Thai Girl Involved In Tragic Tollway Accident Says That She Is Sorry

[jfchandler]

Wow...I find myself agreeing with Nisa on something... See, miracles can happen....

[Nisa]

--The Thammasat guy says no seat belts were in the van.

Early on police said the vehicle was equipped with seat belts but nobody had them on.

[OzMick]

OK, I do respect your opinion. And it quite a valid point, as you have seen lots of persons injured. But It is YOUR opinion.

With all my respect, it does not make it a "rule".

Correct. It is my opinion. It does not make it a rule.

My statement above:

"Actually, the fact that a witness (one injured person) says he asked for water does mean something. It says something about the credibility of the witness (or his memory) if it's unlikely that he would have actually asked for water."

is not really aimed to be specifically at the fact that he asked for water, but more that everything a witness says goes to their credibility. You can't ignore one part that might not make sense, and completely believe another part. In addition, in my experience it is normal for someone who has suffer shock to ask for water, personally I would ask for water and a smoke.

Actually when you consider that this poor guy would have had a surge of adrenaline, the fight, flight response, it would be normal for him to have a dry mouth. Due to the bodies response of shutting down the digestive system and diverting tthe blood to the muscles and the rapid breathing, shouting for help. Therefore, I can see why he would be calling for water, I dont see that as abnormal in any way.

I agree with you. From personal experience, road grazes bloody hurt, and one of the 1st things I want is a drink. I find something sweet (Sprite or orange juice) better at preventing onset of shock.

Edited January 8, 2011 by OzMick

[Nisa]

I don't know how injured she was as I saw some photos of her, which appeared to show her sitting against the median/rail and texting. Sorry, texting immediately after this horrific accident shows a bit like it was not a big deal to her.

TheWalkingMan

I am fairly confident her injuries were not life threatening but MANY people die after an accident who appeared fine after the accident and either didn't seek medical attention or were not adequately checked. Often this is due to things such as a brain injury.

We don't know how long after the accident the picture was taken but given many facts we do know, it is surely not "immediately" after the accident.

The girls statements along with her step-brother and mother indicate she contacted her father and the owner of the car after the accident and this is what she was doing in the photo. The girl also addressed this herself during an interview and stated that the police couldn't release her to go to the hospital until she contacted her parents (she is a minor) and provided the insurance information for the vehicle.

If she is at this particular time or scrolling through he contact/phone numbers is anybody's guess but it is common for 16-year olds to communicate via text than making a call. Also if she was getting insurance information texting might have seemed the easiest way to get this information from her friend who likely didn't have it and needed to call the garage who lent him/her the car while his/her was in for repair.

The family also needed to address the issue of the way she was standing/leaning in the photo since so many of the online lynch mob had an issue with this too (along with the way she was dressed). They stated she had gotten cuts and glass on her "bottom" in the accident or while being freed from the vehicle and couldn't sit down.

[jfchandler]

In my experience riding in transit vans here...and it's just my experience and different vans obviously can be equipped differently, there have been seatbelts in the front driver's row....but not in the rear rows...

Chalk it up to yet another item in this case where where the details of things change depending on who's talking and when it's being said....

Personally, I might be more inclined to believe the Thammasat guy's version since it's coming later, after all the initial stuff involved the crash has settled down a bit, and people have had a chance to piece things together a bit...

--The Thammasat guy says no seat belts were in the van.

Early on police said the vehicle was equipped with seat belts but nobody had them on.

[neverdie]

Guys, give the water thing a rest... :jap:

Do you mean "believe his statement and forget about inconsistencies"?

It's not an inconsistency. It was an unusual request, but unless you can put yourself exactly in his situation, i don't see how you can fairly judge.

What you say is true rixalex. I've seen plenty of people injured in mva's. Ive been by their side when they have been seriously injured and trapped in cars. I have had them ask me for water when they were being cut free from the wreckage. Of course in this situation I would NOT give them a drink but if possible soak a cloth in fresh water & let them suck on it.

