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

[Johnniey]

I'd like to know what time of the day this happened.Did the groping happen after she fell down the cliff or before. It is possible she over-reacted to his advances and panicked. Is there any mention of where she had been, was alcohol involved?

 

I ask because this should affect the sentencing. If it happened after the fall, it is simple sexual assault, if before it could be attempted murder. 

 

BIG difference.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Johnniey

[sanemax]

21 minutes ago, amykat said:

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.

 

  That is quite an unfair assessment . 

I was just asking questions about the case .

I had only read what was reported in the OP

I hadnt read what was reported in the USA

I asked some questions and Farcenell replied and I appreciate Farcinell taking the time and effort to inform me .

   I now know that it was a violent sexual assault , although I disagree with term "rape" being used in this case

[amykat]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

 

  That is quite an unfair assessment . 

I was just asking questions about the case .

I had only read what was reported in the OP

I hadnt read what was reported in the USA

I asked some questions and Farcenell replied and I appreciate Farcinell taking the time and effort to inform me .

   I now know that it was a violent sexual assault , although I disagree with term "rape" being used in this case

Well these answers are here, in this thread for one thing.

But you have done this to me specifically in other threads, which is why I say this,

The better my points and arguments, the more "forgetful" and stupid you became claiming you couldn't even remember who you were writing to, although you never wrote to anyone but me in the thread.

[manarak]

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

He is responsible.

He deserves a longer sentence.

 

he is responsible for what he did, and deserves severe punishment for that. but I don't see the need to blame people for more than they are objectively responsible for.

 

her fall and injuries were neither a direct consequence of his actions nor were they his intent nor could they be reasonably anticipated.

this warrants at most a qualification as "unintentional harm" in addition to the other charges

 

 

[MiKT]

3 hours 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

 

Thanks Farcanell, your honest comments are much appreciated. I hope your headache is better now, too much Lao in Lao's can be too much of a good thing.

 

I don't mean to say that putting someone with a broken back in a recovery position is always bad if carried out by those who really know what they are doing, but to expect that any normal Thai (or average person from any country) to know how to do it safely is over-ambitious and moving accident victims has proved fatal on many occasions. One only has to witness the so-called "rescue" foundations handling accident victims here to know what I mean. I was taught how to handle injured persons and moving someone with a broken back without special support was not recommended. I can see where it might be necessary in an unusually isolated emergency situation like at sea, but face up is not the normal "recovery" position. But not to be picky, please let’s drop that,

 

I will hijack your post now to answer a few other posters without doing so directly, so please bear with me.

 

1. She was injured by the attacker when he attempted to rape her before she fell down the cliff, that's why she was running away. Refer to the original post which mentions her injuries. He also attacked her when she was lying with a broken back.

 

2, It was without a shadow of a doubt his fault she fell down and was very badly injured. No question about it, he was attacking her and she was trying to escape and fell down as a direct result of his actions. He was totally responsible for crippling her.

 

3. I don’t think all rapists are criminally insane, but I do think that on the face of the evidence relating to the behavior of the rapist in this particular case  -  going down the cliff to carry on the assault, then praying  over her and finally going and getting people to rescue her, it indicates that he was not of sound mind, because this is not typical rapist behavior. He could very well have murdered her as happens to so many poor women.

 

As I said, I have no way of knowing if my estimate of the level of his sanity is correct, but all I am saying is in a Western country this kind of behavior would more than likely have seen him locked away in an institute for the criminally insane, not a regular jail, on grounds of diminished responsibility.  I am pretty sure Thailand does not have this kind of facility, but maybe it does and he was not insane enough to qualify.

 

I would add that whilst all rapists are not criminally insane, they are all criminals and most are at least temporarily insane to a lesser degree, or are so brainwashed by their disgusting cultures that they think its normal behavior. Otherwise they would not do it. Oh I forgot they were all lead on by the woman. Silly me.

