Girl Involved In Bangkok Tollway Accident Will Be Sent To A Home: Police

[housepainter]

Pol Colonel Saran, Sudawadee's father.

That is the only hope of justice.

The fact that a relatively high ranking PO has lost his daughter. Despite the Thai way of the Na Ayutaya clan being untouchable as they are monied and influential, there's a grieving cop to be compensated. And for once this may all end up behind bars.

The parents should be prosecuted. Should doen't seem to carry much weight in Thailand. And 'will' has always been remiss.

The girl should be prosecuted and detained in a young offenders prison until she is 18 and transferred to an adult prison. The loss of life merits a maximum sentence under law.

But what law is there? If the circumstances were reversed and an ordinary, low incomed, unconnected working class Thai had caused the death of 9 connceted, infleuntial, powerful, high-so persons, then some kind of book [ do the Thais have law books?] would be hurled with all the force of an outraged elite, calling the shots, from on high with politician statements backing it up.

But this is Thailand and we'll be reading of this one, at best, if at all, for years to come. Perhaps, as shown by the Moo Ham case, this kind of carnage can not be tolerated or condoned any longer. Perhaps, the elite can not fix what society now accepts as an outrage. This is not about run of the mill corruption, and though there is no Thai moral compass to point the way forward, there is the real dilemma that if justice is not seen to be done then it sure helps the red shirt recruitment campiagn.

If ordinary Thais are still unable to achieve justice when facing the Thai elite then let there be rivers of blood under any name, pretence or misguided rage to deliver democracy. For if the Abhisit government doesn't do the right thing here then it rips away this veneer of democracy under which all people are expected to act peacefully, confining their protests to civil disobedience at most.

We are outraged.

Who has read a thread defending the girl or the parents? What argument can be constructed for mitigation? Are we to say it's not that bad as she only drove a small car, if she'd have had say, a BMW or a MERC, what would have happened would be much worse. Shouldn't we be thanking her for choosing the small sedan? And for travelling alone and not causing bumps or bruises to her fellow high-so shopping mall, beauty salon hang out, drop out, don't need to work only to play friends.

I can see the Thais getting their head round that one, along with some payment. But surely you can't compensate the loss of a such promising young persons even without considering that 4th year Thammasat University student who died. What a contribution there to Thai society. Brains, qualifications and intellect, everything a parent dreams of in their off spring. Reduced to temporarily warming a mortuary slab instead of working for the benefit of Thai society for 40 years.

That individual is lost while a silly girl, froth and no sense, a spoilt brat, and Thai's do such a god spoiled brat, survives and contributes what exactly of merit or worth or value to society. Do we measure her by the hours spent in endless Silom shopping Malls? Or the number of coffees bought or stirred, CDs listened to, mobiles bought, dresses discarded, time wasted, education avoided or number of times she was allowed to drive the car that killed? That number being at least once too many.

Lives are ruined. Hers amongst them. That needs to be drilled home. By way of punishment, understanding, the delivery of swift and harsh justice. The relatives of the dead will never forget. This silly girl must never be allowed to forget, to move on without having been punished. A moment of sadness, a lachrymose misting caused by rising coffee steam care of Silom's Starbucks is not enough.

That punishment needs to start. That will allow the minimal closure that is possible for the grieving mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. That will allow a community to recover, accept and move on. That community includes the whole of Thailand where we all await justice. The same Justice that Abhisit has announced he is to over haul. What better way to start?

This terrible abuse of the law leading to horrific injury, death and sorrow is a result of the lawlessness of Thailand. Also, it is due to the misguided view that good parenting is about giving your child everything. That includes the means to kill. And the money to cover it up for do not forget the words of the parent: 'I hope to avoid prosecution.' How? Other than by buying your way out. Front pages of anational newspaper as if it is the right thing to say. Thai mentality.

It is a total abdication of responsibility by the parents. For that reason the girl must be punished to the maximum and the parents too. Clearly the mother's thinking has not been altered one iota by what has happened so far. It needs to be.Otherwise we will be revisiting this one again. With all thos eother deluded and dangerous spoilt brats allowed to run amok without repudiation. Already the Moo Ham similarities are there. Spoilt brats, doting, blind parenting and a car to kill.

Which way do you wish to see Thai society go?

