes it all the more suspicious.

I think once can almost guarantee in stories such as this police are liable to make things up to make themselves look better. That is why we should

be suspicious of everything they say. There does not appear to be much evidence that leo tried to disarm the policeman. He had his hands up.

The struggle over the weapon is Carly hitting the gun out of the way of her face.

According to Drummond. Police did take a statement from Carly but did not even bother to bring an interpreter so used Fune instead.

When Fune was at the proscutors office, clearly giving evidence against the police, he was approached by Colonel Sombat - the man who said variously that Carly was fighting over a love triangle, that she was pregnant and 'luckily the bullet missed the foetus, and told 'When you get back to Pai you should come and see me."

Drummond claims Fune was literally shaking at the time so he intervened and the police walked off. But he took this pic.

Fune cannot of course ever go back to Pai again.

[Tony Clifton]

Criminals always lie.

This police force is packed with criminals and their superiors mostly always cover for them and are aware of every other policeman's personal rackets.

All of them are guilty by association and that is what makes them a total failure, add to that their absolute disdain of an eventual and much needed reform.

Whatever happened, they've successfully botched yet another investigation and intimidated witnesses as they always do.

[Khun ?]

Claymore

Thanks, it is much more clear. As I said it had no sence Leo was shot first and then turned and shot

Carly.

I wondered why Fune's ( Fuen) statement was not available ( he speaks thai which Drummond could not understand when given).

This is great they are onto intimidation of witnesses by the upper and all levels of the Pai police force.

Wonder why we have Sombat's version of Fune's statement as you indicated, I believe.

Where is the actual statement as given to the prosecutor from Fune?

No one really expected less of the local police force and if Uthai was an officer most likely he would

be in hidding in a neighboring country.

I hope the thai people understand this reflects on the general population of Thailand and not just the police force.

Edited February 8, 2008 by Khun ?

[Claymore]

Claymore

Thanks, it is much more clear. As I said it had no sence Leo was shot first and then turned and shot

Carly.

I wondered why Fune's ( Fuen) statement was not available ( he speaks thai which Drummond could not understand when given).

This is great they are onto intimidation of witnesses by the upper and all levels of the Pai police force.

Wonder why we have Sombat's version of Fune's statement as you indicated, I believe.

Where is the actual statement as given to the prosecutor from Fune?

No one really expected less of the local police force and if Uthai was an officer most likely he would

be in hidding in a neighboring country.

I hope the thai people understand this reflects on the general population of Thailand and not just the police force.

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

Actually Fune speaks English fairly well (for Thailand) but Drummond finds a lot of the time that speaking in Thai to him is easier. NHRC asked him to be interpreter at the prosecutors office but he declined as this was legal matter and he was not confident his Thai was up to standard - also conflict of interest.

He does have Fune's statement to the court and DSI. Police have made available some of their statements to NHRC but not everything I believe.

On the question of whether Leo and Carly attacked Uthai he is happy to receive any statements on either side btw, provided the witnesses give a name, contact number, and where exactly they were at the time of the shooting. They will be passed on to NHRC and also published if they have merit.

This may reflect badly on Thailand but not on the local people. You should bear in mind what Drummond readily admits, these things happen to Thais all the time but they dont make news. It is because a foreigner involved that this has become hot news so to speak. (His contacts details r on his website)

[Danielle]

There is an article out in the Chilliwack Times.

http://www.canada.com/chilliwacktimes/news...08-13c6ab8f54a4

Reisig version backed

Paul J. Henderson, The Times

Published: Friday, February 08, 2008

Two witnesses to the shooting of Sardis secondary grad Carly Reisig in Thailand in January have come forward with a version of events that back up Reisig, and conflict with police reports, according to a Thai news source.

The witnesses from Chiang Mai told the Bangkok-based newspaper The Nation that Reisig was fighting with her Thai boyfriend when the officer, Sgt. Uthai Dechawiwat, kicked her, struck her with his pistol and then shot her in the chest.

Dechawiwat then shot and killed Reisig's friend, Canadian Leo Del Pinto who, according to the witnesses, had his hands in the air and was yelling at the officer to stop.

They also said the officer, who has now been charged with murder and attempted murder, was drunk.

This story is consistent with what Reisig's parents told the Chilliwack Times back in January, but varies greatly from the official police report.

© Chilliwack Times 2008

[Claymore]

From Arkady or Kate cant remember

"I also find it disturbing that Carly's story is so different, for many reasons. I have no doubt about the most important details and how they correspond to the forensic findings, but I question why she altered her story so dramatically. It is obvious that she was trying to protect someone - either herself or Fuen."

