73-Year-Old Woman Gets 3 Years, 4 Months For Electrocuting Thief

[necronx99]

Thailand does indeed have laws that stipulate appropriate force. If a robber comes in to your house and threatens you and your family you can shoot him. But as the police said to me, for Gods sake shoot to kill! If you shoot him running out your garden you are in big big trouble (so drag him back in said the police!!

It is unlikely a 73 year old woman knew of the lethality of the fence. I would think she was talking to one of her 'regulars' about protecting the drug and he said, I know someone that can put up electric fences....bingo. So something that done properly will set you back 80-100K for a 30m by 20m garden gets done for her for 3000 baht! It could be a tough old time in the clink for a 73 year old.

No you can’t. It`s not that simple.

If someone intrudes onto your land, either making threats or not and is unarmed and he is seriously hurt or killed from a weapon or devices set up on the land used by the landowner or anyone else on the property, than those responsible will be charged with GBH, attempted man slaughter or manslaughter if the intruder dies.

If an unarmed intruder invades a property, the resident is permitted to use reasonable force to restrain the intruder and can make a citizens arrest. If the intruder receives minor injuries during this procedure, than that too is not a criminal offence, providing the actions of the resident can be justified to the police and perhaps the court.

If an intruder is armed and breaks into a property then suffers injury or death from the person or people living there, that can be claimed as self-defence but the residents had better be able to prove it was self-defence.

It`s not so cut and dry as many of you may believe and also must take into consideration that those who hold firearms must be approved and licensed to use them, otherwise the user could still find themselves in serious trouble resulting with serious consequences.

Another point is that ignorance of a fact is no defence under the law, which means the old hag cannot make excuses for frying the alleged thief. Yes, surprise, surprise, these laws even pertain in Thailand.

If an intruder is in my house I won't be playing 20 questions or show and tell to find out if he is armed, crazy, high or a muay thai death ninja.

Once I have shot and killed said intruder, if I were to discover that he was not in fact armed, he certainly would be by the time BiB showed up.

[Beetlejuice]

Thailand does indeed have laws that stipulate appropriate force. If a robber comes in to your house and threatens you and your family you can shoot him. But as the police said to me, for Gods sake shoot to kill! If you shoot him running out your garden you are in big big trouble (so drag him back in said the police!!

It is unlikely a 73 year old woman knew of the lethality of the fence. I would think she was talking to one of her 'regulars' about protecting the drug and he said, I know someone that can put up electric fences....bingo. So something that done properly will set you back 80-100K for a 30m by 20m garden gets done for her for 3000 baht! It could be a tough old time in the clink for a 73 year old.

No you can’t. It`s not that simple.

If someone intrudes onto your land, either making threats or not and is unarmed and he is seriously hurt or killed from a weapon or devices set up on the land used by the landowner or anyone else on the property, than those responsible will be charged with GBH, attempted man slaughter or manslaughter if the intruder dies.

If an unarmed intruder invades a property, the resident is permitted to use reasonable force to restrain the intruder and can make a citizens arrest. If the intruder receives minor injuries during this procedure, than that too is not a criminal offence, providing the actions of the resident can be justified to the police and perhaps the court.

If an intruder is armed and breaks into a property then suffers injury or death from the person or people living there, that can be claimed as self-defence but the residents had better be able to prove it was self-defence.

It`s not so cut and dry as many of you may believe and also must take into consideration that those who hold firearms must be approved and licensed to use them, otherwise the user could still find themselves in serious trouble resulting with serious consequences.

Another point is that ignorance of a fact is no defence under the law, which means the old hag cannot make excuses for frying the alleged thief. Yes, surprise, surprise, these laws even pertain in Thailand.

If an intruder is in my house I won't be playing 20 questions or show and tell to find out if he is armed, crazy, high or a muay thai death ninja.

Once I have shot and killed said intruder, if I were to discover that he was not in fact armed, he certainly would be by the time BiB showed up.

All I`ve explained is the law, not my opinions.

How anyone wishes to play the game is up to they`re discretion.