[Steely Dan]

So the girl will be sent to a home pending trial. All well and good, and thus far no deviation from procedure. If the girl is indeed legally a minor then I suspect her punishment will be far too lenient for many, but it is justice not revenge that is needed here.

As for the many internet vigilantes I trust that in arriving at your judgment you find yourselves nowhere on the following list.

1) Driving without a valid Thai or current international license.

2) Driving a taxed and tested vehicle which has been insured at least to the minimum standards required by law.

3) Driving while drunk or with judgment impaired through drugs.

4) Driving too fast while tailgating the car in front and flashing lights to bully them into moving over.

If you EVER found yourself on the above list there is a chance that some time in your life you might have ended up in the same predicament as the girl.

[random]

So the girl will be sent to a home pending trial. All well and good, and thus far no deviation from procedure. If the girl is indeed legally a minor then I suspect her punishment will be far too lenient for many, but it is justice not revenge that is needed here.

As for the many internet vigilantes I trust that in arriving at your judgment you find yourselves nowhere on the following list.

1) Driving without a valid Thai or current international license.

2) Driving a taxed and tested vehicle which has been insured at least to the minimum standards required by law.

3) Driving while drunk or with judgment impaired through drugs.

4) Driving too fast while tailgating the car in front and flashing lights to bully them into moving over.

If you EVER found yourself on the above list there is a chance that some time in your life you might have ended up in the same predicament as the girl.

so you don't want anyone driving a vehicle that has been taxed, tested and insured??

[Steely Dan]

So the girl will be sent to a home pending trial. All well and good, and thus far no deviation from procedure. If the girl is indeed legally a minor then I suspect her punishment will be far too lenient for many, but it is justice not revenge that is needed here.

As for the many internet vigilantes I trust that in arriving at your judgment you find yourselves nowhere on the following list.

1) Driving without a valid Thai or current international license.

2) Driving a taxed and tested vehicle which has been insured at least to the minimum standards required by law.

3) Driving while drunk or with judgment impaired through drugs.

4) Driving too fast while tailgating the car in front and flashing lights to bully them into moving over.

If you EVER found yourself on the above list there is a chance that some time in your life you might have ended up in the same predicament as the girl.

so you don't want anyone driving a vehicle that has been taxed, tested and insured??

Sorry my bad, should read Driving an untaxed, untested and uninsured vehicle.

[random]

So the girl will be sent to a home pending trial. All well and good, and thus far no deviation from procedure. If the girl is indeed legally a minor then I suspect her punishment will be far too lenient for many, but it is justice not revenge that is needed here.

As for the many internet vigilantes I trust that in arriving at your judgment you find yourselves nowhere on the following list.

1) Driving without a valid Thai or current international license.

2) Driving a taxed and tested vehicle which has been insured at least to the minimum standards required by law.

3) Driving while drunk or with judgment impaired through drugs.

4) Driving too fast while tailgating the car in front and flashing lights to bully them into moving over.

If you EVER found yourself on the above list there is a chance that some time in your life you might have ended up in the same predicament as the girl.

so you don't want anyone driving a vehicle that has been taxed, tested and insured??

Sorry my bad, should read Driving an untaxed, untested and uninsured vehicle.

I understand your sentiments, but the fact remains that the majority on here are much older than 16, also you missed out sending an sms while doing number 1,2, and 4, as yet we don't know about number 3.

I am still amazed that some people are trying to justify her actions, or trying to deflect blame, the fact is 9 people are dead because she drove a car, while unlicensed, while driving too fast,, while not insured so lets try and focus on her actions rather than trying to focus on imaginary situations involving other people and when they drive. She has already done this so lets focus on her and what her punishment should be,

I would ask that every time you think about this girl and empathize with her I would like you to think about the families of 9 people that are suffering because of this girls reckless, selfish behaviour, then maybe some can see why there is this witch hunt when it started to become clear that this was going to be swept under the carpet, the witch hunt has been successful in forcing the authorities to dealing with this (although no doubt she will still walk away with the minimum of sentence).

[Mario2008]

Justice means among others to weight all the circumstances and not jumping to conclusions.

As to the girl going to a remand centre, that is the normal procedure. It is also the normal procedure that at that time the parents can bail her out. It has nothing to do with being influential.

[whybother]

<snip>

then maybe some can see why there is this witch hunt when it started to become clear that this was going to be swept under the carpet,

<snip>

The witch hunt began well before anyone thought it would be swept under the carpet.

