Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
webfact

Phuket Mob Surrounds British Expat Who Hit Motorcyclist

Recommended Posts

if i remember well, 16yo can obtain a driving licence fit to drive only motorcycles under 110cc.

that honda is how much? i can spot a front disc brake wider that the standard, plus tires apparently too tight for rims...

drunk driving or not, if i were the brit i'd hire a laywer, and if there are enough circumstances, i'd sue the boy's family

or, if indeed he was drink driving and caused an accident, he takes responsibility for his stupidity and fairly compensates the injured rider...

If the 16 year old boy was not riding the motorbike legally, he should not get any compensation, and if the Brit was driving over the drink driving limit, he should be jailed and fined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i remember well, 16yo can obtain a driving licence fit to drive only motorcycles under 110cc.

that honda is how much? i can spot a front disc brake wider that the standard, plus tires apparently too tight for rims...

drunk driving or not, if i were the brit i'd hire a laywer, and if there are enough circumstances, i'd sue the boy's family

or, if indeed he was drink driving and caused an accident, he takes responsibility for his stupidity and fairly compensates the injured rider...

Only if the motorbike rider was riding legally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a silly question, but was the 16 year old victim licensed? and if he was not, was he also fined for driving without a license?

What's that got to do with the incident - no driving license, no helmet, under the influence. I'm talking about the Thai 'victim' here. If it's proven that the farang was drunk then that will be the crux of an accident investigation/legal proceedings.

If anyone is riding a motor cycle underage or without a helmet etc, and is hurt in an accident, they and/or their parents should be punished by law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two drunk Thais kicked me and the motorcycle over in Kalasin Sunday at 5:30 a/m I was going for coffee in the cycle lane very slowy, they were walking towards me, I went down on the higway. The police report says that my bike fell down, no mention of the one Thai who kicked me over. I hope he broke his leg, since I suffered more injuries to add to the roll I took 3 weeks ago.

I will not stop if I hit a Thai, I will keep going. I hope lots of Thais are reading this.

So would I, but lots of Thais reading this????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i remember well, 16yo can obtain a driving licence fit to drive only motorcycles under 110cc.

that honda is how much? i can spot a front disc brake wider that the standard, plus tires apparently too tight for rims...

drunk driving or not, if i were the brit i'd hire a laywer, and if there are enough circumstances, i'd sue the boy's family

or, if indeed he was drink driving and caused an accident, he takes responsibility for his stupidity and fairly compensates the injured rider...

Only if the motorbike rider was riding legally.

No, also if he was underage or did not have a DL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two drunk Thais kicked me and the motorcycle over in Kalasin Sunday at 5:30 a/m I was going for coffee in the cycle lane very slowy, they were walking towards me, I went down on the higway. The police report says that my bike fell down, no mention of the one Thai who kicked me over. I hope he broke his leg, since I suffered more injuries to add to the roll I took 3 weeks ago.

I will not stop if I hit a Thai, I will keep going. I hope lots of Thais are reading this.

So a Thai kicks you over and now you hate Thais? Sounds like you're in the wrong place.

Who Mentioned hating Thais?

That was the impression your post gave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the driver was drunk...he's guilty..end of story. What the young man was doing is realy irrelevant - he could have been riding a pushbike - or even just walking down the street and the drunk driver hit him. A comment about not being able to smell alcohol on the breath is quite correct which is why the police usually say they could smell liquor on the breath. If you can't smell if someone (their breath) has been drinking then you need to be concerned, it is one of the easiest smells to detect...unless of course you have been drinking yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we know is that there was an accident involving a 16 YO Thai and a 48 YO Brit. The Thai is in hospital. A newspaper report claims that one police officer said he smelled alcohol on the Brit.

Edited by LivinginKata
rude remark removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we know is that there was an accident involving a 16 YO Thai and a 48 YO Brit. The Thai is in hospital. A newspaper report claims that one police officer said he smelled alcohol on the Brit.

You have a road accident between a 16 year old Thai kid, and a 48 year old Brit. One has money, the other doesn't. In between, is a corrupt police force, and probably a corrupt police officer in charge of the investigation.

No doubt, he will be looking for his "mediation of compensation and lessening of charges commisssion."

If the same accident occurred, but was Thai on Thai, it probably would never have made the news. The reason this is news, is because of the interest all the expats here have in just how much money they are going to "screw" out of the Brit.

It's not rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@bearpolar. You've hit the nail on the head, the police have claimed that they smelt alcohol on his breath so all the TV hang 'em high brigade have convicted Ian already with at least one keyboard warrior calling for his deportation.

I will add that I have no time for people driving when drunk or even with enough alcohol to impair their judgement, there is no excuse for it whatsoever, but I don't know if Ian had one or ten glasses of wine, or indeed any, and I suspect no one who has posted here does either.

Unlike a lot of other posters who seem to know the facts, I wasn't there, so I will wait for the truth to out.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

More importantly, we don't know who actually caused the accident. Just because Ian may have been driving under the influence, that does not automatically mean the accident was his fault.

Yes, I have yet to see any reporting on how this accident occurred. However, if Ian is proven to have been over the alcohol limit then that places him at a disadvantage in answering the investigators.

A "disadvantage" yes - but not automatically at fault.

Picture this scenario.

You are sober, driving along, totally legal in every way. A 16 year old Thai kid pulls out of a Soi, right in your path, and you have right of way. You hit him. It's his fault.

