Two Tourists In Pai Shot By A Police Officer

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai. Dr. Pornthip has determined from the forensic evidence the shots were fired into Del Pinto from above. That has been corroborated by two witnesses who are now under the protection of the DSI. I suspect there may be other forensic evidence we have not been told about such as the approximate distance the shots were fired from. According to the new witnesses there was no struggle for the gun save Reisig pushing the gun away after she was pistol whipped.

"Pornthip has been studying post mortems carried out both in Calgary, Canada and in Chiang Mai. She said this week that police claims that Leo del Pinto, 24, had been shot from below by a local policeman "as he was falling to the ground" did not match the evidence."What the police say is just not possible. Evidence shows that the gunman was above Leo when he was shot in the head," she said at the Maharaj Chiang Mai hospital after studying medical records."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/02/09...al_30064884.php

Edited February 9, 2008 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[permanent_disorder]

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.

yes, one case where the police was involved. at that time her boyfriend, was in a pub fight with a foreigner/falang from israel. and surprising contrary about so many 'facts' i read on TVforum, police didn't team up with the fellow countryman but arrested the thai person instead of putting all the blame on the falang. (and not sure if you can call this a attack by police against her ex boyfriend. ) the charge have being pressed against the tourist Ms. Reisig and her thai boyfriend was somekind of unwritten 'law order' : leave the town and never come back. a friendly deal, no paper work for he police, no further trouble for the arrested people. her ex-boyfriend never came back.

there have been also reports that a drug test that night turn out negative, but that proves little, because as avid readers of TVforum we all know thai police is corrupt and money can turn your drug test negative. that is also a personal experience from me, once i accompany a foreign artist after his gig in bangkok in a taxi, we came into a police control, silly him had little bit ganja in his pocket. but money gave us a free ride and he got his lesson in obey the law.

ms. reisig herself was talking also about an other fight with one of her boyfriends.and here on the forum have been also other reports from local witness(es) describing her as a trouble maker. these words coming from a TVmember, who try to give a balanced report and doesn't sound biased. so i believe that. according to herself we know that she get into physical fights about subjects like her dog is not being feed. sounds not like a person who kick over the traces only once in a weak moment.

[LaoPo]

"Pornthip has been studying post mortems carried out both in Calgary, Canada and in Chiang Mai. She said this week that police claims that Leo del Pinto, 24, had been shot from below by a local policeman "as he was falling to the ground" did not match the evidence."What the police say is just not possible. Evidence shows that the gunman was above Leo when he was shot in the head," she said at the Maharaj Chiang Mai hospital after studying medical records."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/02/09...al_30064884.php

Thank you ChiangMaiAmerican, for the link; please allow me to post the entire article, especially for those with slow connections:

SHOOTING DEATH

Police tale fabricated: Pornthip

NHRC wants DSI to take over Pai inquiry

Published on February 9, 2008

"Top forensic doctor Pornthip Rojanasunan has rejected the police account of the shooting of two Canadians, one of whom was killed, in the northern town of Pai last month.

Pornthip has been studying post mortems carried out both in Calgary, Canada and in Chiang Mai. She said this week that police claims that Leo del Pinto, 24, had been shot from below by a local policeman "as he was falling to the ground" did not match the evidence.

"What the police say is just not possible. Evidence shows that the gunman was above Leo when he was shot in the head," she said at the Maharaj Chiang Mai hospital after studying medical records.

"One bullet went through his abdomen, piercing his kidney and liver, and the entry and exit points were at quite similar points. The bullet that entered the man's head entered through his right cheek, went down through his larynx and was embedded under his shoulder," she said.

Her comments add to a growing belief that the inquiry by local police into the incident is a sham, designed simply to get their colleague off the hook.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is set to formally request the Justice Ministry's Department of Special Investigation (DSI) take over investigation into the shooting of del Pinto and Carly Reisig.

Rights Commissioner Surasee Kosolnavin, who has been looking into the case with the DSI's Colonel Piyawate Kingkate and Pornthip, also indicated a range of concerns about the police probe.

