Foreigners behaving badly

[jackspratt]

Was he holding the gun when the other police arrived? Would they be justified in shooting him if the gun was, say, on the ground?

Shame the person filming stopped while the brother was still wrestling. If it was me, I would have kept filming till the police arrived .....hmmm!

If a cop pulled a gun on someone, and looked like he was going to shoot them for failing to stop their motocycles, I think they would be justified in taking the gun from the copper, and waiting for the troops to arrive to sort it out the legalities.

All hypothetical of course - as I said in my first post on this thread:

Be helpful if the full video were available - just to arrive at an informed opinion.

[Kenr6583]

Wow, yes, many hypotheticals. If you had read what was reported it states that the individual attacked the officer while he was attempting to film them with his cellphone. And you want to speak of legalities, how about not wearing a helmet, not stopping when ordered by the police, driving without a license. Are those enough legal violations?

[pipoz4444]

I agree, pippo - if you transgress the local laws, you should be accountable.

The point I am making is that we don't know what lead up to the altercation between the Thai BiB, and the NZ brothers.

Take this report in the local press for instance:

Even in NZ (I assume), and certainly in the various Australian state jurisdictions, a cop needs to have a legal reason to pull his gun. In Thailand, who knows.

Looking at the video that I have seen, one of the brothers seems to be restraining Somsak in self-protection mode, while the other is holding the gun in a very, "what the faark is going on here" mode.

So if earlier video exists, and hopefully it does, everything should become a lot clearer. There have been several instances that I can remember where earlier, lead-up footage of incidents in LOS have resulted in a totally different understanding of what actually happened.

Hi JS and I don't think the lead up will be relevant to the actions of the two guys. They say and he says?? If there is a earlier video of it, it will not come to light.

From my experience Thai Police don't go out of their way to pull out their guns on tourists riding motorbikes fast or slow, unless the Thai police are threatened in some way. I am not aware of Thai Policeman shooting a tourist in the past over a traffic infringement and I am sure if one did he would be in deep Sh...t. It would be a bit like shooting the golden goose and most Thai Police would probably see a tourist as an opportunity.

Regardless of the speed they were travelling at, if a Thai Police was to signal you to pull over, any sane or smart person would just pull over, as it is only a matter of negotiation, after that. Unless of course you are arrogant or plain stupid, thinking you can do whatever you wants in a foreign country.

All these two guys had to do was stop and get a 1000 Baht out of each of their pockets and it was over. Its is not as though they could not afford 1000 B each.

I just don't see what looks like small stature Thai policemen pulling them over by himself and doing a Dirty Harry on them. These guys are 36 and 38 years old and appear to be solid framed, (one is certainly tall & solid) when compared to the Thai policemen on the ground.

My view is that they stopped and he stopped. Negotiations started and they insulted him with a few Baht. He then went to record their details and they chose to escalate it to the point where they are now. Just my view and some may consider speculation.

Either way and for sure, it is going to cost them a hell of a lot more from this point one and a lot of grief.

Their only saving grace is that the bullet didn't hit the Thai Policemen when the gun discharged, regardless of who pulled the trigger .

pipoz4444

[jackspratt]

Wow, yes, many hypotheticals. If you had read what was reported it states that the individual attacked the officer while he was attempting to film them with his cellphone. And you want to speak of legalities, how about not wearing a helmet, not stopping when ordered by the police, driving without a license. Are those enough legal violations?

I did read the report - this is what is says:

The speeding occurred in front of a noodle restaurant on Chao Fah Tawan Ork Road, Phuket’s Muang district, after the two Kiwis failed to stop when notified and after Somsak pursued them to a nearby street-side noodle shop, take a video clip of the two, before being assaulted by them.

Obviously it's not Somsak's video that is being linked. Have we seen the entirety of the video that was linked - if not, why not?

Interesting, isn't it.

Legalities - yes, I have never questioned that they were probably breaking some laws. The more interesting part is how did it escalate to the situation that is shown in the video ie why did they feel it necessary to tackle the cop, and end up in possession of his gun.

If there is no more video, it becomes he said/they said, plus whatever other witnesses there were.

[Khun Paul]

All the hyperbole and statements about may or maynot happened is amusing certainly seems to keep some people uttering unintelligent remarks.
We are forgetting the bottom line here more so than in well known western countries , here Plod gestures to you to stop, YOU STOP, simple, not difficult and you are polite and say yes sir three bags full sir. Pay whatever or maybe even a warning and off you go. That to the average person on ho9;liday here is simple , does not need great bain power and can be easily followed.
If you wish to up the ante be prepared to deal with the consequences. There are ZERO mitigating circumstances that they can even offer , only one I CAN REALLY THINK OF AND THAT IS SHEER STUPIDITY

[jackspratt]

All these two guys had to do was stop and get a 1000 Baht out of each of their pockets and it was over. Its is not as though they could not afford 1000 B each.