Now picture the same scenario, but you are driving along after a few bottles of suds, maybe drunk, may be just a couple of bottles after work, now the whole lot is your fault. Forget about the kid pulled out of a Soi - you wear the lot.

We don't know the circumstances of this accident - probably never will know the truth. Ma be Ian was really drunk and ran up the back of the Thai kid. May be the Thai kid pulled out in front of him.

One thing is for sure, a corrupt police force is a corrupt police force, and Ian has just "given them an inch" - and no doubt they "will take a mile."

He's lucky he didn't kill the kid, otherwise, he would be sitting in a gaol cell right now, calling in all of his assets to buy his freedom back, and may be looking at going back home, to work in the real world, rather than the lifestyle he has made here, and yes, it could happen to any of us, given certain circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE PG

Correction: The original story yesterday named the driver, as repeatedly confirmed and spelled out to our reporters by Thalang Police Sub Lt Niphon Temsang, as "Martin Ian Potter". His reports of the surname were incorrect. The driver charged over the incident was Martin Ian Foster, who reportedly works in the hotel industry on Koh Maphrao.
The Gazette obtained the correction today when responsible police officers at Thalang Police Station allowed our reporters to finally sight the charge sheet, a request which had been denied by Sub Lt Niphon.

Sub Lt Niphon was not available today for comment.

So,

Martin Ian Foster, who reportedly works in the hotel industry on Koh Maphrao.

Better known to the community? coffee1.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "disadvantage" yes - but not automatically at fault.

Picture this scenario.

You are sober, driving along, totally legal in every way. A 16 year old Thai kid pulls out of a Soi, right in your path, and you have right of way. You hit him. It's his fault.

Now picture the same scenario, but you are driving along after a few bottles of suds, maybe drunk, may be just a couple of bottles after work, now the whole lot is your fault. Forget about the kid pulled out of a Soi - you wear the lot.

Yes, you would be blamed for the accident, both here and in other countries. If only because you were drunk, reactions delayed, etc.

Don't drink and drive and open yourself to these things, here or anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "disadvantage" yes - but not automatically at fault.

Picture this scenario.

You are sober, driving along, totally legal in every way. A 16 year old Thai kid pulls out of a Soi, right in your path, and you have right of way. You hit him. It's his fault.

Now picture the same scenario, but you are driving along after a few bottles of suds, maybe drunk, may be just a couple of bottles after work, now the whole lot is your fault. Forget about the kid pulled out of a Soi - you wear the lot.

Yes, you would be blamed for the accident, both here and in other countries. If only because you were drunk, reactions delayed, etc.

Don't drink and drive and open yourself to these things, here or anywhere else.

Not true.

The insurance companies would argue contributory negligence for compensation purposes, but the fault of the accident still remains, mostly, with one party.

By your reasoning, if there was an accident involving two drink drivers, both would be at fault, for the one accident. That is possible, but pretty rare.

If you are driving along, under the influence, and someone goes through a red light, for example, and crashes into you, the accident is not your fault, just becaue you are under the influence. Sure, you will be fined drink driving, but the fault of the accident remains with the red light runner.

Agreed, you are exposing yourself here to the bigger rip off, if you have an accident and have been drinking.

Given "the mob" becoming aggressive with the farang, I doubt there would be any witnesses come forward to corroborate his possible version of events that the kid pulled out in front of him, even though he may have.

That said, as mentioned, the kid could have been in the right and this drunk farang run up the back of him, so, in that case, he should wear the lot.

We may never know what really happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "disadvantage" yes - but not automatically at fault.

Picture this scenario.

You are sober, driving along, totally legal in every way. A 16 year old Thai kid pulls out of a Soi, right in your path, and you have right of way. You hit him. It's his fault.

Now picture the same scenario, but you are driving along after a few bottles of suds, maybe drunk, may be just a couple of bottles after work, now the whole lot is your fault. Forget about the kid pulled out of a Soi - you wear the lot.

Yes, you would be blamed for the accident, both here and in other countries. If only because you were drunk, reactions delayed, etc.

Don't drink and drive and open yourself to these things, here or anywhere else.

Not true.

The insurance companies would argue contributory negligence for compensation purposes, but the fault of the accident still remains, mostly, with one party.

By your reasoning, if there was an accident involving two drink drivers, both would be at fault, for the one accident. That is possible, but pretty rare.

If you are driving along, under the influence, and someone goes through a red light, for example, and crashes into you, the accident is not your fault, just becaue you are under the influence. Sure, you will be fined drink driving, but the fault of the accident remains with the red light runner.

Agreed, you are exposing yourself here to the bigger rip off, if you have an accident and have been drinking.

Given "the mob" becoming aggressive with the farang, I doubt there would be any witnesses come forward to corroborate his possible version of events that the kid pulled out in front of him, even though he may have.

That said, as mentioned, the kid could have been in the right and this drunk farang run up the back of him, so, in that case, he should wear the lot.

We may never know what really happened.

If it is clear what happened it becomes a different stiry, like with the red light example, but in your previous example it will never be clear who was at fault, therefor the drunk driver was at fault.

You're wrong regarding insurance companies BTW, in many countries they won't even care too much, since they won't pay if drunk driving is involved. Or they'll only pay 3rd party and recoup from the drunk driver.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...