Road Rage In Bangkok Ends In Fatal Stabbing

[DumFarang]

Here's a newer definition for the younger crowd.

Cold Blooded

a person/persons who is considered wrong for an action they committed

Man, what you did to that ole girl is cold blooded.

To show blaten disrespect for another.

After his mother took me out for a nice steak dinner, I layed that ----- over the table and ------ her.... Cold blooded

Straight from the urban dictionary.

Cold-blooded or premeditated or other, he was carrying a knife (small, concealed, double-edge type used for close combat). He got out of his car. Note that the person who was murdered did not get out of his car (I think that is an important point). He walked over to the other car (and had time to consider his actions) and attacked the man who was sitting inside his car. He could have yelled at him and walked away or punched him, but he DECIDED to kill him. In my country he would either be on death row or in prison for life. Personally, I do not care what a person twice my age did or said, I would never assault him (unless he was trying to kill me). Some of you might find this interesting:

In Cold Blood is a 1966 book by American author Truman Capote detailing the brutal 1959 murders of Herbert Clutter, a wealthy farmer from Holcomb, Kansas, his wife and two of their children. The oldest daughters no longer lived at the farm. When Capote learned of the quadruple murder before the killers were captured, he decided to travel to Kansas and write about the crime. He was accompanied by his childhood friend and fellow author Harper Lee, and together they interviewed local residents and investigators assigned to the case and took thousands of pages of notes. The killers, Richard "Dick" Hickock and Perry Smith, were arrested not long after the murders, and Capote ultimately spent six years working on the book.

The recreation of events is inaccurate:

"A guy stepped out and despite my protest, my dad got out too. They quarrelled and fought. When my dad came back, he was holding his neck and was bleeding. He lost consciousness a short time later," Chatchawas said.

They did both get out and have some sort of altercation. The lack of details also make any presumptions, at best, only guesses because there's not enough information in the article to say that the man with the knife wasn't defending himself, or that he didn't just start stabbing the poor old guy in a fit of rage.

[DumFarang]

Hard to understand why a 63 yr. old man gets out of the car and has a fight with a man half his age, and at the cost of his life. R.I.P. It is sad.

[SteeleJoe]

Here's a newer definition for the younger crowd.

Cold Blooded

a person/persons who is considered wrong for an action they committed

Man, what you did to that ole girl is cold blooded.

To show blaten disrespect for another.

After his mother took me out for a nice steak dinner, I layed that ----- over the table and ------ her.... Cold blooded

Straight from the urban dictionary.

Cold-blooded or premeditated or other, he was carrying a knife (small, concealed, double-edge type used for close combat). He got out of his car. Note that the person who was murdered did not get out of his car (I think that is an important point). He walked over to the other car (and had time to consider his actions) and attacked the man who was sitting inside his car. He could have yelled at him and walked away or punched him, but he DECIDED to kill him. In my country he would either be on death row or in prison for life. Personally, I do not care what a person twice my age did or said, I would never assault him (unless he was trying to kill me). Some of you might find this interesting:

In Cold Blood is a 1966 book by American author Truman Capote detailing the brutal 1959 murders of Herbert Clutter, a wealthy farmer from Holcomb, Kansas, his wife and two of their children. The oldest daughters no longer lived at the farm. When Capote learned of the quadruple murder before the killers were captured, he decided to travel to Kansas and write about the crime. He was accompanied by his childhood friend and fellow author Harper Lee, and together they interviewed local residents and investigators assigned to the case and took thousands of pages of notes. The killers, Richard "Dick" Hickock and Perry Smith, were arrested not long after the murders, and Capote ultimately spent six years working on the book.

The refernce to that book is pretty off-topic but I can't resist...

In Cold Blood is one of my favorite books of all time. Read it as a boy (yeah, I was kind of a wired kid I guess), as a young adult, and again not long ago. The period that Capote is writing it, and Capote's resultant relationship with the killers, is what makes up a large portion of the very fine film Capote. The book In Cold Blood was also made into quite a good multi-oscar nominated film of the same name in 1967 (this movie, like the book, did not feature Capote -- it is the story he told in his book, in which he his never mentioned directly).

A footnote: one of the killers in the latter film was played by actor Robert Blake -- who had been a famous child actor and later a very successful TV star. In 2004 Robert Blake was acquitted in a criminal trial but convicted in a civil trial...of shooting his wife in the head -- in cold blood.

[SteeleJoe]

Slightly off topic, how can this guy now get a fair trial having been paraded on television, with the normal assortment of goons getting getting in the photo-shoot, explaining his actions to the assembled media.