Exactly - so why they chose not to, and why it escalated, is what is exciting my curiosity. Along with having lived here long enough to know that things are never as they first might seem.

I see it was due in court last Monday, but as is so often the case in LOS, no follow-up reports (in the English language media at least) that I can find.

I also read that dad has a few quid - that could be the answer to the eventual successful resolution of the whole incident.

[Kenr6583]

Wow, yes, many hypotheticals. If you had read what was reported it states that the individual attacked the officer while he was attempting to film them with his cellphone. And you want to speak of legalities, how about not wearing a helmet, not stopping when ordered by the police, driving without a license. Are those enough legal violations?

I did read the report - this is what is says:

The speeding occurred in front of a noodle restaurant on Chao Fah Tawan Ork Road, Phuket’s Muang district, after the two Kiwis failed to stop when notified and after Somsak pursued them to a nearby street-side noodle shop, take a video clip of the two, before being assaulted by them.

Obviously it's not Somsak's video that is being linked. Have we seen the entirety of the video that was linked - if not, why not?

Interesting, isn't it.

Legalities - yes, I have never questioned that they were probably breaking some laws. The more interesting part is how did it escalate to the situation that is shown in the video ie why did they feel it necessary to tackle the cop, and end up in possession of his gun.

If there is no more video, it becomes he said/they said, plus whatever other witnesses there were.

Correct. So he was attempting to take a video, which he may have or may not have been able to start because one of the brothers attacked him before he could start videotaping.

And why did they take his gun? Maybe, just maybe, the New Zealander is an idiot and the officer was trying to get his gun out to defend himself because he was in a chokehold.

The officer pulled out his phone initially, not his gun.

And that’s the problem with some entitled foreigners, they think they can buy themselves out of trouble. I don’t think that’s going to happen in this case.

[jackspratt]

Correct. So he was attempting to take a video, which he may have or may not have been able to start because one of the brothers attacked him before he could start videotaping.

And why did they take his gun? Maybe, just maybe, the New Zealander is an idiot and the officer was trying to get his gun out to defend himself because he was in a chokehold.

The officer pulled out his phone initially, not his gun.

So many hypotheticals ....... but so little (video) evidence.

Did Sgt Somsak manage to start his video before being attacked, and if yes, where is his footage?

Did the intrepid camera-person whose video we have seen, actually record more, and if so, where is the extra footage?

In the absence of supporting video, should Sgt Somsak's self-serving version be taken at face value? Independent witnesses are important here. For example, at what point did Somsak draw his weapon?

At the end of the day, I am quite happy to accept, based on real evidence, that the NZ bros were just a couple of lawless thugs, and poor old Sgt Somsak, acting in accordance with his duty, was the victim of their thuggery.

But I am not there yet. And, I suspect, neither is the size of the brown paper bag.

[tamada]

All these two guys had to do was stop and get a 1000 Baht out of each of their pockets and it was over. Its is not as though they could not afford 1000 B each.

Exactly - so why they chose not to, and why it escalated, is what is exciting my curiosity. Along with having lived here long enough to know that things are never as they first might seem.

I see it was due in court last Monday, but as is so often the case in LOS, no follow-up reports (in the English language media at least) that I can find.

I also read that dad has a few quid - that could be the answer to the eventual successful resolution of the whole incident.

NZ media reports that the father claims hasn't spoken with his sons since the day after they assaulted the cop and he's staying at home for now.

"Asked whether he intended to travel to Thailand, Day said “I’m sure at some stage that will be appropriate”."

https://www.waikatotimes.co.nz/nz-news/ ... us-support

[pipoz4444]

[/quote]

So many hypotheticals ....... but so little (video) evidence.

At the end of the day, I am quite happy to accept, based on real evidence, that the NZ bros were just a couple of lawless thugs, and poor old Sgt Somsak, acting in accordance with his duty, was the victim of their thuggery.

But I am not there yet. And, I suspect, neither is the size of the brown paper bag.
[/quote]

Sorry JS but it is well past the BPB stage.

Too many questions would be asked and too many people are now involved, with one hand extending from their torso. Plus neither Oscar and Hamish sound the same as Vorayuth when pronounced slowly

pipoz4444

[jackspratt]

All the hyperbole and statements about may or maynot happened is amusing certainly seems to keep some people uttering unintelligent remarks.

