Bangkok Santika Pub Managers To Be Charged For New Year's Blaze Disaster

[sedeflonga]

lets start the blame game

[peecee]

It would be so nice to see the police who were taking tea money on this list along with the fire chiefs or whoever forged the signatures, I seem to remember police from thonglor had often raided santika with presure for tea money until one of the police became a shareholder? seems the name of many guilty people are missing.

It's a good pointer to just how far up the ladder the tea money reaches!

[julemanden]

So the owners walk free when they are responsible for making sure the building meets fire regulations etc.

How many managers would start their job and say, "hold on a second, i wonder if this place has been inspected and passed by the health & safety. Is that material on the roof flammable?"

And the marketing manager is indicted too? What a joke!

The rich always walk free in Thailand.

Not at all only in Thailand, this BS happens all over the world !

[Thai at Heart]

Aren't there meant to be quite a lot of unpaid taxes?

Is that the owners responsibility to pay alongside the management? It would appear that if the can is going to fall completely on the managers then in that case, they had better pay the people in line with their responsibility.

[Scott]

In many western countries, owners and members of the Board of Directors do have issues of liability. Most have a special insurance against financial claims. These 'higher ups' are usually limited to financial loss only unless they were directly involved in knowing or allowing a negligent act to occur.

Most of the issues that these people will face will occur in civil court, rather than criminal court. If sued, they will pay according to the Court's ruling. This seems fair since they reap from the profits, they should share in the loss.

[Brewsta]

Try, try and try again?

rgdz,

Brewsta

Edited February 16, 2010 by Brewsta

[asiawatcher]

Out will come the payments schedule - let's see how many are actually charged and convicted. And why are the authorities who were paid off to allow the Club to function - approvals and so on - not in the prosecution list?

[eggomaniac]

I wonder what % of violent crimes and accidents occur by drunken and loud people after midnight? [punch outs in bar parking lots, road deaths, and so on, bar fires]

When I was 17 I woke up one morning in car in Alberta Canada that was upside down in a ditch. I made a decision at that point to stop heavey drinking, calculating that drunken revellery was more, truthfully, idiotic, NOT all the 'fun' it is hyped up to be.

I am not and will not say the victims are responsible for what happened.

I can, however, tell you, in all honesty, it is impossible that I could ever die in that manner. I will never be there!

At gatherings like that I like to get there real early. I like to see the set up, the characters, and the arriving role players. I can get a bit tipsy and have some fun but have learned that when the first 'crazy' happens, [ie; drunken shouting match, or people staggering] that is my signal to call it an enjoyable night.

More than once I have heard, "Gee, you're lucky you left when you did."

Because people, in droves, won't consider their safety, it has to be up to the authorities to regulate and provide patrols!? We complain about Big Brother all the time, then beg Him to be an all encompassing protector so we can Party ON.

None of us gets out alive, I just don't want my last breath to by a lapse of clear thinking and responsibilty for my own actions.

If I die from cancer, it won't be from smoking. If a drunk driver runs me over it won't be because I was drinking.

I don't know, I would prefer to be sober when my time comes; possibly others would prefer to be in a stupor when the time comes, you think?

What would you like better, clear thinking or to be in a mindless drunk, when you shed the earthly coil?

--------

Oh, it didn't happen this year; but Songran is coming up. What will it be? 4000 drunken road deaths per day? Have fun.

Edited February 16, 2010 by eggomaniac

[onnut]

So the owners walk free when they are responsible for making sure the building meets fire regulations etc.

How many managers would start their job and say, "hold on a second, i wonder if this place has been inspected and passed by the health & safety. Is that material on the roof flammable?"

And the marketing manager is indicted too? What a joke!

The rich always walk free in Thailand.

to start with, that IS why they are managers, it is there job to stand back and make sure the place is safe. They should be had up in court for this because they did not do there jobs.

[Digger]

These should be completed to the revelant ISO standards.

And these standards are what exactly?........ Oh they are not defined. No surprises there.

Simple reality is that this was an illegal venue operating without valid licences - however those who are charged and employed with checking it get away scot free. I suspect the families of the victims feel the same, and what exactly does a marketing mgr have to do with in house fire safety? Talk about typical Thai Scapegoats........

