Kingpower Talks Back!

[Ulysses G.]

in the left hand corner we have the bleedin' heart liberal vegan socialist brigade and on the other hand we have the right wing facist "hang em by their testicles" brigade

each stating the guilt or innocence of the accused

If someone stole something from their store, they would ALL be in on the hanging party!

[sleepyjohn]

NO, instead, they sadistically grill an innocent businessman, bringing lots of money to the country

Sorry i didn't realise they were sadistic from your words I thought they just looked stern and asked questions.

BTW how would they know you were innocent without the very questions you castigate them for?

.....and should lots of money have made a difference had you for instance slipped into the country, perhaps on the run for a serious offence? Oh and how would they know anything about your money......without asking questions?

Get my drift?

ps: sorry you found some comment of mine ugly and nasty do point out where and I'll amend it.

Edited July 12, 2009 by sleepyjohn

[LaoPo]

NO, instead, they sadistically grill an innocent businessman, bringing lots of money to the country

Sorry i didn't realise they were sadistic from your words I thought they just looked stern and asked questions.

BTW how would they know you were innocent without the very questions you castigate them for?

.....and should lots of money have made a difference had you for instance slipped into the country, perhaps on the run for a serious offence? Oh and how would they know anything about your money......without asking questions?

Get my drift?

ps: sorry you found some comment of mine ugly and nasty do point out where and I'll amend it.

Maybe you should read my original post again and a little better this time. I never blamed the airport police officers.

I expressed my fear that I was taken away and was scared to death that someone put drugs in my suitcase, especially because they didn't say WHY they took me.

It wouldn't have been the first time somebody was framed and how does anybody explain his/her innocence if they find drugs in your suitcase ?

THAT is why I was scared.

You turn it into an excuse for the officials; I never blamed them.

Read better!

LaoPo

[CRUNCHER]

NO, instead, they sadistically grill an innocent businessman, bringing lots of money to the country

Sorry i didn't realise they were sadistic from your words I thought they just looked stern and asked questions.

BTW how would they know you were innocent without the very questions you castigate them for?

.....and should lots of money have made a difference had you for instance slipped into the country, perhaps on the run for a serious offence? Oh and how would they know anything about your money......without asking questions?

Get my drift?

ps: sorry you found some comment of mine ugly and nasty do point out where and I'll amend it.

Maybe you should read my original post again and a little better this time. I never blamed the airport police officers.

I expressed my fear that I was taken away and was scared to death that someone put drugs in my suitcase, especially because they didn't say WHY they took me.

It wouldn't have been the first time somebody was framed and how does anybody explain his/her innocence if they find drugs in your suitcase ?

THAT is why I was scared.

You turn it into an excuse for the officials; I never blamed them.

Read better!

LaoPo

Errr... You accused them of giving you a "sadistic" grilling. Is that not blaming them? Hardly friendly comments. ...and you have to go back 25 years to dredge this up???

Edited July 12, 2009 by CRUNCHER

[Benjie]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

I find it quite amusing that you talk of people selectively quoting and yet seem to be the biggest example of such action.

Some people just can't accept the fact that the Thai company involved in this is in the right, the ONLY evidence is a video showing them stealing the wallet and a piece of paper they have bought (and even talked us through the details), saying that they are innocent. They went against the advice from the British consulate - and wouldn't accept their help.

It sounds like you really want them to be innocent, for some reason.

It all just sounds dodgy to me, their acknowledgement that it's them (or him) in the video but that there is something 'odd' about the video. The fact they wouldn't accept the British Consuls help or guidance, sitting apart on the plane, the original article in which they hardly even protest their innocense.

I'm quite happy to say that in my opinion I am satisfied that they stole from the airport, what happened to them afterwards is terrible and would only happen in a 3rd world country, however if they would have simply refrained from stealing they simply wouldn't have been in that situation.

[LaoPo]

Errr... You accused them of giving you a "sadistic" grilling. Is that not blaming them? Hardly friendly comments. ...and you have to go back 25 years to dredge this up???

I experienced it as "sadistically grilling me" because that's the way they behaved and thats the way they were asking questions. And yes, I had to go 25 years back because it happened that way back. If you have problems with that, don't bother to write.