"The most telling point of all is that police have given evidence that the bullet which hit Carly Reisig also hit Leo del Pinto. It is not possible," said Commissioner Surasee. "So we are starting from that point and going back.

"There are reports that the policeman has been charged with murder and attempted murder, but no such charges have been brought. They have, however, now been put to the officer [at the court hearing on Wednesday] ,and we will be referring the case to the governing board of the DSI and recommend they take over the investigation."

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej may be asked to decide whether the DSI should take over the case, as the new PM is understood to head the committee that will consider the matter.

Reisig and del Pinto, both 24 and from British Columbia, were shot in the main street of Pai at about 2am on January 6.

Pai Police Sergeant Uthai Dechawiwat was freed without bail after admitting to shooting the two Canadians. He pleaded not guilty in Mae Hong Son Court on Wednesday to charges of murder and attempted murder.

But Uthai's claims to have acted in self-defence after a fight erupted when he confronted the two tourists and that his gun discharged accidentally are contentious.

Reisig told the court on Wednesday she had been pistol-whipped then shot in the chest and that del Pinto had been fatally shot straight afterwards, despite having his hands in the air and pleading with Uthai to "Stop! Stop!"

Reisig's account has been backed by two local witnesses, now in protective custody, who have given their account to the NHRC and DSI in Bangkok.

Andrew Drummond

Special to The Nation

Mae Hong Son"

From: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/02/09...al_30064884.php

LaoPo

[LoveDaBlues]

Great to see a top Thai forensic doctor refute the police lies. The shooter might actually be sweating bullets (pun intended) now. I hope this doesn't die and the pathetic little man gets convicted.

Now, I'd like to see a gun expert do this:

1) match the bullets to the gun so we know the gun being touted as the one used in the shooting really is the proper gun.

then

2) testify/report as to the likelihood of 3 shots being 'accidentally' fired as the pathetic little copper claims.

edit: each little emerging fact adds a nail to the shooters coffin.

Edited February 9, 2008 by LoveDaBlues

[permanent_disorder]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai.../url]

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.

okay, i didn't state that it is an undisputed fact that the shots have being fired during the struggle for the gun. we don't know when that happen, (probably later)

only that there was a struggle for the gun, i state as a fact. the police was talking about the struggle, there have been witness reports about the struggle and also Ms. Reisig was talking about the struggle. now Ms. Reisig change her version. now you can pick up the version that favour your personal theory or do not believe at all what Ms. Reisig is talking. i think neither the police man nor ms. resig are telling the full truth.

but okay, i will soften my statement. we don't know if one of them try to grab the gun to gain control, disarm the police man or just push the gun away. but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun, out of whatever motivation? a fatal mistake.

that is not a case of peaceful promenader getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

no doubt that police man is guilty, he even should have not draw his gun in the first place. people starting fights about dogs not getting feed don't deserved to get gunned down but need professional help. but to find justice in that case we also have to consider the behaivior of the victims.

and there are also cases in the west where police getting involved in domestic violence fights ending fatally for the civilian. these people are in rage and out of control and the average street cop is often overstrained. this is not a TIT case, the ongoing investigations maybe are, but the manner of discussion here is -TIT(farang edition). fresh fruits for the blamers.

[stumonster]

but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun,

I don't know where you acquired that fact , erco.

[Maxi101]

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?

What is so confusing about her two statements, hmm ?!

Like I stated looong ago -

the new version just shows that she is INDEED responsible too, for Leos death (due to her temper and wrong behavior).

