Norwegian Man, Thai Woman Killed In Chon Buri Road Accident

[Nigel1500]

So your point is that sex with a 6-year old is okay? I can't see any other reason for making this statement unless you are trying to prove that the law in England may be wrong when you are using this law to justify your opinion that sex with somebody under 18 is okay.

It appears that you have fatally misinterpreted my point. My point is this, and please let me make it clear.

I support the legal age of consent to sex, smoking and gambling to be at the age of 16. I also support giving children in schools as young as 7 years old, sharp metal scissors and support things like abortion and secular thinking.

If we give a good education, and rely on the persons common sense and give them some credibility, instead of treating young girls like they are brain dead magnets to foreign men, who are teen and therefore incapable of making rational decisions, then we can take an objective view on cases like this.

Children who are given scissors with the taught responsibility are less likely or wont cause themselves or others harm, and giving women control over their own bodies and giving them rights goes somewhat to supporting them in the face of societies like you lot.

You take my words and twist them, no, I am explicitly NOT condoning sex with a 6 year old girl. That is disgusting, and a biological, as well as criminal violation. At the age of 13 the human body may be ready for intercourse but I don't think it is appropriate. 16 however, is something I support.

My link was to say to you, if you want age of consent to complain about, go and find a muslim forum board who say its ok to have sex with a girl, in the words of mohammeds sex life for example, when she (aisha) turned 9 years old.

What people forget is that if you say 18 should be the legal age for sex then explain to me the different between 17 years of age with one hour to turn 18, or 1 hour and 5 minutes after. What miraculous change does the body go through in that time?

Back on topic in reply to Kananga:

I would appreciate the references to these quotes you have taken from whatever source you got them. Mapping consent age is very difficult and not in such a scientific context, rather depending instead on the social and cultural norms of the country in question.

I would propose this, if two 16 year olds had sex, then you wouldnt kick up a fuss about it. If a 16 year old and a 60 year old had sex however, you suddenly consign it to the pits, ridiculously and wrongly deeming the behaviour as 'paedophilia' or any other such perversion.

This is a fallacious argument:

Children who are given scissors with the taught responsibility are less likely or wont cause themselves or others harm, and giving women control over their own bodies and giving them rights goes somewhat to supporting them in the face of societies like you lot.

Thai people are often poorly educated and impoverished. Responsibility?! Taught in Thailand?! I would refute your argument on the basis of the scissors alone. I know of no kindergartens that present their charges with full scissors like those used by a tailor, etc. They are usually plastic/safety-enhanced and are very small, for the exact reason that they CANNOT be trusted to use such objects responsibly. I expect that next you'll be suggesting that twelve-year-olds should be able to drive cars if they are "taught responsibility"; even though every statistic known to man suggests that when you drop the driving age, accidents attributed to young people sky-rocket.

Thanks for your support. The victimisation of Thai girls has got to stop. No wonder farang are out of flavour. Making the change starts with us.

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

Yes you said it right! "Approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age." ...... She was not there yet she was still a child!

Agreed. And I'm tired of dirty old men taking advantage of children. They would be in jail back in their homeland.

[ttelise]

As there is no conclusive proof of anything I think you should keep your comments to yourself out of respect for the dead. Your arguments are just pure innuendo and to have the cheek that your version is MORE THAN LIKELY correct because you say so is just rubbish.

True there isn't, yet. But in life we often have to make a judgement based on experience and observation. And that would suggest that the article is likely correct. It is very sad they died, weren't wearing helmets, that the possibility of alcohol was involved (and again is likely to be involved). If it turns out to be completely the opposite, I can admit I was wrong. Guilty, needs to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

My point is that if we take the newspaper report and photos etc, you can see the girl is not in school uniform but a very short pink mindress and if alcohol was involved then she has been passing herself off as 18+ (which apparently the bars had no problem with) so it may be possible the man didn't know she was underage. Also it's the newspaper or police calling her a 'girlfriend' which is just normal practice but doesn't mean it's the truth. As they say 'you can't believe what you read in the newspapers' they will print anything to sell their rag.

Whateva, I am sure a bunch of sicko whackadoodles claim I though she was 18. That it why it is a strict liability crime in US and matters not how old you thought the child you were findeking is/was.

