Comedian's son still not charged for fatal car crash

[Shawn0000]

Just now, jaltsc said:

Doesn't matter. Even at slower speeds the crash would have occurred. He made the U-turn without looking at oncoming traffic, and was traveling ridiculously slow. If he had made the turn at a respectable speed (faster than a turtle) the crash might have been avoided  altogether. Even if the other driver was traveling at 200 km/hr, the guy making the U-turn should have seen him approaching at that speed, if he had been looking up the road in the first place. 

 

Yes, he might have been driving at a dangerous speed, and somewhere down the road a crash could have been his fault alone, but not in this case. This is a culture where the wealthy and entitled do get away with murder. However, this is not one of those situations.

 

Completely ridiculous, you can't see where he would have been looking, for all you know it could be a blind corner, and obviously at a slower speed it could have been avoided, god knows what you were thinking there, but at a slow enough speed he would have been able to stop in time, obviously.

[sandrabbit]

40 minutes ago, Wiggy said:

Why is someone running away from the scene at 0:02 (just after the collision, and picture goes darker) near the white wall to the left of the vehicles?

I had another look and you're right but I see 2 people running away but I think they were pedestrians who had narrowly avoided a rta.

[Shawn0000]

56 minutes ago, Wiggy said:

Why is someone running away from the scene at 0:02 (just after the collision, and picture goes darker) near the white wall to the left of the vehicles?

Looks like a wheel rolling along to me.

[jaltsc]

5 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Completely ridiculous, you can't see where he would have been looking, for all you know it could be a blind corner, and obviously at a slower speed it could have been avoided, god knows what you were thinking there, but at a slow enough speed he would have been able to stop in time, obviously.

They are driving high speed autos using an ox cart driving mentality. That's the big problem here. Their lack of progress in driving matches that of domestic violence, entitlement of the the haves, and their archaic education system. The law says you have to "look". It doesn't say you have to see what is approaching. For them, "looking" is the end and not the means for a further action. I drive at very slow speeds and anticipate that there is some idiot coming from a side road or street. No matter how slow I drive, there is always some imbecile who pulls out in the middle of the road and then looks to see if someone is approaching. Which might have been the case in the situation in question. Worked great when an ox cart was traveling at 2 km. an hour. The same goes for making the turn and never speeding up, in anticipation of the wooden cart turning over. Unfortunately they haven't progressed beyond that technology. They have no concept that they are driving a vehicle with 4 wheel suspension that wont' turn over if they are going more than 10 km/h.

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, jaltsc said:

They are driving high speed autos using an ox cart driving mentality. That's the big problem here. Their lack of progress in driving matches that of domestic violence, entitlement of the the haves, and their archaic education system. The law says you have to "look". It doesn't say you have to see what is approaching. For them, "looking" is the end and not the means for a further action. I drive at very slow speeds and anticipate that there is some idiot coming from a side road or street. No matter how slow I drive, there is always some imbecile who pulls out in the middle of the road and then looks to see if someone is approaching. Which might have been the case in the situation in question. Worked great when an ox cart was traveling at 2 km. an hour. The same goes for making the turn and never speeding up, in anticipation of the wooden cart turning over. Unfortunately they haven't progressed beyond that technology. They have no concept that they are driving a vehicle with 4 wheel suspension that wont' turn over if they are going more than 10 km/h.

 

People turning without looking is a big problem, but no bigger problem than those driving far beyond the speed limit, not slowing when going through villages and instead just flashing their lights expecting everyone to make way for their entitled self, and it does appear that we could have both of those issues at play in this accident.  It would be ridiculous to put all blame on someone pulling out slowly at a junction if at that point the speed limit is 40kmph and the other vehicle was doing 120kmph, in that case both are to blame, and since one is dead it is only actually relevant to look into whether there is any guilt on the surviving members part, which all comes down to whether or not he was speeding and or drunk, which we do not know, although it looks like he probably was speeding. 

[Baerboxer]

17 hours ago, esprit said:

irrespective, You should not, if you have  half a brain, pull out into an oncoming lane when it is not safe to do so. Basic driving education.

 

Have you ever completed a ROSPA Defensive Driving Advanced Course or something equivalent?

