More video footage emerges in high profile road rage shooting death in Chonburi

[hobz]

47 minutes ago, DMC1 said:

Hobz, when the van drives off after the parking incident why didn't he just let them drive off?

Why did he overtake the van beeping his horn (whilst gobbing off further about guns with his wife)? Why did he pull-in further up the road in front the van?

He was raging by then and he knew there was a chance that they would stop in front of him and continue the confrontation, but they didn't know he had a gun at that point.

No one on here is defending either side but some people on here are almost suggesting that Suthep was in an almost unavoidable confrontation and had to use the gun.

He was the one who started the verbal abuse which obviously pissed off the van people, even though they shouldn't have double parked. He was the one that decided to escalate the situation by driving past the van again (once they'd driven away) and further goaded them by beeping his horn and pulling in.

Good point about him pulling up in front of the van,, is this true? I thought the van chased him.. And the van does pull up in front of him at the end.

 

If you are right that he pulled up in front of the van, then i agree that it looks like premeditated murder (he instigated the situation and was waiting for the right time to pull the trigger).. Still nobody forced those teens to come out of their van...

[DMC1]

Good point about him pulling up in front of the van,, is this true? I thought the van chased him.. And the van does pull up in front of him at the end.

 

If you are right that he pulled up in front of the van, then i agree that it looks like premeditated murder (he instigated the situation and was waiting for the right time to pull the trigger).. Still nobody forced those teens to come out of their van...

Yes, just take a look at the first video and how it links up with the second video footage. Until I watched the first video and listened to everything it looked a bit different.

There was really no need for him to overtake the van beeping his horn and it doesn't look like the van chases him. He passes them, beeping his horn and then pulls in - he could've driven off at any point, reversed and drove away or just continued around the corner or even driven at the van occupants. The way he was talking with his wife, it was like he was itching to use the gun.

[hobz]

1 minute ago, DMC1 said:

 

Yes, just take a look at the first video and how it links up with the second video footage. Until I watched the first video and listened to everything it looked a bit different.

There was really no need for him to overtake the van beeping his horn and it doesn't look like the van chases him. He passes them, beeping his horn and then pulls in - he could've driven off at any point, reversed and drove away or just continued around the corner or even driven at the van occupants. The way he was talking with his wife, he was itching to use the gun.

 

Ok, i have seen all the videos, but what you said about him being able to just drive away, the same can be said for the van at the end. In the video where the shot actually happens the van is clearly parked in front of him and the teens came out for him, not the other way around. 

It takes two to tango..

[DMC1]

Ok, i have seen all the videos, but what you said about him being able to just drive away, the same can be said for the van at the end. In the video where the shot actually happens the van is clearly parked in front of him and the teens came out for him, not the other way around. 

It takes two to tango..

Yes, agree with that. Just wanted to point out that Suthep isn't as innocent as some people are making out.

And let's face it, if he wasn't carrying a gun he probably wouldn't have got himself into that situation by hailing all the abuse a the start.

[IAMHERE]

14 hours ago, ocddave said:

Its kill or be killed, I am with the gunman here, he did what he had to do (Protect yourself and your family at all costs, I wouldn't fault him for shooting all of them), the teens hopefully learned a valuable lesson.

I am sure the teens did learn a lesson: buy a gun.

[Shawn0000]

9 hours ago, Allstars said:

 

Wait let me help you thinking a little.

 

I'm sure you are smart enough to understand that obstructing traffic flow, which the minivan did,  is a traffic offence.

 

Question : What is deemed a traffic offence?

 

Answer : A traffic offence is an action by a road user that endangers other road users.

 

Let me know if you need a drawing to understand the reasoning behind a traffic offence.

 

He was beeping his horn in anger as he drover off past him, that's a traffic offense by the way, and this is about a premeditated murder by the way.

[Damrongsak]

19 hours ago, Destiny1990 said:

...Not even a warning shot but straight for a kill shot...

That is what firearms are intended for.  Not necessarily to kill, but to incapacitate a threat.  Warning shots tend to kill or injure innocent bystanders.

[Shawn0000]

3 hours ago, bheard said:

 

Typical behaviour of many people in Thailand, park in front of someone, on footpaths, in driveways, whatever, to please yourself, don't have to worry about inconveniencing someone else. No wonder Suthep blew his stack.

 

For the van people, they were never taught the old adage "sticks and stones might break my bones, but names will never hurt me".

 

Unfortunately for Suthep, his reaction was over the top and he shot and killed a person. So, it's murder. He's gotta get his just desserts for that. Shooting up into the air would have sufficed surely. The remaining van people should be taken to task by the law also for their bad behaviour.

 

Yeah, the van people should be "taken to task" and the driver fined about 200 baht for double parking, that is the only crime they have committed, while both the shooter and the woman who got the gun ready for him as they drove up the road talking about planning to shoot them should be looking at life, I hardly think a minor traffic offense even deserves a mention, or do you want the man charged with murder and beeping his horn unnecessarily?

