Thai man who carried out brutal sex attack on American tourist has sentence slashed

[amykat]

12 hours ago, MiKT said:

 

Yet another one. I did not say that her injuries were minor full stop. I said that the injuries he inflicted upon her whilst trying to rape her were (relatively) minor compared to a broken back and this is true.

 

I don’t understand how you can say “any decent individual would have offered comfort”. He was trying to rape her and went down to continue the rape; any decent sane person would not have attempted to rape her, let alone continued to assault her.

 

Also how can you talk about putting her in a coma position? How on earth you think that any Thai person of his standing (let alone his obviously defective mental abilities) would know about the coma position is beyond belief; and shows you have no idea whatsoever about Thailand.

 

 

But I don’t think remorse really comes into it. I think that in any Westernized country he would have pleaded guilty on the grounds of diminished responsibility and have been put away for a long time in an institution for the criminally insane.

 

 

I don’t know if 5 years in a Thai jail is sufficient punishment, or if he will even notice that he is locked-up.

 

I do know that I don’t want to be defending him and wish you had a better comprehension of English.

 

Okay, so I understand you are on the woman's side and all of that.  What I don't understand is why/what is making you think these things I underlined in your post?  Yes, we don't agree with rape, but if you think that all rapists are criminally insane then we wouldn't have any in jail?  Well before I go on, I thought I would just ask you??

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by metisdead
Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes or wording.

[manarak]

On 29.10.2016 at 2:30 PM, Bluespunk said:

Yeah right. 

 

There is never going to be justice here until scum like this piece of crap are given sentenced that match the crime. 

 

actually, compared to Western sentences, the guy has been severely punished, even 5 years is quite harsh *if the time is really spent in jail*

 

 

[Bluespunk]

7 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

actually, compared to Western sentences, the guy has been severely punished, even 5 years is quite harsh *if the time is really spent in jail*

 

 

For what he did? I think the near crippling of the woman alone would get him more than 5, never mind the sexual assault.

[jacko45k]

23 hours ago, jamesbrock said:

 

I don't understand why you're being so obtuse.

Perhaps because I did not understand the process and had a question about it.

Why are you being so rude?

Thank you for the clarification.

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by jacko45k

[manarak]

39 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

For what he did? I think the near crippling of the woman alone would get him more than 5, never mind the sexual assault.

 

he didn't cripple the woman

[Bluespunk]

21 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

he didn't cripple the woman

Yes he did.

 

Not long term we hope, but she has to learn to walk again. Still has no feeling in her legs. 

 

For what this scum did 5 years is nothing

[manarak]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes he did.

 

Not long term we hope, but she has to learn to walk again. Still has no feeling in her legs. 

 

For what this scum did 5 years is nothing

 

no he didn't. she fell while trying to escape.

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

no he didn't. she fell while trying to escape.

He is responsible.

He deserves a longer sentence.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Bluespunk

[erobando]

MiKT and manarak are making logical arguments about laws and the legal system.

IMHO the arguments against their posts are primarily emotional.

Laws are non-emotional and exist in large part to prevent the type of emotionally-based vigilante justice some posters are advocating.

[farcanell]

42 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

no he didn't. she fell while trying to escape.

 

Wow..... who would not try to escape?

 

this guy is 100% responsible for her injuries caused during her fall, which would never have happened, if the assault had not happened

 

suggesting otherwise is ridiculous and dispicable

 

next some genius will claim that the man pulling the pin on a hand grenade, is not responsible for the damage done by the hand grenade.

[DM07]

57 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

no he didn't. she fell while trying to escape.

...I ...can't believe...what i just read....

[farcanell]

Mikt was responding to a post by me, Amy... poorly worded, and thinking I was replying to someone else post, as I was in my cups.

 

in my response, I did suggest making the victim comfortable, verses raping her,  which would have shown remorse... including perhaps putting her in a coma position, which I acknowledged was very risky, but with a conscious girl, being able to verbally assist, it would perhaps have been possible.... and it would certainly have been a better physiological choice of actions than raping her

 

we move spinal injury victims all the time... I've done it myself at sea, which included rolling the victim face up... so it is achievable... but again... Ill advised and risky... but better than leaving her in situation whilst raping her

 

otherwise, mikts jibes at me were acceptable... and deserved... 

