Jump to content
BANGKOK 26 June 2019 17:41
snoop1130

Italian expat faces recklessness causing death charge over fatal boat collision

Recommended Posts

10 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

 

I just read the article and found this little gem.

"Police claim that the reckless and negligent behaviour"

and?  Two directly contradictory legal terms and the Mirror thinks it could be both, hillarious, I suggest you change your reading material!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, SiSePuede419 said:

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

 

No one "needs" to be driving a boat for "pleasure".

 

He wasn't fishing for food.

 

He wasn't going from Point A to Point B for transportation.

 

Another rich idiot who thinks he's superior to locals.

 

LOOK AT ME!  I'M ON A BOAT!  I'M RICHER THAN YOU.

I've owned boats for a large part of my adult life, gained great pleasure from driving them and catching fish for my food.

I am richer, smarter and superior to you.

 

 

Edited by Old Croc
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2019 at 8:44 PM, Aussieroaming said:

I wonder who was actually at fault and whether either had their maritime licence. One thing guaranteed is that the Italian is guilty unless he was squeaky clean and can prove it.

 

 

The Thai boat does not look like a "Longtail" to me. Where is the motor and prop shaft. All i see is a wooden paddle.

Share this post


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

errrr that's how forums work - if you want to keep it private PM

 

 

Errr - you were the one who asked "why I was putting in my 2 pennies worth" (or words to that effect) so I could refer you to your own statement above!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 11:41 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Yep, that's the prior article I also had read from the same news outlet, making a total of two from them on this incident that I'm aware of... And neither of them has any meaningful, specific details about when, where, or how the collision occurred that would in any way help determine guilt/responsibility/recklessness.

 

And why would they? Such information is in a sane country usually not disclosed. Thailand is not USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 5:06 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, let's start with a dead person.

 

So if your wife wakes up from bed some night while you're sleeping, goes out to the balcony and jumps to her death, are you automatically a murderer???  Just because she's dead and you're there?

 

In my book, the answer would be no... But perhaps your view is you would automatically be a murderer, just as you assume the farang boat guy is recklessly responsible for a death -- without absolutely no details of just how that death occurred and under what circumstances.

 

Just because the Thai guy is dead doesn't automatically mean the farang guy is recklessly responsible...  He may well be.... But I'd kinda like to see some proof or evidence first.

 

 

First of all: if your wife jumps to her death and you are in the house (confirmed by witnesses) you are most likely the first suspect.

 

Now the case above: which part after nearly 100 posts don't you grasp? 

Victim was a rowing boat.

Culprits boat was under power.

 

Now ... lets open marine law book number one (there is only one, so that is easy): who is at fault? There is a reason why I wrote "victim" and "culprit".

The power boat is at FAULT BY DEFINITION OF THE LAW. So the captain now goes to court. AND THE COURT DECIDES IF THERE ARE REASONS FOR NOT BEING GUILTY or for REDUCING THE GUILT ...

 

Can't really be so hard to grasp.

 

And next rule:

Which ships boats have "the right of way" even if other rules say otherwise?

The term is "ships with reduced maneuverability" and that are:

  • carrier under maneuver
  • mine clearer or mine layer
  • ships involved in a rescue operation
  • ships in distress, engine fault or sitting on ground
  • a fire ship
  • ships with high draft inside of a shipping lane they can not leave
  • ships doing marine work, as e.g. 
    • Dredgers
    • cable layers
    • pipeline layers
    • etc.
  • and last but not least: a fishing vessel, with its nets out

 

So: if you run with a powered (speeding?) boat over a fishing boat that has its nets out, then: YOU ARE AT FAULT. 

 

No idea why you want to dispute that and think YOU need more information from Thai media to be rest assured that the captain of the _culprit_ boat is treated fairly. 

 

And then comes RULE NUMBER ONE on the water: stay <deleted> clear from everything! If you god damn THINK you have the "hold course obligation" (that is how right of way is called, loosely translated - to lazy to look up the perfect english translation), then you blow your horn: five or more short blows with the horn, to inform the "opponent" that you suppose him to change course.

