Phuket hit-and-run Russians now fugitives

[BeforeTigers]

So an arrest warrant was issued for the husband becaussssssse?

These people would have left, even if they were not to blame, for the same reason that they were allowed to leave- ineptitude on the part of law enforcement.

Bet your ass if I'm involved in any kind of fatal accident I'll be pleading my case from the safety of my home country.
I'm not betting my life on Thai authorities getting the story right.

[LivinginKata]

Troll posts removed.

[papa al]

Since 9 out of 10 accidents reported in the news in Thailand involve hit and run, and there is rarely if ever any reported outrage about it, I was under the impression that hit and run was, if not strictly legal, then at least socially acceptable?

I wonder what would have happened if the Russians had waited around for the outraged family to arrive at the scene?

I also wonder what the kid on the bike was doing driving next to the car? Was the kid in a separate lane, and the car was crossing lanes in order to make the u-turn, or was the kid illegally passing the car in the narrow space between the car and the curb? Not laying blame, just curious as to who is actually at fault?

Next to the curb is where motos are supposed to drive, so why the 'illegal' innuendo?

[Docno]

They are Koreans that acquired Russian passports according to a Russian friend of mine familiar with this.

With a family name like Kim, this would seem pretty logical...

Nope.

A number of Russians with the name "Kim", were not of Korean descent, but rather were named after the "Kommunistichesky International Molodyozhi" ('Youth Communist International').

Not really. It happened only with given names. But "Kim" as the family name means only they are ethnic Koreans. And there are lots of them in eastern part of Russia.

Just because the man's surname is Kim and he looks (partly) Asian, does not mean he is ethnic Korean. See http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Names-in-Russian-Empire,-Soviet-Union-and-CIS-countries: "A number of Russians with the name "Kim", are not of Korean descent, but rather named after the "Kommunistichesky International Molodyozhi", or "Youth Communist International"." In fact, the man has the 'mixed' features of a central Asian rather than a Korean.

[Winniej]

It does matter where the bike was . I was on my bike the other day in the far right lane with my indicator on to turn probably 50 metres before I was turning .

This brainless idiot come up behind me on the outside of me in the oncoming traffic lane speeding and was very close to smashing into the side of me .

I suspect something like this could have happened .

[Equalizer]

If the drivers of the car had been Thai, this wouldn't even be more than a small blurb in the news.

Don't know the facts, other than they were both going in same direction and collided when driver attempted a U-Turn. But logically that tells me the bike was in the wrong lane, between cars and curb, and crashed into the car because of it.

But condolences to his family.

Doesn't matter where the bike was. The car was doing a u-turn and hit somebody wile making that manouvre, and was therefor in the wrong.

Yes, a Thai would probably have left the scene as well, but would have been apprehended later and compensation would have been paid. I would presume compensation would still have to be paid by the insurance company of the rental car, but I don't know where it was rented from and how much their insurance was.

Excuse me! Please explain why this driver was in the wrong for doing a U turn which is perfectly legitimate maneuver. A U turn is no different than making a right turn. It only becomes a U turn when, instead of continuing right you continue in the opposite direction. It is clear this accident happened when the car was turning right. You can indicate to turn right whenever you please as long as it is on a minor road. Exceptions are road markings. A single unbroken yellow line (no right turn) or double yellow unbroken line ( no right turn and no overtaking). If you live on a main residential road and your home is on the right would you put your indicator on to turn right and slow down, then when there is no oncoming traffic continue and park at your home? Yes you would. If the driver behind was driving sensibly there would be clear distance between the car in front and himself. So any maneuver utilized by the car in front will offer you; (a) thinking time, ( breaking distance. In the case of a motor bike there is also the possibility that if the bike behind was so close to the car in front he will have put himself in the blind spot of the cars right side mirror and also hide the effect of the bikes front light in the cars rear view mirror because it is so close to the rear end of the car.

The car was doing a u-turn, which as you say is a legitimate manouver if not hindering other traffic. Obviously she was hindering other traffic. While making the u-turn she was overtaken and failed to notice the bike overtaking her, therefor she was legally at fault.

See also the provided link.

Once again you are completely WRONG and it seems you do not know the rules of driving. EVERY maneuver in driving hinders other traffic in some way. Just having another car on the road at the same time is a potential hazard, this is why there are strict rules for keeping SAFE DISTANCE. If the bike was not at a safe distance and has not given itself thinking time then any maneuver exercised from any vehicle in front is potentially hazardous. Let us make a simple example from this. Forget about the car for one min. What if the driver of the bike was so close, he then went and exercised an overtaking maneuver with the car, then he got run down by oncoming traffic! whose at fault now? The Russian in the car for indicating to turn? Na i don't think so my friend, you are miles and miles out!!!!

[thepool]

This issue is easy to resolve.

The Thais issue an international arrest warrant via Interpol.

[stevenl]

Once again you are completely WRONG and it seems you do not know the rules of driving. EVERY maneuver in driving hinders other traffic in some way. Just having another car on the road at the same time is a potential hazard, this is why there are strict rules for keeping SAFE DISTANCE. If the bike was not at a safe distance and has not given itself thinking time then any maneuver exercised from any vehicle in front is potentially hazardous. Let us make a simple example from this. Forget about the car for one min. What if the driver of the bike was so close, he then went and exercised an overtaking maneuver with the car, then he got run down by oncoming traffic! whose at fault now? The Russian in the car for indicating to turn? Na i don't think so my friend, you are miles and miles out!!!!

Don't confuse the issue with imaginary things.

The guy on the motorbike was overtaking her when she executed an u-turn. So she is at fault.