Arrested suspects in Thailand typically are taken to a scene of the crime and made to reenact their crime in front of the press and onlookers.

But I suppose the argument is, they confessed and Thailand doesn't have jury trials anyway so...leave it to the always fair and infallible judges to sort out completely objectively.

[random]

Hard to understand why a 63 yr. old man gets out of the car and has a fight with a man half his age, and at the cost of his life. R.I.P. It is sad.

there was a collision, the old guy was cut up, he chased the other guy, this resulted in a collision. the front of his car was badly damaged, I guess they need to get out of the car anyway, but in this case they got out because they wanted to argue/fight, pair of morons squabbling over bad driving.

to be fair to the murderer (and I am not condoning what he did in any way) he was rammed from behind by the older guy. ( unless he braked hard causing the collission)

[DumFarang]

Hard to understand why a 63 yr. old man gets out of the car and has a fight with a man half his age, and at the cost of his life. R.I.P. It is sad.

there was a collision, the old guy was cut up, he chased the other guy, this resulted in a collision. the front of his car was badly damaged, I guess they need to get out of the car anyway, but in this case they got out because they wanted to argue/fight, pair of morons squabbling over bad driving.

to be fair to the murderer (and I am not condoning what he did in any way) he was rammed from behind by the older guy. ( unless he braked hard causing the collission)

That's true. Road rage is our primordial, territorial beast at its best/worst unleashed I guess. There's hardly another explanation or excuse needed really.

Someone said in some another post that the Thai Buudhist way and how Thai people really act sometimes are shockingly at odds. I guess this is a good example, especially in regards to a younger man killing a significantly older one.

I thought one of the most telling things in the article was when the younger man was quoted as saying something to the effect of, "I was just so angry, and he spoke rudely to me." All I could think was, "so you killed him?"

[hellodolly]

Well, it would certainly make more sense than calling a man who killed someone in a fit of road rage cold blooded.

Fact is, the guy totally lost it and in a rage, killed another man over what is essentially a very stupid thing. Its terrible and sad and I feel awful for the old man's family.

It was not cold blooded, it was not pre-meditated and I know that most courts take that into consideration when sentencing and also when considering bail.

Sorry if facts offend or if some people wrongly assume that its condoning the action. That is your own read of it and has nothing to do with what is essentially a recitation of fact. Please do not ascribe to me opinions I have not made.

not pre-meditated? tell me please why did he have a knife in his vechicle ? perhaps to clean his nails ? perhaps to pick his teeth ?

Since you seem unaware of the meaning of premeditated: characterized by fully conscious willful intent and a measure of forethought and planning

Are you suggesting he knew that someone was going to cut him off, he would end up in a rage and then stab this guy?

I know people who carry pocket knives with no intention to murder anyone.

Again, do not confuse explanations with apologies. It is most annoying to be willfully misconstrued.

yes i am suggesting he had intention. why else would any rationally minded person carry a knife in his car.

Under state of mind (i), intent to kill, the deadly weapon rule applies. Thus, if the defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon or instrument against the victim, such use authorizes a permissive inference of intent to kill. Examples of deadly weapons and instruments include but are not limited to guns, knives, deadly toxins or chemicals or gases and even vehicles when intentionally used to harm a victim. I also am aware of the law as regards carrying a deadly weapon and it is as stated previously. accept the to and fro of intelligent conversation and debate and try not to be condescending when you do so. a lot of people on tv are a lot smarter than you.

So according to your logic a martial arts expert who has hands that are deadly is planning on killing some one when ever he or she gets in a car.

you claim

"a lot of people on tv are a lot smarter than you"

But not many as Naive as you.

I thought maybe I would capitalize your word a being as it is the start of a sentence. But what the heck why try to make sense out of your argument.

Edited July 21, 2011 by hellodolly

[Awohalitsiktoli]

Cold-blooded or premeditated or other, he was carrying a knife (small, concealed, double-edge type used for close combat).

Where does it say that the alleged perpetrator was carrying a knife of the type you describe? I thought it was a pen knife, of course it's still wrong to draw and use it whatever type of knife it was.

Note that the person who was murdered did not get out of his car (I think that is an important point). He walked over to the other car (and had time to consider his actions) and attacked the man who was sitting inside his car.

That's not what the report says, The Nation quotes the victims son as saying that his dad did get out of the car.

A guy stepped out and despite my protest, my dad got out too. They quarrelled and fought. When my dad came back, he was holding his neck and was bleeding. He lost consciousness a short time later," Chatchawas said.