Has anyone stopped to think, maybe he was thirsty before he got in the mini bus but didnt have time to stop & get some drinking water? Its a terrible feeling when ur mouth is dry, so what if he asked for water, get past it - sheish

edit to say: ps: that is good advice from nisa regarding to allowing injured people to drink. In hospital you often see people that are due to have surgery with signs on their bed saying 'nil by mouth'. At an accident scene, especially a bad one, its fair to assume people may be required to undergo surgery as a result of their injuries, hence - nil by mouth.

Edited January 8, 2011 by neverdie

[Nisa]

Guys, give the water thing a rest... :jap:

Do you mean "believe his statement and forget about inconsistencies"?

It's not an inconsistency. It was an unusual request, but unless you can put yourself exactly in his situation, i don't see how you can fairly judge.

What you say is true rixalex. I've seen plenty of people injured in mva's. Ive been by their side when they have been seriously injured and trapped in cars. I have had them ask me for water when they were being cut free from the wreckage. Of course in this situation I would NOT give them a drink but if possible soak a cloth in fresh water & let them suck on it.

Has anyone stopped to think, maybe he was thirsty before he got in the mini bus but didnt have time to stop & get some drinking water? Its a terrible feeling when ur mouth is dry, so what if he asked for water, get past it - sheish

edit to say: ps: that is good advice from nisa regarding to allowing injured people to drink. In hospital you often see people that are due to have surgery with signs on their bed saying 'nil by mouth'. At an accident scene, especially a bad one, its fair to assume people may be required to undergo surgery as a result of their injuries, hence - nil by mouth.

I was pretty sure you should not give water but did a Google search before posting those bullets to be sure. However, it should also be noted that one SHOULD NOT GIVE WATER TO SOMEBODY IN SHOCK either as a general rule either. There are some exceptions but they really boil down to being trained in dealing with the shock. Bottom line is you can do a lot of damage by putting anything in the mouth of somebody in shock or going into shock. The exceptions pretty much have to do when dealing with a person in shock when you are far and long away from any medical treatment and you know the cause of the shock is such as an arm injury and that the person in shock's body temp. is not already low. It is important to keep a normal body temp. when going into shock and that is why you often see blankets being used when the person's body temp. has fallen. Giving water could cause the victim's body to become cooler and shut down more along with causing the person to choke to death since their ability to swallow may be limited.

[OzMick]

It is as factual as everything else that has been reported in this case by the newspapers.

How do you know how many rescue workers were on the scene at the time? How could they know the extent of her injuries? (By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident). It is a priority to get people out of trapped vehicles after an accident and if people are stable and not going to get worse without roadside medical attention there is little to do for them but wait for transport and attend to those with more urgent needs such as those trapped in a vehicle. You are making a lot of assumptions in your post regarding who was being treated first, how many medical, rescue and police were on the scene at a specific time.

"(By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident)"

An interesting side note - her only reported injuries are "cuts to the bottom," which in the picture taken supposedly 20 min later there is no sign of any real bleeding, that require 4-5 days hospital treatment, but she meets with other victims sitting in a wheel chair. I smell lawyer input.

[473geo]

If the Girl had gone searching for water,( which as Nisa has stated should not to be administered before proper medical attention) half of the posters here would then be adding leaving the scene of the accident to the potential charge list!!!........JFC is right give the water thing a rest........really is clutching at straws to throw a little more mud

[neverdie]

If the Girl had gone searching for water,( which as Nisa has stated should not to be administered before proper medical attention) half of the posters here would then be adding leaving the scene of the accident to the potential charge list!!!........JFC is right give the water thing a rest........really is clutching at straws to throw a little more mud

and whilst ur giving the water issue a rest, why not also give the telephone call thingy a rest, nobody except the person that took the pic knows what time it was taken and how it fits in with the sequence of events.

given that reporters don't sit on the fence on the sideway of the motorway, theres a good chance it was taken some time later & not the initial moments after the crash. :jap:

[ginjag]

It is as factual as everything else that has been reported in this case by the newspapers.

