Foreigner Assaulted At Bangkok BTS Station By Security Guard - Police Launch Investigation

[smedly]

a kids balloon is inflated with a flammable gas ??????? I thought they used Helium sometimes to make them float

[Gweiloman]

Newsweird said, And yes you do have the legal right to attack the guard when he keeps touching you and trying to steal from you when pitching an unwritten and non-posted policy different than other stations.

No you don't have that right. He is a security guard doing his job. If he says 'jump', you don't ask 'how high'. You jump and ask 'is this high enough'.

Whether a sign prohibiting balloons on the BTS is visible or not is irrelevant. The security guard says it's a violation so don't do it. Take it up with the authorities later, but don't take on the guard. That's madness as this guy found out. That the BTS management has apologized is no more than a bit of defusing going on.

Many a time have I shopped at TOPS Suk only to be stopped by security at Asoke BTS entrance for having a bottle of Shelltox or Baygon. What did they think I might do? Hold a mosquito hostage? Do I make a scene? No, I just cross the road overground instead of underground. No big deal is it?

[Gweiloman]

Newsweird said, And yes you do have the legal right to attack the guard when he keeps touching you and trying to steal from you when pitching an unwritten and non-posted policy different than other stations.

No you don't have that right. He is a security guard doing his job. If he says 'jump', you don't ask 'how high'. You jump and ask 'is this high enough'.

Whether a sign prohibiting balloons on the BTS is visible or not is irrelevant. The security guard says it's a violation so don't do it. Take it up with the authorities later, but don't take on the guard. That's madness as this guy found out. That the BTS management has apologized is no more than a bit of defusing going on.

Visible sign..what sign?Up till yesterday there wasn't and hasn't been any such sign at Phrom Phong BTS..fullstop!!

What a ridiculous argument. If there is a sign for every single prohibited item, all the walls would be plastered by these signs and it still won't be enough. Like another poster mentioned, there is no sign saying you can't piss on to the tracks. Does that mean it's allowed?

[Gweiloman]

It is so unfortunate the crappy handheld video that has become so famous now, does not come with a clear explanation that it only contains the events that occured after this man was smashed in the face with a metal detector. and before he was beaten again by a gang of guards upstairs by the train.

If I said "hey watch this video of how mad this guy gets after someone smashed him in the face" to a normal person. They would watch it and say. Well he looks mad, but mostly he looks like he is just trying to leave and they are stopping him. Or. they might say "I would be more mad than that."

But instead what is happening is people still assume the video shows the whole event or the evidence of the crime. It doesn't.

It is like watching a halftime show, and then commenting on the quality of the football game. It is a near perfect framejob and I fear that this guy might very well be in danger of losing his job and being seriously hurt. His crime: showing anger over poorly communicated and inconsistantly interpreted regulations, and protecting property that had special value to his 7 year old daughter on her graduation day.

Lynch mob mentality here. very sad indeed.

I take it that you saw the video where he was smashed in the face and subsequently beaten again by a gang of guards upstairs? If so, then why did he come back downstairs and out the barriers again?

[Gweiloman]

What is most disturbing in this entire sad episode, has I think, been entirely overlooked. As a parent, your duty is to protect and keep safe your child as a FIRST PRIORITY. At the first sign of trouble, being whacked with a metal detector, or whatever, the reasonable thing to do, for the protection and welfare of your child, is to retreat immediately to safety, discarding any and all other plans, including charging headlong into a situation where you have been warned not to go.

This is the single most irresponsible part of the story. Your child could be hurt in any melee. Retreat. Period.

????? Clearly you do not subscribe to the mama bear and her cub theory of defensive violence...... Mess with either one, and you get the claws.......I still think the guy showed restraint in not attacking the guard. If I was out with my daughter, and a Thai guy attacked me, my first thought would be that I MUST win, for the sake of my daughter. Grabbing up my daughter and running away like a rat would not be my first course of action....

Spoken like a ...... an animal?