And it doesn't excuse posts telling lies or spreading rumours to fan the flames even more.

[Steely Dan]

I understand your sentiments, but the fact remains that the majority on here are much older than 16, also you missed out sending an sms while doing number 1,2, and 4, as yet we don't know about number 3.

I am still amazed that some people are trying to justify her actions, or trying to deflect blame, the fact is 9 people are dead because she drove a car, while unlicensed, while driving too fast,, while not insured so lets try and focus on her actions rather than trying to focus on imaginary situations involving other people and when they drive. She has already done this so lets focus on her and what her punishment should be,

I would ask that every time you think about this girl and empathize with her I would like you to think about the families of 9 people that are suffering because of this girls reckless, selfish behaviour, then maybe some can see why there is this witch hunt when it started to become clear that this was going to be swept under the carpet, the witch hunt has been successful in forcing the authorities to dealing with this (although no doubt she will still walk away with the minimum of sentence).

If the girl was indeed sending an SMS or indeed using a phone without a headset that too would be imho wickedly reckless and deserving of severe punishment. Furthermore in my opinion being in charge of a potentially lethal weapon such as a car should mean you assume adult responsibilities in doing so.

However, I think it wrong to retroactively punish the girl more than the law allows, though future legislation would perhaps be appropriate. Yes I agree that the 'witch hunt' appears to be making it more difficult to bury the case, however don't count your chickens on that one either. I await developments with interest and of course I do empathize with the bereaved in this tragedy.

[Soutpeel]

WOW the vast majority of commentors on this subject should have lived in the middle ages, where it was acceptable to execute a child for crimes. (actually, maybe some did live in middle ages, based on the TV demographic... )

The person concerned is under the legal age, has scr*wed up big time and has to live with it for the rest of her life.

Now I am in agreement that her parents should be brought to account, if it turns out they had knowlege about her driving cars etc etc

[neverdie]

I think it's time to reduce the adult age to 16 or younger now. I felt that the teenagers nowaday know everything and do not listen when the adults try to tell them something.

The most important right of a child is to be child, with all (ir)responsibilities and behaviour that comes with that.

I agree with your statement Mario, wholeheartedly, however, when we let out children become the drivers of motor vehicles there is also a level of responsibility that goes with that. I mean, a motor vehicle is a loaded gun, in this case more than 1000kgs of gun.

If you were addressing the simple 'mistake' of a child who, being unlicenced and according to the law, not allowed to drive a car, but drove and was caught doing so by police. Then perhaps there child made a mistake.

However, when that child then proceeds to do x, y & z in that motor vehicle, are they all to be classed as 'further' mistakes to the original mistakes? How many mistakes can the child keep making before its held accountable?

What age in Thailand can someone 'legally' obtain a drivers licence?

If that age is less than 18 (the aged people are deemed to be adult) then at least at that age the child should be held fully accountable for their mistake's especially in the situation where the act of x, y & z results in a death. The only difference in this scenario is the process involved in the child being held accountable ie: the processes of the police & courts etc.

As you know, one of the things they look at with children is, did the child know what they were doing was wrong. I can see there might be a case with a really young child (7-12 years), perhaps for some even higher, but having said that, we are talking about a child who in a very few short months will actually be 18. Did she know what she was doing was wrong?

I wonder how many times the child has been making these mistakes for? Perhaps the Police investigation might reveal that the child was making these mistakes every day for the last 12 months, maybe it won't, maybe this is the first time. Alot can be said on the issue, can't it?

Whatever happens, I hope that justice prevails and I hope that no idiot thinks he can take the law into his or her own hands. When thinking about the entire situation I don't think anyone can seriously suggest that this child intended for any of this to happen & for most people involved in something like this, perhaps more than 99%, this is a life changing moment.

So much life snuffed out, so terribly sad.

[neverdie]

WOW the vast majority of commentors on this subject should have lived in the middle ages, where it was acceptable to execute a child for crimes. (actually, maybe some did live in middle ages, based on the TV demographic... )

The person concerned is under the legal age, has scr*wed up big time and has to live with it for the rest of her life.

Now I am in agreement that her parents should be brought to account, if it turns out they had knowlege about her driving cars etc etc

Of course there is no crime committed by people rationally sitting around and discussing the issues, is there?

