Babcock Posted May 25, 2012 Author Share Posted May 25, 2012 I've just found out that the Benz driver reported to the police not on Sunday morning but on Monday morning 28 hours after the accident. He argued with the police which was witnessed. I suggest that you ask the mods to remove your thread because it is clearly that you are making a fool of yourself the more you post on this topic. And if you'd bothered to read all the way through my post you'd see that 4 people were run over by another car which didn't stop. So 2 drivers fled the scene. A tragic affair. That's why it's on Channel 3. And who was the primary cause of all this?By the way the reason of my post was that you seem to not know the real story and are just posting and changing the facts at a fast pace. I was told 140km and I wrote I thought that was about 100 mph. Anyways your point that he maybe only had a few drinks and maybe wasn't the cause of the accident does not excuse him to flee the scene. Maybe it does in Thailand if you're a hiso. He left in a petulant frenzy. Swearing at the injured people in the car he wanted a new mercedes from them. I'm told in UK there are people who deliberately cause accidents to claim for a new car. I stated 100 mph I thought that was 140 km. 140 km was the speed quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I've just found out that the Benz driver reported to the police not on Sunday morning but on Monday morning 28 hours after the accident. He argued with the police which was witnessed. I suggest that you ask the mods to remove your thread because it is clearly that you are making a fool of yourself the more you post on this topic. And if you'd bothered to read all the way through my post you'd see that 4 people were run over by another car which didn't stop. So 2 drivers fled the scene. A tragic affair. That's why it's on Channel 3. And who was the primary cause of all this? I am confused because it says the people helping pulled over and parked to the left of the accident and it says the accident happened in the express lane (furthest right lane) which means they must have been blocking 2 lanes of traffic and leaving 1 open. Even at 5 in the morning there is traffic and I would assume this had to have caused a traffic jam of some sort. So, how does the Mini Cooper run over 4 people who I assume were all standing in the roadway and not in their car? I am just don't get it because I am picturing bumper to bumper traffic squeezing through the 1 open lane as drivers gawk at the accident. Even if there was no traffic, how do 4 people not see this car barreling down on them ... where they all standing in the one open lane with their backs turned to on coming traffic and nobody there directing or watching traffic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babcock Posted May 25, 2012 Author Share Posted May 25, 2012 I've just found out that the Benz driver reported to the police not on Sunday morning but on Monday morning 28 hours after the accident. He argued with the police which was witnessed. I suggest that you ask the mods to remove your thread because it is clearly that you are making a fool of yourself the more you post on this topic. And if you'd bothered to read all the way through my post you'd see that 4 people were run over by another car which didn't stop. So 2 drivers fled the scene. A tragic affair. That's why it's on Channel 3. Is it on Channel 3 news now or was it on last week when this happened? I am confused why this is being posted now. It's been on recently. The TV anchor with glasses was talking about it. I'm afraid I don't watch too much thai TV. Need to learn the language still. As this tragedy has unfolded with hospital vigils etc I thought I should post as I have a connection with it and there has been much talk about accidents on the expressways at night recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipo1000 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I stated 100 mph I thought that was 140 km. 140 km was the speed quoted. And which is the speed limit on Rama 9 bridge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babcock Posted May 25, 2012 Author Share Posted May 25, 2012 Nisa said: "I am confused because it says the people helping pulled over and parked to the left of the accident and it says the accident happened in the express lane (furthest right lane) which means they must have been blocking 2 lanes of traffic and leaving 1 open. Even at 5 in the morning there is traffic and I would assume this had to have caused a traffic jam of some sort. So, how does the Mini Cooper run over 4 people who I assume were all standing in the roadway and not in their car? I am just don't get it because I am picturing bumper to bumper traffic squeezing through the 1 open lane as drivers gawk at the accident. Even if there was no traffic, how do 4 people not see this car barreling down on them ... where they all standing in the one open lane with their backs turned to on coming traffic and nobody there directing or watching traffic?" It was 5 in the morning on Sunday. We don't know where they parked. The best thing would have been to park behind the crashed cars. Sorayud the TV anchor on channel 3 reported about it yesterday evening I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipo1000 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Is it on Channel 3 news now or was it on last week when this happened? I am confused why this is being posted now. It's been on recently. The TV anchor with glasses was talking about it. I'm afraid I don't watch too much thai TV. Need to learn the language still. As this tragedy has unfolded with hospital vigils etc I thought I should post as I have a connection with it and there has been much talk about accidents on the expressways at night recently. You don't need to understand Thai to remember when you saw it on channel 3, that is if you saw it at all