[Gweiloman]

More prejudiced generalised claptrap. We have not seen the video,of the previous altercation, so we don't know what happened. Why must you rush to condemn without the facts? Indeed, being an Irishman, I mean "a guy like that", he was PROBABLY blind drunk and carrying a thermonuclear device in one of the balloons, and his daughter was REALLY a toxic world-dominating dwarf, and his friend, World Armwrestling Champion. There is no end to what one can imagine and speculate, if one is blind enough to overlook the fact that he was carrying some colored balloons, not ricin, not acetylene, not hydrogen, not anthrax, in fact it appears, nothing harmful at all. Btw, ricin can be carried and delivered without the use of balloons, so please don't pretend to know anything about it, and spout off as though you have even a faint inkling of the subject matter. Some of the comments here really make me wonder what paranoid imaginary realm your heads dwell in. Keep taking the medication. PLEASE.

Which part of the video that you saw don't you understand? The video shows very clearly that he was the aggressor. Even if he was "attacked" as alleged by some, does that justify what he subsequently did? If it was you, is this what you would have done? Or would you have shown your intelligence and education by nipping things in the bud and maybe calling the relevant authorities and maybe also one or two newspapers to report the attack?

[Gweiloman]

If that is what they were doing then they should not be commended as I made very clear in my post by using the word "if" but then again if they waited for backup to make sure they increased the odds of their safety and others involved in order to enforce the rules and prevent this violent behaving guy from boarding the train, this would be good training and something police officers do every day.

No matter how anyone wants to spin this, this guy was extremely wrong in his actions and should not have handled things the way he did (by his own admission) but it certainly doesn't excuse any wrong doing by security that we don't see on this particular tape.

The only person that stands out trying to blatently spin the whole event based on the small portion that the video shows is you, which is why you use the same negative language to describe the Irish guy and the same praising language every time you refer to the guard. Instead of saying the victim or the Irish guy it's always "the wreckless criminal and his criminal behaviour" reinforcing your opinion and judgement several times every sentance.

Also please stop making the same point again and again and again and again. You've made it several times every hour for the last two days, we get it. Please give it a rest.

Actually I don't think you get it. I commend Nisa for his patience to try and make some sense to you people. If you have been reading this thread from start to finish and think Nisa is the only poster believes the guy was wrong and the guards were right, that explains why you take the stance you are taking, EVEN after having seen the video.

[Nisa]

way over the top if you ask me, the guy was out with his daughter maybe at a kids function or something and she got some balloons made up, ever try taking away a kids balloons or the like - very distressing, whats with the balloon rule on the BTS anyway ? sounds rather stupid if you ask me, ok maybe at rush hour they may take up some room but in the middle of the day what's the problem, a little big of common sense might have resolved this issue

As explained it isn't anything to do with room on the train. It is about possible panic of people on trains and platforms next to train tracks located several stories up that popping balloons can cause ... this is probably the same reason (panic) they are banned on planes.

But the bottom line is that this issue is not about a rule but what ensued after somebody refusing to comply with the rules. One can question all the want about things like airport security if done appropriately but becoming enraged and kicking airport property because you didn't have to take off your belt last time through is certainly going to end badly .... right or wrong, this is reality.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Nisa

[TAWP]

Which part of the video that you saw don't you understand? The video shows very clearly that he was the aggressor.

No, it doesn't.

If a person is attacked the response doesn't indicate they are an aggressor - it is clearly an emotional response to the start of the conflict that occurred before the video recording started.

[p_brownstone]

Why have the BTS company come out and publically apologised (and even sent flowers) to the guy concerned ?

According to his wife's comments on a Video taken when the Irish teacher reported his complaint to the Thonglor Police Station the flowers were sent by a BTS representative only in recognition of the distress the situation caused to his family. She also clearly states that the Company has not, so far, accepted any responsibility for the incident.

I cannot find any confirmation that the BTS Company has apologised in any way but I am open to correction if you can provide a Link.

The Video also reports a statement from the BTS Guard that Behan was assaulted on the Platform by another passenger, not by him or any other Guard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXKHhqoYbWQ

Patrick

[Nisa]

Which part of the video that you saw don't you understand? The video shows very clearly that he was the aggressor.

No, it doesn't.

If a person is attacked the response doesn't indicate they are an aggressor - it is clearly an emotional response to the start of the conflict that occurred before the video recording started.

To be even more accurate his emotional and physical (kicking trash can) response started when he was told he couldn't bring the balloons onboard and not after he was hit with what amounts to a weapon.