I gave 16 and 17 year old daughters and they and all if their friends are and look like children. Only some pedophile pervert grown man could be or would be attracted to this age group. Trying defend is actions just makes you guys sound like a bunch of pervs trying to justify in your mind your own sickness. Just because old sick dudes go to Thailand for this type of stuff and the police turn the other way does not make it right. Actually makes it worse.

A 52 year old man has no business being out with a girl that just turned 16 at 4:30 in the morning and dude knew she was young or underage. The girl's parents should arrested or just beat down if they allowed her to be out and at bars at that time in the morning. This is just wrong on so many levels.

As adults, we have a duty to protect children not take advantage of them particularly when they have been placed in compromising situations by society, their parents or just their bad judgment.

Edited August 15, 2012 by ttelise

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Perhaps the girl, like many others here, was from an impoverished background, and like many, was in Pattaya to escape that poverty. There are older farangs here who are only to happy to enter innapropriate relationships with girls young enough to be their grandaughter. Even if she was with him by her own consent it doesn't mean that the majority shouldn't find these relationships distasteful.

And "by her own consent" might be a decision borne out of duty and responsibility to family. How often do we hear farang complain about their wives wanting to send money home. Thank God in my situation it is the other way around. These young girls aren't in love. They don't write these old grandpa's little love letters, send cards, or demand their "husband" share the Ipod headphones so that they can listen to the same love song together, arm in arm. They aren't in love ... they're in bed !!!

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Once again I must go back to your post of your claiming it legal in some countries to have sex (marry) with 6-year olds. Based on your using the law to defend a 50+ year old having sex with a child who just turns 16, I must again assume you believe it okay to have sex with 6-year olds if the laws in that country allow it.

Or how about ... You have repeatedly stated your preference for 16-year olds being old enough because they can conceive. Do you not see any problem with a 50+ year old having sex with an 11 year old who has reached puberty or how about a 9-year old as long as there is no law against it?

Thankyou Nisa ... I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

No, his assertion that an equitable relationship is impossible considering both the cultural and age gap is dead on. It's also guaranteed to be "just" the "opinion" of nearly everyone on the planet, as it's just common sense that that kind of age differential would preclude a meaningful relationship on all fronts and in nearly all situations. If you want to pretend that fifty-year-olds dating seventeen-year-olds is normal, then that's your prerogative; nevertheless, I guarantee you would be contradicted socially and legally in nearly every developed country in the world. Your argument sounds more like a justification for the way you choose to live in Thailand. Good for you for being so open about your pedophilia issues.

You are so correct Unkomoncents. I wish I had thought of that myself. I might even suggest a several mental tests to help people understand:

1. Swap the genders: ie: 55 y. o. woman dating a 16 y. o. boy ... seems a bit wrong? Geez ... I wonder why???

2. Ask them what they'd buy each other for their aniversary .... surprise surprise, neither has any idea !!!

3. Watch them at a restaurant: she plays facebook on her phone while he nurses a beer and pervs at other girls

I've seen it all before !!!!

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

You've got no idea. This is child exploitation, sexual abuse and mental torture. She was a child. The law relating to legal age was expecting teens and young adults to interact with each other, not to be raped by dirty old scoundrels old enough to be their grandfathers.

[Nigel1500]

We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

And very prevalent here. Where YOU been?

Prevalence doesn't make it right. It isn't Thailand. It isn't Thai culture. It happens throughout S E Asia, South and Central America, Africa and Eastern Europe. The recipe is the same: dirty old pedophiles with money preying on poor children.

[Nigel1500]

Since the topic has changed to age gaps Rupert Murdoch and his young wife Wendi almost 40 years age gap they had a kid a couple of years ago no one seemed to bother about the age gap or that he was a grandfather already, you are only as old as the thing you are feeling so Rod Stewart says.

I will just stick with my old Thai wife for a few years yet only 22years age gap

As far as I know, nobody is saying there is something wrong with age difference (haven't read the latest posts) when both are adults as with Rupert marrying a 30-year old women. However there can be no denying there would be a huge scandal if he was screwing around with a child under 18 let alone one that turned 16 less than a month ago.

Exactly. Well said Nisa.