 

AND IF HE DOES NOT CHANGE COURSE FOR WHAT EVER REASON: YOU CHANGE COURSE. Do you get it? Having "the right of way" does not give you the right to cause a collision and then walk away and say: IT WAS HIS FAULT. No: it still was your fault. You have to handle your boat/ship in a way: THAT NOTHING CAN HAPPEN.

 

So, regardless how you want to turn it: that guy belongs into court. And then we can talk how plausible his defenses are. Perhaps he had a heat stroke and ran half unconcious over the poor Thai in his tiny boat ... that would be an excuse. Perhaps he was drunk. Perhaps he thought that "long tail" had an engine and actually "would yield passage" .... 

 

Sorry, your attitude, is simply wrong. Mentally, Morally and Legally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 7:35 PM, Isaanbiker said:

[.....] radars these days are pretty good. But only if you look at them. 

I really wonder ... which part of: a wooden boat is made from ... tata tata tata "Wood" do people not grasp in this forum?

Again: a wooden boat is made from ... price question ... you win if you guess it right ... made from? Please tell me: from what material is a wooden boat made?

 

And now please check what a RADAR is ... can't be so hard to grasp that RADAR can only pick up METAL!!! Well, not 100% true. There are a few other things it can pick up, but: NOT WOOD. NOT PLASTIC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,  thanks for brightening my day guys.  This topic has been hilarious what with all the Collision Regs experts, TV Marine Accident  Investigation Branch  and radar techies (forward-looking surface sonar? Sounds good), hilarious, really,  very entertaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wanna try to guess, listening the voices going around in Rawai area, how the story is putting all the various pieces together:

  1. The long tail was not rowing: how could it have been off Ko Bon? in fact, as you can see from the photos, at the stern there is the engine housing (the hole). Engine that in the accident fell into the water.
  2. The long tail was trolling probably at about 4-5 knots on parallel route of the Robalo fishing boat. The old pilot (listening to gossip) is almost totally deaf and sees little: that's why the boat captain's driving license has expired and never renewed and the boat (which at the origin was equipped with the classic engine) is not even registered, so even not insured.
  3. Robalo boat was going on straight route from Chalong to Racha at about 18 knots. The captain has a regular Thai boat driving license and also as a shipboard engineer. The boat is regularly registered and insured.
  4. It seems that suddenly the long tail turns crossing the path of the Robalo that slows down instantly and turns to starboard.
  5. Following the clash that was not strong, given the minimum damage reported by the two boats, the long tail engine and the pilot fall into the water. Probably the head of the long tail pilot was hit by some parts of the motor.
  6. The pilot of the Robalo immediately throws itself into the water to recover the body of the long tail pilot that, despite not having obvious wounds, does not regain consciousness
  7. The Captain of the Robalo repeatedly calls the MayDay by radio without receiving any response and then decides to immediately return the long tail pilot to Chalong while alerting the ambulance by mobile.
  8. People say that Chalong police, however not competent, has never questioned the pilot of the Robalo
  9. The competent maritime police of Chalong has already questioned the pilot of the Robalo, putting everything on record
  10. Someone says that the scientific (forensic) police have already inspected the boats, reporting that the impact, given the minimum damage, was not violent, so the Robalo had already visibly slowed down.
  11. It seems that the family of the deceased, with the police mediation, had initially agreed for 1.2 million of bath (no one can feel good about his conscience even if death is accidental) . Later, in the face of a higher demand (voices say that family raised the amount to 1.3 mln) despite the agreement reached, the matter passed to the lawyers on the advice (it seems) of the police itself .
Edited by LeungKen
Reduce font size

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some troll posts and replies have been removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot something:

  1. About 2 hours after the accident the maritime police with the pilot of Robalo and his boat went to recover the long tail that had drifted for about 1 mile then towing it to the Rawai jetty
  2. Size of the boats are nearly the same: both are over 7 meter and less than 8. Robalo is about 15 years old but with new engine. The long tail is just built and has no more than 1 month of life.
  3. The pilot of the Robalo was never arrested and never realized on bail.

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...