 

They teach you to always drive at a speed that as well as complying with the law, allows time for you to react for the unexpected. Sure people do pull out at U-Turns, when turning left onto main roads etc. Whilst annoying slamming your car into them, killing them, is not really an accepted remedy.

 

The speed he was traveling and being involved in a fatal accident would mean talking to police and being breath tested in most normal countries.

[esprit]

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Have you ever completed a ROSPA Defensive Driving Advanced Course or something equivalent?

 

They teach you to always drive at a speed that as well as complying with the law, allows time for you to react for the unexpected. Sure people do pull out at U-Turns, when turning left onto main roads etc. Whilst annoying slamming your car into them, killing them, is not really an accepted remedy.

 

The speed he was traveling and being involved in a fatal accident would mean talking to police and being breath tested in most normal countries.

And what speed was that exactly ? No timescale v distance on the recording so we don't not know. Frankly had he been going quicker he would have passed the moron who did the crazy u turn.  Speed kills but no where near as much as moronic drivers who should never be behind a steering wheel.  Quite often in accidents it is the innocent party who dies. For once poetic justice was served and the innocent BMW driver survived fortunately. 

[USPatriot]

17 hours ago, Psimbo said:

did you happen to notice the speed he was travelling at?

It wouldn't have made a difference the guy turned in front of him.

 

Yes scenarios can be seen   if he wasn't speeding he wouldn't have hit him.

 

The same if he had stayed home or if on of them left 30 seconds later. His lights were on and the guy pulled out in front of the BMW.  

I wonder if the other guy making the u turn was texting 

[Baerboxer]

9 minutes ago, esprit said:

And what speed was that exactly ? No timescale v distance on the recording so we don't not know. Frankly had he been going quicker he would have passed the moron who did the crazy u turn.  Speed kills but no where near as much as moronic drivers who should never be behind a steering wheel.  Quite often in accidents it is the innocent party who dies. For once poetic justice was served and the innocent BMW driver survived fortunately. 

 

Jeez. You think someone who drives in a way you find unacceptable deserves to die! Justice for someone to die, seek help, professional help.

 

Watch the video. You don't have to be Einstein to see that the BMW driver was driving very very fast. Look at the damage caused and relative speeds. No we don't know the exact speed, or if he had been drinking, or taking drugs, or was texting or looking for Pokemons. But we do know that had he been travelling slower, maybe observing the speed limit, he would have had a better chance of avoiding the accident.

[esprit]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Jeez. You think someone who drives in a way you find unacceptable deserves to die! Justice for someone to die, seek help, professional help.

 

Watch the video. You don't have to be Einstein to see that the BMW driver was driving very very fast. Look at the damage caused and relative speeds. No we don't know the exact speed, or if he had been drinking, or taking drugs, or was texting or looking for Pokemons. But we do know that had he been travelling slower, maybe observing the speed limit, he would have had a better chance of avoiding the accident.

Good to see that there are people generous enough to actively support lunatic drivers who are incapable of stopping.  Perhaps the moron doing the U turn was drunk,  on yaba or some other substance ? or is it solely the mere fact that that moron doing the U turn was driving a cheap car, whereas the BMW is more expensive it wrangles you to envy  so hence that streak of jealousy kicks (because someone can afford a better car)  so you come to your absurd  conclusions   ?

[elgordo38]

17 hours ago, rkidlad said:

Okay, I can understand maybe why he hasn't been charged with anything yet, but it's unacceptable that he hasn't even been questioned. 

 

Just more uselessness from the RTP. 

Thanks for injecting some common sense. 

[scorecard]

16 hours ago, smedly said:

I would apportion blame at both drivers, the BMW is very obviously travelling at a very high speed

 

 

Many countries have 'shared responsibility' within their laws.

 

Does anybody know if Thai law specifically includes this subject?

[DM07]

I have no car let alone a license, so please correct me, if I am wrong.

Should'nt any driver -especially at night or in rainy conditions f.e.- drive at a speed, that allows him/her to react to sudden dangers like...I don't know...crossing deer, suddenly appearing children or..let's say...IDIOTS AT U-TURNS???

Maybe the victim wasn't acting all perfect, maybe even completely stupid...but given a speed of 60 km/h instead of 120 km/h...wouldn't that have helped to prevent this disaster?