Of course she didn't pull the trigger - but HER try making Leo a hero (which he truly was) - gives just a bad taste -

And this over a dogs food.

maxi

Edited February 9, 2008 by Maxi101

[LoveDaBlues]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai.../url]

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.

okay, i didn't state that it is an undisputed fact that the shots have being fired during the struggle for the gun. we don't know when that happen, (probably later)

only that there was a struggle for the gun, i state as a fact. the police was talking about the struggle, there have been witness reports about the struggle and also Ms. Reisig was talking about the struggle. now Ms. Reisig change her version. now you can pick up the version that favour your personal theory or do not believe at all what Ms. Reisig is talking. i think neither the police man nor ms. resig are telling the full truth.

but okay, i will soften my statement. we don't know if one of them try to grab the gun to gain control, disarm the police man or just push the gun away. but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun, out of whatever motivation? a fatal mistake.

that is not a case of peaceful promenader getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

no doubt that police man is guilty, he even should have not draw his gun in the first place. people starting fights about dogs not getting feed don't deserved to get gunned down but need professional help. but to find justice in that case we also have to consider the behaivior of the victims.

and there are also cases in the west where police getting involved in domestic violence fights ending fatally for the civilian. these people are in rage and out of control and the average street cop is often overstrained. this is not a TIT case, the ongoing investigations maybe are, but the manner of discussion here is -TIT(farang edition). fresh fruits for the blamers.

Correct. It is a case of loud drunks getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

As I've posted before; dealing with drunks is a BIG part of a cops job description. This little excuse for a real cop is a murderer, plain and simple. Happens in Thailand all too often. Hopefully, you can visit him in jail someday.

[Claymore]

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.

Yes you are right

[Claymore]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai.../url]

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.

okay, i didn't state that it is an undisputed fact that the shots have being fired during the struggle for the gun. we don't know when that happen, (probably later)

only that there was a struggle for the gun, i state as a fact. the police was talking about the struggle, there have been witness reports about the struggle and also Ms. Reisig was talking about the struggle. now Ms. Reisig change her version. now you can pick up the version that favour your personal theory or do not believe at all what Ms. Reisig is talking. i think neither the police man nor ms. resig are telling the full truth.

but okay, i will soften my statement. we don't know if one of them try to grab the gun to gain control, disarm the police man or just push the gun away. but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun, out of whatever motivation? a fatal mistake.

that is not a case of peaceful promenader getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

no doubt that police man is guilty, he even should have not draw his gun in the first place. people starting fights about dogs not getting feed don't deserved to get gunned down but need professional help. but to find justice in that case we also have to consider the behaivior of the victims.

and there are also cases in the west where police getting involved in domestic violence fights ending fatally for the civilian. these people are in rage and out of control and the average street cop is often overstrained. this is not a TIT case, the ongoing investigations maybe are, but the manner of discussion here is -TIT(farang edition). fresh fruits for the blamers.

Well whatever the past stories are about a struggle for the gun the version sworn in the court by Reisig is that she pushed the gun away when Uthai was pointing it in her face. She demonstrated a fast sideways movement (almost hitting) with her right hand.

[Claymore]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai.../url]

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.

okay, i didn't state that it is an undisputed fact that the shots have being fired during the struggle for the gun. we don't know when that happen, (probably later)

only that there was a struggle for the gun, i state as a fact. the police was talking about the struggle, there have been witness reports about the struggle and also Ms. Reisig was talking about the struggle. now Ms. Reisig change her version. now you can pick up the version that favour your personal theory or do not believe at all what Ms. Reisig is talking. i think neither the police man nor ms. resig are telling the full truth.

but okay, i will soften my statement. we don't know if one of them try to grab the gun to gain control, disarm the police man or just push the gun away. but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun, out of whatever motivation? a fatal mistake.

that is not a case of peaceful promenader getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

no doubt that police man is guilty, he even should have not draw his gun in the first place. people starting fights about dogs not getting feed don't deserved to get gunned down but need professional help. but to find justice in that case we also have to consider the behaivior of the victims.

and there are also cases in the west where police getting involved in domestic violence fights ending fatally for the civilian. these people are in rage and out of control and the average street cop is often overstrained. this is not a TIT case, the ongoing investigations maybe are, but the manner of discussion here is -TIT(farang edition). fresh fruits for the blamers.