 

4. It is also very strange to ask if I am blaming all men for her attack. The horrible fact is that in many, many countries, especially some of those I mentioned, women are treated like chattels, have no rights and are assaulted daily by millions, yes millions of men. In some of those countries rape is almost not legally recognized (especially by a husband) and many, many women are crippled and murdered EVERY DAY and the perpetrators are not even charged with a crime. But this is not ALL men. I don't do it for one.

 

5. I am very glad to hear that Hannah is making progress with her recovery, but it was not at all clear if her family have collected sufficient money to continue her treatment. I hope they have.

 

6. I am indeed making logical comments about laws and the legal system and the level of the rapist’s sanity, but this does not mean I have any sympathy for him whatsoever (even if he is insane to one degree or another) and to be totally honest, if it had been one of my daughters, he might not be moving now (allegedly). You would have to be totally gibbering before I thought you did not know what you were doing was wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by MiKT

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

he is responsible for what he did, and deserves severe punishment for that. but I don't see the need to blame people for more than they are objectively responsible for.

 

her fall and injuries were neither a direct consequence of his actions nor were they his intent nor could they be reasonably anticipated.

this warrants at most a qualification as "unintentional harm" in addition to the other charges

 

 

He is completely and solely responsible for what happened.

 

He should be gaoled for a lot longer than 5 or even 10 years.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Bluespunk

[sanemax]

9 minutes ago, amykat said:

Well these answers are here, in this thread for one thing.

But you have done this to me specifically in other threads, which is why I say this,

The better my points and arguments, the more "forgetful" and stupid you became claiming you couldn't even remember who you were writing to, although you never wrote to anyone but me in the thread.

 

   Well , if the answers have already been posted, then I didnt see them .

Yes, I do not recall the name of every poster that I have replied to on TV

Which thread are you talking about in which I didnt reply to anyone but you ?

Actually this will turn into bickering and this thread going off topic, so, it would be better to forget it

[Johnniey]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

He is completely and solely responsible for what happened.

 

He should be gaoled for a lot longer than 5 or even 10 years.

What does one get for manslaughter in your country?

 

[Chicog]

17 minutes ago, manarak said:

her fall and injuries were neither a direct consequence of his actions nor were they his intent nor could they be reasonably anticipated.

 

 

Yes, I'm sure she already had plans to run off a cliff that day.

 

[amykat]

17 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

he is responsible for what he did, and deserves severe punishment for that. but I don't see the need to blame people for more than they are objectively responsible for.

 

her fall and injuries were neither a direct consequence of his actions nor were they his intent nor could they be reasonably anticipated.

this warrants at most a qualification as "unintentional harm" in addition to the other charges

 

 

 

Well if you try to rape someone, it is reasonable and foreseeable that they will try to escape ....

 

 

[manarak]

4 minutes ago, Chicog said:

 

Yes, I'm sure she already had plans to run off a cliff that day.

 

 

and there are no such things as panic, bad luck or loosing your footing...

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, Johnniey said:

What does one get for manslaughter in your country?

 

It all depends on circumstances.

 

Anyone acting as this scum did would get a sentence a lot longer than 5 years because of the circumstances.

 

For me 10 years would not be enough.

 

He is clearly a danger to society.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Johnniey]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

It all depends on circumstances.

 

Anyone acting as this scum did would get a sentence a lot longer than 5 years because of the circumstances.

What's the average?

Minimum and Maximum?

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, Johnniey said:

What's the average?

Minimum and Maximum?

No idea and I don't care...because as I said

It

All

Depends

On 

Circumstances

 

Nothing to do with this case.

 

Anyone acting as this filth did would get a lot longer than 5 years. 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Johnniey]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

No idea and I don't care.

 

Nothing to do with this case.

 

Anyone acting as this filth did would get a lot longer than 5 years. 

You're great at avoiding questions.

 

 

[amykat]

8 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

and there are no such things as panic, bad luck or loosing your footing...

