Murder Fugitive Aldhouse To Arrive In Phuket On Saturday

[sydneyjed]

"he'll be able to shag ladyboys". I think I'd rather sleep near the toilets.

Whatever sentence he gets, isn't it so that he will do 4 years here and the rest of his time in UK ?

From what I've heard from Brits locked up before (I've talked to two) is that they have to serve half (or ten years) of their Thai sentence in Thailand, and then part in the UK. The USA, and certain EU countries have the 4 year treaty with Thailand. Personally, I'd rather serve it in Phuket than in a US prison (where gangs and violence are rampant). Most of the foreign prisoners in Thailand are Nigerian.

If he has money, he will eat well, not have to sleep near the toilet, not have to wear leg shackles, and he will be able to shag ladyboys, and train Muay Thai while in jail. Highly doubt he will suffer as much as he would in a US prison.

He will be forced to wear shackles for the first 3 months that is for certain...they do it to all new prisoners to break their will and to force them to show respect to the prison officers.Yes if he has enough dosh he can bribe his way into a comfortable lifestyle but if he gets sentenced to life for example(99 years)for pleading guilty to murder he will still have to serve a fair amount of time regardless...I do also wonder wether the US have played a 'silent' active roll in enforcing his extradition back to Thailand as this does seem as if it may have been politically influenced to me somehow...

[NovaBlue05]

Welcome back Lee.

Hope you brought your soap-on-a-rope, not something you want to be dropping anymore.

From what i am led to believe that isn't too much of an issue in Thai prisons. I'm sure he'll have plenty of other things to worry about though.

Given his "tough guy wannabe" persona, more likely ambushed & shanked. Such irony

[SteeleJoe]

If he didn't go to Thailand I believe the Yanks would have tried to extradite him to USA as he killed an American serviceman and they believe their laws touch every country.

You obviously are free to believe whatever you like but in this instance it would appear to be based on nothing but your imagination. (Personally, I prefer to have some sort of factual basis for my beliefs -- and give credence to the beliefs of others only when they are similarly founded).

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

There are recent examples of the US trying to achieve this with UK nationals,

one, Gary Mckinnon, where army, navy and NASA systems were hacked into, blocked by the current Home Secretary, one where the CEO Christopher Tappin is accused of selling batteries for missiles to Iran, not from US but from UK. He was extradited and now stands trial in the US on charges, which incidentally were within the UK law but outside US law.

So you actually think those cases are analogous?

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[Humbugged]

Quite sad when the Thais pursue something like this so much for fear of losing face....yet other crimes they have no issue with white washing them.

[rotary]

Sounds like Lee will end up married to the guy with the most cigarettes in jail. Welcome to the Bkk Hilton where rat turds take the place on mints on your pillow at evening time,

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed.

[delh]

If he didn't go to Thailand I believe the Yanks would have tried to extradite him to USA as he killed an American serviceman and they believe their laws touch every country.

You obviously are free to believe whatever you like but in this instance it would appear to be based on nothing but your imagination. (Personally, I prefer to have some sort of factual basis for my beliefs -- and give credence to the beliefs of others only when they are similarly founded).

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

There are recent examples of the US trying to achieve this with UK nationals,

one, Gary Mckinnon, where army, navy and NASA systems were hacked into, blocked by the current Home Secretary, one where the CEO Christopher Tappin is accused of selling batteries for missiles to Iran, not from US but from UK. He was extradited and now stands trial in the US on charges, which incidentally were within the UK law but outside US law.

So you actually think those cases are analogous?

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Quite simply, The two cases prove America saw fit to extradite non US citizens to fall in with US law. The previous comment generalises that it appears to be well within what the US see as acceptable to do this, without documenting facts.

In the second case, Tappin, no offence occurred on US soil to a US national or institution and in the eyes of other countries laws, where the 'trade' - not 'offence' took place it fell within those laws.

By all means dispute the previous point, I simply added detail to that point.

[Baerboxer]

Scary. Your own country deports you to a third world country.

Isn't the UK a third world country these days? Have you seen the arrivals hall at Heathrow

What does the arrival hall at Heathrow have to do with this topic? If you think Heathrow's bad you've never been to LA, Newark or Charles de Gaule airports then?

Regardless of the airports' arrival halls the US, France and the UK would all hopefully extradite a murderer when the evidence is so strong.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Baerboxer

[kevvy]

Wow, how come he cannot do the whole european human rights thing?