It was about my own scary experience with Thai (airport) Police, that's all.

I hope you never experience it. If you do, don't bother writing your experience here, ok ?

You're probably a tough guy anyway and scare the police and talk your way out

LaoPo

Edited July 12, 2009 by LaoPo

[Saiyan]

There are basically 3 different events/senareos that are being discussed and debated on this thread.

Firstly the argument of weather the couple committed a crime or not.

Secondly the actions of the police and or extortionists.

And the third is the thread topic “Kingpower Talks Back!

The proper procedures were never followed and I doubt that the couple will return to find the appropriate recourse that they claim. Many on this thread are acting as judge and jury and others are acting as defense lawyers. Realistically IMHO I don’t believe that either way it could ever be resolved conclusively.

The police are unable to act unless a complaint or charges are pressed. Therefore the KP would have been the complainant and the couple the accused and it would have to be notified and recorded as such. It is the action of the police custody and the alleged extortion money that has attracted negative publicity for both the KP and Thailand and it is this fact that will determine the reaction of future buyers from KP and visitors to this country.

Kingspower has responded by saying that it is out of their hands after the police are involved and they have done everything right. It is their right to feel that the couple

are guilty based on the evidence that they may have no matter how conclusive or inconclusive this evidence may be. However it does not make the accused guilty as only at a court hearing this will be determined.

I am a little surprised that the KP has not released a statement with regards to the release of the accused couple, as it would be appropriate for them to follow up on any future court dates etc. In this case it might seem that the fist they heard about the couple being in a different country was when it hit the media. It would be interesting to hear from KP the explanation of why the charges were dropped and the subsequent release of the accused. Either way I would have thought that KP would have been outraged at their release and would have responded far quicker to the allegations that the couple were making. Unless they are fully aware of what happened and perhaps condone the actions following the arrests and that may be the reason why they have reacted as they have so far.

[caf]

I've searched that through Drumond's site. How the fuc_k do you know "Andrew's spoken to the Ingrams who have denied the video shows any guilt"? Are you a work colleague or drinking mate of his? You seem to know a lot about the man and your style of writing is right down his alleyway.

I have read the entire Drummond site and have found No admission by the police that they are innocent. A Sri Lankan translator in books does not count as Thai Police.

This couple are as guilty as fuc_k and as written before they are bloody lucky they aren't rotting in a 10x10 cell in Samut Prakarn Central with a hundred ball-scratching room mates.

Bribing their way out of the justice system makes them them as corrupt as the hands they buttered.

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

Take a bit more time reading the site.

You are getting too emotional on this as the bold quote above shows. You, as self-apponted judge, would recommend they didn't pay the bribe as you call it; but fester in gaol. A well thought out analysis of the reality.!!!

[kamui]

The proper procedures were never followed and I doubt that the couple will return to find the appropriate recourse that they claim. Many on this thread are acting as judge and jury and others are acting as defense lawyers. Realistically IMHO I don’t believe that either way it could ever be resolved conclusively.

I fully agree that the published material makes it impossible to draw a conclusive jugdement, since we have contradictory claims by the parties involved:

- The couple says it's innocent

- KP says they are thiefs, and supports this with a blurred video with the time stamp erased(!)

- An official report by the police that the case is closed because of lack of evidence

As long KP does not provide clear and conclusive evidence the case can't be judged.

The only matter which seems to be clear is that corrupt policemen extorted money from the couple.

[caf]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

I find it quite amusing that you talk of people selectively quoting and yet seem to be the biggest example of such action.

Some people just can't accept the fact that the Thai company involved in this is in the right, the ONLY evidence is a video showing them stealing the wallet and a piece of paper they have bought (and even talked us through the details), saying that they are innocent. They went against the advice from the British consulate - and wouldn't accept their help.

It sounds like you really want them to be innocent, for some reason.

It all just sounds dodgy to me, their acknowledgement that it's them (or him) in the video but that there is something 'odd' about the video. The fact they wouldn't accept the British Consuls help or guidance, sitting apart on the plane, the original article in which they hardly even protest their innocense.