And there is no way that one can honestly or be non-biased if they say at the time period captured in this video that the Irish guy is not the aggressor as during the tape he is under no threat and even on the other side of the barrier (when the tape starts) than the staff he attacks who are not posing any threat to when and after he enters the BTS against orders. If he ran down to the 711 and grabbed a knife and came back and stabbed the guard who hit him, he would still then become the aggressor ... this certainly is not to say there was not aggression that happened earlier but the law and society norms do not allow for revenge and only defending yourself ... if you enter an area you are legally bared from entering to attack other people and force your way onto a public transit with banned items (and have been told such) then it really is difficult to claim any kind of self defense or call it anything but being an aggressor ... at least during this part of the incident captured on the Youtube video.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Nisa

[Pseudolus]

In the video above he does not actually talk about what happened prior to the set-to we have all seen. Not prejudging but if things had happened as his wife hastily blogged, then with the news crews there, surely that was the time to say so. I was expecting him to say "i tried to get in, they said no, I tried to put my card in the slot when nik-nak the security guard smashed my eye socket to pieces" or something like that. But he didn't. He said "i'm not perfect and with the benefit of hind sight I would have acted differently". or words to those effect. Interesting perhaps?

[Reasonableman]

The video shows part, apparently the mid- to latter part, of the total exchange, can you simply acknowledge that? It is not the whole story. Both parties may have been at fault. he was bleeding and he was angry, clearly. We do NOT have all the facts. We can speculate whatever fancies our fertile imaginations, but we don't have all the facts. Nevertheless, the armchair TVF posse, like a pack of hungry hyenas, still won't be denied its kill. Why bother? To prove you are superior? Let the law take its course, and please discharge this kangaroo court for a mistrial.

More prejudiced generalised claptrap. We have not seen the video of the previous altercation, so we don't know what happened. Why must you rush to condemn without the facts? Indeed, being an Irishman, I mean "a guy like that", he was PROBABLY blind drunk and carrying a thermonuclear device in one of the balloons, and his daughter was REALLY a toxic world-dominating dwarf, and his friend, World Armwrestling Champion. There is no end to what one can imagine and speculate, if one is blind enough to overlook the fact that he was carrying some colored balloons, not ricin, not acetylene, not hydrogen, not anthrax, in fact it appears, nothing harmful at all. Btw, ricin can be carried and delivered without the use of balloons, so please don't pretend to know anything about it, and spout off as though you have even a faint inkling of the subject matter. Some of the comments here really make me wonder what paranoid imaginary realm your heads dwell in. Keep taking the medication. PLEASE.

Which part of the video that you saw don't you understand? The video shows very clearly that he was the aggressor. Even if he was "attacked" as alleged by some, does that justify what he subsequently did? If it was you, is this what you would have done? Or would you have shown your intelligence and education by nipping things in the bud and maybe calling the relevant authorities and maybe also one or two newspapers to report the attack?

[Pseudolus]

The video shows part, apparently the mid- to latter part, of the total exchange, can you simply acknowledge that? It is not the whole story. Both parties may have been at fault. he was bleeding and he was angry, clearly. We do NOT have all the facts. We can speculate whatever fancies our fertile imaginations, but we don't have all the facts. Nevertheless, the armchair TVF posse, like a pack of hungry hyenas, still won't be denied its kill. Why bother? To prove you are superior? Let the law take its course, and please discharge this kangaroo court for a mistrial.

I'm referring to his press conference outside the other kangaroo court (aka the police station). He had his chance right there and then to say what actually happened but he didn't. Why not? I would have if the actual facts were as stated by his wife in her blog

[Soutpeel]

I cannot find any confirmation that the BTS Company has apologised in any way but I am open to correction if you can provide a Link.

How about this head line from TV via the nation

"BANGKOK: -- Bangkok Mass Transit System (BTS), the operator of the Skytrain, yesterday apologised to a foreign passenger who claimed he was attacked by a security guard for breaching a rule banning gas-filled balloons on the rail system

[ShodomonRules]

In the west, an authority instructs you to do or not do something, you comply. If the authority was acting outside of his granted powers, you can file a complaint, perhaps get damages.

The guy said he didn't know it was against the rules to take balloons on the BTS. So what? The authority said no, you obey, not shove.

Problem is, the "authorities" here don't look anything like cops in the west. Look like easy pickings. Try shoving an LAPD uniform out of the way, or a NY Transit cop aside, and watch what happens. This guy should consider himself lucky. I seriously doubt he would have made the same moves "back home". And if he had, he'd have to come up with bail. The Thais let him walk away. He should be thankful.