[reason1]

WOW the vast majority of commentors on this subject should have lived in the middle ages, where it was acceptable to execute a child for crimes. (actually, maybe some did live in middle ages, based on the TV demographic... )

The person concerned is under the legal age, has scr*wed up big time and has to live with it for the rest of her life.

Now I am in agreement that her parents should be brought to account, if it turns out they had knowlege about her driving cars etc etc

I was reading down forming the same opinion as you. Posters here clearly would not be satisfied with just execution. I am sure they never screwed up and got lucky. Also in the whole world only Thais screw up? My only Mbike offence was at 15 the court laughed and I was given a suspended sentence, justice not revenge

[rodentwarrior]

[

The most important right of a child is to be child, with all (ir)responsibilities and behaviour that comes with that.

So you seriously believe that it's absolutely fine for a minor to drive a car and irresponsibly kill other road users?

Extraordinary.

[neverdie]

My only Mbike offence was at 15 the court laughed and I was given a suspended sentence, justice not revenge

Are you believe to this date, had you been 17 & driving in some questionable manner along a motorway and killed 9 people that the result would of been the same ?

Edited January 3, 2011 by neverdie

[reason1]

My only Mbike offence was at 15 the court laughed and I was given a suspended sentence, justice not revenge

Are you believe to this date, had you been 17 & driving in some questionable manner along a motorway and killed 9 people that the result would of been the same ?

What I did was stupid but harmless and I was given an appropriate punishment; trying to find a way to deal with this tragedy is beyond me all have a lot of pain and this kid will be damaged as it is, so are the families.

[ginjag]

This MINOR-KID-CHILD -could be 25 soon, my god, maybe she has the blue book and the owner of the civic, maybe she paid cash for the car. I have asked for all the details of ownership--age--NO-ONE can seemingly answer all --WHY--is the ownership classified ??????----is the I.D. details of the real age of the MINOR classified ?????....................is there anyone out there can get answer to these SIMPLE requests. surely forum could search---save a lot of argument, on--MINOR or not----OWNER or not...

If they are such simple requests, maybe you could do it yourself.

Thanks whybother for that, BECAUSE I naturally thought by now it would be known. Your remark came over sarcasticly. I didn,t imply I wanted everyone to do a search for me. O.K. I have to assume we do not know for sure the answers to the important points, I think it is vital to know if possible as there is too much speculation, on this serious subject. BUT it could be me whybother for asking a STUPID question. Reading over much of this, 75 per cent of the 2-ing and fro-ing, needn,t be had we had the info. I,m just gob struck no-one can find out ???---I, have tried but hit brick walls.

[neverdie]

My only Mbike offence was at 15 the court laughed and I was given a suspended sentence, justice not revenge

Are you believe to this date, had you been 17 & driving in some questionable manner along a motorway and killed 9 people that the result would of been the same ?

What I did was stupid but harmless and I was given an appropriate punishment; trying to find a way to deal with this tragedy is beyond me all have a lot of pain and this kid will be damaged as it is, so are the families.

Sure, & ?

[Nisa]

I think it's time to reduce the adult age to 16 or younger now. I felt that the teenagers nowaday know everything and do not listen when the adults try to tell them something.

Sounds like a reason NOT to lower the age.

[Nisa]

As a minor at 17 years of age, the girl would not be detained and therefore a request for temporary release on bail would not be needed. But she would be sent to a facility under the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection, Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

This makes no sense. The legal term "detained" is not an arrest or does it mean incarceration. When an officer pulls you over he detains you while you are being given a ticket. So, if she is sent to a "home" it may just be for processing. However it sounds like she is going to be remanded to a juvi home.

If she is remanded to a home and there is no bail then this makes no sense as minors are typically not held until trial unless they pose a risk or have no other stable place to go. I do know that bail is not typical (possibly not offered) for minors as holding them is about their protection and in some cases the protection of others. If the minor has a responsible family to live with, that signs for responsibility, then they are placed with this family member(s) ... this is always the preferred method when available.

Bottom line is I believe she will be in the parents care shortly as there is no reason to hold her until trial or a pleading. Maybe within a certain period (such as 48 to 72 hours) there is a brief hearing where a judge decides where she is to be placed.

Edited January 3, 2011 by Nisa

[TAWP]

Seems the poor child is aging very quickly since the horror she created.According to the OP it seems she gets every day a year older.

