Beer Mat Mum Follow Up

mc2 · May 23, 2009

In her own words, this woman Walked down the steps and then ran across the road, so hardly "Doing a runner"
In bar owner Steve's statement, She did a runner and was caught at the beach.

So who do you and the other posters think is most likely telling the truth?

i think steve is telling the truth

we have a crime scene, lady is the prime suspect, she is frightened, she leaves the crime scene, starts running across the road ...... yep thats a runner.

btw a drunk woman, probably in heals is not going to run down the steps, its impossible.

So you think that Steve is telling the truth. So please give us your opinion as to how this drunk and disorderly woman (maybe or maybe not wearing heels) managed to get down the steps and all the way to the beach before the police were able to catch her.

The bit where she is frightened and runs across the road (it was raining) comes from her statement - not steve's

they were just giving her the rope to hang herself...

either that or were content to watch the jiggling bits a bit longer

loong · May 23, 2009

No, she didn't make it to the beach but she did start to run across the road.

Response from Loong...

Yes I had listened to the radio interview.

In her own words, this woman Walked down the steps and then ran across the road, so hardly "Doing a runner"

In bar owner Steve's statement, She did a runner and was caught at the beach.

So who do you and the other posters think is most likely telling the truth? The bar owner who states that she did a runner and managed to get all the way to the beach before the police could catch up with her? or the woman?

If posters think that the woman is most likely to be telling the truth in this case, that would mean that they think the bar owners statement relating to her doing a runner is a lie.

So maybe the woman's version is the truth?

If so, why would people still insist on accepting everything else in Steve's statement as fact, yet dismiss the woman's version as lies.

She said her self "i RAN across the road"

now there may be different interpretations of doing a runner but all parties concerned have stated she ran!

I can't believe you are still defending her when its so blatant that she caused a scene with the help of a group of girls/people and then ran from the police! No assumptions these are facts as she gave them in her interview.!

It was raining the day before yesterday and I ran to the local shop. What am I guilty of?

I can't believe that you continue to condemn this woman when you have so little in the way of facts or reason

As I have already stated, but the point doesn't seem to sink in. There is one and ONLY one statement that says that the woman did a runner. That statement was made by Steve, a person who was not there. He states that she did a runner and was caught on the beach. Now if you believe Steve's statement that she did a runner, then you have to believe that she managed to get down the steps and run to the beach before the police could catch her.

If you don't think it likely that she managed to get to the beach with the police in pursuit then I find it quite odd that you consider this part of his statement untruthful, but that everything else is the gospel truth. Please remember, Steve was not there and he is the ONLY person that has stated that she did a runner. The police, to my knowledge, have not stated that she ran away or in any way tried to resist arrest.

"I can't believe you are still defending her when its so blatant that she caused a scene with the help of a group of girls/people and then ran from the police! No assumptions these are facts as she gave them in her interview.!"

Please enlighten me, where in her interview did she admit to cause a scene and running from the police? I certainly don't remember her saying this and yet you are quoting it as fact!

Please don't just say "She ran across the road", that means nothing. I find it hard to believe that she would have got down the steps and even reach the road without the police catching her.

I hope that this post is readable as I've had to remove a number of quotes as i couldn't post.

Edited May 23, 2009 by loong

stumonster · May 23, 2009

loong and laughing man, can you also clue us in on whether all the women involved were sitting at one table , and where in the bar they were sitting ?

because you have seen the cctv footage it seems or else you are doing a massive amount of conjecture based on ???

I think she is lying and her friends are lying - the police should have had them all in for attempting to mislead.

as for the other accounts that are surfacing , we are hearing one side of a story in each case , with no corroborating evidence.

loong · May 23, 2009

You know that I am very disappointed that there can be such a lack of compassion in the hearts of some of the people who post here.

Whatever the true facts of this case, I don't believe that she deserved to be imprisoned for 2 days and then prevented from returning to her family over such a trivial matter.

Some people, or so it seems would have liked to seen her hanged for such a hideous crime.

As there are apparently video cameras all over this bar and the ladies did say that there was video evidence to support her case, I find it very strange that no video has come to light.

Knowing that there is video evidence, I would have thought that the first thing that the police would do would be to request a copy.

But then if a video surfaced that showed this women getting slapped around by the security, it would have been her fault for getting her face in the way of the security personnel's hands.