[transam]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

You've got no idea. This is child exploitation, sexual abuse and mental torture. She was a child. The law relating to legal age was expecting teens and young adults to interact with each other, not to be raped by dirty old scoundrels old enough to be their grandfathers.

My ex UK wife was sixteen and l was 32 when we met. We were together for 25 years, married for 20. What do you think to that. ? There was a similar age difference with Charles and Diana. What do you think of that ?.

[Nigel1500]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

I find it disconcerting that you are a teacher placed in a position of trust with young children who are not mature enough to form consent to sexual relations with old nasty sick men. A 52 year old even looking at a 16 year old sexually and wanting that 16 year old is wired wrong and a danger to society.

Agreed. This kind of behaviour needs to be reported to the Police.

[Nigel1500]

Thai people are often poorly educated and impoverished. Responsibility?! Taught in Thailand?! I would refute your argument on the basis of the scissors alone. I know of no kindergartens that present their charges with full scissors like those used by a tailor, etc. They are usually plastic/safety-enhanced and are very small, for the exact reason that they CANNOT be trusted to use such objects responsibly. I expect that next you'll be suggesting that twelve-year-olds should be able to drive cars if they are "taught responsibility"; even though every statistic known to man suggests that when you drop the driving age, accidents attributed to young people sky-rocket.

I said I would give metal, sharp scissors to 7 year olds, not kindergarteners. Also I said I would give it as well as teaching responsibility, don't misquote me or quote out of context.

Once again I must go back to your post of your claiming it legal in some countries to have sex (marry) with 6-year olds. Based on your using the law to defend a 50+ year old having sex with a child who just turns 16, I must again assume you believe it okay to have sex with 6-year olds if the laws in that country allow it. Or how about ... You have repeatedly stated your preference for 16-year olds being old enough because they can conceive. Do you not see any problem with a 50+ year old having sex with an 11 year old who has reached puberty or how about a 9-year old as long as there is no law against it?

Again another misconstrued point. I have 'repeatedly stated my preference for 16 year olds (note this non connection) being 'old enough because they can conceive'? What do you mean my preference that 16 year olds are 'old enough'? How can I prefer that someone is old enough? It is my opinion that biologically girls are ready to conceive at a lower age, but my opinion is, and note this, explicitly nowhere under the age of 16 for a girl to have sex. Now, girls can have sex and run no more health risks than the usual, disease and HIV etc.

The only real danger is children under 15 carrying babies, which is way off my point. For you to be trying to connect me to saying having sex at 6 or 9 is ok, is insanity. I told you to 'go and complain about people like muslims doing the shocking things that are paedophilia related, like having sex with children'. I condemn that as evil because, as I reiterate, girls of 6 and 9 are no where ready for such things, they are only children and way too young for that.

I wonder what kind of depravity that you hide in your incessant pushing that I am a paedophile or have those kinds of thoughts. I don't usually do this but, to get rid of any of your illusions, I am 27 and like girls around my age. I havent and wouldnt have sex with 13 or 15 year old girls. I also wouldnt go 16 here because the laws of this country are different, but my countrys law is 16. You trying to make it look like this mans defense is to justify my own wants is absurd. It proves you cannot take an objective view without trying to vilify it and paint it like some paedophile support post.

Do you realise what you've just said? Seriously? The only real danger is children under 15 carrying babies? So, you think it's ok to have sex with them as long as you don't get them pregnant ... and you WOULD have sex with them if the law in your own country permitted it .... you disgust me !!!

[Fozfromoz]

My glass ball is not working as well as you guys is this morning. Why do you think he was having a sexual relationship. It maybe yet that it was his daughter. I have nothing at all to talk about with a 16 year old and its likely he did not either. The guy is dead not 24 hours and already hes a pervert and pedophile.

Whats next in the glass ball --he had just robbed a bank as well.

(Witnesses nearby said he was speeding and was drunk) so there are people standing on this 2 lane fly over 30 feet in the air with no pavement at 4 am that can spot a drunk on a motorcycle. This is a start of a highway to Bangkok -- it leaves the center of Sukumvit Rd and joins the highway to Bangkok,-- no one walks there.

Facts would make a more interesting conversation .