 

It doesn't matter. You, the rapist, set the series of events in motion.  If you walk into a bank to rob it, and don't intend to kill anyone, but someone has a heart attack and dies, you will be charged with capital murder. 

 

Also, see what I wrote above, it is reasonable and foreseeable that someone will try to escape ...if she ran in front of car accidentally, that would be his fault.

 

In other words, when you decide to commit a crime, you have decided to take on these added risks.

Edited November 1, 2016 by amykat

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Johnniey said:

You're great at avoiding questions.

 

 

I answered the relevant question you just didn't like the answer.

 

Tough.

[MiKT]

2 hours ago, amykat said:

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!!

 

Sorry amyKat, I missed this post whilst I was composing my reply to Farcanell, but underlining made no difference to your meaning, the references you quoted were still perfectly understandable.

 

Please see my post #256 which I hope will provide the answers your questions as to why I think the perpetrator in this particular case is not entirely sane.  But just to be clear, I was saying that I think that in a typical Western court he would MORE THAN LIKELY be allowed to plead diminished responsibility, based on his behaviour when he went down to the bottom of the cliff. The praying and sending people to rescue her does not seem to me to be typical rapist behaviour.  But thank god I am not an expert, only putting forward my hypothesis.

 

I use the term rapist to describe him, even though he did not commit full rape in the legal sense, but attempted rape and sexual assault is the same for me. His original intent seems clear.

 

 

 

 

[MiKT]

2 hours 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.

 

 

"Clean a fellow as you'll ever meet", no I don't think so.

 

If you think what he did was "average behaviour" you most certainly qualify for some kind of flushing treatment.

[MiKT]

42 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

and there are no such things as panic, bad luck or loosing your footing...

 

Sorry manarak, this is totally unnecessary splitting hairs. He caused he to loose her footing and fall over a cliff, not bad luck.

[farcanell]

Many and various questions or postulations about the severness, or lack there off, have been made, but no one really wants to clarify it all.

 

clarifying is really really hard, due to mitigating circumstances, however, there are guidelines, and I took the time to check "the law pages.com" website, which I think is US based.... and given the style of litigation there, the following would be very unreliable, due to said use of mitigating circumstances.... which comes down to how much your lawyer charges

 

OJ style perhaps

 

but.... some obvious offenses that I see as applicable in this circumstances include;

 

sexual assault.... life

attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle a person.... life

indecent assault on a woman....10 years

abuse of position of trust regards sexual assault.... strangely less at 7 years

assault occassioning bodily harm.... 5 years

unlawful wounding of a person.... 5 years

Threats to kill.... 10 years

 

there may be more, if laid by a prosecutor with a wit of intelligence.

 

but.... right there....37 years plus..... two life sentences

served concurrently.... life

 

now that sounds fair.... and, for erobandos penchant for dealing with these types of issues without  compassion and emotion.... I hope this helps

 

but... that's first world justice, without plea bargaining and mitigating circumstances ( (which the act of down trowlling and masterbating over a crippled and helpless girl should remove from the bargaining table)

 

so.... chemical casterstion and a few years in max security, really does make me a forgiving humanitarian.

[sanemax]

2 hours ago, amykat said:

 If you walk into a bank to rob it, and don't intend to kill anyone, but someone has a heart attack and dies, you will be charged with capital murder. 

 

   No you wouldnt be charged with capital murder .

Do you even know what the word "murder" means ?

[MiKT]

13 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Many and various questions or postulations about the severness, or lack there off, have been made, but no one really wants to clarify it all.

 

clarifying is really really hard, due to mitigating circumstances, however, there are guidelines, and I took the time to check "the law pages.com" website, which I think is US based.... and given the style of litigation there, the following would be very unreliable, due to said use of mitigating circumstances.... which comes down to how much your lawyer charges

 

OJ style perhaps

 

but.... some obvious offenses that I see as applicable in this circumstances include;

 

sexual assault.... life

attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle a person.... life

indecent assault on a woman....10 years

abuse of position of trust regards sexual assault.... strangely less at 7 years

assault occassioning bodily harm.... 5 years

unlawful wounding of a person.... 5 years

Threats to kill.... 10 years

 

there may be more, if laid by a prosecutor with a wit of intelligence.

