Jump to content
BANGKOK 21 July 2019 11:41
snoop1130

Italian expat faces recklessness causing death charge over fatal boat collision

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, mogandave said:

 


Methinks dude could use a little break...

 

 

Go for it if it stops you persisting for a moment frkm attacking people in these most inane ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 5633572526 said:

A small wooden boat sitting low in the water would probably not show up on radar if that is the instrument you are referring to. 

It should, but there must be a law where the Captain of the bigger boat must visually check for any vehicles in front of him. We're in the 21st century and radars these days are pretty good. But only if you look at them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Benroon said:

Right ok so I've asked you twice for a scenario where the little wooden rowing boat could be to blame - have I missed the reply?

 

Or just perhaps he had a power breakfast that morning, guzzled a few protein shakes down and in a fit of pique rowed his little wooden boat with such ferocity into a reinforced fibre glass power boat that he died of the injuries ?

 

Over to you detective

 

I've never said or suggested the Thai guy was to blame, although since we have zero details on how the crash actually happened, I'm not making any presumptions one way or another.

 

However, even assuming the Thai guy was totally blameless, that doesn't automatically translate into the farang guy being "recklessly responsible" for the death.  Whether the farang guy was "recklessly responsible" would depend on the details of just how the crash occurred, which for now remain undisclosed.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I've never said or suggested the Thai guy was to blame, although since we have zero details on how the crash actually happened, I'm not making any presumptions one way or another.

 

However, even assuming the Thai guy was totally blameless, that doesn't automatically translate into the farang guy being "recklessly responsible" for the death.  Whether the farang guy was "recklessly responsible" would depend on the details of just how the crash occurred, which for now remain undisclosed.

 

 

Actually I think we know enough.  He ran over a boat crossing his path from the starboard side, that is a breach of maritime law, which states that the boat approaching on the right must maintain its course and speed while the other boat must yield.  To not obey that rule would be reckless operation of a boat, to cause an accident while not obeying that rule would be reckless endangerment of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Actually I think we know enough.  He ran over a boat crossing his path from the starboard side, that is a breach of maritime law, which states that the boat approaching on the right must maintain its course and speed while the other boat must yield.  To not obey that rule would be reckless operation of a boat, to cause an accident while not obeying that rule would be reckless endangerment of life.

 

What's your source for that account? Also, in your description above, you're assuming the farang guy was in control of his boat at the time, which may or may not have been the case.

 

Meanwhile, the farang guy isn't facing any charges under maritime law... He's facing criminal charge(s) under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" that probably doesn't hinge on right vs left.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Benroon said:

yep because civilization can't move forward until we've found a radar that can detect a wooden boat (facepalm)

 

For accuracy, in this rather sad materialistic world the guy who finds the 'cure' to baldness will be that richest man on earth !

 

We found it about 40 years ago anyway, they've got radar that can detect a log. 

 

As for the baldness cure, there is a product that will make your hair grow, just no guarantee that it will be on your head, for some its the back of the hands that grow the most, for others its rhe shoulders does that count?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

And what's your source for that account?

 

Just the damage on the port side, how else could it have happened other than he was crossing from the starboard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Just the damage on the port side, how else could it have happened other than he was crossing from the starboard?

 Neither of us know exactly how it happened. That's been my point all along. You're making assumptions without having all the pertinent facts.

 

For me, I'd like to wait and see what the official investigation concludes before presuming anyone guilty.

 

Meanwhile, I found it intriguing that the police released the farang boat guy on bail...all the while saying he was facing a reckless death charge. That's more than a bit unusual IMHO, especially because the police seem to generally fear that farangs facing criminal charges will flee if given the opportunity...

 

Unless, the whole point of the exercise was not to prosecute a criminal case, but instead, to promote the resolution of a financial payout to the family of the deceased.  That also might explain the total absence of any details or description of how/where/when the crash occurred in the police's public statements thus far.

 

The Thai authorities don't have any problem keeping the 70 year old Italian fishermen locked up without bail... all for supposedly illegal fishing. But the boat guy is involved in a collision in which another person dies, and he's released on bail... Go figure.

 

https://www.thephuketnews.com/italian-men-both-70-still-behind-bars-pending-trial-for-fishing-in-national-park-71346.php#MstUmfvg8DVI6g8x.97

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a similar rowboat.  They do sit pretty low in the water. 

 

image.jpeg.61e4158b067f3aaae21f3a03030fd29a.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Neither of us know exactly how it happened. That's been my point all along. You're making assumptions without having all the pertinent facts.
 
For me, I'd like to wait and see what the official investigation concludes before presuming anyone guilty.
 
Meanwhile, I found it intriguing that the police released the farang boat guy on bail...all the while saying he was facing a reckless death charge. That's more than a bit unusual IMHO, especially because the police seem to generally fear that farangs facing criminal charges will flee if given the opportunity...
 
Unless, the whole point of the exercise was not to prosecute a criminal case, but instead, to promote the resolution of a financial payout to the family of the deceased.  That also might explain the total absence of any details or description of how/where/when the crash occurred in the police's public statements thus far.
 
