Mystery surrounds death of Englishman found in north-east rubber plantation

[Artisi]

4 hours ago, sambum said:

Maybe!

Where did suddenly come from, a figment of imagination? 

[Artisi]

3 hours ago, AlexRich said:

Would be amusing (or perhaps not, given the topic) to list the most bizarre Thailand "farang suicide" verdicts from the BIB.

 

 

 

The list would be endless... 

[sambum]

50 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Where did suddenly come from, a figment of imagination? 

Where did "suddenly" come from? No imagination of your own?

 

 " On 5/1/2017 at 8:32 PM, FritsSikkink said:

Were did you get that suddenly from? Oh your imagination running wild again."

Edited May 2, 2017 by sambum

[Sig]

On 5/1/2017 at 8:53 PM, FritsSikkink said:

I still get texted by former girlfriends, isn't that strange. Could be friendly or unfriendly, you never know.

yes, it wouldn't necessarily be strange from a former girlfriend or even ex-wife. But this article said she was his "estranged wife". That is VERY different than simply 'ex-wife'. Either the writers don't know the meaning of 'estranged', or it's quite a strange scenario. Why would someone who is at mutual enmity with their ex or holding their ex with indifference be concerned to go check up on them just because they didn't answer their stupid phone!? If someone doesn't answer my call, I assume their on the toilet or any vast number of other reasons too occupied to bother with the phone. For that matter... why would an estranged spouse be calling someone that they don't want to have anything to do with in the first place?? If she were calling to complain or b*tch about something, ok, that I can see. But not a visit because she "was concerned when he did not pick up". That is far-fetched. I would believe it more if she said she was going over to yell at him for not answering his phone, but definitely not out of concern.

Just for kicks, since it appears there are a number of others in the forum (and perhaps even the 'journalist' who wrote the piece to begin with) who don't understand what 'estranged' means... I'm posting the primary definition here for further edification.
Merriam Webster first and followed by the Oxford primary entry

estranged; estranging

1 :  to arouse especially mutual enmity or indifference in (someone) where there had formerly been love, affection, or friendliness
 

estranged
1(of a person) no longer close or affectionate to someone; alienated.

[Sig]

11 hours ago, Artisi said:

Maybe she phoned him every week or so -  they were married at some stage and maybe they kept in touch for some reason, like friendship, consideration etc. 

 

11 hours ago, starky said:

No that can t be it, it has be fishy/suspicious you know those Thais...no one ever stays in touch with their ex its unheard of..they coudnt of had an amicable relationship...dont you read TVF no one here dies of natural causes thats only in the west..every 50, 60, 70 year old that dies was murdered  by their Thai girlfriend/wife 

Friendship? Amicable relationship?  No..... That is antithetical to what the article said. The article defined their relationship as "estranged".
Yes, TVF sure does have its share of those who jump the gun a lot in finding blame or guilty verdicts about things they know virtually nothing about, I agree. But in this case, at least there is reason for saying either her story does not add up or the writer of the article doesn't know what 'estranged' means and is using it FAR too loosely, to say the least. My previous post a couple of minutes ago might help with 'estranged'.
That said, there is no way on earth to know much or even have a real clue at all from a little article like this that may be poorly written or even factually wrong regarding their relationship or a number of other things. I wouldn't for a moment pass any kind of judgment on what really happened. But the way the article is written, IF taken as fact... it would be a very strange situation. The basic idea that CAN be taken from the article is that a guy died and nobody knows why. Pretty simple... but some people seem to not like not knowing things, I think maybe it makes them feel stupid to admit to not having a clue about something... so they create all kinds of scenarios in their minds to make up for a lack of knowledge, which in turn makes them look stupid.

[pattayahenry]

On 1.5.2017 at 11:17 AM, StefanBBK said:

Hope it was natural causes.

Right beneath the line announcing an autopsy was some advertisement for cut meat. I found that inappropriate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

at my browser the ads are personalised, just for you, you have searched "food delivery" in the last days or weeks.