**added

Well that may very well be the reason. Fuen was not a happy puppy. She was certainly not trying to involve him earlier on and needed to keep him happy in case she needed him in the future. A point in his favour is that he has not left her for five minutes (cigarette breaks at the hospital) since the shooting. The Pai mob are now calling him a ganja dealer and gigolo btw 'with lots of foreign girls sending him money'. Still we can all have our aspirations!

[LoveDaBlues]

"That is where the "baseless" Internet rumor that Carly changed her story comes from. I think that Drummond might be feeling the heat of Internet writers coming on the scene to question his journalism after enjoying his salad days for so long when he could file sensationalist stories and nobody would question it."

Here is something that is not questioned, and is quite "sensationalist" on its own: a drunk, off-duty police officer fired three "accidental" shots into the kill zones of two unarmed people, and then ran away with nothing more than a tiny scratch. There are no other details that are greater than these; if you think about it, everything else is secondary, in that they have no meaning apart from this fact.

*added color for my comments

AD is a good reporter....naw he's a joke. Carly's story has changed......naw it hasn't. He was shot first......naw she was shot first.........blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

All smoke and mirrors and meaningless. kat has it right above; the facts are these and they haven't been disputed since day one:

1) armed cop shoots 2 unarmed people; one fatally and the other near-fatal.

2) he runs away.

Folks, there's a reason most Thai people I know are afraid of the Thai police and don't want anything to do with them. BTW, how's the case going where the Thai cops have been beating/extorting innocent civilians?

[Arkady]

I think once can almost guarantee in stories such as this police are liable to make things up to make themselves look better. That is why we should

be suspicious of everything they say. There does not appear to be much evidence that leo tried to disarm the policeman. He had his hands up.

The struggle over the weapon is Carly hitting the gun out of the way of her face.

According to Drummond. Police did take a statement from Carly but did not even bother to bring an interpreter so used Fune instead.

When Fune was at the proscutors office, clearly giving evidence against the police, he was approached by Colonel Sombat - the man who said variously that Carly was fighting over a love triangle, that she was pregnant and 'luckily the bullet missed the foetus, and told 'When you get back to Pai you should come and see me."

Drummond claims Fune was literally shaking at the time so he intervened and the police walked off. But he took this pic.

Fune cannot of course ever go back to Pai again.

Claymore, can you tell us what is depicted in the photograph?

[Claymore]

"That is where the "baseless" Internet rumor that Carly changed her story comes from. I think that Drummond might be feeling the heat of Internet writers coming on the scene to question his journalism after enjoying his salad days for so long when he could file sensationalist stories and nobody would question it."

Here is something that is not questioned, and is quite "sensationalist" on its own: a drunk, off-duty police officer fired three "accidental" shots into the kill zones of two unarmed people, and then ran away with nothing more than a tiny scratch. There are no other details that are greater than these; if you think about it, everything else is secondary, in that they have no meaning apart from this fact.

*added color for my comments

AD is a good reporter....naw he's a joke. Carly's story has changed......naw it hasn't. He was shot first......naw she was shot first.........blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

All smoke and mirrors and meaningless. kat has it right above; the facts are these and they haven't been disputed since day one:

1) armed cop shoots 2 unarmed people; one fatally and the other near-fatal.

2) he runs away.

Folks, there's a reason most Thai people I know are afraid of the Thai police and don't want anything to do with them. BTW, how's the case going where the Thai cops have been beating/extorting innocent civilians?

AD would absolutely and totally agree with this post - apart from the first line of course. But at the time he claimed Carly Reisig had not changed her story, she had not changed her story. Things have changed in this case, which is quite obvious. While in this has happened to foreigners and attracted a lot of interest, it happens all the time to Thais and they are powerless to act.

1. Armed cop shoots 2 unarmed people. (Not unusual)

2. he runs away (V.usual)

3. Police prepare plausible defence (even though they are the prosecutors!) and attempt to cover their tracks, expecting nobody will challenge them as usual in these cases. (usual)

4.Glaring and stupid gaps are found when their claims are put to the test. (Usual if anybody actual looks into the case)

[Arkady]

Now would be a good time for the Canadian government to make a push either publicly or behind the scenes while the NHRC's request for the DSI to take over the investigation is being considered and the new Thai government has just been installed. All they need to do is express concern about confusion surrounding the initial investigation and that they hope no efforts will be spared to ensure that the investigation will now proceed as efficiently as possible, so as to ensure justice for all parties involved, as well as express general concern for the safety of foreign tourists. I have seen myself in the past that a nudge at the right moment by an ambassador in Thailand can make all the difference. Timing is also enhanced by the revolting stories being revealed about the brutality and corruption of the Border Patrol Police gang (with the complicity of senior police, prosecutors and judges) that have shocked even the Thai public, long enured to the everyday reality of police brutality and corruption. This has put the police and their apologists very much on the back foot for now, although they will no doubt spring back before long.