[whatawonderfulday]

1 hour ago, esprit said:

And what speed was that exactly ? No timescale v distance on the recording so we don't not know. Frankly had he been going quicker he would have passed the moron who did the crazy u turn.  Speed kills but no where near as much as moronic drivers who should never be behind a steering wheel.  Quite often in accidents it is the innocent party who dies. For once poetic justice was served and the innocent BMW driver survived fortunately. 

Have to agree

[realenglish1]

No charges have been files because it was not his fault The guy that made the U turn was at fault

 

Exactly the same thing happened to me on a Thai road about 10 years ago The police ruled in my favor and the other guys insurance had to 

 

pal for repairs Thank God I was wearing a seat belts  and had air bags

[DrTuner]

20 hours ago, Psimbo said:

did you happen to notice the speed he was travelling at?

He seemed to be able to stop in appx 30 meters. Add reaction time and substract the energy spent on the crash I'd estimate 80km/h.

[realenglish1]

Hey everyone Although I have sympathy for the driver who died He did not even look if there were any on coming cars. He was in a rolling stop and just

continued  without looking

 

On the other hand the driver who hit the the car was going too fast and at the very best he can only be charged with  speeding  and nothing more

 

How they are going to calculate it is beyond me but give it a go

 

That is my take on this 

[smedly]

25 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

He seemed to be able to stop in appx 30 meters. Add reaction time and substract the energy spent on the crash I'd estimate 80km/h.

seriously ? so you worked all that out based on ? absolute nonsense

 

His speed could easily be worked out from a simple measurement of time and distance and I can tell you with 100% confidence he was doing a lot more than 80kph, my estimate would be 170+, also from the cctv footage - the only part that shows the collision in real time is the first 10secs the rest is in slow motion

 

 

Tell you what, if he had hit a tree or a lorry or any other solid object he would have stopped instantly, maybe you can explain the science behind that one lol, he hit a stationary car side on (from his perspective), and there is science you could use, how far did he push the car up the road - was it 30 meters lol

 

I seen a F1 car come to a stop from over 200mph in a few meters

[Shawn0000]

21 minutes ago, realenglish1 said:

Hey everyone Although I have sympathy for the driver who died He did not even look if there were any on coming cars. He was in a rolling stop and just

continued  without looking

 

On the other hand the driver who hit the the car was going too fast and at the very best he can only be charged with  speeding  and nothing more

 

How they are going to calculate it is beyond me but give it a go

 

That is my take on this 

 

No, that's not how the law in Thailand or probably anywhere else works, if you are speeding and also kill someone then you can also be charged with causing death by reckless driving which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years.

 

And they can calculate the speed from the cctv, by marking the distance out on the road and using the video to see how long it took to travel that distance, very basic stuff.

Edited March 23, 2017 by Shawn0000

[DrTuner]

Just now, smedly said:

I seen a F1 car come to a stop from over 200mph in a few meters

Sure, with slicks and considerable downforce on a bone dry track, giving deceleration of over 2G. A standard passenger car takes about 30m to stop from 80kph.

 

 

[smedly]

17 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Sure, with slicks and considerable downforce on a bone dry track, giving deceleration of over 2G. A standard passenger car takes about 30m to stop from 80kph.

 

 

are you trolling, you have failed to include the stationary vehicle he broadsided and pushed 30m down the road (the latter according to you)

 

Honestly mate and I really don't mean to be rude but you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about

[impulse]

When I see an accident at night in Thailand, I can't help but wonder how much the dark windows affect someone's ability to see oncoming traffic, differentiate it from the ambient clutter of lights, and to judge speeds and distances.  

 

I know I open my driver's side window whenever I'm at a dangerous intersection- even in the daytime.  If I had electric windows, I'd open both of them.

Edited March 23, 2017 by impulse

[Shawn0000]

27 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Sure, with slicks and considerable downforce on a bone dry track, giving deceleration of over 2G. A standard passenger car takes about 30m to stop from 80kph.

 

 

 

 

You assume that hitting a car would have the same stopping distance to applying the brakes, the big question being, why?

[DrTuner]

14 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

You assume that hitting a car would have the same stopping distance to applying the brakes, the big question being, why?