of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Nisa said:"I am confused because it says the people helping pulled over and parked to the left of the accident and it says the accident happened in the express lane (furthest right lane) which means they must have been blocking 2 lanes of traffic and leaving 1 open. Even at 5 in the morning there is traffic and I would assume this had to have caused a traffic jam of some sort. So, how does the Mini Cooper run over 4 people who I assume were all standing in the roadway and not in their car? I am just don't get it because I am picturing bumper to bumper traffic squeezing through the 1 open lane as drivers gawk at the accident. Even if there was no traffic, how do 4 people not see this car barreling down on them ... where they all standing in the one open lane with their backs turned to on coming traffic and nobody there directing or watching traffic?" It was 5 in the morning on Sunday. We don't know where they parked. The best thing would have been to park behind the crashed cars. Sorayud the TV anchor on channel 3 reported about it yesterday evening I believe. In the OP you explained where they parked. Is there a link to anything online to this accident that is "the talk of the town" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vtjforyou Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Vehicle that hits another from behind is always in the wrong therefore your nephews friend is in the wrong and should cover damages to the Mercedes (was the Merc driver charged with drink drinking), lets hope he/she is adequately insured. the injured passengers should also be covered by insurance. You're not in the wrong If the car in front suddenly brakes or swerves and you hit it from behind. They were doing about 140 kph so judging from the photos I'd suggest there was a big speed difference. no the merc driver was not breathalysed. No-one was. It should be for a court to decide blame. They may now know who the mini driver was but they are afraid he'll disappear (or advised to) if too much is revealed. You are wrong, this i'm sure :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 From personal experience, if you flee the scene of an accident, the law automatically presumes you are the guilty party. ................ My situation; a ten wheel truck swiped me as I was changing lanes, so I was more in the wrong than the other party. The truck fled the scene, I chased him down and made him pull over, and called the police and my insurance guy. The truck driver called his company and their insurance guy. Both the police and the insurance guys said that irrespective of who called the accident, the blame now rests on the driver who fled the scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I have removed some posts. Try to discuss/debate without resorting to childish argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Yes, he did return but 4hrs later. If he came back right away with help then it probably wasn't a hit and run. Hit and run being that the merc driver was the one hit by the bozo doing 100mph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Perhaps he ran as everybody is thinking.....not hit and run as usual...but he cut in front, on purpose or not...and caused the accident...and was drunk.....he knew it and ran like a girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Perhaps he ran as everybody is thinking.....not hit and run as usual...but he cut in front, on purpose or not...and caused the accident...and was drunk.....he knew it and ran like a girl. Any proof he was drunk or just 3rd hand heresay by the OP ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Perhaps he ran as everybody is thinking.....not hit and run as usual...but he cut in front, on purpose or not...and caused the accident...and was drunk.....he knew it and ran like a girl. Any proof he was drunk or just 3rd hand heresay by the OP ? Why did he run then ?? ......guilty is as guilty does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartempion Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Lets see,mercedes driver has had a few alcoholic drinks,someone speed devil who is driving way over the speed limit comes from behind and crashes into his car. If you drink, don't drive, a basic rule many can't come to grips with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Perhaps he ran as everybody is thinking.....not hit and run as usual...but he cut in front, on purpose or not...and caused the accident...and was drunk.....he knew it and ran like a girl. Any proof he was drunk or just 3rd hand heresay by the OP ? Why did he run then ?? ......guilty is as guilty does. Maybe he had to go do a shit, who knows why he ran but act off is not an admission of being drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Perhaps he ran as everybody is thinking.....not hit and run as usual...but he cut in front, on purpose or not...and caused the accident...and was drunk.....he knew it and ran like a girl. Any proof he was drunk or just 3rd hand heresay by the OP ? Why did he run then ?? ......guilty is as guilty does. Maybe he had to go do a shit, who knows why he ran but act off is not an admission of being drunk. Strange how you try to protect a runner from an accident that was said to be drunk. Perhaps you would be the sort to do same same seeing as you seem to support the action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Strange how you try to protect a runner from an accident that was said to be drunk. Perhaps you would be the sort to do same same seeing as you seem to support the action. Even stranger how you are the judge, jury and hangman condemning this person with only 3rd hand hersay to base you conclusion on. An no, If I was the merc driver I would not have ran in this instance as Iam not in the wrong but we all do questionable things when in a distressed state of mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Yes....Somchai the truck driver or Somchai the merc driver...same same....just more comfy driver seat. You do not run from the scene of an accident if not guilty....simple....and considering reports.....eyewitness....of him being drunk....then you dun have to be a rocket scientist....oh and you would have been in the wrong if it had been you...cos you were drunk. Guess what....my brother was killed by a drunk driver.....guess what the drunk driver did....he ran away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Yes....Somchai the truck driver or Somchai the merc driver...same same....just more comfy driver seat. You do not run from the scene of an accident if not guilty....simple....and considering reports.....eyewitness....of him being drunk....then you dun have to be a rocket scientist....oh and you would have been in the wrong if it had been you...cos you were drunk. Guess what....my brother was killed by a drunk driver.....guess what the drunk driver did....he ran away. Ran or Staggered ? Sorry to hear about your brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Yes....Somchai the truck driver or Somchai the merc driver...same same....just more comfy driver seat. You do not run from the scene of an accident if not guilty....simple....and considering reports.....eyewitness....of him being drunk....then you dun have to be a rocket scientist....oh and you would have been in the wrong if it had been you...cos you were drunk. Guess what....my brother was killed by a drunk driver.....guess what the drunk driver did....he ran away. Ran or Staggered ? Sorry to hear about your brother. Drove actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCFC Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 As soon as I read the title I knew that this thread would be an attempt at slagging off an alleged hiso. And it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphlsasser Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Vehicle that hits another from behind is always in the wrong therefore your nephews friend is in the wrong and should cover damages to the Mercedes (was the Merc driver charged with drink drinking), lets hope he/she is adequately insured. the injured passengers should also be covered by insurance. You're not in the wrong If the car in front suddenly brakes or swerves and you hit it from behind. They were doing about 140 kph so judging from the photos I'd suggest there was a big speed difference. no the merc driver was not breathalysed. No-one was. It should be for a court to decide blame. They may now know who the mini driver was but they are afraid he'll disappear (or advised to) if too much is revealed. No where in Thailand has a safe speed posted at 140 klm per hour. Speeding. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaigold Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 (edited) This is Thailand, not California. However, the concept of Contributory Negligence is a concept in the Thai legal codes. It might be applied here. Edited May 26, 2012 by thaigold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theyreallrubbish Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Just a thought, but if confronted by a car full of people and you're on your own you might decide discretion is the better part of valor. I'm sure the OPs relatives are lovely people, but we can't know how they reacted and they did outnumber the Merc driver and shootings and other acts of violence over traffic accidents aren't exactly unknown. Also, the bottom line is that they hit him from behind. There has to be really clear evidence of extraordinary bad driving by the person in front for it not to be the driver behind's fault, and no evidence has been presented, in this thread at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babcock Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 As soon as I read the title I knew that this thread would be an attempt at slagging off an alleged hiso. And it was. LATEST NEWS Mini Cooper has been found by the police in a garage being repaired. Inside the police found the boys student ID card and they also found bullets. The car is registered to his 80 year old grandmother. They are chinese thai who own a lot of gold shops. One of the 4 victims who were run over remembered his car registration number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babcock Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 Just a thought, but if confronted by a car full of people and you're on your own you might decide discretion is the better part of valor. I'm sure the OPs relatives are lovely people, but we can't know how they reacted and they did outnumber the Merc driver and shootings and other acts of violence over traffic accidents aren't exactly unknown. Also, the bottom line is that they hit him from behind. There has to be really clear evidence of extraordinary bad driving by the person in front for it not to be the driver behind's fault, and no evidence has been presented, in this thread at least. Apparently the CCTV camera that views the road it rotates and actually missed the accident but obviously came back and recorded the aftermath. It was very dark and the pictures are not very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murf Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 If you run from an accident, regardless of fault, you must be considered guilty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 If you run from an accident, regardless of fault, you must be considered guilty. among other things... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonman Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 If you run from an accident, regardless of fault, you must be considered guilty. Yeah maybe back home but not here, I don't there is even a penalty here for leaving/fleeing the scene of an accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now