Now would also perhaps be a good time for the apologists in this thread to review such sentiments as the outrageous "possibly manslaughter" comment and the view raised on several occasions from on the spot that Pai residents found it so laughable that any of them might be afraid to give evidence against the police. It now looks unfortunate for these happy go lucky, fearless folk and their esteemed police force that there might be witnesses that are not Pai residents who can give their evidence to the DSI in Bangkok and be under the latter's protection.

There has been no explanation as to why the Mae Hong Song court freed Uthai without bail but I suppose we have to accept that this is standard practice when a policeman is charged with murdering some one lower down the food chain and not worthy of comment. Like others here, I would like to know what Fuen has said to the police and to the court, if he indeed testified in court. Unlike others I don't think that Carly's changes of story, bizarre though they are, have much bearing on the case, nor do I think her prior behavior or personality are particularly relevant. The forensics are much more important and after that comes the testimony of independent witnesses. Farang Prince said early on that Uthai had screwed himself by claiming to have shot Leo from below and it is now looking as if he may be right. Unlike other prominent cases, the Pai police fortunately don't seem to have had the sophistication or financial resources to distort the forensic evidence to fit their story.

Let's hope that we make it to the next very important stage of the DSI being given authority to take over the investigation.

Edited February 9, 2008 by Arkady

[Claymore]

I think once can almost guarantee in stories such as this police are liable to make things up to make themselves look better. That is why we should

be suspicious of everything they say. There does not appear to be much evidence that leo tried to disarm the policeman. He had his hands up.

The struggle over the weapon is Carly hitting the gun out of the way of her face.

According to Drummond. Police did take a statement from Carly but did not even bother to bring an interpreter so used Fune instead.

When Fune was at the proscutors office, clearly giving evidence against the police, he was approached by Colonel Sombat - the man who said variously that Carly was fighting over a love triangle, that she was pregnant and 'luckily the bullet missed the foetus, and told 'When you get back to Pai you should come and see me."

Drummond claims Fune was literally shaking at the time so he intervened and the police walked off. But he took this pic.

Fune cannot of course ever go back to Pai again.

Claymore, can you tell us what is depicted in the photograph?

This is a picture taken at the prosecutor's office in Mae Hong Son during a break during questioning on Wed afternoon at about 4.45 pm. Carly and Fune head outside for a cigarette break, and for Carly, slightly irritated, to argue a little with Fune that some of her important points are being left out of her statement which she wants added. Everybody else is on the second floor. AD spots Sombat approaching the couple with another policeman and rushes down and out crossing a ditch so he is standing in front of them facing with his camera. AD is bit vague about what he sd or did apart from taking the pic. But he said Fune looked v scared and Sombat uncomfortable ( at the photographer). The identity of AD had not been given to police. NHCR just said he was foreign observer from UK. The couple got up and went inside first (not police as earlier stated) Sombat approached AD and asked him if he spoke Thai. AD smiled feigning lack of Thai language. and walked on and inside and spoke to Fune. Fune said that Sombat had asked him to go and see him in his office in Pai when he returned.

There was later a confrontation between NHCR officials in Pai on Thursd. Carly had hoped to spend the night there again but found all her belongings had been stolen. Surasee Kosolnavin advised them both to leave with NHCR as clothes could turn up at a later date with an illegal substance in them. I have to say Surasee sounds quite canny. Many people smoke ganja in Thai prob Fune/Carly too. But AD has no personal knowledge and not really bothered. Its yaa ba people r worried about.

[A_Traveller]

I see there's another article by AD in the Nation today LINK headlined Police tale fabricated: Pornthip.

Regards

PS There's a version on his website with a couple of photographs as well

PPS Can anyone once and for all confirm the rank of the officer involved, is it Sgt., or Sgt. Major?

Edited February 9, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Claymore]

I see there's another article by AD in the Nation today LINK headlined Police tale fabricated: Pornthip.

Regards

PS There's a version on his website with a couple of photographs as well

PPS Can anyone once and for all confirm the rank of the officer involved, is it Sgt., or Sgt. Major?

Or senior sergeant

[Claymore]

!

Here is an example from an anonymous poster 'Friends of Pai' sent to the Nation here and passed on to AD. I include it because it is typical of some levels or argument coming out of Pai

we want you guys at the Nation to know that Carly's Thai boyfriend deals in Ganja, that's his job in Pai. He also a gigolo and has many farang girls sending him money all the time. Carly has had many Thai boyfriends too.