Good on Thailand for pursuing it

why doesn't Thailand pursue other people who flee the country as well.

[2008bangkok]

With Lee's money he'll have steak every night and servants at his beck and call.

Probably some 'friendly' visitation rights too.

The life of a rich Westerner in a 3rd World prison where money sets you up in luxury.

What makes you think he is a rich westerner??

[SteeleJoe]

If he didn't go to Thailand I believe the Yanks would have tried to extradite him to USA as he killed an American serviceman and they believe their laws touch every country.

You obviously are free to believe whatever you like but in this instance it would appear to be based on nothing but your imagination. (Personally, I prefer to have some sort of factual basis for my beliefs -- and give credence to the beliefs of others only when they are similarly founded).

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

There are recent examples of the US trying to achieve this with UK nationals,

one, Gary Mckinnon, where army, navy and NASA systems were hacked into, blocked by the current Home Secretary, one where the CEO Christopher Tappin is accused of selling batteries for missiles to Iran, not from US but from UK. He was extradited and now stands trial in the US on charges, which incidentally were within the UK law but outside US law.

So you actually think those cases are analogous?

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Quite simply, The two cases prove America saw fit to extradite non US citizens to fall in with US law. The previous comment generalises that it appears to be well within what the US see as acceptable to do this, without documenting facts.

In the second case, Tappin, no offence occurred on US soil to a US national or institution and in the eyes of other countries laws, where the 'trade' - not 'offence' took place it fell within those laws.

By all means dispute the previous point, I simply added detail to that point.

So, that's a "yes" then?

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[cbrer]

With Lee's money he'll have steak every night and servants at his beck and call.

Probably some 'friendly' visitation rights too.

The life of a rich Westerner in a 3rd World prison where money sets you up in luxury.

What makes you think he is a rich westerner??

"One officer familiar with the investigation said today that a careful watch had been kept on a bank account belonging to Aldhouse. The account was topped up with five million baht before Aldhouse fled Thailand, but no withdrawals had been made."

Source: Google it. Some forums are delicate in their business ties.

Wonder what that will be used for....

Edited November 28, 2012 by cbrer

[ALFREDO]

Scary. Your own country deports you to a third world country.

Just kill nobody, or do not get caught doing it! Simple!

[Humbugged]

Source: Google it. Some forums are delicate in their business ties.

[ALFREDO]

So I imagine this Aldhouse guy will become quite popular if hes good at it ... and if he tries to do in there what he has done in Phuket he will be erradicated and put down.

My feeling is that once he is over the initial shock of being sent to Thai prison and he begins to settle into the pecking order he will become involved with their system and fit in pretty well with the flow of things.

You are clearly fairly new to the idea of Thai prisons I think.

Visit Youtube or pick up one of the many accounts of life inside Bang Kwang (Big Tiger) and then you may understand the reality of the Thai prison system.

I would say, what is important in a Prison, is not so much different from the world outside.

You have to gain respect, how you do that, a strong body and fighting skills help and money helps to.

Seems, Aldhouse, has at least some fighting skills and a sporty body. And his family, remember the 5 Million Baht, has a bit money, (should be still in his account)

So he is a rich, strong, fighting skilled Falang in a Thai prison. I think, he has not so much to fear!

Edited November 28, 2012 by ALFREDO

[cbrer]

So he is a rich, strong, fighting skilled Falang in a Thai prison. I think, he has not so much to fear!

Not likely to be there for long anyway, before back to Blighty.

He'll be revered by the Thais due to the win at all costs method of his victory. Will probably have a fighting/coaching school set up, like many foreign Muay Thai fighters who end up in Thai prison do.

His victory and mentality was very Thai.... He's rich.... They'll worship the ground he walks on.

[delh]

SteeleJoe,

'So thats a yes then ?'

Whatever you want it to be. The facts are on the books.

[marc651]

So I imagine this Aldhouse guy will become quite popular if hes good at it ... and if he tries to do in there what he has done in Phuket he will be erradicated and put down.

My feeling is that once he is over the initial shock of being sent to Thai prison and he begins to settle into the pecking order he will become involved with their system and fit in pretty well with the flow of things.

You are clearly fairly new to the idea of Thai prisons I think.

Visit Youtube or pick up one of the many accounts of life inside Bang Kwang (Big Tiger) and then you may understand the reality of the Thai prison system.