This MINOR-KID-CHILD -could be 25 soon, my god, maybe she has the blue book and the owner of the civic, maybe she paid cash for the car. I have asked for all the details of ownership--age--NO-ONE can seemingly answer all --WHY--is the ownership classified ??????----is the I.D. details of the real age of the MINOR classified ?????....................is there anyone out there can get answer to these SIMPLE requests. surely forum could search---save a lot of argument, on--MINOR or not----OWNER or not...

Since when is it anyone's - police, victims or defendants - responsibility to keep you informed about an ongoing investigation?

If you want to have the information so badly you could always try to write a letter to them. If you can write a letter in proper English.

[Xangsamhua]

As a minor at 17 years of age, the girl would not be detained and therefore a request for temporary release on bail would not be needed. But she would be sent to a facility under the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection, Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

This makes no sense. The legal term "detained" is not an arrest or does it mean incarceration. When an officer pulls you over he detains you while you are being given a ticket. So, if she is sent to a "home" it may just be for processing. However it sounds like she is going to be remanded to a juvi home.

If she is remanded to a home and there is no bail then this makes no sense as minors are typically not held until trial unless they pose a risk or have no other stable place to go. I do know that bail is not typical (possibly not offered) for minors as holding them is about their protection and in some cases the protection of others. If the minor has a responsible family to live with, that signs for responsibility, then they are placed with this family member(s) ... this is always the preferred method when available.

Bottom line is I believe she will be in the parents care shortly as there is no reason to hold her until trial or a pleading. Maybe within a certain period (such as 48 to 72 hours) there is a brief hearing where a judge decides where she is to be placed.

Thank you for your informative posts, Nisa.

[Mario2008]

I think it's time to reduce the adult age to 16 or younger now. I felt that the teenagers nowaday know everything and do not listen when the adults try to tell them something.

The most important right of a child is to be child, with all (ir)responsibilities and behaviour that comes with that.

I agree with your statement Mario, wholeheartedly, however, when we let out children become the drivers of motor vehicles there is also a level of responsibility that goes with that. I mean, a motor vehicle is a loaded gun, in this case more than 1000kgs of gun.

If you were addressing the simple 'mistake' of a child who, being unlicenced and according to the law, not allowed to drive a car, but drove and was caught doing so by police. Then perhaps there child made a mistake.

However, when that child then proceeds to do x, y & z in that motor vehicle, are they all to be classed as 'further' mistakes to the original mistakes? How many mistakes can the child keep making before its held accountable?

What age in Thailand can someone 'legally' obtain a drivers licence?

If that age is less than 18 (the aged people are deemed to be adult) then at least at that age the child should be held fully accountable for their mistake's especially in the situation where the act of x, y & z results in a death. The only difference in this scenario is the process involved in the child being held accountable ie: the processes of the police & courts etc.

As you know, one of the things they look at with children is, did the child know what they were doing was wrong. I can see there might be a case with a really young child (7-12 years), perhaps for some even higher, but having said that, we are talking about a child who in a very few short months will actually be 18. Did she know what she was doing was wrong?

I wonder how many times the child has been making these mistakes for? Perhaps the Police investigation might reveal that the child was making these mistakes every day for the last 12 months, maybe it won't, maybe this is the first time. Alot can be said on the issue, can't it?

Whatever happens, I hope that justice prevails and I hope that no idiot thinks he can take the law into his or her own hands. When thinking about the entire situation I don't think anyone can seriously suggest that this child intended for any of this to happen & for most people involved in something like this, perhaps more than 99%, this is a life changing moment.

So much life snuffed out, so terribly sad.

She is accountable, but to a lesser degree than an adult. Childrens rights and repsonsibilities grow with the years. As they get more and more mature, so grows their accountability.

The sad thing in Thailand is that there is no efficient law enforcement for traffic laws. One sees that when mini vans are driven beyond capacity, so when things go wrong it goes more wrong than should have been. Every day I see motor cylces being driven by 12/13 year olds with 3 people on it, I can't count the number of motorcucle accidents. But every year I attend at least 1 funeral of a student, killed in am motorcycle accident. If only they would wear helmets, some major injuries would be prevented. Not to mention parents driving a motor cycle while their 2 year old desperatly hangs on to the motor cycle.

It is in that enviroment that this girl drove a car.