[Equalizer]

Once again you are completely WRONG and it seems you do not know the rules of driving. EVERY maneuver in driving hinders other traffic in some way. Just having another car on the road at the same time is a potential hazard, this is why there are strict rules for keeping SAFE DISTANCE. If the bike was not at a safe distance and has not given itself thinking time then any maneuver exercised from any vehicle in front is potentially hazardous. Let us make a simple example from this. Forget about the car for one min. What if the driver of the bike was so close, he then went and exercised an overtaking maneuver with the car, then he got run down by oncoming traffic! whose at fault now? The Russian in the car for indicating to turn? Na i don't think so my friend, you are miles and miles out!!!!

Don't confuse the issue with imaginary things.

The guy on the motorbike was overtaking her when she executed an u-turn. So she is at fault.

WOW next time mate use the petrol to put in your car not up your nose. Your answers do not have anything but signs of loosing face.

[stevenl]

Once again you are completely WRONG and it seems you do not know the rules of driving. EVERY maneuver in driving hinders other traffic in some way. Just having another car on the road at the same time is a potential hazard, this is why there are strict rules for keeping SAFE DISTANCE. If the bike was not at a safe distance and has not given itself thinking time then any maneuver exercised from any vehicle in front is potentially hazardous. Let us make a simple example from this. Forget about the car for one min. What if the driver of the bike was so close, he then went and exercised an overtaking maneuver with the car, then he got run down by oncoming traffic! whose at fault now? The Russian in the car for indicating to turn? Na i don't think so my friend, you are miles and miles out!!!!

Don't confuse the issue with imaginary things.

The guy on the motorbike was overtaking her when she executed an u-turn. So she is at fault.

WOW next time mate use the petrol to put in your car not up your nose. Your answers do not have anything but signs of loosing face.

Nothing to productive to add so some non relevant remarks.

Edited April 21, 2014 by stevenl

[webfact]

Arrest warrant soon for Phuket hit-and-run Russian woman
Anthika Muangrod


Larisa Kim, left, and the dead boy, 'Lotus'.

PHUKET: -- An arrest warrant is to be sought this week for Russian woman Larisa Kim, accused of crashing into the motorbike of a 16-year-old boy on April 5 while making a U-turn on Patak Rd close to Chalong Circle.

The boy, Thananbavorn “Lotus” Durongpan, died at the scene of the crash.

Capt Thada Sodarak, investigation officer at Chalong police station told The Phuket News, “We will go to the court and ask them to issue us with an arrest warrant for Mrs Kim.

“We just have to wait for the hospital autopsy result. The doctor has not finished the examination yet. I contacted the hospital [on Friday (April 18)], and they said they expect to be finished this week.”

“The Russian Consulate is in touch with the embassy to contact her friends and people who know her to urge her to come back here and clear up everything she has done, and help the family.

“But I’m not sure she is going to come. We do know for sure that she is no longer in Thailand.”

The funeral of Lotus took place on April 12. Pin, a relative of the boy, told The Phuket News bitterly, “No one from the Russian consulate came to visit us or even sent a wreath.”

Source: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/719680-phuket-hit-and-run-russians-now-fugitives/page-3#entry7715375


-- Phuket News 2014-04-21

[shunima]

Once again you are completely WRONG and it seems you do not know the rules of driving. EVERY maneuver in driving hinders other traffic in some way. Just having another car on the road at the same time is a potential hazard, this is why there are strict rules for keeping SAFE DISTANCE. If the bike was not at a safe distance and has not given itself thinking time then any maneuver exercised from any vehicle in front is potentially hazardous. Let us make a simple example from this. Forget about the car for one min. What if the driver of the bike was so close, he then went and exercised an overtaking maneuver with the car, then he got run down by oncoming traffic! whose at fault now? The Russian in the car for indicating to turn? Na i don't think so my friend, you are miles and miles out!!!!

Don't confuse the issue with imaginary things.

The guy on the motorbike was overtaking her when she executed an u-turn. So she is at fault.

Reason for edit...

Had a look at the road and what I wrote does not apply. Still... from 10 yrs driving in LOS I have the strong feeling that the motorbike boy *#ed it up for good while trying to squeeze through the eye of a needle on the right hand side of the car ( where no traffic is supposed to be on a road with the design Patak Rd. has ). But even if it is found that the boy is a fault you have to consider the one golden rule in traffic regardless of whos fault it was:

Farang killed by a Thai: Mai bpen rai.

Farang kills a Thai: Basically exactly the opposite of Mai bpen rai.

Edited April 21, 2014 by shunima

[NamKangMan]

Must be a very thin brief of evidence.

I mean, really, what have they got????

[northguy]

Nope.

A number of Russians with the name "Kim", were not of Korean descent, but rather were named after the "Kommunistichesky International Molodyozhi" ('Youth Communist International').

Not really. It happened only with given names. But "Kim" as the family name means only they are ethnic Koreans. And there are lots of them in eastern part of Russia.

Just because the man's surname is Kim and he looks (partly) Asian, does not mean he is ethnic Korean. See http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Names-in-Russian-Empire,-Soviet-Union-and-CIS-countries: "A number of Russians with the name "Kim", are not of Korean descent, but rather named after the "Kommunistichesky International Molodyozhi", or "Youth Communist International"." In fact, the man has the 'mixed' features of a central Asian rather than a Korean.

Do you know the difference between "name" and "surname"? I'm native speaker and I can assure you that "surnames" in Russia begins quite a bit earlier than communists came. This man is ethnically korean. And don't argue with native speakers like Mr.Nortguysky.

[Somtamnication]

Mr. Kissmyasky might also be Korean.