I'm quite happy to say that in my opinion I am satisfied that they stole from the airport, what happened to them afterwards is terrible and would only happen in a 3rd world country, however if they would have simply refrained from stealing they simply wouldn't have been in that situation.

As other posters have said you are selectively quoting but you just can't see it, can you?

Look at youtr post above , you say and you put it in capitals: the ONLY evidence is the video.

what about the police letter. that's just one bit of "evidence" you don't mention.

[caf]

There are basically 3 different events/senareos that are being discussed and debated on this thread.

Firstly the argument of weather the couple committed a crime or not.

Secondly the actions of the police and or extortionists.

And the third is the thread topic "Kingpower Talks Back!

The proper procedures were never followed and I doubt that the couple will return to find the appropriate recourse that they claim. Many on this thread are acting as judge and jury and others are acting as defense lawyers. Realistically IMHO I don't believe that either way it could ever be resolved conclusively.

The police are unable to act unless a complaint or charges are pressed. Therefore the KP would have been the complainant and the couple the accused and it would have to be notified and recorded as such. It is the action of the police custody and the alleged extortion money that has attracted negative publicity for both the KP and Thailand and it is this fact that will determine the reaction of future buyers from KP and visitors to this country.

Kingspower has responded by saying that it is out of their hands after the police are involved and they have done everything right. It is their right to feel that the couple

are guilty based on the evidence that they may have no matter how conclusive or inconclusive this evidence may be. However it does not make the accused guilty as only at a court hearing this will be determined.

I am a little surprised that the KP has not released a statement with regards to the release of the accused couple, as it would be appropriate for them to follow up on any future court dates etc. In this case it might seem that the fist they heard about the couple being in a different country was when it hit the media. It would be interesting to hear from KP the explanation of why the charges were dropped and the subsequent release of the accused. Either way I would have thought that KP would have been outraged at their release and would have responded far quicker to the allegations that the couple were making. Unless they are fully aware of what happened and perhaps condone the actions following the arrests and that may be the reason why they have reacted as they have so far.

when a poster takes an extreme position - for example, as you say, acting as judge and jury, and as another poster has said " The hang um by the testicles brigade" then the replying poster will defend his view. Yes, that comes across as a one-sided contribution to the debate but it does not mean posters are not considering all aspects.

I do not know whether the Ingrams are guilty or not. I do know there is a lot of evidence out there ( police letter, the video, bank transfer documents etc); there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence too both supporting and not supporting the Ingrams position.

With regard to your last paragraph, I referred to the timing of the kp response in an earlier post. While their letter gives their point of view there are questions I would ask

[Kf6vci]

Theft is serious - many a shop goes under because of it.

IMHO, it is time to clean up this corrupt mess and establish that the embassies get called first thing.

Not some Sri Lankan diplomat with no authorisation or endorsement of the British Embassy.

This incident should be investigated and the findings published.

Follow the money - this "diplomat" got GBP 8,000. What next? Who got how much?

How much ended up in the official Police ledger?

Who paid or received a bribe?

The Police itself has been victimized here, too. Seems they lose way more than the value of the stolen goods.

What does Thai law say about the accounting for bail money?

It is unbelievable that the GBP 8,000 remain outside the official bail system.

Some individuals take over and fleece the Police

Q: How much was being paid to the diplomat over the years? Yeah, right. He is just "helping"

[Benjie]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

I find it quite amusing that you talk of people selectively quoting and yet seem to be the biggest example of such action.

Some people just can't accept the fact that the Thai company involved in this is in the right, the ONLY evidence is a video showing them stealing the wallet and a piece of paper they have bought (and even talked us through the details), saying that they are innocent. They went against the advice from the British consulate - and wouldn't accept their help.

It sounds like you really want them to be innocent, for some reason.

It all just sounds dodgy to me, their acknowledgement that it's them (or him) in the video but that there is something 'odd' about the video. The fact they wouldn't accept the British Consuls help or guidance, sitting apart on the plane, the original article in which they hardly even protest their innocense.