 

lol... I'll even let the barb regards my lack of English comprehension slide.... as John walker was whispering in my ears

 

thanks, Amy, for the update you have provided today, and I'm sure most all posters wish her the best of luck, in what will be a long and hard recovery.... I hope she has the strength and fortitude to get thru this ordeal

[Bluespunk]

6 minutes ago, DM07 said:

...I ...can't believe...what i just read....

Apologist of the year winner for sure.

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, farcanell said:

.... and it would certainly have been a better physiological choice of actions than raping her

 

 

 

  Did he rape her ?

[sanemax]

14 minutes ago, DM07 said:

...I ...can't believe...what i just read....

 

   It is true though, why can you not believe something that is true ?

[farcanell]

10 hours ago, sanemax said:

 

    You seem to be blaming the male species for this one action

The huge majority of males would never do such a thing 

Males find his actions to be abhorrent and most of us would never do such a thing

Yes, there are some rapists and sex asaulters amongst us

What this guy done was horrendous and most guys think that

Normal guy do not do what this guy has done

Do not suggest that all the male species are the same as this guy

It simply isnt true .

You seem to be blaming the whole male population on one guys actions 

Most of us abhor what this guy did

We are not the same as him 

 

Interesting post... worth commenting on, from a different prospective as offered so far

 

you responded to mikt suggesting it's the treatment of women, by men, that needs to be overcome... post 206.

 

now.... everyone looks to the alpha male for decisions.

males run the judiciary

males run the church's.

males run politics

males run the police

males run the army

males ( sorry girls) run this world.... with very few exceptions... but as they say, exceptions make the rules

 

and whilst far from suggesting that all males... most males... or even a small percent of males, are capable of this kind of atrocity.... some obviously are.

 

given the above.... it's up to males, not females, who are still stoned to death in some countries, to fix this particular perversion afflicting some men... hell .... even Abraham recognized it as a problem, thousands of years ago, whilst chiseling away on his stone tablets.... but still, we... men... refuse to do enough about it... so perhaps it is the fault of males in general.... and we need to look deep within, to find solutions to stop these incidents, wherever they occur.

 

lawmakers especially need to recognize this.... perhaps raise sentences way out of proportion, to emphasis the nessesity for change, (then maybe reduce sentences once the crime becomes less prevelent)

 

i don't know... but I do know that it is the men of this world who must effect the changes needed to protect our women, our daughters, our wife's.... and even that random female stranger, walking down to 7/11

 

my preference, as a humanitarian, is chemical casterstion, and a few years in a max security prison in general population, with his crimes gazetted

 

but that's just my opinion.... and I'm heartily gladdened by your comment that you abhorr the actions of this scumbag, who can never suffer enough for this crime.... or rather, this accumulation of crimes.

 

( this could also be called an act of terror.... as I'm sure she was terrorized.... and we know ... in general terms...what happens to terrorists)

[farcanell]

34 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

  Did he rape her ?

 

Yes.... most definitely... I have supplied definitions of rape, from different sources, three times in this thread.

 

i shall do so again for your benefit.

 

 

[Chicog]

Five years is nothing. He will be perfectly capable of doing this again when released.

A phenomenally stupid sentence considering the impact on the victim and his potential to reoffend.

 

 

[amykat]

3 hours ago, amykat said:

 

Okay, so I understand you are on the woman's side and all of that.  What I don't understand is why/what is making you think these things I underlined in your post?  Yes, we don't agree with rape, but if you think that all rapists are criminally insane then we wouldn't have any in jail?  Well before I go on, I thought I would just ask you??

 

Okay, well I underlined all the comments you made about insanity, diminished capacity, being unable to recognize he was even in jail, various things like this, but I can't see your post right now to read it while I write this (and my underlines were deleted) so that makes it more difficult to read, as one must read my words, then look for them in your post, which is in another place ...etc. 

[sanemax]

20 minutes ago, farcanell said:

 

Yes.... most definitely... I have supplied definitions of rape, from different sources, three times in this thread.

 

i shall do so again for your benefit.

 

 

 

    The report only says that he sexually assaulter her, the report dosent say that he raped her 

[farcanell]

56 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

  Did he rape her ?

 

Ah.... I'm seeing your point.... did he penetrate her body, whilst molesting and masterbating on top of her... that's what your really after.....