[Shawn0000]

2 minutes ago, Damrongsak said:

That is what firearms are intended for.  Not necessarily to kill, but to incapacitate a threat.  Warning shots tend to kill or injure innocent bystanders.

Shots fired in the air do not "tend" to kill innocent people, shooting innocent people, like he did, does kill innocent people, an innocent person is dead.

[Damrongsak]

1 minute ago, Shawn0000 said:

Shots fired in the air do not "tend" to kill innocent people, shooting innocent people, like he did, does kill innocent people, an innocent person is dead.

OK, shots "in the air" may only return to earth at 300 feet per second or some such.  I wouldn't want to get hit in the head or face with one.  I'm not an expert, but I have owned and operated firearms for 50 years.  Of my 20 or so firearms, I wouldn't want to fire any warning shots.  They are tools used for a purpose. 

[IAMHERE]

12 hours ago, balo said:

That video has been posted before.  My point was he started it , not the van full of teens. They parked only for a couple of minutes , he could have waited. 

 

Imagine your life is in danger just because you have a verbal argument with someone .  The man with the gun is to blame, he is a killer and will kill again . 

 

 

My bet is that the surviving teens will kill before the man with the gun again, and with about as much provocation.

[DMC1]

My bet is that the surviving teens will kill before the man with the gun again, and with about as much provocation.

The man probably won't kill anyone again. The teens in the van haven't killed anyone, what makes you think they would kill anyone? Maybe dish out a bit of a kicking to save face nonsense.

[Damrongsak]

Who said what, and which party got their nickers in a twist?  Someone a couple years older got pissed at some young punks or what? No respect, so you blow someone away?  Who knows.

[Shawn0000]

5 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

My bet is that the surviving teens will kill before the man with the gun again, and with about as much provocation.

Why?  You have nothing to go on, the man killed due to being blocked in for 1min, the teens got chased down and went up to the van, as far as we know they have never been violent in their lives, you are completely irrational.

[Shawn0000]

2 minutes ago, Damrongsak said:

Who said what, and which party got their nickers in a twist?  Someone a couple years older got pissed at some young punks or what? No respect, so you blow someone away?  Who knows.

It was the man who was disrespectful in the first place, he was the one who started with the name calling, he drove off saying on his dashcam that he planned to kill them, all they did was approach his car once he had blocked them in, then he did what he was planning, murder.  What gives you the right to call them punks?  Because they blocked his car for a total of 1min?  Or because they ignored him while he gave them a barrage of abuse?  Its pretty clear who the punks were and it wasn't the young people.

[whaleboneman]

14 hours ago, Allstars said:

This afternoon when I exited the highway 7 at the Pattaya sukhumvit Southbound there was a Bangkok taximeter entering the highway in reverse, because he probably took the wrong exit and was too lazy to get to the next U-turn.

 

I almost hit him from behind in that curve, but lucky I could just avoid an accident, and gave him the full horn while passing with only centimeters between his and my car.

 

Should i have been followed and threatened with death?

No. But you could have.

[hobz]

39 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

It was the man who was disrespectful in the first place, he was the one who started with the name calling, he drove off saying on his dashcam that he planned to kill them, all they did was approach his car once he had blocked them in, then he did what he was planning, murder.  What gives you the right to call them punks?  Because they blocked his car for a total of 1min?  Or because they ignored him while he gave them a barrage of abuse?  Its pretty clear who the punks were and it wasn't the young people.

Why again did the teens surround his car?

Edited February 11, 2017 by hobz

[Shawn0000]

Just now, hobz said:

Why again did the teens surround his car?

Because he headed them off and blocked them in.

[hobz]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

Because he headed them off and blocked them in.

Is there any evidence that he blocked them in? The van looks completely free to leave when the teens step outside.

 

Do you think the teens wanted to talk with him? Or what was their intention when coming out of the van? Why did they want the man to come out of his car? If you just want to talk the man can surely stay in the car and talk through the window. The only probable reason for telling the man to get out of his car is because the teens intended to assault and possibly kill the man (a couple of kicks to the head of a 50 something man can surely lead to death)

[Shawn0000]

1 minute ago, hobz said:

Is there any evidence that he blocked them in? The van looks completely free to leave when the teens step outside.

 

Do you think the teens wanted to talk with him? Or what was their intention when coming out of the van? Why did they want the man to come out of his car? If you just want to talk the man can surely stay in the car and talk through the window. The only probable reason for telling the man to get out of his car is because the teens intended to assault and possibly kill the man (a couple of kicks to the head of a 50 something man can surely lead to death)

He spoke of getting his gun ready and shooting them before he heads them off down the road, do you think he could have just driven off without planning to head them off and them shoot them?  You are utterly shameful making excuses for this murderer.