The Thai authorities don't have any problem keeping the 70 year old Italian fishermen locked up without bail... all for supposedly illegal fishing. But the boat guy is involved in a collision in which another person dies, and he's released on bail... Go figure.
 
https://www.thephuketnews.com/italian-men-both-70-still-behind-bars-pending-trial-for-fishing-in-national-park-71346.php#MstUmfvg8DVI6g8x.97
 


We really have no way of knowing the Italian was/is a fisherman do we? As far as l know, those jobs and businesses are protected.

Should we not wait to see what the official investigation concludes, rather making presumptions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 


We really have no way of knowing the Italian was/is a fisherman do we? As far as l know, those jobs and businesses are protected.

Should we not wait to see what the official investigation concludes, rather making presumptions?

 

 

You misunderstood my post... The fishermen (not man) reference was to the two Italians (just coincidentally) who were recently arrested for illegal fishing and have been cooling their heels in jail for weeks without bail, as the article I linked to on their case explains.

 

I wasn't talking about the Italian boat operator who was involved in the collision, in that particular part of my comment. Both Italians, but two separate, different cases. I thought the wording of my post and the link to the related article made that pretty clear.

 

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

What's your source for that account? Also, in your description above, you're assuming the farang guy was in control of his boat at the time, which may or may not have been the case.

 

Meanwhile, the farang guy isn't facing any charges under maritime law... He's facing criminal charge(s) under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" that probably doesn't hinge on right vs left.

 

 

Yes, that assumes he was in control, if not then its a different maritime law he breached but its much the same, you must keep watch, all the time.

 

As for the charge, where did you get that it was under Thai penal code rather than maritime law?  There isn't one mention of the word reckless within the Thai penal code, its not a Thai legal term, while it is the term used in maritime law to describe these kinds of breach, so I think you are wrong.

 

"under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" "

 

And I'm pretty sure you just made that up.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

As for the charge, where did you get that it was under Thai penal code rather than maritime law?  There isn't one mention of the word reckless within the Thai penal code, its not a Thai legal term, while it is the term used in maritime law to describe these kinds of breach, so I think you are wrong.

 

"under Thai criminal law, which I'm pretty sure has its own definition or context for what constitutes "reckless" "

 

And I'm pretty sure you just made that up.

 

 

Actually, no, I did not...

 

This case below was not a maritime case, yet Thai police somehow managed to file the criminal charge:
 

Quote

 

He faces up to ten years in prison or a fine of 200,000 Thai baht on a charge of causing death by negligent or reckless behaviour.

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/haunting-cctv-shows-thai-prostitutes-11821208

 

So I'd say, it's pretty apparent that such a charge is part of Thai criminal law.

 

I'm just guessing, because we're talking about translating Thai legal code into English terms. But they're probably looking at filing under Section 291:


 

Quote

 

Section 291 Whoever, doing the act by negligence and that act causing the other person to death, shall be imprisoned not out of ten years or fined not out of twenty thousand Baht.

 

Same Thai criminal code section was used to prosecute this past local offense:

 

 

Quote

PHUKET: More than than a year after a fatal blaze killed four people at Patong’s famous Tiger Disco nightclub on August 17 last year, the nightclub’s operators will be called to Phuket Court to enter a plea to charges of negligence causing death.

“Tiger Group CEO Piya Isaramalai and Sara Entertainment Co Ltd each face a charge under Section 291 of the Thai Criminal Code: Causing Death through Negligence.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Actually, no, I did not...

 

This case below was not a maritime case, yet Thai police somehow managed to file the criminal charge:
 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/haunting-cctv-shows-thai-prostitutes-11821208

 

So I'd say, it's pretty apparent that such a charge is part of Thai criminal law.

 

I'm just guessing, because we're talking about translating Thai legal code into English terms. But they're probably looking at filing under Section 291:


 

 

Same Thai criminal code section was used to prosecute this past local offense:

 

 

 

 

Negligence is within the Thai penal code, but recklessness is not, they are seperate legal terms defined by degree of foresight of risk, negligence doesn't apply to those in charge of a boat because there is an assumed foresight of risk.  As for, "we're talking about translating Thai legal code into English terms", actually that was done when it was written, its always been bilingual.  Perhaps the journalist who wrote this article translated it themself, and poorly, or just perhaps, this being a maritime offense they are being tried under the maritime offense of recklessness.  It would actually make a lot more sense.

 

A similar incident in Phuket:

"Phuket Governor Norapat Plodthong on Wednesday said the collision of two speedboats the previous day offshore Phuket stemmed from recklessness and urged the Marine Department to enforce laws and regulations strictly"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, unlike you apparently, I'd wait to hear and evaluate the actual evidence and details in the case.... instead of presuming someone guilty pretty much on the basis of nothing other than the outcome.

 

 

Next time you're rear ended lets hear you call for an investigation rather than put automatic blame on the one who rear ended you, its not like the world over the one who hits from behind is held acountable, is it?  No, lets wait to hear and evaluate the actual evidence and details in the case.

 

In truth, they may not get a charge of recklessness under maritime law to stick, the offense being based on awareness and foresight of risk and so may only be able to be determined if he has a boat operators licence, so perhaps they will try him for negligence, which would be based on unknowingly taking a risk which they should have been aware of.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...