How do you know how many rescue workers were on the scene at the time? How could they know the extent of her injuries? (By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident). It is a priority to get people out of trapped vehicles after an accident and if people are stable and not going to get worse without roadside medical attention there is little to do for them but wait for transport and attend to those with more urgent needs such as those trapped in a vehicle. You are making a lot of assumptions in your post regarding who was being treated first, how many medical, rescue and police were on the scene at a specific time.

"(By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident)"

An interesting side note - her only reported injuries are "cuts to the bottom," which in the picture taken supposedly 20 min later there is no sign of any real bleeding, that require 4-5 days hospital treatment, but she meets with other victims sitting in a wheel chair. I smell lawyer input.

After being released from the car, cuts to her bottom, stood with mobile, I think I would have done that, hospitalised for 5 days, if the cuts were raw for a start-then you would stand, after 5 days they would hurt, sat in awheelchair would be the last thing that I would want-unless I wanted to impress

[Nisa]

In my experience riding in transit vans here...and it's just my experience and different vans obviously can be equipped differently, there have been seatbelts in the front driver's row....but not in the rear rows...

Chalk it up to yet another item in this case where where the details of things change depending on who's talking and when it's being said....

Personally, I might be more inclined to believe the Thammasat guy's version since it's coming later, after all the initial stuff involved the crash has settled down a bit, and people have had a chance to piece things together a bit...

--The Thammasat guy says no seat belts were in the van.

Early on police said the vehicle was equipped with seat belts but nobody had them on.

I went back and looked at some of the previous news articles and there have been people (including investigators) who state the van seats all had belts while other say there were not any (assume they mean passenger's seats). I really wish these newspapers had real reporters as this really is important in terms of education as well as regulating.

I'm going to assume that if the seats were installed by the manufacturer or any accredited (if there is such a thing here) that they would have seat belts. I say this because at least the manufacturers would be concerned about lawsuits by not even allowing passengers in their vans to wear them. If I recall the photos, this van didn't look like one of those modern vans that are usually grey and appear to be clearly made to transport people. This looked more like a van a family might buy that was likely modified to fit as many people as they had it this day.

The vans I have taken have all been the newer/modern ones and they have always had seat belts (at least on my seat) and I notice I am the only one to use them. This includes border runs where all the other passengers are farangs too. Yesterday, I took a big bus (like a Greyhound) and was shocked to find all the seats equipped with seat belts (always has blown my mind that big school buss' in the USA don't have seat belts). But what I found funny (not really) is that another big bus, I took the other say, was equipped with TV monitors (no seat belts) and the one in the front was mounted in front of the driver ... nothing like encouraging a driver, with 50-passengers, to be distracted.

[jfchandler]

Frankly (compared to the water issue) I'm more interested in the report in The Nation this morning re the crash car actually belonging to a garage, being loaned to the girl's female "friend," and then being somehow passed along to the girl.

If's that's accurate, it would seem to have the potential for making sorting out the legal liabilities and/or penalties even more complicated....

Edited January 8, 2011 by jfchandler

[Nisa]

It is as factual as everything else that has been reported in this case by the newspapers.

How do you know how many rescue workers were on the scene at the time? How could they know the extent of her injuries? (By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident). It is a priority to get people out of trapped vehicles after an accident and if people are stable and not going to get worse without roadside medical attention there is little to do for them but wait for transport and attend to those with more urgent needs such as those trapped in a vehicle. You are making a lot of assumptions in your post regarding who was being treated first, how many medical, rescue and police were on the scene at a specific time.

"(By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident)"

An interesting side note - her only reported injuries are "cuts to the bottom," which in the picture taken supposedly 20 min later there is no sign of any real bleeding, that require 4-5 days hospital treatment, but she meets with other victims sitting in a wheel chair. I smell lawyer input.