Talk is easy and if faced with a real life situation the reality maybe completely different.

Edited March 27, 2012 by Beetlejuice

[maidu]

In Thailand, the law is often subjective. a certain son of a deputy PM comes to mind - allegedly shot a cop and witnessed by a crowd of Thai onlookers, not one of whom had the courage to tell the truth about it.

[gamini]

In Australia where my house was robbed three times in two years that I lived there. (I have never had my house robbed in Thailand) I put some barbed wire up and was told it was illegal and that if a potential robber got scracthed by it he could sue me!! So I reckon that if the someone electrocuted a robber in Oz they would get life, so I think the woman got off lightly.

[orosee]

I have very little respect for those that doesn't know the difference between 'mine' and 'yours'.

Imaginary scenarios with kids and footballs are the escapes of the lazy.

Well the life she took was "his".

Is it true that her son used to work as a security guard on BTS*? There'd be a pattern of excessive use of force/lethal means then.

* no, of course it's a baseless allegation and unrelated to this topic

[udonguy]

i have no sympathy for anyone robbing someone getting 'hurt' or indeed 'dying' - don't do it! simple

[sparebox2]

In Thailand, the law is often subjective. a certain son of a deputy PM comes to mind - allegedly shot a cop and witnessed by a crowd of Thai onlookers, not one of whom had the courage to tell the truth about it.

In Thailand, the law is often subjective?

Go ask Thaksin about it. He is knowledgable enough to be able to right a phd thesis.

The only man in Thailand to pay tax on stock gain.

[udonguy]

In Thailand, the law is often subjective. a certain son of a deputy PM comes to mind - allegedly shot a cop and witnessed by a crowd of Thai onlookers, not one of whom had the courage to tell the truth about it.

In Thailand, the law is often subjective?

Go ask Thaksin about it. He is knowledgable enough to be able to right a phd thesis.

The only man in Thailand to pay tax on stock gain.

not just Thaksin to be fair - the whole of Thai culture is built on hedonism and graft and its no point blaming your favourite 'hate figure' it's endemic in Thai society and the law IS subjective compared to the west where presidents can be brought down, IMF leaders can be brought down and there IS FREE SPEACH

[VocalNeal]

If I put up a electric grid on my yard, well within the boundaries of the land so no-one innocent could touch it, had a nice sign warning for it - why would I feel guilt if a burglar got fried from touching it?

I didn't force him to commit a crime and I didn't force him to touch the defense-grid.

So what language or languages would you post the sign in?

The sign should of course be in Thai. With the appropriate international symbol for and electrified fence. Adding a high voltage lightning bolt does hurt.

As for innocent children with footballs etc. A well designed electric security fence will not allow anyone to "accidentally" touch it and should they be unfortunate enough to do so, by ignoring the signs, obstacles and such then they would not willingly touch it twice.

As for the law on killing people with 220v it is somewhat ambiguous and hinges on the intent of the charged and to some extent the value of what you are trying to protect. Is the intent to protect valuables or to harm people. I wouldn't take the risk of electrifying wire with 220v. Prisons do but.....

[moe666]

As usual lots of talk from the tuff guys here about how they would do it. usually the talkers do nothing.

[technologybytes]

Seems to me a rather a light sentence for premeditated murder, is the sentence too lenient? that is the unspoken question, or am I missing something?

This seems to be overlooked in most comments about this case. The sentence was WAY TOO LOW for murder.

Remember, the court that had all the facts in the case (we presume) decided that she was guilty, so regardless of how we feel about the electrocuted guy, thief or whatever, the court decided she murdered him and then gave her a very low sentence for that offence, especially as she was also in the drugs business.

If she was in the UK and found guilty of murder she would get life, totally regardless of any other circumstances. I'm sure it's just as bad in the USA, unless it seems you are in Florida and the victim is a black teenager.

[chrisinth]

Thailand does indeed have laws that stipulate appropriate force. If a robber comes in to your house and threatens you and your family you can shoot him. But as the police said to me, for Gods sake shoot to kill! If you shoot him running out your garden you are in big big trouble (so drag him back in said the police!!