Some of you have made judgments based on little or no known facts and it does worry me that if I am ever unlucky enough to be wrongly accused of a crime that people like you may be on the jury. People that are not able to accept any argument that contradicts the decision that they have come to after hearing the opening statement by the prosecutor. Reasonable doubt doesn't even figure in your way of thinking.

Even though you have closed your mind to any discussion or doubts, I really hope that you never find yourself in the same situation as this woman. Don't kid yourself that you are too smart for something like that to happen to you. Being unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time is enough to land you in prison.

The other story of the 3 young girls who were accused of stealing a bar mat is a good example of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They suffered a 90 minute grilling for a crime that another person subsequently confessed to. They had only had a chat and maybe a drink with him in the bar. We can only guess what would have happened if the culprit had not returned and confessed.

So please remember, if you are ever in a gold shop and another customer walks out with a gold chain, the staff will want to blame someone. If you are in the shop when the staff notices that a chain has been stolen, then it is obvious that you have stolen it. Remember not to get angry or offended when the staff call you a thief.

When the police arrive, please remember to smile sweetly at them even when they are shouting at you and calling you a thieving scumbag liar. The correct response is to smile and meekly say "I didn't do it". No matter how much they scream and shout and whatever names they call you, do not get indignant. Just keep on smiling and repeat many times "Please Sir, it wasn't me" After you have repeated this 100 times, the police will not think you an idiot, they will come to the obvious conclusion that such a polite person with this stupid grin on his face cannot possibly be a thief. They will not wonder why an innocent person doesn't deny the crime with any emotion.

If, despite being meek and mild, for some reason and in the absence of anyone else to accuse, they still think that you are guilty, they may put you in handcuffs and take you to the police station.

While you are being roughly manhandled into the police station, it is important that you do not lose you cool. Keep calm at all times. This is where you suddenly realise something so obvious but you hadn't thought about it before. If you had stolen the chain - where was it? you hadn't left the shop so if you had stolen it, it would still be on your person. What a relief, the police will see how obvious that is. You quietly point that out to the police, but they tell you they are not interested. You must have passed the chain to an accomplice.

The police officer tells you that you have stolen a gold chain valued 50,000 Baht and tell you that if you pay the 50,000 Baht plus 50,000 Baht fine that you will be released. You think to yourself ''Ha ha nice try, that would be considered a bribe and then you would be guilty of a crime". So of course you refuse. The police tell you that if you dont pay you will be held in prison until you can meet bail of 500,00 Baht. You calmly respond "But I didn't do anything wrong". " No we know you are a thief and you will be going to a delightful Thai jail for 5 years.

They then hand you a statement written in Thai and tell you to sign it. Unfortunately you don't read Thai and have no idea what it is that they want you to sign. Despite this, on no account refuse to sign, it would be very rude.

So months later you are still in jail waiting for your trial, but there is hope because you know that you are innocent and so will be exonerated in the end.

You wonder why your Embassy has not helped you, but your government has given in to pressure by action groups that say if a person in a foreign land commits a crime they should be prepared to do the time. You must be guilty after all.

You're sitting on your dirty little patch of concrete in the Thai jail and think to yourself "Why was I so stupid to go into that gold shop? everybody knows only an idiot goes into a gold shop, I should have known that"

Luckily, most people are too smart for something like this to happen to them, or are they?

Yes, this is just fiction, but is the story so far fetched? Could it happen in Thailand? Has it happened already?

Edited May 23, 2009 by loong

Samuian · May 23, 2009

as is - she had the mat in her bag - got arrested, fined and is back home - lucky!

could have gone "the other way"!

assume yourself a lucky lady, only you know the truth to this story!

rozrokz · May 23, 2009

Kin ell folks, if she had done the same thing at her local RSL in Melbourne , maybe she would not have been locked up, but if the police were involved she would have got a bigger fine, but it was just another case of a tourist behaving badly, and theboys in brown being a bit macho, She should have tried the same prank in singapore, it is a caning offence (Sorry dude, here in the land of fines, women are spared caning even if the penalty carried this punishment. Isn't equal sex great !) she will no doubt earn a fewbob for her exclusive story, just another nail in Thailands tourism coffin!!

loong · May 23, 2009

loong and laughing man, can you also clue us in on whether all the women involved were sitting at one table , and where in the bar they were sitting ?
because you have seen the cctv footage it seems or else you are doing a massive amount of conjecture based on ???

I think she is lying and her friends are lying - the police should have had them all in for attempting to mislead.

as for the other accounts that are surfacing , we are hearing one side of a story in each case , with no corroborating evidence.