What hyperbole and unintelligent remarks are you referring to, KP?

[jackspratt]

Sorry JS but it is well past the BPB stage.

I'm not so sure, pipo.

As I pointed out above, it has all gone very quiet, including the scheduled court case.

That may be a sign that "negotiations" are afoot.

[Kenr6583]

Correct. So he was attempting to take a video, which he may have or may not have been able to start because one of the brothers attacked him before he could start videotaping.

And why did they take his gun? Maybe, just maybe, the New Zealander is an idiot and the officer was trying to get his gun out to defend himself because he was in a chokehold.

The officer pulled out his phone initially, not his gun.

So many hypotheticals ....... but so little (video) evidence.

Did Sgt Somsak manage to start his video before being attacked, and if yes, where is his footage?

Did the intrepid camera-person whose video we have seen, actually record more, and if so, where is the extra footage?

In the absence of supporting video, should Sgt Somsak's self-serving version be taken at face value? Independent witnesses are important here. For example, at what point did Somsak draw his weapon?

At the end of the day, I am quite happy to accept, based on real evidence, that the NZ bros were just a couple of lawless thugs, and poor old Sgt Somsak, acting in accordance with his duty, was the victim of their thuggery.

But I am not there yet. And, I suspect, neither is the size of the brown paper bag.

Don’t you think all of your concerns will be addressed by their lawyer? Is it a requirement for law enforcement to make public all evidence before a trial even begins? You seem to want answers and evidence that you’re not even entitled to.

[jackspratt]

Is it a requirement for law enforcement to make public all evidence before a trial even begins? You seem to want answers and evidence that you’re not even entitled to.

In Thailand - not as far as I am aware.

It's certainly not the case in Australia, nor in the UK as I understand it.

Of course, some of the evidence in this dust-up is already in the public domain. That being the case, I wonder why, if there is more, it hasn't been leaked yet.

[Kenr6583]

Is it a requirement for law enforcement to make public all evidence before a trial even begins? You seem to want answers and evidence that you’re not even entitled to.

In Thailand - not as far as I am aware.

It's certainly not the case in Australia, nor in the UK as I understand it.

Of course, some of the evidence in this dust-up is already in the public domain. That being the case, I wonder why, if there is more, it hasn't been leaked yet.

The only reason the video was made public is because a Thai citizen posted it online. The government had nothing to do with it.

[jackspratt]

Indeed - and my question is, if there is more (which I am assuming there is), why has the Thai citizen not posted it?

That is the point I have been making in several earlier posts.

[Kenr6583]

Indeed - and my question is, if there is more (which I am assuming there is), why has the Thai citizen not posted it?

That is the point I have been making in several earlier posts.

If, if, if. You can only assume. You seem to be harping about wanting to see something you don't know if it even exists.

[maaka]

in nearly every crime of the hour on the news here, there is CCTV footage, of cars cruising at night being shot at, people climbing over fences and into houses, people shooting at people, beating them up, etc etc but not here, so far..indeed, it is a miracle that none of that has surfaced on tv..

[jackspratt]

Great minds think alike, maaka.

Of course, in this case, we do have some video of the event being plastered over the internet.

What we don't have is (what might be a completely plausible confirmation) whether, or why, that video has started late in the conflict, and/or ended early.

If I, or perhaps anyone, was filming an apparent assault on a BiB, including the loss of his service pistol, why you would stop filming the crucial events which precede the arrival of the cavalry. And what happens when they do arrive.

[tamada]

Great minds think alike, maaka.

Of course, in this case, we do have some video of the event being plastered over the internet.

What we don't have is (what might be a completely plausible confirmation) whether, or why, that video has started late in the conflict, and/or ended early.

If I, or perhaps anyone, was filming an apparent assault on a BiB, including the loss of his service pistol, why you would stop filming the crucial events which precede the arrival of the cavalry. And what happens when they do arrive.

Are you serious? If I came across some idiots of any breed wrestling a gun from a cop or anyone for that matter, I wouldn't be standing around trying to capture anything on my phone, let alone the whole event. But that's probably just me. Self preservation trumps being a sticky beak masquerading as being public spirited when firearms are concerned.

You appear hell bent on assuming there's more phone video than currently being shared and that it's being suppressed? Since this is a high-profile assault on a police officer, there's a very, very good chance that any and all other smartphone and cctv evidence has already been secured by the RTP. This in order for any investigation to be untainted by witless speculation and gossip on social media.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I going shopping at HomePro and I can't find my kevlar and body cam.