After being released from the car, cuts to her bottom, stood with mobile, I think I would have done that, hospitalised for 5 days, if the cuts were raw for a start-then you would stand, after 5 days they would hurt, sat in awheelchair would be the last thing that I would want-unless I wanted to impress

We can assume all day long but what is most likely given the info we have read so far is that she likely had glass on her bottom after the accident. This based on the reports it was glass that hurt her rear and some statements about her injuries that didn't mention anything about her bottom having any serious injury. But what really is the bottom line here is who cares and why? It is idiotic to read so much into a single photo and make judgements about her as a person. Nor do her injuries or lack of relate in anyway to the cause of this accident and its tragic results.

A statement and recap from a passenger in the van ....

" I saw many of the seats empty as I struggled to get out of the wreckage. Then I saw some injured passengers on the road and realised why the seats were empty." He said he borrowed a rescue worker's mobile phone to inform his mother of his whereabouts. "I will never be able to forget what happened."

What no pictures of him going viral on the internet to try to suggest he wasn't injured or just went through what was likely the most horrific moments in his life???????????

Edited January 8, 2011 by Nisa

[jfchandler]

The seatbelts issue is an important one, both for safety and regulation for the future...

Think about regular taxis while we're at it... I can't remember ever riding in the back seat of the common Toyota taxis and ever seeing seat belts there here in BKK.......

Do the cars come without them somehow in Thailand, or do the taxi companies somehow remove them and or tuck them underneath the back seat where they won't "get in the way" or be seen and used.

Re buses, most of the common intercity Thai buses (older) ones I've been on have had no seatbelts... However, I have taken a couple VIP trips with newer buses where they did have seatbelts....

[473geo]

It is as factual as everything else that has been reported in this case by the newspapers.

How do you know how many rescue workers were on the scene at the time? How could they know the extent of her injuries? (By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident). It is a priority to get people out of trapped vehicles after an accident and if people are stable and not going to get worse without roadside medical attention there is little to do for them but wait for transport and attend to those with more urgent needs such as those trapped in a vehicle. You are making a lot of assumptions in your post regarding who was being treated first, how many medical, rescue and police were on the scene at a specific time.

"(By the way, she was injured and hospitalized for at least 5-days after the incident and appeared in a wheel chair when she met with victims 4 or 5 days after the accident)"

An interesting side note - her only reported injuries are "cuts to the bottom," which in the picture taken supposedly 20 min later there is no sign of any real bleeding, that require 4-5 days hospital treatment, but she meets with other victims sitting in a wheel chair. I smell lawyer input.

After being released from the car, cuts to her bottom, stood with mobile, I think I would have done that, hospitalised for 5 days, if the cuts were raw for a start-then you would stand, after 5 days they would hurt, sat in awheelchair would be the last thing that I would want-unless I wanted to impress

Perhaps not if you had twisted,damaged and bruised the musles in your back and neck...........but of course that is pure speculation......as is any comment regarding the full extent of her injuries, other than those from the doctor actually treating her injuries

[jfchandler]

Someone made a funny here.... heheheh

We can assume all day long but what is most likely given the info we have read so far is that she likely had glass on her bottom after the accident. This based on the reports it was glass that hurt her rear and some statements about her injuries that didn't mention anything about her bottom having any serious injury. But what really is the bottom line here is who cares and why?

[Nisa]

Someone made a funny here.... heheheh

We can assume all day long but what is most likely given the info we have read so far is that she likely had glass on her bottom after the accident. This based on the reports it was glass that hurt her rear and some statements about her injuries that didn't mention anything about her bottom having any serious injury. But what really is the bottom line here is who cares and why?

LOL - I should take credit for this but it was purely unintentional.

[waza]

Nisa is right, you shouldnt give water to an trauma patient til they have been medically assessed. They main reason is to reduce the risk of vomitting, this could make abdomial injuries worse, but the biggest risk is apiration (aspiration pneumonia). Thats why patients fast before surgery, with a full stomache the aspiration risk on induction (intubation) and during surgery is very high.