There is a lot of speculation as to whether it was premeditated or not, I wasn't there so I don't know but I doubt it very much. Maybe the guy who lost his life lunged at the perp so he is going to claim self defence, again I don't know I wasn't there. I don't though if there are levels of murder in Thailand, similar to that in the UK or maybe there is a possibility of a charge of manslaughter, if that's on the statue in Thailand, if so that might explain why he was bailed.

Certainly the red mist came down during this tragic incident, but I doubt very much if the guy got out of his car with the sole intention of killing the other driver.

Slightly off topic, how can this guy now get a fair trial having been paraded on television, with the normal assortment of goons getting getting in the photo-shoot, explaining his actions to the assembled media.

A video was posted (link to it) which I watched. You can see the knife "jacket" and tell what kind of knife was used. You can see the dead main inside his car (I assume he did not get out and then get back in or was placed in the car). Maybe he got out and then got back in and died.....not sure now. Still.....cold blooded murder.

[hehehoho]

When the murderer got out of the car to confront the man in his 60s he took the knife with him, yes?

Doesn't sound like a defensive nor instantaneous fit rage if so.

He carried a knife with him in his vehicle or on his person.

Upon getting out to meet a 60 yr old man he took this knife with him.

He then stabbed him to death with a number of neck/head shots.

This doesn't sound like a murderer who should be released on any sort of bail conditions, and the crime does not appear to have happened simply due to a 'fit of rage'.

[Steely Dan]

So according to your logic a martial arts expert who has hands that are deadly is planning on killing some one when ever he or she gets in a car.

you claim

"a lot of people on tv are a lot smarter than you"

But not many as Naive as you.

I thought maybe I would capitalize your word a being as it is the start of a sentence. But what the heck why try to make sense out of your argument.

This comparison does not stack up, a martial arts expert cannot but take his potentially lethal weapons with him. I did know of a guy who was a martial arts expert who went out looking for trouble and in that case premeditation was in my view present. Living in a rural area it is common to see motorcyclists with knives in holsters used for their every day work, in metropolitan Bangkok I can think of few jobs, except perhaps concerning food preparation which would require a large knife for every day use. True a small craft knife may be plausible, especially one which can open bottles, indeed some have so many attachments that by the time you find the blade the red mist would have possibly sunsided.

In summary I think the nature of the murder weapon contributes greatly to how the case should be dealt with - a sharpened Samurai sword should be treated exactly the same as premeditated murder in my oppinion.

[theoldgit]

A video was posted (link to it) which I watched. You can see the knife "jacket" and tell what kind of knife was used.

Hence my post yesterday

In my last post I meant to apologise to 'Awohalitsiktoli' I wasn't doubting you over the type of knife, I hadn't seen the tv shot of the knife and there were earlier comments about pocket-knives - sorry about that.

[random]

A video was posted (link to it) which I watched. You can see the knife "jacket" and tell what kind of knife was used. You can see the dead main inside his car (I assume he did not get out and then get back in or was placed in the car). Maybe he got out and then got back in and died.....not sure now. Still.....cold blooded murder.

the report says he walked back to his car holding his neck, so i guess he went back and collapsed into the car or sat in the car then slumped.

[DumFarang]

So according to your logic a martial arts expert who has hands that are deadly is planning on killing some one when ever he or she gets in a car.

you claim

"a lot of people on tv are a lot smarter than you"

But not many as Naive as you.

I thought maybe I would capitalize your word a being as it is the start of a sentence. But what the heck why try to make sense out of your argument.

This comparison does not stack up, a martial arts expert cannot but take his potentially lethal weapons with him. I did know of a guy who was a martial arts expert who went out looking for trouble and in that case premeditation was in my view present. Living in a rural area it is common to see motorcyclists with knives in holsters used for their every day work, in metropolitan Bangkok I can think of few jobs, except perhaps concerning food preparation which would require a large knife for every day use. True a small craft knife may be plausible, especially one which can open bottles, indeed some have so many attachments that by the time you find the blade the red mist would have possibly sunsided.

In summary I think the nature of the murder weapon contributes greatly to how the case should be dealt with - a sharpened Samurai sword should be treated exactly the same as premeditated murder in my oppinion.

I don't think the logic of the type of weapon determining premeditated or not makes sense, even if it were a sharpened Scottish Claymore. One problem I have with it, amongst others, is that it implies that a much smaller handheld knife wouldn't be premeditated based solely on the fact that it's less lethal. To me, anyone feel free to set me straight here, premeditated murder refers to a decision made by a person prior to murder, a decision to kill.