Well whatever the past stories are about a struggle for the gun the version sworn in the court by Reisig is that she pushed the gun away when Uthai was pointing it in her face. She demonstrated a fast sideways movement (almost hitting) with her right hand.

fast sideways movement with the flat of her right hand

[permanent_disorder]

but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun,

I don't know where you acquired that fact , erco.

okay, you are right. most of the 'facts' we just hear from the sensationalist story teller Andrew Drummand. we can not really rely on that.

so is my bad to take the following statements into account.

reisig : "... 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 ..." (quoted from the nation article "SURVIVOR'S CLAIM Cop 'executed my best friend'")

Sgt-Major Uthai / Case investigator Pol Lt-Colonel Sombat Panya : "...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 and the couple went down." (quoted from same source)

because both side talking about a struggle/scuffle i thought we could take it as fact.

but, okay this is also old news. on a biased reporting of Andrew Drummond where als Ms. Reisig not told him the truth but for a catchy headline he believed her.

then the court Ms. Reisig told a complete other story. and this new version we also know only from Andrew Drummand, who i don't give so much credit.

but have a look at the new version:

"Reisig told the court she was on the ground and had been fighting with her boyfriend Ratthapon because she said he had failed to feed her Labrador dog ‘Magic’. Leo had tried to separate the couple when a man she knew as Sgt Uthai approached.

“He came and kicked me in my side as I was trying to get up. He was shouting in Thai and pointing a gun at me. I pushed the gun away ..." (source Andrew Drummond:"Canadian woman tells court of fatal shooting in Pai - Feb 8 2008"

okay, in this version a struggle or scuffle for the gun is not mentioned, but she claimed that she pushed the gun away. there is a little chance that she was doing that without using her hands in direction to the gun, that she just blow some air on it or whatever or do some magical spell (remember the name of that lovely dog who didn't get his supper?), all without getting physical to push the gun away. so she never reach for the gun? we don't know.

before, in the earlier version Ms. Reisig was also talking about that "“There never was a fight. That is not true. John was my ex-boyfriend, but still my best friend. We had nothing to argue about. We had been drinking in the Be-Bop bar in Pai and were heading for a last drink at the Bamboo Bar near the bridge. We were walking together. My Thai boyfriend Fuen was walking slightly behind. “A man came up to me on the road near Pee Dang’s Restaurant and hit me for no reason. “My face was painted with face paint, for fun, but I don’t know why he hit me." (source andrew drummond: Canadian survivor describes how ‘best friend’ was executed by Thai policeman) in the new version she was fighting on the ground with her thai boyfriend and del pinto was trying to help.

also very different is the chronology according to her how the three shots have been fired. old version "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." her new version "I fell to my knees. 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.”

so there is no more match in both side stories about the struggle/scuffle for the gun between del pinto and the police officer. but she also not revoke her old statement about the struggle. it just don't get mentioned anymore. but we don't know if she leave out that point or if that have been done by Andrew Drummond.

and there is still something odd Leo was shouting ‘Stop! Stop!’ He had his hands in the air. The policeman fell back over a motorcycle then recovered...

so del pinto had his hand in the air, was it gesture of capitulation or boxer position, then something must have been happend, because why the police man had to revover himself from a fall over a motorcycle? a magic spell again with out any physical contact to the police officer or still the struggle about the gun she was talking before?

[Claymore]

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.

The only undisputed fact regarding the shooting is that it was impossible for it to have happened the way the police described. Del Pinto was shot from above not below as alleged by Sgt. Uthai.../url]

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.

okay, i didn't state that it is an undisputed fact that the shots have being fired during the struggle for the gun. we don't know when that happen, (probably later)

only that there was a struggle for the gun, i state as a fact. the police was talking about the struggle, there have been witness reports about the struggle and also Ms. Reisig was talking about the struggle. now Ms. Reisig change her version. now you can pick up the version that favour your personal theory or do not believe at all what Ms. Reisig is talking. i think neither the police man nor ms. resig are telling the full truth.

but okay, i will soften my statement. we don't know if one of them try to grab the gun to gain control, disarm the police man or just push the gun away. but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun, out of whatever motivation? a fatal mistake.

that is not a case of peaceful promenader getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

no doubt that police man is guilty, he even should have not draw his gun in the first place. people starting fights about dogs not getting feed don't deserved to get gunned down but need professional help. but to find justice in that case we also have to consider the behaivior of the victims.

and there are also cases in the west where police getting involved in domestic violence fights ending fatally for the civilian. these people are in rage and out of control and the average street cop is often overstrained. this is not a TIT case, the ongoing investigations maybe are, but the manner of discussion here is -TIT(farang edition). fresh fruits for the blamers.