[jfchandler]

Whatever her actual injuries were, I'd say two things are clear:

1. they weren't as serious as the van victims who had variously a broken collar bone and other similar stuff...

2. If I were her family, lawyer, PR adviser or anything similar, I would have advised her to stay in the hospital in the aftermath of the crash.. That also probably had the effect of temporarily keeping the police at bay, to some extent.

Plus, don't forget, according to the family, she has some kind of unspecified chronic medical condition requiring medication...and that somehow was a reason she wouldn't want to flee to the good ole USA (though I don't quite understand that rationale...)

[473geo]

Whatever her actual injuries were, I'd say two things are clear:

1. they weren't as serious as the van victims who had variously a broken collar bone and other similar stuff...

2. If I were her family, lawyer, PR adviser or anything similar, I would have advised her to stay in the hospital in the aftermath of the crash.. That also probably had the effect of temporarily keeping the police at bay, to some extent.

Plus, don't forget, according to the family, she has some kind of unspecified chronic medical condition requiring medication...and that somehow was a reason she wouldn't want to flee to the good ole USA (though I don't quite understand that rationale...)

You sure are a class act JFC........you tell people to stop with the water thing.......then immediately go off into the realms of fantasy regarding medical conditions where the information is not, and probably due to protective privacy laws, never will be fully disclosed.

[animatic]

You lot are a sad bunch. You all cry for justice, but are ready to pass your own judgement on this girl before she has been properly convicted.

And before you all get on your high horses about me defending her, I'm not..I'm quite happy for a court to decide whether she is guilty or not after reviewing all the facts and evidence (and not from reading newspaper reports like the wannabe judges on this forum)

Listen to yourselves almost baying for blood.. "lock her up, throw away the key" you say.. thank god you are not part of the legal system in any country.

This whole thing is a tragedy.. for all involved.

totster

:clap2:

Also agreed.

If justice gets done, as it eventually will in Thai fashion, then justice will be served.

I would not want to live in this girls head the rest of her days.

I see her as a likely eventual suicide in the fullness of time.

I have no qualms about the owner of the car to take a hit too for their culpability.

And the parents of the go between driver who allowed her to drive it.

All in all a sad business.

Edited January 8, 2011 by animatic

[jfchandler]

Thanks for the compliment... But there's really no "fantasy" here...

The injuries to the victims have been reported in the news media fairly specifically and extensively...

And, it was clear from the video and the photos of the girl at the police station the other day that nothing major was broken in the crash (she had no casts or splints and was walking unaided)... And re her "chronic" medical condition, that was publicly stated by her family in somehow explaining why she wouldn't be inclined to flee the country.

But my main point was, as I said, regardless of whatever her real injuries were and I agree we don't know other than what can be seen on the surface, I would have as her family, lawyer, PR consultant or whatever still advised her to stay in the hospital a while..no matter what... Under the circs, it probably was the best place she could be... better than home... better than jail... etc.

Whatever her actual injuries were, I'd say two things are clear:

1. they weren't as serious as the van victims who had variously a broken collar bone and other similar stuff...

2. If I were her family, lawyer, PR adviser or anything similar, I would have advised her to stay in the hospital in the aftermath of the crash.. That also probably had the effect of temporarily keeping the police at bay, to some extent.

Plus, don't forget, according to the family, she has some kind of unspecified chronic medical condition requiring medication...and that somehow was a reason she wouldn't want to flee to the good ole USA (though I don't quite understand that rationale...)

You sure are a class act JFC........you tell people to stop with the water thing.......then immediately go off into the realms of fantasy regarding medical conditions where the information is not, and probably due to protective privacy laws, never will be fully disclosed.

[jfchandler]

I don't agree about your "if justice gets done" comment. Often justice is NOT done in any fashion, Thai or otherwise... Justice SHOULD be done...

But that aside, I do agree about the girl and her future. She obviously did various things to put herself in that situation. She was a moving (active) party in the accident, unlike the passengers in the van.