Basic Newtonian physics. The combined mass of the two cars (~2x) is decelerating at a similar rate with 8 wheels (2x of of car) locked. About half of the energy was spent when the stationary car was hit and suddenly accelerated. The road was wet the the coefficient of the friction was low. I'm sure some one can tease out the actual formula.

 

Besides, having seen the photos of the T-boned car it's very unlikely that the speed was anywhere in excess of 100. It was hit on the weak spot and still hadn't caved in, hitting at 120+ would've wrapped it around the bmw's nose like a wet rag.

Edited March 23, 2017 by DrTuner
Added more physics mumbo

[dave3478]

22 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Comedian's son still not charged for fatal car crash

By Teeranai Charuvastra, Staff Reporter

 

 

PATHUM THANI — Police said Wednesday they had yet to charge or even question the son of a famous actor involved in a fatal high-speed auto accident earlier this week.

 

Kittiphum Iamsook, 28, slammed his BMW into another car at a U-turn in Pathum Thani on Monday, killing a 47-year-old engineer inside. Kittiphum was still in the hospital Wednesday for what are said to be minor injuries to his arms and chest, while his father publicly apologized on his behalf.

 

 

Full Story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/crimecourtscalamity/2017/03/22/comedians-son-still-not-charged-fatal-car-crash/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2017-3-22

If the actors Son was traveling at  twice the speed limit at night, Thats Dangerous Driving. The other driver could noway judge his speed at night and both should have erred to caution . Driving here MUST be done with extreme CAUTION by all parties .

[smedly]

8 hours ago, dave3478 said:

If the actors Son was traveling at  twice the speed limit at night, Thats Dangerous Driving. The other driver could noway judge his speed at night and both should have erred to caution . Driving here MUST be done with extreme CAUTION by all parties .

the above video is in slow motion, anyone want to work out what speed a vehicle needs to be travelling at to knock one and a half tonnes 30-40-50 meters down a road, I know 100% it is not 80kmh - the BMW was doing in excess of 170kmh and my expertise and experience says I am being conservative - yes even from a video

 

Dr Turner will figure it out - the man with the science or just an imagination resulting in baiting and trolling this thread with absolute nonsense ......

 

I also suspect that the two vehicles that followed in the cctv footage were involved in a race with the BMW

Edited March 23, 2017 by smedly

[balo]

Yes they are both to blame but only 1 driver is a alive today to tell the story. 

 

If it was me driving I would not speed like crazy and would had time to slow down in case of something like this . In Thailand expect the unexpected and always drive with safety in mind.  

[berybert]

12 hours ago, smedly said:

seriously ? so you worked all that out based on ? absolute nonsense

 

His speed could easily be worked out from a simple measurement of time and distance and I can tell you with 100% confidence he was doing a lot more than 80kph, my estimate would be 170+, also from the cctv footage - the only part that shows the collision in real time is the first 10secs the rest is in slow motion

 

 

Tell you what, if he had hit a tree or a lorry or any other solid object he would have stopped instantly, maybe you can explain the science behind that one lol, he hit a stationary car side on (from his perspective), and there is science you could use, how far did he push the car up the road - was it 30 meters lol

 

I seen a F1 car come to a stop from over 200mph in a few meters

As you rightly say, he hit a car side on. Now call me dumb or whatever but if I am driving down the road I don't expect to come upon a car in my lane that is side on.

 

Having seen the you tube video which shows the car from further back and other angles also, I would say the car doing the U-turn didn't even bother to look to see if anything was coming. He would have done the same thing even if the other car was right on top of him.

Edited March 23, 2017 by berybert

[assayer]

On 3/22/2017 at 7:31 PM, Psimbo said:

did you happen to notice the speed he was travelling at?

he appeared to be driving approximately the same speed as the others who went through the camera

 

[zoza]

Thailand has major issues with the safety on the roads, one of the main issues is speeding

another is the lack of driving in a safe manner awareness both faults are displayed clearly

in this incident, you would think this would be a perfect opportunity for the powers that be

to re-enforce these faults and confirm the errors displayed by both parties.

but it seems another wasted opportunity as they would rather maintain the TIT and the hub of R.T.A. status.