[canuckamuck]

It is so unfortunate the crappy handheld video that has become so famous now, does not come with a clear explanation that it only contains the events that occured after this man was smashed in the face with a metal detector. and before he was beaten again by a gang of guards upstairs by the train.

If I said "hey watch this video of how mad this guy gets after someone smashed him in the face" to a normal person. They would watch it and say. Well he looks mad, but mostly he looks like he is just trying to leave and they are stopping him. Or. they might say "I would be more mad than that."

But instead what is happening is people still assume the video shows the whole event or the evidence of the crime. It doesn't.

It is like watching a halftime show, and then commenting on the quality of the football game. It is a near perfect framejob and I fear that this guy might very well be in danger of losing his job and being seriously hurt. His crime: showing anger over poorly communicated and inconsistantly interpreted regulations, and protecting property that had special value to his 7 year old daughter on her graduation day.

Lynch mob mentality here. very sad indeed.

I take it that you saw the video where he was smashed in the face and subsequently beaten again by a gang of guards upstairs? If so, then why did he come back downstairs and out the barriers again?

He did not come back down again, he left by train.

Here is how it went

-He arrived at station

-He was confronted by a guard and told he couldn't take all of the balloons on the train

-He was angry about that because had been allowed to do just that plus the ballons were his daughters property (faher's are protective)

-He showed his anger by kicking a trashcan

-He was then smashed in the face with a metal detector which blackened his eye and bled down his face.

-Now freaked out and full of adrenelain he makes for home, which for him is a couple of stations away by BTS

-Somewhere a video begins recording the famous shaky you tube video

-He desperatley fights his way through the turnstiles and tries to make for the stairs. At this time he has a few security guards trying to stop him, and he does lash out agressively.

-He finally makes it to the stairwell with the help of his friend and a female bystander

-The video stops recording

-At the platform he is surrounded by guards again and is punched and beaten over the head with a baton, receiving a second head injury.

-The train doors open and he and his party leave the station.

[p_brownstone]

I cannot find any confirmation that the BTS Company has apologised in any way but I am open to correction if you can provide a Link.

How about this head line from TV via the nation

"BANGKOK: -- Bangkok Mass Transit System (BTS), the operator of the Skytrain, yesterday apologised to a foreign passenger who claimed he was attacked by a security guard for breaching a rule banning gas-filled balloons on the rail system

As you say, it's a Headline.

That's all it is.

Where in that story is there a direct Quote from a Senior Official from the BTS Company officially, on behalf of the Company, apologising?

Find me an actual Link???

Patrick

[Reasonableman]

It really is pointless to speculate on why.

The video shows part, apparently the mid- to latter part, of the total exchange, can you simply acknowledge that? It is not the whole story. Both parties may have been at fault. he was bleeding and he was angry, clearly. We do NOT have all the facts. We can speculate whatever fancies our fertile imaginations, but we don't have all the facts. Nevertheless, the armchair TVF posse, like a pack of hungry hyenas, still won't be denied its kill. Why bother? To prove you are superior? Let the law take its course, and please discharge this kangaroo court for a mistrial.

I'm referring to his press conference outside the other kangaroo court (aka the police station). He had his chance right there and then to say what actually happened but he didn't. Why not? I would have if the actual facts were as stated by his wife in her blog

[Soutpeel]

I cannot find any confirmation that the BTS Company has apologised in any way but I am open to correction if you can provide a Link.

How about this head line from TV via the nation

"BANGKOK: -- Bangkok Mass Transit System (BTS), the operator of the Skytrain, yesterday apologised to a foreign passenger who claimed he was attacked by a security guard for breaching a rule banning gas-filled balloons on the rail system

As you say, it's a Headline.

That's all it is.

Where in that story is there a direct Quote from a Senior Official from the BTS Company officially, on behalf of the Company, apologising?

Find me an actual Link???

Patrick

So now your saying the Nation is lying ??...this thread is getting more and more bizarre

Would you like to speculate what the contents of the balloon were as well... Mustard Gas, Cyanide, acetylene...secret nerve agents perhaps...