[coma]

I make no excuses for this young girl and hope she will be awarded the correct punishment according to the applicable laws of Thailand.

However what I believe will be harsher than any punishment will be the fact that she will have to live with the results of her actions her entire life. This in itself will be a life sentence.

No winners here. Everybody involved has lost. IMO,

[transam]

I think it's time to reduce the adult age to 16 or younger now. I felt that the teenagers nowaday know everything and do not listen when the adults try to tell them something.

The most important right of a child is to be child, with all (ir)responsibilities and behaviour that comes with that.

I agree with your statement Mario, wholeheartedly, however, when we let out children become the drivers of motor vehicles there is also a level of responsibility that goes with that. I mean, a motor vehicle is a loaded gun, in this case more than 1000kgs of gun.

If you were addressing the simple 'mistake' of a child who, being unlicenced and according to the law, not allowed to drive a car, but drove and was caught doing so by police. Then perhaps there child made a mistake.

However, when that child then proceeds to do x, y & z in that motor vehicle, are they all to be classed as 'further' mistakes to the original mistakes? How many mistakes can the child keep making before its held accountable?

What age in Thailand can someone 'legally' obtain a drivers licence?

If that age is less than 18 (the aged people are deemed to be adult) then at least at that age the child should be held fully accountable for their mistake's especially in the situation where the act of x, y & z results in a death. The only difference in this scenario is the process involved in the child being held accountable ie: the processes of the police & courts etc.

As you know, one of the things they look at with children is, did the child know what they were doing was wrong. I can see there might be a case with a really young child (7-12 years), perhaps for some even higher, but having said that, we are talking about a child who in a very few short months will actually be 18. Did she know what she was doing was wrong?

I wonder how many times the child has been making these mistakes for? Perhaps the Police investigation might reveal that the child was making these mistakes every day for the last 12 months, maybe it won't, maybe this is the first time. Alot can be said on the issue, can't it?

Whatever happens, I hope that justice prevails and I hope that no idiot thinks he can take the law into his or her own hands. When thinking about the entire situation I don't think anyone can seriously suggest that this child intended for any of this to happen & for most people involved in something like this, perhaps more than 99%, this is a life changing moment.

So much life snuffed out, so terribly sad.

She is accountable, but to a lesser degree than an adult. Childrens rights and repsonsibilities grow with the years. As they get more and more mature, so grows their accountability.

The sad thing in Thailand is that there is no efficient law enforcement for traffic laws. One sees that when mini vans are driven beyond capacity, so when things go wrong it goes more wrong than should have been. Every day I see motor cylces being driven by 12/13 year olds with 3 people on it, I can't count the number of motorcucle accidents. But every year I attend at least 1 funeral of a student, killed in am motorcycle accident. If only they would wear helmets, some major injuries would be prevented. Not to mention parents driving a motor cycle while their 2 year old desperatly hangs on to the motor cycle.

It is in that enviroment that this girl drove a car.

Absolutely and the thing that annoys me is the parents of these too young bike riders let them do it, mainly cos they can't be bothered to take them themselves but when they are killed it's the other guys fault, not the parents.

[OzMick]

Several posters have taken umbrage at my statement in another thread "How can the police justify NOT laying charges?"

From the above article:

".......... Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

Whether the girl's parents would be charged with a criminal offence depended on evidence compiled during the investigation process, the officer said.

One certain offence against the girl is causing multiple deaths and injuries through an act of carelessness, he said." NB My emphasis

Seems the police and I are of a like mind, and by the Thai website postings, more than a few others.

Nisa, moral equivalence is stupid and has no place in logical argument - and equating the illegality of the van driver not wearing a seat-belt with the actions of the 16-year-old is simply inane, obtuse and repugnant.

[Nisa]

Several posters have taken umbrage at my statement in another thread "How can the police justify NOT laying charges?"

From the above article:

".......... Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

Whether the girl's parents would be charged with a criminal offence depended on evidence compiled during the investigation process, the officer said.

One certain offence against the girl is causing multiple deaths and injuries through an act of carelessness, he said." NB My emphasis

Seems the police and I are of a like mind, and by the Thai website postings, more than a few others.

Nisa, moral equivalence is stupid and has no place in logical argument - and equating the illegality of the van driver not wearing a seat-belt with the actions of the 16-year-old is simply inane, obtuse and repugnant.