But, if the same thing had happened to me as a teenager, I'm sure it would have messed up me, or anyone, pretty badly for the future -- apart from any legal consequences that may result.

If justice gets done, as it eventually will in Thai fashion, then justice will be served.

I would not want to live in this girls head the rest of her days.

I see her as a likely eventual suicide in the fullness of time.

I have no qualms about the owner of the car to take a hit too for their culpability.

And the parents of the go between driver who allowed her to drive it.

All in all a sad business.

[473geo]

You really should learn when to stop digging JFC...........I would suggest that there are many 'chronic medical conditions' that would would require a stay in hospital following a serious accident that could trigger a reaction. We do not, as far as I know, have any further detailed information on this condition......as I suggested we cannot therefore discuss without the discussion being pure speculation.

Any person who has suffered back and neck trauma will also almost certainly inform us that it is possible to become mobile, with pain, controlled by drugs, thus outwardly giving the impression that there is no injury.

[jfchandler]

Geo, I never said she didn't have the need to be in the hospital... or that she didn't sustain any injuries...

I just said, it certainly appears she ended up better off than the van victims, and for publicity/public relations reasons, the hospital in any event was a good place for her to stay.

Do you want to argue over that?

PS - I do know the type of injuries that can be sustained in car accidents, and only later manifest themselves. But now you're speculating about that in regards to her.

Edited January 8, 2011 by jfchandler

[473geo]

Geo, I never said she didn't have the need to be in the hospital... or that she didn't sustain any injuries...

I just said, it certainly appears she ended up better off than the van victims, and for publicity/public relations reasons, the hospital in any event was a good place for her to stay.

Do you want to argue over that?

PS - I do know the type of injuries that can be sustained in car accidents, and only later manifest themselves. But now you're speculating about that in regards to her.

If you accept she needed to be in hospital, I feel your comments about publicity and public relations could be construed by some as offensive, in my opinion.

[Nisa]

I never really looked too hard at the picture of the girl after the accident but when going back to read a news article I saw this picture again and it seems fairly apparent the back of her leg and possible knee are hurt along with scrapes on her arm. Again, not that any of this goes to responsibility for why this accident was so horrific or who holds the blame. Other than that it seems ridiculous to speculate she was doing ANYTHING wrong in this photo especially given reports she was following police instructions.

Edit: It also doesn't look like she was texting at the 1/30th of the second this photo takes place. Looks like she is scrolling or talking on speaker phone but again all irrelevant since the whole scandal about this photo was largely based on the bogus Twitter post she was supposed to have made. After that folks just seemed determined to find something wrong with using a phone after an accident ... especially if it might be a Blackberry.

Edited January 8, 2011 by Nisa

[animatic]

I don't agree about your "if justice gets done" comment. Often justice is NOT done in any fashion, Thai or otherwise... Justice SHOULD be done...

But that aside, I do agree about the girl and her future. She obviously did various things to put herself in that situation. She was a moving (active) party in the accident, unlike the passengers in the van.

But, if the same thing had happened to me as a teenager, I'm sure it would have messed up me, or anyone, pretty badly for the future -- apart from any legal consequences that may result.

If justice gets done, as it eventually will in Thai fashion, then justice will be served.

I would not want to live in this girls head the rest of her days.

I see her as a likely eventual suicide in the fullness of time.

I have no qualms about the owner of the car to take a hit too for their culpability.

And the parents of the go between driver who allowed her to drive it.

All in all a sad business.

Look justice happens slowly here. We all know that.

An example of "if" is, the young lady dies for some reason before justice is completed.

Don't construe "if" means it should not be completed.

The Thai's, hi and lo so, all are strong believers in ghosts, evil spirits and the like.

This girl is haunted in her own mind the rest of her days.

[neverdie]

^^looks bloody, poor little thing.

still, doesnt look as painful as some of the other injuries that were received by the poor unfortunate passengers in the van.

Edited January 8, 2011 by neverdie