I would say, what is important in a Prison, is not so much different from the world outside.

You have to gain respect, how you do that, a strong body and fighting skills help and money helps to.

Seems, Aldhouse, has at least some fighting skills and a sporty body. And his family, remember the 5 Million Baht, has a bit money, (should be still in his account)

So he is a rich, strong, fighting skilled Falang in a Thai prison. I think, he has not so much to fear!

I agree. I bet there is quite a chance he will be the topdog of his cell, having the others work for him. He is a hardened fighting machine, a bully, and he has got money... On top of it, he is (in)famous. Just like in a streetgang, the prison ecosystem favours this type of profile.

I can imagine many inmates would want to be on his side, rather than be against him.

[SteeleJoe]

SteeleJoe,

'So thats a yes then ?'

Whatever you want it to be. The facts are on the books.

That's quite a non-answer. I'm aware of the facts and they are precisely why I asked the question that you won't answer. As a follow up question I might have asked whether you thought the original poster - whose post you have generously tried to make more substantial - was thinking of those cases or any like them when he made his post. Obviously there's no point in pursuing this with you so I'll respond an equally intelligent and reasoned way:

Whatever.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[delh]

SteeleJoe,

'So thats a yes then ?'

Whatever you want it to be. The facts are on the books.

That's quite a non-answer. I'm aware of the facts and they are precisely why I asked the question that you won't answer. As a follow up question I might have asked whether you thought the original poster - whose post you have generously tried to make more substantial - was thinking of those cases or any like them when he made his post. Obviously there's no point in pursuing this with you so I'll respond an equally intelligent and reasoned way:

Whatever.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

jcw suggested that America would extradite this guy on the basis that he killed a US citizen and America believes their laws touch every country.

You suggest this opinion is based on his imagination whilst you prefer to have factual basis for your beliefs. That is fair enough.

I have supplied some facts on the topic to support his point.

I agree with jcw's point specifically because, on the second example supplied, America has ignored another country's laws, used a pathetically weak (from the British point of view) agreement to extradite a UK citizen for what is simply a trade deal.

For me, this confirms, in my opinion, that if they will extradite on these grounds, they most certainly would extradite where a US citizen is murdered, even though it is not within their jurisdiction. My opinion is based on factual events, the US has form on this.

For the first example, the Home Secretary intervened on medical grounds, the guy has a brain disorder. A sensible solution might have been to employ the man to improve their systems, for which he has shown the need to improve, rather than to incarcerate.

Of course this would mean that they admit that the systems are not as good as they should be, but its only the Army, Navy and NASA after all!!!

You didn't ask the follow up question until your most recent posting.

Edited November 29, 2012 by delh

[sirchai]

“No amount of suffering that is brought to him will bring you back to us, but he deserves every pain and suffer filled second of it.”

There's no more to ad.........

[SteeleJoe]

SteeleJoe,

'So thats a yes then ?'

Whatever you want it to be. The facts are on the books.

That's quite a non-answer. I'm aware of the facts and they are precisely why I asked the question that you won't answer. As a follow up question I might have asked whether you thought the original poster - whose post you have generously tried to make more substantial - was thinking of those cases or any like them when he made his post. Obviously there's no point in pursuing this with you so I'll respond an equally intelligent and reasoned way:

Whatever.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

jcw suggested that America would extradite this guy on the basis that he killed a US citizen and America believes their laws touch every country.

You suggest this opinion is based on his imagination whilst you prefer to have factual basis for your beliefs. That is fair enough.

I have supplied some facts on the topic to support his point.

I agree with jcw's point specifically because, on the second example supplied, America has ignored another country's laws, used a pathetically weak (from the British point of view) agreement to extradite a UK citizen for what is simply a trade deal.

For me, this confirms, in my opinion, that if they will extradite on these grounds, they most certainly would extradite where a US citizen is murdered, even though it is not within their jurisdiction. My opinion is based on factual events, the US has form on this.

For the first example, the Home Secretary intervened on medical grounds, the guy has a brain disorder. A sensible solution might have been to employ the man to improve their systems, for which he has shown the need to improve, rather than to incarcerate.

Of course this would mean that they admit that the systems are not as good as they should be, but its only the Army, Navy and NASA after all!!!

You didn't ask the follow up question until your most recent posting.

Don't mean to be condescending but thanks for actually giving me an answer this time and actually applying some reasoning.