I'm quite happy to say that in my opinion I am satisfied that they stole from the airport, what happened to them afterwards is terrible and would only happen in a 3rd world country, however if they would have simply refrained from stealing they simply wouldn't have been in that situation.

As other posters have said you are selectively quoting but you just can't see it, can you?

Look at youtr post above , you say and you put it in capitals: the ONLY evidence is the video.

what about the police letter. that's just one bit of "evidence" you don't mention.

Its only you that has said I am selectively quoting.

If you actually read my previous post I do mention the 'evidence' that they bought from corrupt officials, I don't think a piece of paper that costs you 8,000 pounds bought from corrupt police proves innocence.

[caf]

So if you were on a jury - and with people like you around I can see the reasons why some people are against a jury system - you would not question the timing of the kp letter, take no account of kp's history, would not question the video, would ignore the letters showing innocence given to them by the police ( and reproduced on this forum for all to see); but you would consider anything that you could twist to justify " hanging them high"

Not only are you still being judge and jury, you now clearly show you are taking the brief for the prosecution. By selectively quoting you are not showing or admitting all the other facts. Exactly what prosecution lawyer would do of course. To say you only show one side because you need to keep the podt size is down won't fool many.

For a balanced and less naive view look at citizen33 serpico and petterrgaga's posts. No bias. No histrionics. Just giving their personal opinions having lived here a while.

Why are you "trying" the case now? They didn't get a jury trial because they PAID not to have one. I get sick and tired of hearing about people buying their way out of a crime and then saying they were victimized. I'm not saying that some don't get scamed; it happens in every society. What I'm talking about are the thieves, murderers, pedophiles and rapists, that pay big bucks, hire huge law firms to get out of some crime that they commited and then scream; "I am a victim", that's BS. Don't talk to me about passing judgement; they bought their judgement. If they were so innocent, despite the damning video... they should have held their moral ground and then brought in the press. That bought and paid for letter from the police is garbage. They're getting the kind of trial they paid for, and that's the court of public opinion. The video and finding the wallet speaks for itself... I have no pity for a thief.

They didn't pay to not have a jury trial. They don't have juries in thailand.

So if you had been collared you would have held the moral ground would you? stood your ground?

[Mario2008]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

I find it quite amusing that you talk of people selectively quoting and yet seem to be the biggest example of such action.

Some people just can't accept the fact that the Thai company involved in this is in the right, the ONLY evidence is a video showing them stealing the wallet and a piece of paper they have bought (and even talked us through the details), saying that they are innocent. They went against the advice from the British consulate - and wouldn't accept their help.

It sounds like you really want them to be innocent, for some reason.

It all just sounds dodgy to me, their acknowledgement that it's them (or him) in the video but that there is something 'odd' about the video. The fact they wouldn't accept the British Consuls help or guidance, sitting apart on the plane, the original article in which they hardly even protest their innocense.

I'm quite happy to say that in my opinion I am satisfied that they stole from the airport, what happened to them afterwards is terrible and would only happen in a 3rd world country, however if they would have simply refrained from stealing they simply wouldn't have been in that situation.

As other posters have said you are selectively quoting but you just can't see it, can you?

Look at youtr post above , you say and you put it in capitals: the ONLY evidence is the video.

what about the police letter. that's just one bit of "evidence" you don't mention.

Its only you that has said I am selectively quoting.

If you actually read my previous post I do mention the 'evidence' that they bought from corrupt officials, I don't think a piece of paper that costs you 8,000 pounds bought from corrupt police proves innocence.

There can be doubts about how the paper was obtained, but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

[caf]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

I find it quite amusing that you talk of people selectively quoting and yet seem to be the biggest example of such action.

Some people just can't accept the fact that the Thai company involved in this is in the right, the ONLY evidence is a video showing them stealing the wallet and a piece of paper they have bought (and even talked us through the details), saying that they are innocent. They went against the advice from the British consulate - and wouldn't accept their help.

It sounds like you really want them to be innocent, for some reason.

It all just sounds dodgy to me, their acknowledgement that it's them (or him) in the video but that there is something 'odd' about the video. The fact they wouldn't accept the British Consuls help or guidance, sitting apart on the plane, the original article in which they hardly even protest their innocense.