[overhaul38]

First a question...Why does it take more than 1 year to decide to prosecute? I know Thai justice is slow but this is embarrassing.

Second...I assume the manager and owner are not elected officials, police official, army official, or a relative, otherwise forget any prosecution.

You can count on one hand the number of officials or relatives of officials that have been charged, not to mention punished, for a crime. Just call me a great big cynic.

[Thai at Heart]

First a question...Why does it take more than 1 year to decide to prosecute? I know Thai justice is slow but this is embarrassing.

Second...I assume the manager and owner are not elected officials, police official, army official, or a relative, otherwise forget any prosecution.

You can count on one hand the number of officials or relatives of officials that have been charged, not to mention punished, for a crime. Just call me a great big cynic.

I don't think there was any doubt that there was going to be a prosecution.

One major change that should be enabled in Thai law is "class action" suits. These victims, deceased and the survivors have been criminally wronged, but they should not need to all individually fund their own law suits. Their combined weight should be brought to bear in the cases to win for them all. If nothing else, the damages would be considerably greater, which would probably spark a greater awareness of management liability v insurance and necessary safety requirements for this type of establishments.

I don't like ambulance chasers, but the only way for the little guy to take on the big guy is for the little guys to gang up on him.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Thai at Heart

[selftaopath]

1 Year 1 month and 16 odd days to come to a decision that someone needs to be prosecuted. Not complaining, however, something more swift would have been appreciated. 66 lives seems to be of no value to Thai prosecutors. Strange.

In Lack of Sanctions (LOS) it might be a very long time before consequences are given/enforced. But the suggestion LOOKS good on paper eh? LOLOLOLOOOL Amazing Thailand - for sure.

[prakhonchai nick]

13 months is better than not at all.

I never recall seeing the owners/managers et all of the Royal Jomtien Resort where fire claimed 90+lives due to locked doors being prosecuted, nor those involved in the collapse of a hotel in Khorat many years ago.

No doubt prosecutors are still formulating their cases!

[robertson468]

I fail to see the words 'owner' or 'owners' in that clip.

Very true and I fail to see mention the name of the government person who granted the club a licence, which clearly had insufficient fire exits. Many complain about "Elf and Safety", but here is a sad and classical case which was woefully inadequate .

[Netfan]

As a parallel case, in February 2003 in Rhode Island US a fire swept thru a night club, killing 100 and injuring more than 200 more. The band’s manager lit sparklers on a small stage surrounded by flammable foam used for soundproofing. The band manager who started the fire plead guilty to 100 counts of manslaughter in 2006 - he was sentenced to 15 years, with 11 of those suspended. He got released in 2008. In September 2006 the two owners of the club plead “no contest”. One served less than 3 years and the other walked – probation, no jail time.

Between the insurance companies, the city and state of Rhode Island, over $175 million in settlement money was paid out to victims and their families. That took over 5 years to complete.

Who’s justice system is screwed up?

[raro]

These should be completed to the revelant ISO standards.

And these standards are what exactly?........ Oh they are not defined. No surprises there.

Simple reality is that this was an illegal venue operating without valid licences - however those who are charged and employed with checking it get away scot free. I suspect the families of the victims feel the same, and what exactly does a marketing mgr have to do with in house fire safety? Talk about typical Thai Scapegoats........

What does ISO has to do with that?

[webfact]

UPDATE

First indictments in Bangkok club fire

BANGKOK: -- (AFP) - Thai public prosecutors Wednesday formally charged the first four people over a deadly inferno at a Bangkok nightclub that killed 67 revellers on New Year's Day in 2009.

The charges of gross negligence resulting in death or injury come after police and authorities faced criticism for failing to more swiftly pursue justice for the blaze at the swanky Santika club.

The four who appeared at a district attorney's office included Saravuth Ariya, the lead singer of rock band Burn, who is accused of setting off pyrotechnics that started the fire.

The others were Santika's operations manager Thawatchai Srithumma, entertainment manager Pongthep Jinda and marketing manager Phuttipong Vailiki.

The charge carries a maximum jail sentence of 10 years.