You are being less than truthful. You have stated over and over again that the girl is responsible (at fault) for the accident automatically because she was driving without a license and have stated that if one breaks a traffic law they are automatically responsible for an accident.

I simply asked you if the owner of the van should also be responsible (at fault) automatically since she was breaking the law by not wearing a seatbelt and/or IF it turned out she was not properly authorized to be transporting passengers.

I also asked you for a link to where you have stated as fact that this is the law in Australia since I tried to find and couldn't.

I am just baffled that your response is to post the above and indicate you are correct because the police are charging her with "careless driving" when any person being rational and with average intelligence knows this is referring to her admitted speeding and is a charge anyone would face in this same situation regardless of being in possession of a DL or not.

Edited January 3, 2011 by Nisa

[neverdie]

As a minor at 17 years of age, the girl would not be detained and therefore a request for temporary release on bail would not be needed. But she would be sent to a facility under the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection, Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

This makes no sense. The legal term "detained" is not an arrest or does it mean incarceration. When an officer pulls you over he detains you while you are being given a ticket. So, if she is sent to a "home" it may just be for processing. However it sounds like she is going to be remanded to a juvi home.

If she is remanded to a home and there is no bail then this makes no sense as minors are typically not held until trial unless they pose a risk or have no other stable place to go. I do know that bail is not typical (possibly not offered) for minors as holding them is about their protection and in some cases the protection of others. If the minor has a responsible family to live with, that signs for responsibility, then they are placed with this family member(s) ... this is always the preferred method when available.

Bottom line is I believe she will be in the parents care shortly as there is no reason to hold her until trial or a pleading. Maybe within a certain period (such as 48 to 72 hours) there is a brief hearing where a judge decides where she is to be placed.

You know something Nisa, we will all find out if and when they (the police) actually do act. As for your defintion of the word arrest & detained, theres a good chance that there could be a mix up in words between thai & english (i havent seen the thai version) and rest assured if you read in the media/paper that someone has been 'detained' by the Police, they've been arrested. It might not be legally correct, as in written in the act to use the word 'detained', however given the language translation issues theres a chance its just a play of words.

If the girl reports to the Police as it has been suggested she has to on the 5th & shes not allowed to leave after that, she has been arrested & is being detained at the (childrens detention centre/home/whatever they want to call it here). If she's free to come and go as she pleases (doesnt sound like it) then shes not detained.

Sometimes just googling things might not be enough to get a grip on things, most people didnt obtain qualifications through google & theres a whole lot more to understanding whats going on than doing internet searches. Same goes with being a Traffic Accident Investigator.

Regarding the exact situation in relation to charges/bail/holding/protection & whatever has been mentioned, I too find this all a bit odd because its not something you would normally see in my home country.

I reakon we will all find out whats going on, after it actually happens, which apparently is in a day or twos time.

Edited January 3, 2011 by neverdie

[neverdie]

She is accountable, but to a lesser degree than an adult. Childrens rights and repsonsibilities grow with the years. As they get more and more mature, so grows their accountability.

The sad thing in Thailand is that there is no efficient law enforcement for traffic laws. One sees that when mini vans are driven beyond capacity, so when things go wrong it goes more wrong than should have been. Every day I see motor cylces being driven by 12/13 year olds with 3 people on it, I can't count the number of motorcucle accidents. But every year I attend at least 1 funeral of a student, killed in am motorcycle accident. If only they would wear helmets, some major injuries would be prevented. Not to mention parents driving a motor cycle while their 2 year old desperatly hangs on to the motor cycle.

It is in that enviroment that this girl drove a car.

I agree. Two things, 17 & 2 months is nearly 18. Its much closer to 18 than 7.

I also cringe at the situations you describe above, but somehow don't think much is going to change. The change would need to start with the people enforcing the rulz & you and I both know where things go wrong there. Sad but true. :jap:

[Patsycat]

So, if she is sent off to a young offenders place until she is of age. Can she then as an adult be done for the manslaughter of 9 people? Like what they would do in the West?

But from reading the numerous threads on numerous forums, her family will probably get her off.

I hope she sleeps well in her cozy wee bed.

Her sister was in the car with her, so I read. Where is she?

Also, she supposedly slipped underneath the steering wheel as the crash occured.... to avoid the airbag.....?????