I'm quite happy to say that in my opinion I am satisfied that they stole from the airport, what happened to them afterwards is terrible and would only happen in a 3rd world country, however if they would have simply refrained from stealing they simply wouldn't have been in that situation.

As other posters have said you are selectively quoting but you just can't see it, can you?

Look at youtr post above , you say and you put it in capitals: the ONLY evidence is the video.

what about the police letter. that's just one bit of "evidence" you don't mention.

Its only you that has said I am selectively quoting.

If you actually read my previous post I do mention the 'evidence' that they bought from corrupt officials, I don't think a piece of paper that costs you 8,000 pounds bought from corrupt police proves innocence.

Post 191 from Loong for example and several following it. You're losing your marbles, Benjie , if you can't even remember replies to your posts, takem a rest and have a beer to relax. Or maybe that's the problem and expalins your going off topic so much - too much beer

Edited July 13, 2009 by caf

[Oberkommando]

but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

In most justice systems, not all.

In Thailand the accused is encouraged and sometimes forced to plead guilty whether guilty or not to obtain favouritism from the system, to ensure the system and it's cronies do not lose face and to influence the outcome of the verdict.

Thailand's justice system is deeply flawed in many respects, not to mention the lack of a verdict being reached by a jury of one's peers.

[david96]

Is there any person who has been picked at random at a duty free shop and accused of stealing?

There seems to be one thing in common, you must buy something first. Of course you will

have a receipt for the item/s.

So if you are accused of stealing you have a receipt to prove purchase. You are innocent.

Those persons apprehended therefore have stolen and concealed the item/s, they will have no receipt.

They will be charged with theft. There should be no argument there.

However the scam which is carried out at the Police Station is fraud and is another matter entirely. What it amounts to is an informal fine, perhaps 50 times the value of the goods.

And nothing can be done about it, just be aware that this scam exists.

Certainly not widespread from a statistical point of view.

It might be of information to point out that you are entitled to ask to contact your consul at the Embassy if detained but that is about all.

So if you want to commit a crime be prepared to do the time or pay the fine.

And that can be expensive.

Your Embassy can do little for you.

[caf]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

[grantbkk]

The fact is, that King Power Duty Free is from time to time going to be a victim of shoplifting. King Power should have procedures in place to deal with them. Maybe an employee made the right call and everything went south from there.

Certainly no one expects any of the binge drinkers from the British Embassy to be in any shape to respond to a British citizen's call for assistance beyond 2:00 PM. That would be dangerous and futile.

Obviously the Sri Lankan is a major player in the scam and as others have pointed out it could be investigated by following the money trail.

This couple may have stolen a wallet. Just like the drug dealers that fill the prisons here in Thailand they may have thought they could never be caught. The biggest impact of this and other similar incidents at Suvarnabhumi is the image of Thailand and to a lesser extent King Power Duty Free's credibility.

Many of us remember how King Power came to be at the airport, the lawsuits over the years between the AOT and King Power over fees and land grabs by the retailer. King Power seems like a modern corporation but its roots may be in corruption and bribes to government officials. They seem above the law and act accordingly.

[Benjie]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

Why are you quoting yourself?

The video evidence and the 8,000 pound get out of jail manuscript have both been posted online. Its pretty easy for people to make up their own mind about what happened. Of course there will be conspiracy theorists who see a much 'broader' picture possibly involving Freemasons but its pretty obvious to anyone without an agenda that they stole the wallet and were forced by the police to pay a huge sum of money to escape justice and Jail in a 3rd world country.

Two wrongs don't make a right, so it's fairly simple as far as I see it, Try to refrain from shoplifting and you will most likely have little to worry about.

[loong]

but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

In most justice systems, not all.

In Thailand the accused is encouraged and sometimes forced to plead guilty whether guilty or not to obtain favouritism from the system, to ensure the system and it's cronies do not lose face and to influence the outcome of the verdict.

Thailand's justice system is deeply flawed in many respects, not to mention the lack of a verdict being reached by a jury of one's peers.