Actually the struggle for the gun is quite an interesting aspect of this case. Police claim there was a struggle for the gun, so did the police supporting witnesses.

But the police supporting witnesses at P Daengs said said they never actually saw the shooting because parked cars were in the way - thus supporting the police view that Uthai had gone down on the ground and was firing defensively upwards when of course we now know from Dr. Pornthip that he was firing downwards. The police will have to get those statements back and changed pretty dam_n quick if these people are not going to look foolish in court.

Carly Reisig may have been v unpopular among a group of farangs in Pai. But in the area where they were taking interviews around the bridge in Pai the NHRC said they had personally heard no negative comments about Ms.Reisig from any Thais. Thais were singing te praises of Del Pinto on the other hand as being a very lovely man. They seem to know the background of Uthai who, they heard did drink a lot and had personal problems. But in terms of Pai police he appears to have been one of the better ones, and when sober, very respectful.

Carly's problems stem I believe from prejudice about her having Thai boyfriends (as in the fight with the Israeli tourist) her appearance, and quite highly strung attitude. She says that fact that she was asked to leave town is a figment of someone's imagination. If her other boyfriend left it was because he was scared, I guess. Sounds a bit Wild West

[permanent_disorder]

Well whatever the past stories are about a struggle for the gun the version sworn in the court by Reisig is that she pushed the gun away when Uthai was pointing it in her face. She demonstrated a fast sideways movement (almost hitting) with her right hand.

well actually, the past stories about the struggle for the gun version was between del pinto and the police officer. that she was slapping the gun holding hand of the police officer with her flat hand is a complete new aspect.

it's also interesting that the version sworn by her to the court is much more matching the police version.

Ms. Reisig: "Reisig told the court she was on the ground and had been fighting with her boyfriend Ratthapon because she said he had failed to feed her Labrador dog ‘Magic’. Leo had tried to separate the couple when a man she knew as Sgt Uthai approached.

police version: "Case investigator Pol Lt-Colonel Sombat Panya said the couple had been drinking in a local pub called Ting Tong and had became involved in a drunken brawl after Del Pinto, who recently arrived in Thailand, found out that Reisig had become pregnant with a Thai man known as Fuen.

The couple continued arguing after they left the pub when Uthai arrived at the scene, near a bridge, on personal business. Uthai approached them and asked them to be calm .."

and if i had followed the newest reports well, the story about her being pregnant was coming from her boyfriend the artist fuen, right?

i just ask, because this police statement was called so ridiculous and just fabricated by the police. but now it's all about dog food.

poor leo, he was together with the wrong people at the wrong time.

[Khun ?]

I would think that this guy was in a drunken rage. The mysterious punch most likely was how

Reisig was knocked to the ground. Then she blocks his kick attempt which enrages him more

to where he pulls the weapon and begins the pistol wipping which she also tries to aviod.

This inferates him to the point he pulls the trigger and moves the weapon to screaming Leo.

All in less than a second his rage has shot two people.

Hoepfully they get Col Sombat for witness tampering and dereliction of duty.

Most likely they had contact with Uthai through the night and did not make the appropriate arrest

at the time.

Edited February 9, 2008 by Khun ?

[Briggsy]

Most likely they had contact with Uthai through the night and did not make the appropriate arrest

at the time.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. Who are "they" and what are you referring to when "they" did not make the appropriate arrest at the time?

[Khun ?]

who would make an arrest after a crime? It would not be normal to wait on someone who left a crime scene,even

a police officer.

[Briggsy]

I'm sorry, I remain confused. Are you claiming a group of Pai policemen was tailing Carly on the night she was shot? Your posts are not clear.