No Stumonster, I have seen no CCTV footage. It's a shame as so much could possibly be revealed if the video footage was available. Of course I'm not suggesting that someone may have an ulterior motive for not allowing the footage into public view.

How can you say I am "doing a massive amount of conjecture based on ???" and then follow with the rest of your post?

"I think she is lying and her friends are lying" - conjecture on your part

"we are hearing one side of a story in each case , with no corroborating evidence." - so what do you mean? that corroborating evidence is only necessary to prove someone's innocence, but not to prove their guilt?

Everything that I have written is based on the very few facts that are known and corroborated by others.

Other peoples posts condemning this woman DO stem from a massive amount of conjecture based on ???

Anyway, I think that this will be my last post in this thread as so many cannot differentiate fact from fiction.

The facts in this case are what?

The mat was in the woman's bag - undisputed

The friend put the mat in the bag - undisputed

The friend confessed to the crime - undisputed

It was raining - undisputed

The woman did run across the road - undisputed

The woman was arrested and charged with theft - undisputed

She was rude to police - disputed as the police admitted that they could not understand what she was saying

She was loud - undisputed

She was drunk - undisputed

She is Australian - undisputed

She is a woman - undisputed

She was on holiday - undisputed

Stumonster, please tell me, hand on heart, if you were serving on a jury and the accused was charged with theft, and the only information that you were given was as above, would you really decide that she was guilty of theft? How many from a jury of 12 would actually want to convict her?

You would only be given the facts as above, because everything else IS conjecture.

Other so called facts

These from a statement by Steve, a co owner of the bar who was not there at the time

She did a runner and was caught at the beach - disputed, not corroborated by one other person and very unlikely that she could make it all the way to the beach before being caught.

She was abusive to police - disputed, not corroborated by one other person

She was abusive to the police chief in the station - disputed, not corroborated by one other person (see above, the chief stated that she was loud, not abusive)

I look forward to reading you reply, but don't expect any more responses from me in this thread.

chuang · May 23, 2009

I can't believe you are still defending her when its so blatant that she caused a scene with the help of a group of girls/people and then ran from the police! No assumptions these are facts as she gave them in her interview.!

Birds of a feather flock together.. ..she is a thief, is a thief, is a thief...

barky · May 23, 2009

I'm truly confused. If she stole the thing I would be all for thinking she should be punished. But I do not understand why even after witnesses and confessions from the true perpetrator and the Governer himself saying she did nothing wrong that people still think she deserved any kind of punishment or ill treatment. What exactly am I missing here. Because in a western case, if another came forward immediately and confessed they would stop chasing the original suspect unless it was obvious the confession was false. What exactly is the big thing I do not see that you all see?

I tend to agree with you. What a beat up by all concerned. Badly handled by the bar owner and the cops here did their usual...trying to show how important they are, lording it over the westeners. And as for the Aussie pess etcetera going over the top with it, well if the situation had been reversed, rest assured, the Thai media would be screaming blue murder and calling the whole population of Australia racists as well as picketing and and demonstrating outside the embassy on Sathorn Road and harrassing all expats coming and going.

stumonster · May 23, 2009

No Stumonster, I have seen no CCTV footage. It's a shame as so much could possibly be revealed if the video footage was available. Of course I'm not suggesting that someone may have an ulterior motive for not allowing the footage into public view.
How can you say I am "doing a massive amount of conjecture based on ???" and then follow with the rest of your post?

you are stating so many opinions as to what occurred as fact - to do that I would expect you to have witnessed or reviewed impartial evidence rather than the what is printed in the newspapers.

many reasons why CCTV is not released to the public.

"I think she is lying and her friends are lying" - conjecture on your part
"we are hearing one side of a story in each case , with no corroborating evidence." - so what do you mean? that corroborating evidence is only necessary to prove someone's innocence, but not to prove their guilt?

Everything that I have written is based on the very few facts that are known and corroborated by others.

Other peoples posts condemning this woman DO stem from a massive amount of conjecture based on ???

I prefixed my statement with "I think" for a reason - it is my opinion.

stumonster · May 23, 2009

Anyway, I think that this will be my last post in this thread as so many cannot differentiate fact from fiction.
The facts in this case are what?

The mat was in the woman's bag - undisputed

conjecture until witness statements and police notes state it as fact

The friend put the mat in the bag - undisputed