[starky]

1 hour ago, Sig said:

 

Friendship? Amicable relationship?  No..... That is antithetical to what the article said. The article defined their relationship as "estranged".
Yes, TVF sure does have its share of those who jump the gun a lot in finding blame or guilty verdicts about things they know virtually nothing about, I agree. But in this case, at least there is reason for saying either her story does not add up or the writer of the article doesn't know what 'estranged' means and is using it FAR too loosely, to say the least. My previous post a couple of minutes ago might help with 'estranged'.
That said, there is no way on earth to know much or even have a real clue at all from a little article like this that may be poorly written or even factually wrong regarding their relationship or a number of other things. I wouldn't for a moment pass any kind of judgment on what really happened. But the way the article is written, IF taken as fact... it would be a very strange situation. The basic idea that CAN be taken from the article is that a guy died and nobody knows why. Pretty simple... but some people seem to not like not knowing things, I think maybe it makes them feel stupid to admit to not having a clue about something... so they create all kinds of scenarios in their minds to make up for a lack of knowledge, which in turn makes them look stupid.

You could be right, could be bad reporting. Having said that estranged in the simplest sense can also just mean no longer living together. I am no English major, but to my knowledge it doesn't necessarily imply animosity only separation. Happy to be proven incorrect though. If he is living in her house I would say they have some sort of relationship though.

Edited May 2, 2017 by starky

[hottrader77]

On 5/1/2017 at 10:18 PM, sambum said:

Read the post please before commenting on it!

ha ha ha so you believe a wife who splits up with her husband 5 years ago is not capable of being involved in his murder ????? why did they split up ??? ah now are your braincells starting to work .... it could have been that he beat her regularly who knows and she might have wanted revenge , ah ah are your braincells starting to jangle , think before making stupid statements 

[sambum]

2 hours ago, sambum said:

Deleted 

To hottrader 77 re your POst # 99:-

 

"ha ha ha so you believe a wife who splits up with her husband 5 years ago is not capable of being involved in his murder ????? why did they split up ??? ah now are your braincells starting to work .... it could have been that he beat her regularly who knows and she might have wanted revenge , ah ah are your braincells starting to jangle , think before making stupid statements" 

 

Not at all!!! I was merely pointing out that you have made assumptions without reading the post first e.g.:-

 

BANGKOK: -- Police have said that they are at a loss to explain the death of a Coventry man found in a house in a rubber plantation in Bung Kan province.

(i.e. not as you state found at a rubber plantation, but actually in a house at a rubber plantation)

 

Mr Checketts was found by his estranged wife Somkhit Patirupa, 45. She said they had been married for years but split up five years ago with her husband deciding to stay alone in the house.

(i.e. " his wife not knowing what happened for 4 days sounds fishy maybe she was in on it ," ) Your tone implies that his wife was still living with him, and did not notice anything for 4 days implies "there was something fishy going on"

 

However, quotes from some of my later posts that you probably haven't read:-

 

Post # 51 ;- " Yes - to me the strangest thing about this case is the fact that they had been apart for 5 years and suddenly she tries to phone him?"

 

Post # 53 :- "

D: 53  Posted Monday at 08:39 PM (edited) · Report post

  On 5/1/2017 at 8:32 PM, FritsSikkink said:

Were did you get that suddenly from? Oh your imagination running wild again.

"Were"? I presume you mean "Where"? I got it "suddenly" from the fact that she "suddenly" decides to phone him after they've been split up for 5 years - I would have thought it a bit unusual If I'd been split up from my wife for 5 years and she DID phone me!

 

 

Edited May 3, 2017 by sambum

[wabothai]

Some folks just give up. Frustration, anger and loneliness may cause heart failure.

 

 

[Geordie59]

So much pathetic speculation on here. I suggest you wait for the results of the autopsy before posting comments based on very limited facts.