[Nisa]

As a minor at 17 years of age, the girl would not be detained and therefore a request for temporary release on bail would not be needed. But she would be sent to a facility under the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection, Pol Lt-Colonel Phithak Niyomphruek, a senior investigator at Vibhavadi Police Station in charge of the case, said yesterday.

This makes no sense. The legal term "detained" is not an arrest or does it mean incarceration. When an officer pulls you over he detains you while you are being given a ticket. So, if she is sent to a "home" it may just be for processing. However it sounds like she is going to be remanded to a juvi home.

If she is remanded to a home and there is no bail then this makes no sense as minors are typically not held until trial unless they pose a risk or have no other stable place to go. I do know that bail is not typical (possibly not offered) for minors as holding them is about their protection and in some cases the protection of others. If the minor has a responsible family to live with, that signs for responsibility, then they are placed with this family member(s) ... this is always the preferred method when available.

Bottom line is I believe she will be in the parents care shortly as there is no reason to hold her until trial or a pleading. Maybe within a certain period (such as 48 to 72 hours) there is a brief hearing where a judge decides where she is to be placed.

You know something Nisa, we will all find out if and when they (the police) actually do act. As for your defintion of the word arrest & detained, theres a good chance that there could be a mix up in words between thai & english (i havent seen the thai version) and rest assured if you read in the media/paper that someone has been 'detained' by the Police, they've been arrested. It might not be legally correct, as in written in the act to use the word 'detained', however given the language translation issues theres a chance its just a play of words.

If the girl reports to the Police as it has been suggested she has to on the 5th & shes not allowed to leave after that, she has been arrested & is being detained at the (childrens detention centre/home/whatever they want to call it here). If she's free to come and go as she pleases (doesnt sound like it) then shes not detained.

Sometimes just googling things might not be enough to get a grip on things, most people didnt obtain qualifications through google & theres a whole lot more to understanding whats going on than doing internet searches. Same goes with being a Traffic Accident Investigator.

Regarding the exact situation in relation to charges/bail/holding/protection & whatever has been mentioned, I too find this all a bit odd because its not something you would normally see in my home country.

I reakon we will all find out whats going on, after it actually happens, which apparently is in a day or twos time.

Not sure what all your Google comments are about except maybe you are referring to the meaning of detained. It is actually a very common term if you work within or are involved or been exposed to the law or law enforcement or for that matter English Cop TV shows where they use term "detained for questioning" or "we are detaining two suspects at gun point" (intro to the show COPS) and you don't here terms such as 'detained with out bail" but instead hear "held without bail" or "remanded to custody until trial" ... The word detained likely comes from the same roots as delayed because it is not that different in meaning when speaking about delaying somebody for a specific purpose. Keep in mind too that when the police detain somebody they are not free to leave but it is for a specific reason (usually to further investigate) and it can (often) is followed by an arrest and they you are brought to jail where some sort of promise to appear or bail is set in most cases. Certainly somebody could use the word detained for incarceration such but that is not how the police or lawyer or court would use the word.

As for translation issues, of course that could be the case but that single word stuck out to me in terms of putting sense to the other statements. However, I would also remind you that just yesterday (or day before) the police stated she would be charged with "reckless" (not careless) driving and that she would be held on bail which the parents would be free to post. Now it seems they are saying she is going to get locked up without any possibility of getting out (no bail) which just makes no sense given she is a minor and bail would even be granted to an adult in this situation. So again, the word detain might be telling. But if we are not going to believe things because of translations (forgetting that they don't need translation problems to get stories wrong) I find it more plausible that she may simply be "going home" and not to "a home'. Not sure about Thailand but they don't call a juvi detention facility 'a home" in most places and although they might have homes immediately available (doubtful in Thailand) to place a child in danger, they don't generally place a minor accused of a crime in "a home" prior to any kind of hearing or evaluation.

So unless Thailand call jails or detention centers for minors "homes" then I find it hard to make a translation error with this word especially given that the word "home" would be understood by even the most novice of English speakers.

Personally I don't put much stock into any of these supposed statements being made but I don't dismiss them entirely and try to use common sense to understand what was actually said along with my understanding of what are the globally and US accepted practices of dealing with minors which I did confirm Thailand follows by way of a post on one of the threads by a mod who pasted the Thai law as it pertains to enforcement/punishment as it relates to minors.