[hobz]

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

He spoke of getting his gun ready and shooting them before he heads them off down the road, do you think he could have just driven off without planning to head them off and them shoot them?  You are utterly shameful making excuses for this murderer.

Your lack of response to my questions makes me not want to answer...

 

I admit that the gunman is literally hitler. Now can you answer why the teens surrounded his car and wanted the gunman to step out. Was it really because they wanted to talk or was it because they wanted to assault hitler the gunman? Or do you see another reason that im missing here?

[hobz]

1 minute ago, hobz said:

Your lack of response to my questions makes me not want to answer...

 

I admit that the gunman is literally hitler. Now can you answer why the teens surrounded his car and wanted the gunman to step out. Was it really because they wanted to talk or was it because they wanted to assault hitler the gunman? Or do you see another reason that im missing here?

Super simple question, if the teens just wanted to talk, why did they ask the gunman to step out of his vehicle? 

[Shawn0000]

Just now, hobz said:

Your lack of response to my questions makes me not want to answer...

 

I admit that the gunman is literally hitler. Now can you answer why the teens surrounded his car and wanted the gunman to step out. Was it really because they wanted to talk or was it because they wanted to assault hitler the gunman? Or do you see another reason that im missing here?

 

I have no idea, no one does because we do not have that evidence, what we do have is a recording of two people readying a gun and speaking of shooting them before heading them off and doing just that.  Anyway, if they planned to beat the person who was chasing them down with intent to kill them, would that not actually be self defense on their part?

[hobz]

5 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

He spoke of getting his gun ready and shooting them before he heads them off down the road, do you think he could have just driven off without planning to head them off and them shoot them?  You are utterly shameful making excuses for this murderer.

As for being shameful making excuses etc... Im just trying to come to the full truth of the matter.

 

We can both agree that the gunman is not innocent. The question remains how innocent the teens were, that may not matter to you but it matters to me.

[Shawn0000]

Just now, hobz said:

As for being shameful making excuses etc... Im just trying to come to the full truth of the matter.

 

We can both agree that the gunman is not innocent. The question remains how innocent the teens were, that may not matter to you but it matters to me.

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

[hobz]

1 minute ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

I have no idea, no one does because we do not have that evidence, what we do have is a recording of two people readying a gun and speaking of shooting them before heading them off and doing just that.  Anyway, if they planned to beat the person who was chasing them down with intent to kill them, would that not actually be self defense on their part?

Yes, perhaps the teens were threathened and wanted to end the situation and talk with the man.. But their body language hints that they were angry / agressive more than afraid.. But yeah, thats why were discussing this vital part of the whole incident.. Because thats where its unclear... Everything up to that point is pretty clear (except i didnt see evidence thar the gunman blocked the van in at any point, but i believe witnesses should be able to clear that up).

Also we forgot to mention that the gunman claims that the deceased threw a punch.. Also no evidence but perhaps witnesses can clear that up.

 

As for sentencing the gunman should at least get the maximum sentence for the illegal firearm.. Not sure about manslaughter, murder or murder one

[hobz]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

I dont see evidence of the gunman chasing someone,, he claims the van chased him,, is there solid evidence of either one?

 

[hobz]

4 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

Dude, i never said that its a crime to ask someone to step outside of their car,, as for fear of thai teens, sure, i admit i would shit myself if a bunch of clearly upset thais surrounded my car in an agressive matter like that,, but unlike the gunman i would just have driven away and prayed that i didnt hurt any of them.. But this is not about me is it...

[Shawn0000]

5 minutes ago, hobz said:

Yes, perhaps the teens were threathened and wanted to end the situation and talk with the man.. But their body language hints that they were angry / agressive more than afraid.. But yeah, thats why were discussing this vital part of the whole incident.. Because thats where its unclear... Everything up to that point is pretty clear (except i didnt see evidence thar the gunman blocked the van in at any point, but i believe witnesses should be able to clear that up).

Also we forgot to mention that the gunman claims that the deceased threw a punch.. Also no evidence but perhaps witnesses can clear that up.

 

As for sentencing the gunman should at least get the maximum sentence for the illegal firearm.. Not sure about manslaughter, murder or murder one

 

Why are you not sure about it being murder?  He is on the dashcam saying get the gun ready I am going to shoot them, he was in no way threatened, he could have continued driving, instead he chooses to stop them and shoot them, obviously he was not threatened and obviously he planned to shoot them so obviously it is murder, no way manslaughter as he was planning it in advance.

[NoshowJones]

16 hours ago, clockman said:

Thailand is very dangerous country, If you challenge a Thai or make him loose face. It is lawless, anybody can be bought. Forget about smiling peaceful people. Just an illusion.!

If you can just mind your own business, and stay sober, the chances are you won't have to challenge any Thai, they are the most unconfrontational people you will ever meet.