I want to avoid arguing the merits of the cases as I think that to do so effectively and accurately would take a lot of work and facts that may not be readily available (so for example, while I am tempted to question your characterization of something as being "simply" this or that, I won't). Nor am interested in either agreeing with or disputing your ideas about what should or shouldn't be done with the unfortunate gentleman with Asperger's or your opinions about what the Pentagon and NASA will or won't do and why.

I do not see the cases as analogous. Federal espionage related charges and such are in no way equivalent to a murder. Murder isn't even a federal crime. Whether you are right or not (we can't know), your assumption that if the US would go after these guys -- who are charged with crimes against the state -- they would attempt to extradite someone for a murder simply doesn't follow. Where would they try him? Who would investigate? Who would prosecute?

Can you cite any cases where a foreign citizen has murdered an American citizen in a third country and the US has extradited him/her or attempted to? There may be some, and that would be analogous and a valid basis of comparison.

Not sure why you point out the exceedingly obvious fact that my follow up question wasn't asked until a latter post so I don't know how to reply to that comment other than to say, "errrm...Yes, and...?"

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[NovaBlue05]

So I imagine this Aldhouse guy will become quite popular if hes good at it ... and if he tries to do in there what he has done in Phuket he will be erradicated and put down.

My feeling is that once he is over the initial shock of being sent to Thai prison and he begins to settle into the pecking order he will become involved with their system and fit in pretty well with the flow of things.

You are clearly fairly new to the idea of Thai prisons I think.

Visit Youtube or pick up one of the many accounts of life inside Bang Kwang (Big Tiger) and then you may understand the reality of the Thai prison system.

I would say, what is important in a Prison, is not so much different from the world outside.

You have to gain respect, how you do that, a strong body and fighting skills help and money helps to.

Seems, Aldhouse, has at least some fighting skills and a sporty body. And his family, remember the 5 Million Baht, has a bit money, (should be still in his account)

So he is a rich, strong, fighting skilled Falang in a Thai prison. I think, he has not so much to fear!

I had a "sporty body" once! Not quite as sporty now but still have a small, cult following. Lee is likely an idiot. If he goes into the Thai prison system, he will revert to his primal western instincts. Problem is, his audience wont be the "mai bpen rai" Thais like in the bars he was used to that just ignored his stupid, farang ass. He will make himself a target quickly if actually convicted and kept. I don't see a dumbass like him maintaining a low enough profile

[SteeleJoe]

ok well i dont know the actual facts

There's a shocker!

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Edited November 29, 2012 by SteeleJoe

[SteeleJoe]

Why don't you read the blog i posted a link to on page 2 of this thread instead of posting cliched hyperbolic comments straight out of the ludicrously sensationalist - and out of date - Prison Porn book The Damage Done? You can read about Bang Kwang from a Brit who's actually been living there for 7 years and has now been moved to the UK. You can also read about the things he preferred about Bang Kwang to his new home in the UK prison system.

Because that's what people do -- mention Thai prison and they start describing stuff out of Midnight Express and/or The Damage Done mixed with the worst of western prisons. I'm glad someone is refuting those canards (I got tired of it years ago on another forum).

There are many aspects of life in a Thai prison that would be better than most prisons in the US.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

amazing human beings ... no first hand experience whatsoever but reckon they know it all ... pffft

You'll never know how much that made me laugh or why...

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[delh]

SteeleJoe,

'So thats a yes then ?'

Whatever you want it to be. The facts are on the books.

That's quite a non-answer. I'm aware of the facts and they are precisely why I asked the question that you won't answer. As a follow up question I might have asked whether you thought the original poster - whose post you have generously tried to make more substantial - was thinking of those cases or any like them when he made his post. Obviously there's no point in pursuing this with you so I'll respond an equally intelligent and reasoned way:

Whatever.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

jcw suggested that America would extradite this guy on the basis that he killed a US citizen and America believes their laws touch every country.

You suggest this opinion is based on his imagination whilst you prefer to have factual basis for your beliefs. That is fair enough.

I have supplied some facts on the topic to support his point.

I agree with jcw's point specifically because, on the second example supplied, America has ignored another country's laws, used a pathetically weak (from the British point of view) agreement to extradite a UK citizen for what is simply a trade deal.