[sambum]

51 minutes ago, sambum said:

To hottrader 77 re your POst # 99:-

 

"ha ha ha so you believe a wife who splits up with her husband 5 years ago is not capable of being involved in his murder ????? why did they split up ??? ah now are your braincells starting to work .... it could have been that he beat her regularly who knows and she might have wanted revenge , ah ah are your braincells starting to jangle , think before making stupid statements" 

 

Not at all!!! I was merely pointing out that you have made assumptions without reading the post first e.g.:-

 

BANGKOK: -- Police have said that they are at a loss to explain the death of a Coventry man found in a house in a rubber plantation in Bung Kan province.

(i.e. not as you state found at a rubber plantation, but actually in a house at a rubber plantation)

 

Mr Checketts was found by his estranged wife Somkhit Patirupa, 45. She said they had been married for years but split up five years ago with her husband deciding to stay alone in the house.

(i.e. " his wife not knowing what happened for 4 days sounds fishy maybe she was in on it ," ) Your tone implies that his wife was still living with him, and did not notice anything for 4 days implies "there was something fishy going on"

 

However, quotes from some of my other posts that you probably haven't read:-

 

Post # 51 ;- " Yes - to me the strangest thing about this case is the fact that they had been apart for 5 years and suddenly she tries to phone him?"

 

Post # 53 :- "

D: 53  Posted Monday at 08:39 PM (edited) · Report post

  On 5/1/2017 at 8:32 PM, FritsSikkink said:

Were did you get that suddenly from? Oh your imagination running wild again.

"Were"? I presume you mean "Where"? I got it "suddenly" from the fact that she "suddenly" decides to phone him after they've been split up for 5 years - I would have thought it a bit unusual If I'd been split up from my wife for 5 years and she DID phone me!

 

 

Post # 57 :- 

And ex wives are a different kettle of fish, mate! Believe me, I know - and it's not my imagination!!!

 

Post # 89 :- 

Posted yesterday at 04:27 PM · Report post

  On 5/2/2017 at 1:16 PM, Artisi said:

Maybe she phoned him every week or so -  they were married at some stage and maybe they kept in touch for some reason, like friendship, consideration etc. 

(My reply "Maybe!")

 

So before you start making more accusations of a personal nature e.g.

 "ah now are your braincells starting to work" ...

 "ah ah are your braincells starting to jangle , think before making stupid statements" 

 

To paraphrase the above, I did NOT say that the ex wife could not have been somehow involved, contrary to your assumptions, and I  would advise YOU to think before making stupid statements, and read the post and threads on it before making your insults.

Edited May 3, 2017 by sambum

[Geordie59]

"Ex wife suddenly tried to phone him" 
How do you know they didn't speak on a regular basis?
Do they have children who would be just one obvious reason for maintaining contact?

I split from my ex Thai wife 23 years ago and we still speak occasionally and are on good terms with each other.

[sambum]

4 minutes ago, Geordie59 said:

"Ex wife suddenly tried to phone him" 
How do you know they didn't speak on a regular basis?
Do they have children who would be just one obvious reason for maintaining contact?

I split from my ex Thai wife 23 years ago and we still speak occasionally and are on good terms with each other.

You could be right, but the term "estranged" has been used and also the definition of that term implies that it was an acrimonious break up:- 

estranged - WordReference.com Dictionary of English

www.wordreference.com/definition/estranged

1.  
2.  

es•tranged /ɪˈstreɪndʒd/USA pronunciation adj. unfriendly or hostile to (another); alienated from:hisestranged wife; estranged from her family. es•trange•ment ...

[55Jay]

Yep, snake bite is a possibility in that area but jeez, never mind the boonies, I had a 2 meter snake in my moo baan couple nights ago.  If he knew he had been bitten (possibly not), felt badly, had a lie down, thought it would pass, take a little nap, and is over-taken.

 

But beyond natural causes or illnesses he may have had, knowingly or unknowingly.... a nod to the conspiracy theorists.  Although there was apparently no sign of obvious struggle, perhaps he was in that house based on a Ufestruct (however it's spelled).  Family wanted the land/house, pressuring the wife about her ex-farang husband who was no longer as generou$ and basically in the way. 