It is unlikely a 73 year old woman knew of the lethality of the fence. I would think she was talking to one of her 'regulars' about protecting the drug and he said, I know someone that can put up electric fences....bingo. So something that done properly will set you back 80-100K for a 30m by 20m garden gets done for her for 3000 baht! It could be a tough old time in the clink for a 73 year old.

No you can’t. It`s not that simple.

If someone intrudes onto your land, either making threats or not and is unarmed and he is seriously hurt or killed from a weapon or devices set up on the land used by the landowner or anyone else on the property, than those responsible will be charged with GBH, attempted man slaughter or manslaughter if the intruder dies.

If an unarmed intruder invades a property, the resident is permitted to use reasonable force to restrain the intruder and can make a citizens arrest. If the intruder receives minor injuries during this procedure, than that too is not a criminal offence, providing the actions of the resident can be justified to the police and perhaps the court.

If an intruder is armed and breaks into a property then suffers injury or death from the person or people living there, that can be claimed as self-defence but the residents had better be able to prove it was self-defence.

It`s not so cut and dry as many of you may believe and also must take into consideration that those who hold firearms must be approved and licensed to use them, otherwise the user could still find themselves in serious trouble resulting with serious consequences.

Another point is that ignorance of a fact is no defence under the law, which means the old hag cannot make excuses for frying the alleged thief. Yes, surprise, surprise, these laws even pertain in Thailand.

If an intruder is in my house I won't be playing 20 questions or show and tell to find out if he is armed, crazy, high or a muay thai death ninja.

Once I have shot and killed said intruder, if I were to discover that he was not in fact armed, he certainly would be by the time BiB showed up.

Lets not forget that she was 73 years old. Maybe her eyesight wasn't that good, maybe she had a bit of a tremble in her hands.

Hooking up the fence to the mains was another option, maybe.

Looks like her memory was OK as well as she didn't zap herself.

[phiphidon]

If I put up a electric grid on my yard, well within the boundaries of the land so no-one innocent could touch it, had a nice sign warning for it - why would I feel guilt if a burglar got fried from touching it?

I didn't force him to commit a crime and I didn't force him to touch the defense-grid.

So no one is innocent who is on your land? A child kicks a football into your garden, climbs over the fence to get it and.......Meanwhile you are safely tucked up with your paranoia and proud of the fact that you will defend your plot to the death, as long as it is someone elses.

Yet you are happy to defend your illegal protest with military weapons and random grenade attacks?

I'll ignore your obvious baiting save for one thing - the mindset displayed is similar to that portrayed by some on this forum wrt to the events of 2010 - that property is more important than people.

[brit1984]

I am surprised they didn't use the "murder" conviction as a good excuse to lock this drug-dealer up for life (or execute her)... but it is quite likely (at her age) she will die in a Thai prison and, if she makes it out, it is very likely she will die in a revenge attack shortly afterwards... unless the hit-man gets electrocuted on the way in... that would make for an interesting sequel to this story

[silsburyhill]

Your home is your castle and you should be allowed to protect it. I can't see what she done wrong. What if she had a gun and shot him, would that be premeditated murder as well?

Karma's a bitch. He done wrong and got punished. I hate people that steel. Get a bloody job like the rest of us.

Sorry, having a bad day.

Seems as though her kratom biz didn't provide her with enough money to pay off the police or the prosecutor. Plenty of wealthier thieves walking around here free.

[maidu]

If she was a Red Shirt operative, Thaksin and the PT party would pay her bail and get her off. If I was her lawyer, that's what I would shoot for - getting the judge to believe she was a dyed in the wool Red Shirt.

[udonguy]

If she was a Red Shirt operative, Thaksin and the PT party would pay her bail and get her off. If I was her lawyer, that's what I would shoot for - getting the judge to believe she was a dyed in the wool Red Shirt.

do you REALLY have to introduce this? its irrelevant and nothing to do with the subject just your opinion about the ELECTED party