If I may make a slight addition to your post. Some of the armchair experts here had him fingered as an alcoholic pedophile loser farang just here to take everything from Thailand as a tourist, before the ice wagon reached the morgue. All of it, some of it, or none of it may be true, but anyone would think only one personae died. Not many gave a toss about the guy.

Good post. Some of the comments from the moralisers and judgmental members on this board have been disgraceful, seeing as they are completely ignorant of the facts.

I'm not sure people don't care about the guy but it seems very clear based on the facts reported that he was the driver and he was responsible for the crash that resulted in not only his death but the death of a child. Had he survived and only the girl died, there is no question he would be charged criminally for her death. So, while it is sad that anyone loses their life, including those who take the life of others, it is a pretty normal practice to focus on the death of the person they are responsible for killing especially when a child.

But I really didn't need to explain this did I?

But you took it upon yourself to do so, and responded only in part. My reference was to some of the postings that vilified this guy on many counts earlier.

Geez, the whole thing now has gone so far off the rails with everyone's opinions as to what's an acceptable age difference, whos a pedo and whos not, I reckon the handbrake needs to be pulled on.

It seems clear on the facts he was the driver yes. By virtue of the fact that he was in charge of a motor vehicle that had an accident that resulted in 2 deaths yes. Unless I have missed something not much more than that. The initial OP and some others didn't say a great deal, and the Pattaya link said that the Cops speculated speeding appeared to be the cause, may have been other factors, and are investigating (or similar). Eyewitnesses said he appeared to be drunk. I guess the police are the people with the "facts", but looking here, there's a lot of bush lawyers.

[BirdsandBooze]

It's not "age discrimination" it's abuse. The man is old enough to be her grandfather. An equitable relationship is impossible. The intelectual boundaries insurmountable. Her father was probably young enough to be his son. We scoff when a rich westerner marries a young model but 17 is a child. In bed with grandpa is no place to be. It is sick and it is disgusting.

First of all it IS age discrimination. The age means nothing, as long as it is within the law and consented.

Your assertion that an 'equitable' (fair or reasonable) relationship is impossible is nothing more than your own opinion and has absolutely nothing to justify itself. Insurmountable intellectual boundaries? Oh now come on, your deciding that a girl of 16 cannot be intellectually equal with an adult of 20, 40 or even 80 is a shocking insult towards human development and capability. You have nothing to support these outrageous remarks other than your charged disrespect of this mans relationship.

It is disgusting when you try to reduce this to an innocent young lady who fell victim to an evil old grandpa who just wants to take advantage of her.

She was with him through her own consent.

Imagine this analogy. I go and take a gun and murder someone. Do I blame the gun maker, the store owner or even the gun itself?

No, I can attribute the severity of my crime, at least somewhat to the availability and ease of access that I have to firearms, but in the end it was me who chose to take it and let loose.

The girl has an old man but has infinite free choice of whether or not to get on the bike , or even be with the old man in the first place. Unless she was held against her will and forced on to the bike, she has a natural amount of blame on her shoulders.

Also, if I may be as brave as to reassert a point of an above poster, sixTEEN or sevenTEEN are teen aged young adults, approaching the western definition of what an 'adult' is, pertaining to age.

You've got no idea. This is child exploitation, sexual abuse and mental torture. She was a child. The law relating to legal age was expecting teens and young adults to interact with each other, not to be raped by dirty old scoundrels old enough to be their grandfathers.

My ex UK wife was sixteen and l was 32 when we met. We were together for 25 years, married for 20. What do you think to that. ? There was a similar age difference with Charles and Diana. What do you think of that ?.

That there is a big difference between a 32 year old man with16 year old girl and a 52 year old man with a sixteen year old girl. Diana was a 20 year old WOMAN when she married Charles. What a bizarre comparison to make.

[thongsuknork]

I think we should not discuss further let we all respect the dead its over both of them rest in peace it is an accident no one wants to die with a girl behind his bike

[HereIAm]

Everything in your last statement is vastly different to the complexities of an intimate relationship sexual or not between someone that 99% of people would consider as a child and someone more than triple their age. There is no comparison at all. You need to think of better examples. Citing some individual counties that have some very bizarre laws does not represent that vast majority of countries that don't think that way.