 

i believe her words were to the effect that he did everything possible, other than rape.... ( which as a 23 year old, perhaps she believes requires penile penetration, which is incorrect)  but with her privacy already violated, do we really need to pursue the question of wether, during the molestation, there was insertion of fingers?

[farcanell]

9 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

    The report only says that he sexually assaulter her, the report dosent say that he raped her 

 

Per my post on definition of rape.....the last sentence may be of interest

 

"the term rape is sometimes used interchangeably with the term sexual assault"

 

[sanemax]

5 minutes ago, farcanell said:

 

Ah.... I'm seeing your point.... did he penetrate her body, whilst molesting and masterbating on top of her... that's what your really after.....

 

i believe her words were to the effect that he did everything possible, other than rape.... ( which as a 23 year old, perhaps she believes requires penile penetration, which is incorrect)  but with her privacy already violated, do we really need to pursue the question of wether, during the molestation, there was insertion of fingers?

 

    Rape suggests sexual intercourse though .

"Sexual molesting" which is what has been reported could mean anything .

I am trying to defend what he done . 

He doesnt seem to have had sexual intercourse with her , he went and got help for her 

He didnt physically harm her, her injuries were the result of accidentally falling

He didnt have sex with her . 

He could have left her there or killed her and then just say that she fell .

Did the woman really need to run ?

Maybe he made sexual advances towards her , looking for consensual sex

She realised she was in a bad situation and decided to run and fell .

 

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, erobando said:

MiKT and manarak are making logical arguments about laws and the legal system.

IMHO the arguments against their posts are primarily emotional.

Laws are non-emotional and exist in large part to prevent the type of emotionally-based vigilante justice some posters are advocating.

 

Emotion is the strongest tool in a lawyers arsenal, and always will be.... using jury picking, character witnesses, crying witnesses, evidence designed specifically to illicit an emotion, crying family members, pictures taken immediately after an event...etc etc

 

Emotions are what sets us apart from most other animals, and is a part of being a sentinent creature, capable of living in a community.... we are lucky, as humans, to have emotions, even if we often try to suppress them

 

removeing emotion, if that's what you are suggesting, will leave us with a society that could care less about one another...

 

SITUATION.... he/ she was gutted, stem to stern, by Jack the Ripper... here's the pictures... who cares?

 

so I disagree 100%.... without emotion, we would have no need for laws.

 

Nowadays, we use a police force to prevent vigilante justice, a hallmark of a time preceding modern policing

 

neither are laws about justice.... but about equality.... which is subverted daily by money, position etc... so what part of the "justice" system, should we really concentrate on..... and to make that question harder.... concentrate on "in Thailand."

 

emotions dictate the need for law.... but must not subvert justice.... they are intertwined... and when justice fails a community, outrage and emotions naturally follow.... thankfully... and at times, result in a correction to justice, and often in changes to laws

[amykat]

1 hour ago, farcanell said:

Mikt was responding to a post by me, Amy... poorly worded, and thinking I was replying to someone else post, as I was in my cups.

 

in my response, I did suggest making the victim comfortable, verses raping her,  which would have shown remorse... including perhaps putting her in a coma position, which I acknowledged was very risky, but with a conscious girl, being able to verbally assist, it would perhaps have been possible.... and it would certainly have been a better physiological choice of actions than raping her

 

we move spinal injury victims all the time... I've done it myself at sea, which included rolling the victim face up... so it is achievable... but again... Ill advised and risky... but better than leaving her in situation whilst raping her

 

otherwise, mikts jibes at me were acceptable... and deserved... 

 

lol... I'll even let the barb regards my lack of English comprehension slide.... as John walker was whispering in my ears

 

thanks, Amy, for the update you have provided today, and I'm sure most all posters wish her the best of luck, in what will be a long and hard recovery.... I hope she has the strength and fortitude to get thru this ordeal

Oh, I was ignoring that part of his response to you farcanell,  and trying to concentrate on WHY he thinks this rapist is insane ...he makes several references to that is his post. I underlined them, but they were deleted as not allowed, and now my post makes no sense, as you can see, you don't understand it.  But thank you for your nice comments!!

[jobin]

The NewYorkTimes ran a story on this news.  Yes, he chased her and she fell over the cliff.  He then went down, saw her and 'masturbated' over her.  