What difference does it make if they succeed with a pen knife, a machete, or a gun? The issue in a court of law won't change based on the weapon from the decision of: did the killer think about doing it prior to the murder or not? Was it a situation where they had time to decide to back away or move forward with murderous intent?

I think as far as the weapon is concerned charges can be added on if a person uses an illegal weapon, which a sharpened sword kept in a car probably would be in most countries. But, it shouldn't have any bearing on the premeditated decision unless a person sets up a guillotine or something and gets someone's head in it somehow and...now that would be ridiculously premeditated I guess.

Another thing I can think of that works with something like road rage is an instance where a person aggressively uses their car to force another car to pull over, gets out with a weapon, and commits murder. Even in this case, though, the weapon just fits into the whole story of premeditation starting with them using their car to instigate a fight and then following through with murder, so it still doesn't come down to the type of weapon in my mind.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

A video was posted (link to it) which I watched. You can see the knife "jacket" and tell what kind of knife was used.

Hence my post yesterday

In my last post I meant to apologise to 'Awohalitsiktoli' I wasn't doubting you over the type of knife, I hadn't seen the tv shot of the knife and there were earlier comments about pocket-knives - sorry about that.

Hi, no apology necessary. The knife jacket that was shown in the video was for a short "two-sided-close-combat-assault" knife that can be easily concealed. It is certainly not for hunting or skinning potatoes. I have seen them sold on Khao San road and in Pattaya. I was talking with several expats today (beer Friday ) We agreed that this simply was not happening 10-15 years ago. But that is another thread.

[TAWP]

You can see the dead main inside his car (I assume he did not get out and then get back in /../).

His son said he did exactly that. Maybe you should read the news-article.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

That has already been established.....maybe you should read earlier threads.

[californiabeachboy]

Hard to understand why a 63 yr. old man gets out of the car and has a fight with a man half his age, and at the cost of his life. R.I.P. It is sad.

there was a collision, the old guy was cut up, he chased the other guy, this resulted in a collision. the front of his car was badly damaged, I guess they need to get out of the car anyway, but in this case they got out because they wanted to argue/fight, pair of morons squabbling over bad driving.

to be fair to the murderer (and I am not condoning what he did in any way) he was rammed from behind by the older guy. ( unless he braked hard causing the collission)

That's true. Road rage is our primordial, territorial beast at its best/worst unleashed I guess. There's hardly another explanation or excuse needed really.

Someone said in some another post that the Thai Buudhist way and how Thai people really act sometimes are shockingly at odds. I guess this is a good example, especially in regards to a younger man killing a significantly older one.

I thought one of the most telling things in the article was when the younger man was quoted as saying something to the effect of, "I was just so angry, and he spoke rudely to me." All I could think was, "so you killed him?"

I read a good article a few years ago by a psychologist who looked at the behavior of people in road rage incidents. He said that many people who are involved in a traffic dispute revert to the emotional maturity of a two year old. If you have ever watched a two year old throw a tantrum - extreme over-reaction, throwing things, screaming etc. - I think the comparison is somewhat accurate. Of course a two year old cannot do any real damage. Unfortunately, in this case we had a couple of two year olds in adult bodies, so damage was done, and there was no parent there to provide control and discipline.

[DumFarang]

I read a good article a few years ago by a psychologist who looked at the behavior of people in road rage incidents. He said that many people who are involved in a traffic dispute revert to the emotional maturity of a two year old. If you have ever watched a two year old throw a tantrum - extreme over-reaction, throwing things, screaming etc. - I think the comparison is somewhat accurate. Of course a two year old cannot do any real damage. Unfortunately, in this case we had a couple of two year olds in adult bodies, so damage was done, and there was no parent there to provide control and discipline.

Yeah, it is just the most peculiar thing when you try to reason it out logically. Can you imagine if the same thing happened when people are walking in a city and one person stepped in front of another and this type of maniacal rage incident occurred? We're all guilty. I've gotten quite angry while driving as well. The only thing I can even begin to attribute it too is that the elevated threat of danger just triggers an explosion. I guess sometimes we feel like somebody cut us off and we could have died. Well documented rage incident ensues. Madness.

[TAWP]

That has already been established.....maybe you should read earlier threads.

Ah, you state a mis-truth after not reading the news articles and then complain that a poster isn't the first one to correct you?

[Awohalitsiktoli]

That has already been established.....maybe you should read earlier threads.

Ah, you state a mis-truth after not reading the news articles and then complain that a poster isn't the first one to correct you?

As stated, this has already been established (already corrected long ago). You do not need to continue to point that out over and over again. If you have nothing constructive to say, move on.