[A_Traveller]

I believe Khun_? is talking only about the single police officer, but is suggesting that the Pai authorities did know where he was and/or didn't try to hold him. In part one would rationalise that this would allow nature to take its course and make any toxicology reports problematic {Alcohol level for example}. In addition there's the curious statements made by senior police officers which seem to have trouble withstanding scrutiny.

Regards

/edit add last sentence//

Edited February 9, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Khun ?]

Brigsby

Where are you lost.

There should of been statements immediately at the crime scene. Uthai only had one beer, shouldn't of he

secured the crime scene and given a statement at that time. I would assume the crime scene was known before

the next day when he decide to come in and give testimony. Anyone that was a witness there should of been immediate statements given to the accounts of what happened.

How do you turn "they" into someone trailing Carly.....

[Briggsy]

I believe Khun_? is talking only about the single police officer, but is suggesting that the Pai authorities did know where he was and/or didn't try to hold him. In part one would rationalise that this would allow nature to take its course and make any toxicology reports problematic {Alcohol level for example}. In addition there's the curious statements made by senior police officers which seem to have trouble withstanding scrutiny.

Regards

/edit add last sentence//

Thank you. So in Khun?'s post "they" = the Pai Police and "they" did not make an arrest of Sergeant Uthai at the appropriate time. This is highly likely since they are colleagues who are prepared to go out on a limb to keep their buddy out of jail.

Perhaps someone should check Khun?'s alcohol level

Edited February 9, 2008 by Briggsy

[Khun ?]

there = crime scene Pai

don't want you to get lost again Briggsy ( better spell that right)

Last drink was first week of May 07 and I am not counting. No drugs either

Edited February 9, 2008 by Khun ?

[kat]

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.

Thanks Arkady, for that excellent post, as usual.

Correct. It is a case of loud drunks getting executed by a violent trigger happy cop.

As I've posted before; dealing with drunks is a BIG part of a cops job description. This little excuse for a real cop is a murderer, plain and simple. Happens in Thailand all too often. Hopefully, you can visit him in jail someday.

Yes, essentially what we have here according to new evidence are a bunch of disorderly, loud foreigners getting executed by a drunk, disorderly, plain-clothes, off-duty cop. And, if the evidence stands, it will be an execution and attempted execution of foreigners, as the other Thai involved at the incident (Fuen) was untouched.

[Khun ?]

add cover up and witness tampering/threat too!

[Claymore]

Actually as usual you have got this arse about face so to speak

Well whatever the past stories are about a struggle for the gun the version sworn in the court by Reisig is that she pushed the gun away when Uthai was pointing it in her face. She demonstrated a fast sideways movement (almost hitting) with her right hand.

well actually, the past stories about the struggle for the gun version was between del pinto and the police officer. that she was slapping the gun holding hand of the police officer with her flat hand is a complete new aspect.

Yes you have got it the police version was that she and Leo (not Rattaporn) were fighting and Leo struggled to to get the gun from Uthai

it's also interesting that the version sworn by her to the court is much more matching the police version.

But Oh yes. How? She claimed she was kicked by police, who then pointed a gun at her face, she slapped the gun away with a movement of her right hand. He hit her over the head with his gun and as she went down. This does not sound like the police version at all.

police version: "Case investigator Pol Lt-Colonel Sombat Panya said the couple had been drinking in a local pub called Ting Tong and had became involved in a drunken brawl after Del Pinto, who recently arrived in Thailand, found out that Reisig had become pregnant with a Thai man known as Fuen.

The couple continued arguing after they left the pub when Uthai arrived at the scene, near a bridge, on personal business. Uthai approached them and asked them to be calm .."

Again little similarity. Police claimed Leo and Carly were fighting. They had not been in the Ting Tong. Reisig was not pregnant. She claimed her boyfriend/girlfriend relationship with Leo had finished years ago. Never in Reisig stories did she say Uthai approached and asked the couple to be calm.

and if i had followed the newest reports well, the story about her being pregnant was coming from her boyfriend the artist fuen, right?