I would have no confidence if a jury consisted of some of the posters here. What chance would an innocent defendant have if people can decide that this couple is definitely guilty based on.....

a very unclear video that incidentally, doesn't show the the couple exiting without paying.

a statement that states the stolen item was not in their possession, but found in a bin near where allegedly the man (and thousands of others) had been.

they were wearing different outerclothing to the couple in the video. No mention that apart from the outerclothing whether they were dressed the same as the couple in the video or not. No mention that the baggage they were carrying was the same or not.

No cross examination of the security staff or Tourist police, so no answers to the questions...

If they were both suspects, why were they not both detained in the restaurant, why was he allowed to wander off.

Why were they not arrested at the restaurant, but as they went to board their plane?

A jury would have to consider whether the security staff were in anyway connected with a plan to extort money from the couple. The statement from King Power is actually a statement from the security staff, and if they are involved in any scam, that statement would not carry any credibility.

If I was sitting on a jury and the only evidence presented was the same as I've seen here, I certainly could not conclude that they are guilty and it is beyond me that anybody could.

[Mario2008]

<br />

but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

<br /><br />In most justice systems, not all.<br /><br />In Thailand the accused is encouraged and sometimes forced to plead guilty whether guilty or not to obtain favouritism from the system, to ensure the system and it's cronies do not lose face and to influence the outcome of the verdict.<br /><br />Thailand's justice system is deeply flawed in many respects, not to mention the lack of a verdict being reached by a jury of one's peers.<br />

Still, they are presumed innocent untill they are fund guilty in court. What you say about the Thai justice system, I have also heard a US judge claiming about plea bargaining. That it was so nice of the system that innocent people could calculate their chances and make a plea bargain so they would get off lighter.

As for the jury, a jury trail is not better or worse then a trail without a jury. You seem to favour the jury system, but many counries don't have the jury system. I think people in the Netherlands for instance will tell you that they don't trust a trail by jury.

[caf]

Is there any person who has been picked at random at a duty free shop and accused of stealing?

There seems to be one thing in common, you must buy something first. Of course you will

have a receipt for the item/s.

So if you are accused of stealing you have a receipt to prove purchase. You are innocent.

Those persons apprehended therefore have stolen and concealed the item/s, they will have no receipt.

They will be charged with theft. There should be no argument there.

However the scam which is carried out at the Police Station is fraud and is another matter entirely. What it amounts to is an informal fine, perhaps 50 times the value of the goods.

And nothing can be done about it, just be aware that this scam exists.

Certainly not widespread from a statistical point of view.

It might be of information to point out that you are entitled to ask to contact your consul at the Embassy if detained but that is about all.

So if you want to commit a crime be prepared to do the time or pay the fine.

And that can be expensive.

Your Embassy can do little for you.

1. Apparently one of the scams is that you are offered a freebie and then stopped after leaving the shop. the frebbie is not of course on the receipt.

2. statistically, how does kp compare with other similarly priced stores in terms of tourists claiming they have been scammed?

3. yes, "entitled to ask" does not mean you can make contact.

[caf]

"But if there was no theft there also would be no opportunity for the scam "

Your logic fails you again, Bienje

If you are riding your bike legally breaking no rules and stopped and asked for money, is that a scam without a crime?.

Can you tell posters a bit about your background . It might help us understand why you are taking these rather " hang them high" views without looking at all the evidence ansd sources.

Why are you quoting yourself?

The video evidence and the 8,000 pound get out of jail manuscript have both been posted online. Its pretty easy for people to make up their own mind about what happened. Of course there will be conspiracy theorists who see a much 'broader' picture possibly involving Freemasons but its pretty obvious to anyone without an agenda that they stole the wallet and were forced by the police to pay a huge sum of money to escape justice and Jail in a 3rd world country.

Two wrongs don't make a right, so it's fairly simple as far as I see it, Try to refrain from shoplifting and you will most likely have little to worry about.

พระเจ้า, you're now bringing freemasons into it!

I agree with you when you say "for people to make up their own mind about what happened" but then you revert to your judge and jury role again and say " it's obvious to anyone.....

[caf]

but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

In most justice systems, not all.