 

but.... right there....37 years plus..... two life sentences

served concurrently.... life

 

now that sounds fair.... and, for erobandos penchant for dealing with these types of issues without  compassion and emotion.... I hope this helps

 

but... that's first world justice, without plea bargaining and mitigating circumstances ( (which the act of down trowlling and masterbating over a crippled and helpless girl should remove from the bargaining table)

 

so.... chemical casterstion and a few years in max security, really does make me a forgiving humanitarian.

 

I like your idea of comparisons, but the problem is (to quote Bernard) TiT; and people get ridiculous sentences for crimes we are not even allowed to mention on TV. Even the good (sic) General has suggested (without condemning it) that you might get raped if you are beautiful enough, so what hope is there of getting sensible sentences out of the Thai judiciary.

 

[MiKT]

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

   No you wouldnt be charged with capital murder .

Do you even know what the word "murder" means ?

 

Don't worry amykat, he does not live up to his pseudonym.

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, MiKT said:

 

Don't worry amykat, he does not live up to his pseudonym.

 

   To get charged with murder, you have to shown intent .

You deliberately killed someone on purpose .

The example she gave didnt show any intent at all .

She was wrong

[MiKT]

28 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

   To get charged with murder, you have to shown intent .

You deliberately killed someone on purpose .

The example she gave didnt show any intent at all .

She was wrong

 

Yes, but to keep flogging this particular dead horse the way in which you are, provides more than subtle indications that you don't live up to your pseudonym.

Edited November 1, 2016 by MiKT

[Johnniey]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

No idea and I don't care...because as I said

It

All

Depends

On 

Circumstances

 

Nothing to do with this case.

 

Anyone acting as this filth did would get a lot longer than 5 years. 

Let me educate you. The average sentence is around 5 years. In Arizona, for example, the first  US state I looked at, the maximum is 12.5 years. Many drunk drivers, for example, get suspended sentences. 

California - maximum 11 years - http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-193.html

 

Somehow, you think that the sentence for groping someone should be higher than someone killing someone. 

Can't you see your twisted logic? Probably not as you turn everything into an attack on the Thai legal system. 

5 years for this crime certainly not as outrageous as some here think.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Johnniey said:

Let me educate you. The average sentence is around 5 years. In Arizona, for example, the first  US state I looked at, the maximum is 12.5 years. Many drunk drivers, for example, get suspended sentences. 

California - maximum 11 years - http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-193.html

 

Somehow, you think that the sentence for groping someone should be higher than someone killing someone. 

Can't you see your twisted logic? Probably not as you turn everything into an attack on the Thai legal system. 

5 years for this crime certainly not as outrageous as some here think.

What has the USA legal system got to do with me...?

 

5 years for what this piece of filth did is way too lenient, but you won't recognise that because of your never ending quest to view all criticisms as ''Thai Bashing''...

[Johnniey]

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

What has the USA legal system got to do with me...?

 

5 years for what this piece of filth did is way too lenient, but you won't recognise that because of your never ending quest to view all criticisms as ''Thai Bashing''...

Avoiding the issue again. I'll start calling you blueseel. 

 

Do you think groping someone should get a more sever sentence than killing someone?

I showed the US sentencing to show you what a so called developed country thinks. I could show similar things for the UK. For example one punch killers get less than 4 years. 

 

I have no quest for such a thing. I say it as I see it. 

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, MiKT said:

 

Yes, but to keep flogging this particular dead horse the way in which you are, provides more than subtle indications that you don't live up to your pseudonym.

 

   Strange that you should say that , because this discussion is about what constitutes murder , and its a new off shot to this topic , so, it can hardly be described as flogging a dead horse