Law's that consider individuals as children until 18 are made from what society has deemed reasonable, based on our life expectancy, education etc etc. Are we forgetting that these laws are there to protect minors, children who are often very easily influenced? It's not that one person is empowered, it's that as a society, on a whole people feel that it is appropriate, to determine a basis of age where the young need to have some level of protection, as other's have said, often from themselves, because they just don't completely understand cause, effect and the responsibility associated with it.

You could also use your argument that we should allow adults to engage in relationships with children, how old, 16? 14? where is the line drawn, all because a very small minority wants to. 18 is a reasonable age, based on the society we live in, developmental rate etc.

As I said, there is no reason someone can make, that can justify knowingly (and ignorance is not an excuse) being with a minor (someone under 18). None, and this will never ever change.

My analogies were meant to show that unless reforms take place different societies would remain stuck in outdated laws and mores that do progressively more harm to their people since other societies progress, the world keeps going forward while the unfortunate children in retarded societies get more frustrated leading to social unrest that often has a global impact. Is that not exploitation of children and adults by the lawkeepers who refuse to change with times ?

Doubtlessly there was solid common ground for fixing 21 as the age of adulthood, 18 as the age of majority in most countries. The fact that different countries have followed different yardsticks while stipulating the age for sexual consent tells us that they have updated their laws to take into account advances made in education, health and communication and information technology, among others, thereby keeping their laws more realistic, more practical, more down to earth. At the same time, regions where these modern advances have been barred by obscurantist governments, religious leaders and the orthodoxy, remain stuck in a time warp and, as we can see, suffer colossal social unrest today.

What has that got to do with sex ? Make no mistake, sex is at the root of it all. People repressed sexually by their repressive societies are more violent, more destructive. Need I give examples ? Cast your mind round the world and see for yourself.

Around the world today, information, knowledge and understanding is spreading at a fast pace, aided by communication technology which has dramatically boosted education in many more ways than is apparent to those looking only at formal education in schools and universities. In remote villages in poor countries -- I know this -- young people with access to internet and the mobile phone are experiencing the joys of an infinite horizon that has suddenly opened up out of the darkness. With that has come sexual awakening and exploration. My point is, the 16 year old girl or boy of today is far, far, far more sexually active today than their peers 10 years back. It is unrealistic therefore to pretend that these kids are sweet sixteens like of yore. No sireee ! They know about sex, they have been there done that and continue to indulge in it. Now if lawmakers continue to stick to 18 as the age of sexual consent then all these 16 year old kids having sex will have to be put in jail if they get reported. Is that what society wants ? Is that what responsible parents want ?

I hope I have answered your point about "Law's that consider individuals as children until 18 are made from what society has deemed reasonable, based on our life expectancy, education etc etc. Are we forgetting that these laws are there to protect minors, children who are often very easily influenced? "

This is not a subject that can be well debated by moralists and holier-than-thou puritans (not referring to you).

Edited August 15, 2012 by HereIAm

[PoodMaiDai]

It's a crying shame that he had to take somebody with him but otherwise natural selection at work once again.

Considering the bodies were already dead on the ground when they were found, how do we know she wasn't driving him around?

[PoodMaiDai]

As adults, we have a duty to protect children not take advantage of them particularly when they have been placed in compromising situations by society, their parents or just their bad judgment.

No one cares about the countless underage girls working in the bars and karaoke bars in Pattaya until one of them gets killed. Then suddenly the children need to be protected.

[Nisa]

No one cares about the countless underage girls working in the bars and karaoke bars in Pattaya until one of them gets killed. Then suddenly the children need to be protected.

That is like saying nobody cares about kids riding bicycles until one them gets killed. I don't think it is at all common let alone all people (opposite no one) saying they don't care about underage girls working (assume you mean prostitutes) in bars when the topic comes up here. I think it is very unfair to state what others think especially when it goes against the vast majority of posters opinions who have shared their thoughts on the subject.

However, there are definitely a few, in the minority, who seem to want to find a way to blame the child even if it goes against logic. An example may be below ...

Considering the bodies were already dead on the ground when they were found, how do we know she wasn't driving him around?

Witnesses, accident investigation and all news reports. Right in the 3 short paragraph OP it states ...