Not quite the same as brutal rape, is it?  Let's be frank, guys.  Even i, as clean a fellow as you'll ever meet, have masturbated while driving a car (automatic shift), in the airplane toilet box, in the woods behind the tree...you name it.  Maybe you too have wanked in various venues.  Are we insane, or normal?  We are certainly average.

 

[lopburi3]

9 minutes ago, jobin said:

The NewYorkTimes ran a story on this news.  Yes, he chased her and she fell over the cliff.  He then went down, saw her and 'masturbated' over her.  

Not quite the same as brutal rape, is it?  Let's be frank, guys.  Even i, as clean a fellow as you'll ever meet, have masturbated while driving a car (automatic shift), in the airplane toilet box, in the woods behind the tree...you name it.  Maybe you too have wanked in various venues.  Are we insane, or normal?  We are certainly average.

 

And this was in the form of a sexual attack causing near death to another human being?

[farcanell]

22 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

    Rape suggests sexual intercourse though .

"Sexual molesting" which is what has been reported could mean anything .

I am trying to defend what he done . 

He doesnt seem to have had sexual intercourse with her , he went and got help for her 

He didnt physically harm her, her injuries were the result of accidentally falling

He didnt have sex with her . 

He could have left her there or killed her and then just say that she fell .

Did the woman really need to run ?

Maybe he made sexual advances towards her , looking for consensual sex

She realised she was in a bad situation and decided to run and fell .

 

 

I understand ( (and am glad) that your not trying to defend the man

 

all relevant questions.... I have taken excerpts from the daily mail to include

 

normally, if someone uses the term "rape"... indeed we do immediately think penetration, but the laws are changing, to protect women from other forms of physical and sexual abuse... so your point is valid ( though in my opinion, outdated.... but we can't all share the same opinion)

 

seemingly he did go and get help.... hours later, during which time she thought she would die, and he may have had the same thought... and given the use of DNA testing in Thailand, having masterbated over her crippled body, if she had been found dead, hours later, who would have been any the wiser

 

i disagree with the ascertation that he didn't physically harm her.... if not for his actions, she would not have fled.... as I said earlier... it's not the man who pulls the grenades pin that does the harm, its the grenade, making the pin puller innocent, in an anology, if we propose her attempted escape and fall were her fault

 

her testimony suggests he had a go at killing her, post masterbation and molestation... so whilst perhaps not being a murderer, I still believe he may have thought that several hours later, she would be found dead (manslaughter?)

 

hannah herself thought she would die on that cliff, strangled by a semi naked man, who was performing indecent acts on and too her

 

did she need to run... perhaps not.... after what appears a savage fight, they shook hands and agreed to stop fighting, but he continued to pester her, putting her in fear of a repeated attack.... so she decided to flee... an understandable response, in my opinion... she was in fear for her safety

 

your last paragraph doesn't tally at all with her story... apparently the feisty lass nearly bit his ear off, in saying no to consensual sex

 

erobando is right... this is an emotional case... a gross and disgusting case against a beautiful young tourist... would be be so outraged if it were against a fat and ugly local... perhaps ( dishonorably / dispicable ourselves) not

 

but here we are.... with the main unanswered question between rape or not, being, whilst cranking one of the wrist, did he stick (or attempt to stick) his finger in her vagina

 

a weak question, given her ordeal of fighting off a bigger man, in unfamiliar territory, at night, before falling down a cliff, which effectively crippled her, then haveing him find her, remove his pants, sit on her broken body, while molesting her and masturbating over her

 

but erobando is also wrong.... this type of assault, and attendant emotional outcry, is what changes laws, which is a nessesity for human civilization to progress to a better form of "civilization"

 

as in... stop stoning women to death.... which is an emotional outcry, right there, on my part.

[amykat]

Farcenell ...this is just a warning to you about Sanemax ....he likes to play stupid, ask questions over and over again, keep arguing the same inane points, in my opinion, this just pleases him to cause other posters a lot of work to explain ourselves, then he pretends he can't remember who you are, what your points are, what you said, etc ...in my experience.  So don't waste too much time on him.

[Johnniey]

32 minutes ago, lopburi3 said:

And this was in the form of a sexual attack causing near death to another human being?

Masturbating while driving a car could be considered MORE dangerous and serious than making sexual advances to someone.