In Thailand the accused is encouraged and sometimes forced to plead guilty whether guilty or not to obtain favouritism from the system, to ensure the system and it's cronies do not lose face and to influence the outcome of the verdict.

Thailand's justice system is deeply flawed in many respects, not to mention the lack of a verdict being reached by a jury of one's peers.

I would have no confidence if a jury consisted of some of the posters here. What chance would an innocent defendant have if people can decide that this couple is definitely guilty based on.....

a very unclear video that incidentally, doesn't show the the couple exiting without paying.

a statement that states the stolen item was not in their possession, but found in a bin near where allegedly the man (and thousands of others) had been.

they were wearing different outerclothing to the couple in the video. No mention that apart from the outerclothing whether they were dressed the same as the couple in the video or not. No mention that the baggage they were carrying was the same or not.

No cross examination of the security staff or Tourist police, so no answers to the questions...

If they were both suspects, why were they not both detained in the restaurant, why was he allowed to wander off.

Why were they not arrested at the restaurant, but as they went to board their plane?

A jury would have to consider whether the security staff were in anyway connected with a plan to extort money from the couple. The statement from King Power is actually a statement from the security staff, and if they are involved in any scam, that statement would not carry any credibility.

If I was sitting on a jury and the only evidence presented was the same as I've seen here, I certainly could not conclude that they are guilty and it is beyond me that anybody could.

I agree. There are two posters here particularly that would be excused duty by a judge in a UK case for their obvious bias and ignoring facts ( one can have different interpretations of facts - that is fine - but ignoring them is something else.)

other posters and I have drawn attention to possible "holes" in the evidence but studiously ignored.

[caf]

<br />

but still one is always presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law.

<br /><br />In most justice systems, not all.<br /><br />In Thailand the accused is encouraged and sometimes forced to plead guilty whether guilty or not to obtain favouritism from the system, to ensure the system and it's cronies do not lose face and to influence the outcome of the verdict.<br /><br />Thailand's justice system is deeply flawed in many respects, not to mention the lack of a verdict being reached by a jury of one's peers.<br />

Still, they are presumed innocent untill they are fund guilty in court. What you say about the Thai justice system, I have also heard a US judge claiming about plea bargaining. That it was so nice of the system that innocent people could calculate their chances and make a plea bargain so they would get off lighter.

As for the jury, a jury trail is not better or worse then a trail without a jury. You seem to favour the jury system, but many counries don't have the jury system. I think people in the Netherlands for instance will tell you that they don't trust a trail by jury.

Mario, plea bargaining is what takes place in a judge's chambers or between lawyers on points of law. It happens rarely and only to save time and expense if an acquital would be likely if the higher charge was pursued. ( eg murder, manslaughter ). it does not compare to the thai system as aprevious poster has accurately described.

There are different views on the appropriateness of jury trials. Some Nederlanders support it, some reject it. On complicated fraud cases juries can get very confused particularly where clever barristers make good closing speeches. This is one of the examples cited in the UK where juries are inappropriate.

But generally juries are a safeguard in a democracy where one can be tried by ones peers. Goes back of course to Magna carta and Bill of rights.

[david96]

Information only:

http://ukinthailand.fco.gov.uk/en/help-for...tish-nationals/

See related documents "Support for British Nationals PDF 2.73 MB" at the top

right hand side of the page.

Read page 3 para 3. "If you are Detained"

Also page 5 and 6 "Criminal Justice System in Thailand"

And of course read the complete document.

[caf]

Information only:

http://ukinthailand.fco.gov.uk/en/help-for...tish-nationals/

See related documents "Support for British Nationals PDF 2.73 MB" at the top

right hand side of the page.

Read page 3 para 3. "If you are Detained"

Also page 5 and 6 "Criminal Justice System in Thailand"

And of course read the complete document.

thanks for the link.

but it does not say anything helpful does it? it says the justice system is different but to find out how you have to go to thaivisa.

it doesn't mention scams - even in the vaguest of terms.

[dave111223]

This couple are a disgrace...i honestly believed their story when i first read it.

The nerve of some people, even getting their photo taken for the newspaper when they knew they were guilty as sin...