Witnesses told police that the tourist appeared drunk and was speeding up the motorcycle. He lost control and crashed into an edge of the bridge, causing his body and the pillion rider woman to be hurled down from the bridge.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Nisa

[hellodolly]

RIP to the woman ,as for the stupid drunk tourist

how do you know the tourist was stupid??????

Surely riding a bike drunk with a pillion passenger at 4.30am quailifies him as being stupid .....

Condolences to both the families relatives. As for the girl being 17 and him 52 and drunk you have to wonder what kind of a life she had ahead of her and behind her.

You say

"Surely riding a bike drunk with a pillion passenger at 4.30am quailifies him as being stupid"

Would he be smart doing it at 4:30 in the afternoon?

[Nisa]

You've got no idea. This is child exploitation, sexual abuse and mental torture. She was a child. The law relating to legal age was expecting teens and young adults to interact with each other, not to be raped by dirty old scoundrels old enough to be their grandfathers.

My ex UK wife was sixteen and l was 32 when we met. We were together for 25 years, married for 20. What do you think to that. ? There was a similar age difference with Charles and Diana. What do you think of that ?.

That there is a big difference between a 32 year old man with16 year old girl and a 52 year old man with a sixteen year old girl. Diana was a 20 year old WOMAN when she married Charles. What a bizarre comparison to make.

Since the poster asked but doesn't clarify his "meeting" his future bride at 16 while he was 32, I can only respond to the the question he poses of, "What do you think to that? " by saying IF he was 32 and having sex with a 16-year old then I think he needs some therapy as he has some mental health issues. IF for some reason this was an incredibly mature girl and he was lacking maturity of a normal 32-year old and some circumstances, other than his being a person of trust to this child, brought these two together and they really fell in love and they waited until she was out of highschool, lived her life like a normal kid and became a legal adult then great and more power to them.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Nisa

[COXYATCITY]

r.i.p. sorry its 2.am for me to late to go back through all the pages,can anyone tell me if it has been confirmed that he was drunk,she was a bar girl,and he was having sex with her for sure on these 3 points,because some of the posts have disgusting,before true facts have come out,both victims have families ,some of you calm down with you accusations and show some respect somewhere .r.i.p

[Nisa]

r.i.p. sorry its 2.am for me to late to go back through all the pages,can anyone tell me if it has been confirmed that he was drunk,she was a bar girl,and he was having sex with her for sure on these 3 points,because some of the posts have disgusting,before true facts have come out,both victims have families ,some of you calm down with you accusations and show some respect somewhere .r.i.p

I don't think we are going to read reports about their sexual life together or if she was a working girl. Besides, some people will deny or make claims despite facts stating the opposite. As for drunk, I don't think there will be any further potential confirmation of this since it has been reported so many times he was and my guess is the police would be able to smell the booze at the scene and probably know where they were coming from. Unless some strange twists to the story comes out or there is an interesting development, I would guess the story is over ... just another account of unnecessary road death and example of a person who should have been protecting a kid and instead put them in a position of risk.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Nisa

[TommyDee]

My glass ball is not working as well as you guys is this morning. Why do you think he was having a sexual relationship. It maybe yet that it was his daughter. I have nothing at all to talk about with a 16 year old and its likely he did not either. The guy is dead not 24 hours and already hes a pervert and pedophile.

Whats next in the glass ball --he had just robbed a bank as well.

(Witnesses nearby said he was speeding and was drunk) so there are people standing on this 2 lane fly over 30 feet in the air with no pavement at 4 am that can spot a drunk on a motorcycle. This is a start of a highway to Bangkok -- it leaves the center of Sukumvit Rd and joins the highway to Bangkok,-- no one walks there.

Facts would make a more interesting conversation .

If I may make a slight addition to your post. Some of the armchair experts here had him fingered as an alcoholic pedophile loser farang just here to take everything from Thailand as a tourist, before the ice wagon reached the morgue. All of it, some of it, or none of it may be true, but anyone would think only one personae died. Not many gave a toss about the guy.

Good post. Some of the comments from the moralisers and judgmental members on this board have been disgraceful, seeing as they are completely ignorant of the facts.