For me, this confirms, in my opinion, that if they will extradite on these grounds, they most certainly would extradite where a US citizen is murdered, even though it is not within their jurisdiction. My opinion is based on factual events, the US has form on this.

For the first example, the Home Secretary intervened on medical grounds, the guy has a brain disorder. A sensible solution might have been to employ the man to improve their systems, for which he has shown the need to improve, rather than to incarcerate.

Of course this would mean that they admit that the systems are not as good as they should be, but its only the Army, Navy and NASA after all!!!

You didn't ask the follow up question until your most recent posting.

Don't mean to be condescending but thanks for actually giving me an answer this time and actually applying some reasoning.

I want to avoid arguing the merits of the cases as I think that to do so effectively and accurately would take a lot of work and facts that may not be readily available (so for example, while I am tempted to question your characterization of something as being "simply" this or that, I won't). Nor am interested in either agreeing with or disputing your ideas about what should or shouldn't be done with the unfortunate gentleman with Asperger's or your opinions about what the Pentagon and NASA will or won't do and why.

I do not see the cases as analogous. Federal espionage related charges and such are in no way equivalent to a murder. Murder isn't even a federal crime. Whether you are right or not (we can't know), your assumption that if the US would go after these guys -- who are charged with crimes against the state -- they would attempt to extradite someone for a murder simply doesn't follow. Where would they try him? Who would investigate? Who would prosecute?

Can you cite any cases where a foreign citizen has murdered an American citizen in a third country and the US has extradited him/her or attempted to? There may be some, and that would be analogous and a valid basis of comparison.

Not sure why you point out the exceedingly obvious fact that my follow up question wasn't asked until a latter post so I don't know how to reply to that comment other than to say, "errrm...Yes, and...?"

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

I go back to jcw's original point that the guy killed a US citzen and they believe 'their laws touch every country'.

However you want to avoid the examples provided. The US, in the examples, have shown that that their law touches UK law,

ignored it and then extradited.

The EG's I have supplied support his theory in that the US have used their own laws, murder or not, on non US citizens, outside of their

jurisdiction. Even in a country where no law has been broken (2nd example) Therefore I am happy to support jcw's opinion.

You ask me that 'if' you were to ask a follow up question, do I think jcw was thinking of the same examples, I have no idea, so ask him.

[SteeleJoe]

I go back to jcw's original point that the guy killed a US citzen and they believe 'their laws touch every country'.

However you want to avoid the examples provided. The US, in the examples, have shown that that their law touches UK law,

ignored it and then extradited.

The EG's I have supplied support his theory in that the US have used their own laws, murder or not, on non US citizens, outside of their

jurisdiction. Even in a country where no law has been broken (2nd example) Therefore I am happy to support jcw's opinion.

You ask me that 'if' you were to ask a follow up question, do I think jcw was thinking of the same examples, I have no idea, so ask him.

I haven't avoided them at all. I've said quite straightforwardly that I feel they aren't analogous, explained why and put questions that highlight that contention -- which you prefer to ignore.

Passive nationality jurisdiction is something that the US generally does not wish to acknowledge or employ (some countries do) except in cases of terrorism or espionage etc. Can you cite instances that would dispute that? (Are murders of US citizens abroad are always or even usually tried by the Federal government when the accused manages to flee local authorities and return to his native country?)

Thanks for answering the follow up. I thought since you wanted to reply to my post to him you might want to continue to speak for him!

Oh, and this:

"The US, in the examples, have shown that that their law touches UK law, ignored it and then extradited."

The US did not extradite (and can not), they asked for the UK to extradite based on their law (the US is not obligated to consider the UK law in doing so -- thus they don't ignore it). The UK can comply or not based on their law and relevant treaties. But again: these are not comparable cases.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Edited November 29, 2012 by SteeleJoe

[SteeleJoe]

Clarification, if you really need it:

What I said I want to avoid is arguing the merits of the case; ie arguing whether the individuals are indeed guilty of something for which they should be extradited and/or punished. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you can see that that is different from wanting to "avoid" the examples you offer.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Edited November 29, 2012 by SteeleJoe

[craigt3365]

Several posts violating forum rules have been removed from view, along with some associated replies. Apologies to the members who posts replies.

Per forum rules:

7) Not to post slurs or degrading comments directed towards any group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

8) Not to post extremely negative views of Thailand or derogatory comments directed towards all Thais.

[Humbugged]

Will there be a ticker tape parade ?