Edited March 24, 2012 by Soutpeel

[TAWP]

To be even more accurate his emotional and physical (kicking trash can) response started when he was told he couldn't bring the balloons onboard and not after he was hit with what amounts to a weapon.

So now you accept 'unsubstantiated and unproven' allegations of events [before the camera started rolling]? I guess you do so since they come into line with your per-conceived notion of who is to blame.

My only position here is that wrongs has been done on both sides - but some posters here clearly have other agendas.

Edited March 24, 2012 by TAWP

[TAWP]

If this guy truly was a security threat then all security guards involved are incompetent and should be fired.

Or if he wasn't a threat there was no need for the harsh treatment.

You cannot have it both ways.

[p_brownstone]

So now your saying the Nation is lying ??...this thread is getting more and more bizarre

So all Headlines are by definition true?

As in one example Google "Dewey Wins".

Just give me a Link please - to the apology from the Thai BTS Company, not the Chicago Tribune of course.

Patrick

[Nisa]

To be even more accurate his emotional and physical (kicking trash can) response started when he was told he couldn't bring the balloons onboard and not after he was hit with what amounts to a weapon.

So now you accept 'unsubstantiated and unproven' allegations of events [before the camera started rolling]? I guess you do so since they come into line with your per-conceived notion of who is to blame.

When there are facts admitted by both sides they would appear to be substantiated. Unlike some posters here, the guys admits he did wrong while also adding he doesn't feel he justified what happened to him as a result.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Nisa

[Nisa]

If this guy truly was a security threat then all security guards involved are incompetent and should be fired.

Or if he wasn't a threat there was no need for the harsh treatment.

You cannot have it both ways.

I do believe it appropriate to consider anyone a security threat who is told they cannot enter with banned items but refuses to obey the rules and attempts to force their way onto a public transportation system all the way from the ticketing area to the boarding platform ... this alone should be considered a security threat without even getting into his other behavior. I cannot think of any major city where it would not be considered a security threat in this day and age.

[Nisa]

So now your saying the Nation is lying ??...this thread is getting more and more bizarre

So all Headlines are by definition true?

As in one example Google "Dewey Wins".

Just give me a Link please - to the apology from the Thai BTS Company, not the Chicago Tribune of course.

Patrick

I wouldn't say lying but clearly you cannot believe everything you read (aren't we all taught this?). Below is the first line in the OP from Tan Network which we all know to be false and in fact close to opposite of what this line in the report states.

BANGKOK: -- The Bangkok police is planning to question all parties involved in

a video clip posted on Youtube showing a foreigner assaulted by BTS security guards.

As for the apology, I believe a poster mentioned an interview where the wife said it wasn't an apology for any any wrong doing but an apology over their unhappiness or something like that. Check the last page or two and I believe the poster may have provided a link.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Nisa

[Reasonableman]

Which part do "we all know" is false, exactly?

[theblether]

At the end of the day it boils down to the Irishman saying..........." I was wrong, but it was wrong to beat me up twice ".

Sounds fair enough to me.

[TAWP]

To be even more accurate his emotional and physical (kicking trash can) response started when he was told he couldn't bring the balloons onboard and not after he was hit with what amounts to a weapon.

So now you accept 'unsubstantiated and unproven' allegations of events [before the camera started rolling]? I guess you do so since they come into line with your per-conceived notion of who is to blame.

When there are facts admitted by both sides they would appear to be substantiated. Unlike some posters here, the guys admits he did wrong while also adding he doesn't feel he justified what happened to him as a result.

I object to your shameful cropping of my posting and then pretending to state a new point, when you are basically stating part of what I said.

I wrote:

My only position here is that wrongs has been done on both sides - but some posters here clearly have other agendas.

That you removed it shows your 'honesty' in this debate. Please, if you can, refrain from doing it in the future.

[TAWP]

If this guy truly was a security threat then all security guards involved are incompetent and should be fired.

Or if he wasn't a threat there was no need for the harsh treatment.

You cannot have it both ways.

I do believe it appropriate to consider anyone a security threat who is told they cannot enter with banned items but refuses to obey the rules and attempts to force their way onto a public transportation system all the way from the ticketing area to the boarding platform ... this alone should be considered a security threat without even getting into his other behavior. I cannot think of any major city where it would not be considered a security threat in this day and age.

Which is my point - if the item is forbidden and he entered the train with it anyway, the guards clearly failed at their job.