I'm not sure people don't care about the guy but it seems very clear based on the facts reported that he was the driver and he was responsible for the crash that resulted in not only his death but the death of a child. Had he survived and only the girl died, there is no question he would be charged criminally for her death. So, while it is sad that anyone loses their life, including those who take the life of others, it is a pretty normal practice to focus on the death of the person they are responsible for killing especially when a child.

But I really didn't need to explain this did I?

I am just wondering why you think it is clear that he was even the driver not the passenger? I am not saying that he is not.. but equally, if you are basing your supppostion on a newspaper reporter's guess then thats not necessarily factual.

Just suppose.. and no one knows otherwise.. this story had been written like this..."

Grandfather killed in bike accident in pattaya

57 yr old XXX was the passenger on his step daughters Motorbike which crashed at 4.30 in the monring when she had gone to collect him from the bus station. On a notoriously wet surface area, where numerous accidents have happened in the past, the 16 year old is thought to have lost control resulting in.... etc etc.

Obviously i read the reports that came in and there is no proof that he was driving ( relased anyway) and no proof that she was his rental for the night ( released anyway). I agree.. no crash helmets in pics and am sure more will come out of this.. what? neither I nor anyone else knows right now.

[brewsterbudgen]

As adults, we have a duty to protect children not take advantage of them particularly when they have been placed in compromising situations by society, their parents or just their bad judgment.

No one cares about the countless underage girls working in the bars and karaoke bars in Pattaya until one of them gets killed. Then suddenly the children need to be protected.

Do you think the countless underage girls working in Pattaya bars care that no-one cares about them? Most are making decent money and supporting their families. The karaoke bars that are frequented by, mostly, Thais are another thing altogether as there does appear to be a proportion of trafficked underage girls, which any right thinking person should care about.

[Semper]

If he got caught driving under the influence in his home country with a minor in the car. What would happen to him?

Where I come from, having a 16 year old girl in the car is not an offense. Why should it be? Do you have sex with everybody who are passengers in your car? I've been stopped by the police in this country with the car full of girls, many of them under 18. Never had a problem with that, except one policeman who insisted on going with us to wherever we were headed. Just envious

Can't blame him.

[ozziebloke]

As adults, we have a duty to protect children not take advantage of them particularly when they have been placed in compromising situations by society, their parents or just their bad judgment.

No one cares about the countless underage girls working in the bars and karaoke bars in Pattaya until one of them gets killed. Then suddenly the children need to be protected.

Thats an incorrect comment there are several societies working against this type of explloitation

[Nisa]

Obviously i read the reports that came in and there is no proof that he was driving ( relased anyway) and no proof that she was his rental for the night ( released anyway). I agree.. no crash helmets in pics and am sure more will come out of this.. what? neither I nor anyone else knows right now.

As I stated earlier - some people will disregard facts no matter what they may be. Witnesses clearly have stated he was driving and the manner in which he was driving but I guess that is not proof.

[coma]

If he got caught driving under the influence in his home country with a minor in the car. What would happen to him?

Where I come from, having a 16 year old girl in the car is not an offense. Why should it be? Do you have sex with everybody who are passengers in your car? I've been stopped by the police in this country with the car full of girls, many of them under 18. Never had a problem with that, except one policeman who insisted on going with us to wherever we were headed. Just envious

Can't blame him.

By the look of your avatar, you fit the bill perfectly.

[TommyDee]

Obviously i read the reports that came in and there is no proof that he was driving ( relased anyway) and no proof that she was his rental for the night ( released anyway). I agree.. no crash helmets in pics and am sure more will come out of this.. what? neither I nor anyone else knows right now.

As I stated earlier - some people will disregard facts no matter what they may be. Witnesses clearly have stated he was driving and the manner in which he was driving but I guess that is not proof.

not trying to burst your bubble or anything, but knowing that road as you may or may not do, here are some facts..

there is no pedestrian area close it it

no vehicles stopped at the scene, which is why the police cant be sure if another vehicle was involved

there were no witnesses

at 4.30 in the monring that area of Pattaya is void of any people

so; all you have is guesswork which may, or nor, be correct .. it is still guesswork.

<deleted>.. give the man a break until the FACTS are released. or give a dog a bad name and hang him a' la aesop.

your call