Club co-owner Visuk Setsawat and Boonchu Laosrinak, owner of the company that installed the pyrotechnics, both said they were sick and sent lawyers to the hearing. They must appear at a later date.

Three Singaporeans, one Japanese and a Myanmar national were among the dead, while scores of foreigners including some from Australia, France and Britain were injured.

-- ©Copyright AFP 2010-02-17

Published with written approval from AFP.

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[connel707]

I fail to see the words 'owner' or 'owners' in that clip.

Yes, what about the man who collected the profits.... not just the employees.... Did I hear someone say the owner was/is a senior policeman..!! or was that just hearsay..?

[connel707]

I wonder what % of violent crimes and accidents occur by drunken and loud people after midnight? [punch outs in bar parking lots, road deaths, and so on, bar fires]

When I was 17 I woke up one morning in car in Alberta Canada that was upside down in a ditch. I made a decision at that point to stop heavey drinking, calculating that drunken revellery was more, truthfully, idiotic, NOT all the 'fun' it is hyped up to be.

I am not and will not say the victims are responsible for what happened.

I can, however, tell you, in all honesty, it is impossible that I could ever die in that manner. I will never be there!

At gatherings like that I like to get there real early. I like to see the set up, the characters, and the arriving role players. I can get a bit tipsy and have some fun but have learned that when the first 'crazy' happens, [ie; drunken shouting match, or people staggering] that is my signal to call it an enjoyable night.

More than once I have heard, "Gee, you're lucky you left when you did."

Because people, in droves, won't consider their safety, it has to be up to the authorities to regulate and provide patrols!? We complain about Big Brother all the time, then beg Him to be an all encompassing protector so we can Party ON.

None of us gets out alive, I just don't want my last breath to by a lapse of clear thinking and responsibilty for my own actions.

If I die from cancer, it won't be from smoking. If a drunk driver runs me over it won't be because I was drinking.

I don't know, I would prefer to be sober when my time comes; possibly others would prefer to be in a stupor when the time comes, you think?

What would you like better, clear thinking or to be in a mindless drunk, when you shed the earthly coil?

--------

Oh, it didn't happen this year; but Songran is coming up. What will it be? 4000 drunken road deaths per day? Have fun.

How boring... hate to tell you this mate.... but you Are dead already... Get a life..!!

[connel707]

Well at last we have some people indicted, and the list of people/roles is quite amazing considering the way only one maybe two scapegoats are normally charged and the wealthy and influential just walk away.

But there are still questions; the roles indicated are 'managers'.

What about the 'owners', they also have responsibility, they formulate and assign, at a high level, the policies of both the marketing of the venue and the operation of the venue. If the operation is not with their instructions or not within the law etc., then they have a responsibility to speak up and to take action.

Above all, they own and operate a venue which could be dangerous in certain circumstances (the actual fire is the ultimate example), and they ultimately are the most responsible in terms of 'duty of care'.

Owners are well protected against liability in any country. Unless you can prove that the owner was actively involved in making decisions, you cannot hold him accountable for what goes on in a company. Just being an owner should not make you responsible for what goes on in a company. Let's say you own a few shares (partial ownership) in a company like PTT and due to gross negligence a plant blows up, kiling many workers. Should you as (partial) owner be held responsible, eg getting a (partial) jailterm? No, the directors and managers are responsible, not the owner.

This is a Private building.... completely different from a public company... The owner certainly is liable if he is collecting the lions share of the profits... he did not rent it out to these guys, they worked for him.... workers do what the owner tells them... its Thailand...

[raro]

I fail to see the words 'owner' or 'owners' in that clip.

Yes, what about the man who collected the profits.... not just the employees.... Did I hear someone say the owner was/is a senior policeman..!! or was that just hearsay..?

ok, once again as it is apparently difficult to understand...

An OWNER of a business puts money into it to gain profits and appoints a Manager or Director to run the business. Nothing else.

A MANAGER or DIRECTOR runs the show and is responsible for its operations, safety etc.

An owner can be a Manager or Director at the same time, but must not be. In any case, no one can be held responsible because of simply OWNING a business unless someone can PROVE that the Managers were instructed to do something illegal by the owner.