Followed by this in the same letter

Please don't write this but we heard in Pai that Andrew Drummond was out drinking with Carly in Mae Hong Sorn town the other night

And this

"Yes it was murder but Carly started it all. It doesn’t matter what any doctor says because we know that the policeman was really angry and he was wrong and he killed Leo while he was on the ground

And this:

Why didn’t Drummond just wait for other witnesses who can defend Uthai and explain that Carly started the problem before selling his sensationalist favouritism to the international press?

And this:Why Drummond did'nt you interview any witnesses in Pai? Because you have never been here that's what it is.

Readers of this thread will know AD has already quoted anti-Carly witnesses in Pai. I guess as he took photographs there he has been there too.

Perhaps he should have put up a stall saying 'Give your evidence here'.

[permanent_disorder]

Arkady was correct all along.

Told you to pay attention to his/her posts.

Cue the hand wringing from the apologists.

At least there is a few of us that still know what is really going on in this country.

not so much apoligising here from other people. just a lot of doubt on the 'stories' of Ms. Reisig. first her story that the police man came out of the blue to hit her, now she was fighting on the ground with her 'boyfriend' because he doesn't feed the dog.

when you taking all the more or less unrelated stories about thai police violence in account you have to look also at the very personality of the people direct involved. and there we have a woman, with a tattoed 'war painted' face, involved in many fights with different boyfriends and even with te police about things like 'he not feed the dog' and month after the shooting being seen drinking with friends in a pub. and how she change her story so often. you should put in account del pintos personality and that include drug using (okay, ganja) and swinging beer bottles when walking on the streets in thailand in bright daylight.

for all that behaivior i read here a lot of apologising.

just imagine that behavior from foreigners in canada. let's say they are from uganda, doing a pub crawl, after that fighting on a public street and then get involved in a struggle for a gun out of a canadian (small town/county side) police mans hand and shouting in swahili language 'stop, stop'. what would you think could be the outcome? would it be different or is it really a case of 'only in thailand' about you seems to know so much?

is there a need for fingerpointing on the thai police in particular? helpful in the sense to come to a conclusion what really happen that night? i doubt this.

okay, you can consider this in your view how the investigation will be in the process, but it's all just speculation and not one of the so often called hard facts in that special case.

[Boo]

involved in many fights with different boyfriends and even with te police

I beleive the reports were, she got involved in a tussel with police ONCE before when her one prior thai bf got attacked & she stepped in to help him. I also recal that no charges were pressed. Is that wrong? There are a lot of posts now so wanted to be sure I didn't miss where this was reported.

[permanent_disorder]

All smoke and mirrors and meaningless. kat has it right above; the facts are these and they haven't been disputed since day one:

1) armed cop shoots 2 unarmed people; one fatally and the other near-fatal.

2) he runs away.

Folks, there's a reason most Thai people I know are afraid of the Thai police and don't want anything to do with them. BTW, how's the case going where the Thai cops have been beating/extorting innocent civilians?

mhm, is the police man still on the run or had he contact his colleagues/ the police later that night. (after maybe being in somekind of shock state in the frist moment)

an other undisputed fact would be also that there are three people, not only two get in confrontation with the policeman, a physical one, and that there was a struggle about to get the gun out of the police mans hand.

most people i know (from thailand and all over the world), know that police have guns and would not get in a fight with them. but i don't know people (personally) fighting and beating on a public street about that the dog was not feed. the people i know (from thailand and all over the world) would not do it. so there is a lack of understanding on my side of the whole situation.

and in the case where cops extorting innocent civilians, arrest have being made by the thai police and the case is going to the criminal court. that is in the news, you just have to read the full story and not only the headlines.

[meadish_sweetball]

If my memory serves me right, altogether two fights have been confirmed, if we are to take the latest testimonies as true - the first one in a brawl in the Bebop bar where it is said Reisig kneed, or hit, a police officer; the second one took place right before the shootings.

There have not been any clear reports of any other actual fights in the thread involving Reisig as far as I can remember.

an other undisputed fact would be also that there are three people, not only two get in confrontation with the policeman, a physical one, and that there was a struggle about to get the gun out of the police mans hand.

From what I have read, it seems that is very much a disputed rather than an undisputed fact. The latest testimonies do not speak of a struggle for the gun, they claim Reisig pushed the gun away but not that there was an actual attempt to gain control of it, unlike some earlier versions.

Hopefully the forensics will establish the most likely version of events.