[Sig]

18 hours ago, starky said:

You could be right, could be bad reporting. Having said that estranged in the simplest sense can also just mean no longer living together. I am no English major, but to my knowledge it doesn't necessarily imply animosity only separation. Happy to be proven incorrect though. If he is living in her house I would say they have some sort of relationship though.

Yeah, and it also could be that the translation just sucks. I don't know who does the translating of these news stories, but I have often wondered how on earth they come up with some of the stuff they write in articles posted here that are commonly written so poorly. Proper translating is a very technical task in which not many so-called translators are truly proficient. I believe you are right regarding a secondary meaning, but that is why I mentioned that the definitions I posted were the primary meanings. And in things as important as this, it isn't a very bright idea for a translator to mess around translating things with secondary meanings without clarification that can lead to all sorts of incorrect understandings. But who knows... as I mentioned, we only really know that a guy died.
You mentioned, "If he is living in her house...", but the article didn't say he was living in her house. But then again... maybe it is her house, who knows. It only said, "the house" and which house or whose house is 'the' house is impossible to determine from the article.
A guy died... somehow... in a house... found by his ex-wife, whether estranged or not...  = sad any way you cut it.
 

[starky]

4 hours ago, sambum said:

You could be right, but the term "estranged" has been used and also the definition of that term implies that it was an acrimonious break up:- 

estranged - WordReference.com Dictionary of English

www.wordreference.com/definition/estranged

1.  
2.  

es•tranged /ɪˈstreɪndʒd/USA pronunciation adj. unfriendly or hostile to (another); alienated from:hisestranged wife; estranged from her family. es•trange•ment ...

Collins dictionary states the definition simply as a man who has separated from his wife. That's the problem with Google you can find something to agree with any point of view. Cheers.

[sambum]

17 hours ago, starky said:

Collins dictionary states the definition simply as a man who has separated from his wife. That's the problem with Google you can find something to agree with any point of view. Cheers.

 

17 hours ago, starky said:

 

That's why I said "implies" and underlined it! Cheers.

[Sig]

On 5/3/2017 at 10:14 PM, starky said:

Collins dictionary states the definition simply as a man who has separated from his wife. That's the problem with Google you can find something to agree with any point of view. Cheers.

If you'll kindly note, I did not use google as you seem to assume.
I used dictionaries, not google. And I even stated in my post that I used Oxford (usually considered as having the best definitions) and Merriam Webster. I used Oxford and Merriam Webster to see what both an American standard dictionary and a British standard dictionary would say. I would look to those before I would think of Collins, although Collins isn't so bad. But according to what you found, they used a secondary meaning for what other dictionaries (plural) as a primary meaning. And I guess to your point... you can hunt around for a dictionary that defines a word's primary meaning differently than others do too.

[sambum]

1 hour ago, Sig said:

If you'll kindly note, I did not use google as you seem to assume.
I used dictionaries, not google. And I even stated in my post that I used Oxford (usually considered as having the best definitions) and Merriam Webster. I used Oxford and Merriam Webster to see what both an American standard dictionary and a British standard dictionary would say. I would look to those before I would think of Collins, although Collins isn't so bad. But according to what you found, they used a secondary meaning for what other dictionaries (plural) as a primary meaning. And I guess to your point... you can hunt around for a dictionary that defines a word's primary meaning differently than others do too.

If you would care to check back a few posts, I think that you will find that Starky was replying to my Post # 105 and not to you!

 

And I answered that myself in Post # 109!

 

As someone said sarcastically to me a while ago "Please try to keep up!"

Edited May 5, 2017 by sambum

[Sig]

On 5/5/2017 at 7:40 PM, sambum said:

If you would care to check back a few posts, I think that you will find that Starky was replying to my Post # 105 and not to you!

 

And I answered that myself in Post # 109!

 

As someone said sarcastically to me a while ago "Please try to keep up!"

Yep,  you're right. And if you'd care to check back, you'll see that his comment came immediately after mine. Perhaps you could see why I might have misunderstood? No need to be snarky.  TVF has more than enough of that crap already