Wrong

poor leo, he was together with the wrong people at the wrong time.

Perhaps. But that's not actually a reason why he was shot

[yorkman]

Two Canadians, or could be from elsewhere, get, in Thailand, involved in a problem they do not understand.

So they mouth off, and he happens to be an off duty policemam with problems and a gun

Not news, it will happen again unless people live and learn from this

[Claymore]

but can we take is as fact that they try to reach for the gun,

I don't know where you acquired that fact , erco.

okay, you are right. most of the 'facts' we just hear from the sensationalist story teller Andrew Drummand. we can not really rely on that.

so is my bad to take the following statements into account.

reisig : "... 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 ..." (quoted from the nation article "SURVIVOR'S CLAIM Cop 'executed my best friend'")

Sgt-Major Uthai / Case investigator Pol Lt-Colonel Sombat Panya : "...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 and the couple went down." (quoted from same source)

because both side talking about a struggle/scuffle i thought we could take it as fact.

but, okay this is also old news. on a biased reporting of Andrew Drummond where als Ms. Reisig not told him the truth but for a catchy headline he believed her.

then the court Ms. Reisig told a complete other story. and this new version we also know only from Andrew Drummand, who i don't give so much credit.

but have a look at the new version:

"Reisig told the court she was on the ground and had been fighting with her boyfriend Ratthapon because she said he had failed to feed her Labrador dog ‘Magic’. Leo had tried to separate the couple when a man she knew as Sgt Uthai approached.

“He came and kicked me in my side as I was trying to get up. He was shouting in Thai and pointing a gun at me. I pushed the gun away ..." (source Andrew Drummond:"Canadian woman tells court of fatal shooting in Pai - Feb 8 2008"

okay, in this version a struggle or scuffle for the gun is not mentioned, but she claimed that she pushed the gun away. there is a little chance that she was doing that without using her hands in direction to the gun, that she just blow some air on it or whatever or do some magical spell (remember the name of that lovely dog who didn't get his supper?), all without getting physical to push the gun away. so she never reach for the gun? we don't know.

before, in the earlier version Ms. Reisig was also talking about that "“There never was a fight. That is not true. John was my ex-boyfriend, but still my best friend. We had nothing to argue about. We had been drinking in the Be-Bop bar in Pai and were heading for a last drink at the Bamboo Bar near the bridge. We were walking together. My Thai boyfriend Fuen was walking slightly behind. “A man came up to me on the road near Pee Dang’s Restaurant and hit me for no reason. “My face was painted with face paint, for fun, but I don’t know why he hit me." (source andrew drummond: Canadian survivor describes how ‘best friend’ was executed by Thai policeman) in the new version she was fighting on the ground with her thai boyfriend and del pinto was trying to help.

also very different is the chronology according to her how the three shots have been fired. old version "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." her new version "I fell to my knees. 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.”

so there is no more match in both side stories about the struggle/scuffle for the gun between del pinto and the police officer. but she also not revoke her old statement about the struggle. it just don't get mentioned anymore. but we don't know if she leave out that point or if that have been done by Andrew Drummond.

and there is still something odd Leo was shouting ‘Stop! Stop!’ He had his hands in the air. The policeman fell back over a motorcycle then recovered...

so del pinto had his hand in the air, was it gesture of capitulation or boxer position, then something must have been happend, because why the police man had to revover himself from a fall over a motorcycle? a magic spell again with out any physical contact to the police officer or still the struggle about the gun she was talking before?

Having a great deal of problem understanding this. Is it possible your are not from an English speaking country as I see you have Carlos Ramirez as your Avatar. U do not seem to have grasped how this story has progressed. Perhaps you should go back and read again because I'm totally lost reading this.

[DavidLeeRoth]

Leo a hero? Sounds like he didn't try to save Carly and just threw his hands up in surrender, but was sadly shot.

[seonai]

Can some of you scoot over to Canadian Brutally Murdered... the family of this man also need help and support. It's in News as is this one...

[taxexile]

good idea seonai , although the circumstances were different , perhaps the two families should be put in contact with each other.