Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
webfact

Dead boy's family in Phuket 'mob' against Russians

Recommended Posts

It does and for not using a helmet.. then something that should not have resulted in death can be death. I find it not fair to put that 100% on the car driver. If someone does not wear a helmet and dies of head injury it should be taken into account and not put 100% on the car driver. That is just my opinion anyway.

As a car and bike driver i see both sides of the story and I always wear a helmet, and when on the big bike not scooter I also wear protective gear.

Stupid post. The onus is on the CAR driver to have checked for oncoming traffic before pulling out, exactly the same as in our civilised Western countries. The fact that the kid wasn't wearing a helmet would most certainly NOT have been taken into consideration, whether the victim of this insensible manouver had died or not. Same as whether lights were on or not, albeit this would have been taken into consideration when sentencing.

In case anyone has forgotten, been out of their home countries too long, the larger the vehicle, the more responsibility is on the driver to take extra caution. Bicyles/pedestrians always have the right of way when crossing across an outgoing flow of traffic for instance. Not so here, where one must run for one's life before even a rare crossing signal turns from red to green. Selfish, inconsiderate bastards.The drivers, that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have been saying all the time here.. doing a U turn is a special manouvre and by doing so you need to let everyone else pass you have no right of way so if someone slams into you your at fault. Seems logic.. only non logic thing is the lights.

Its good that these laws exist else motorcycles would be even more at risk by cars as they already are.. But same goes for a motorcycle doing a U turn and you slamming into it they will be at fault.

Not if someone slams into you from behind or into the driver's side when trying to pass on the inside lane, I've seen imbeciles do that.

from the OP it's not quite clear in which direction the boy was traveling...

knocking the boy – who was travelling in the same direction – off his bike

in which same direction? in the direction she was traveling prior to executing the U-turn or after that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does and for not using a helmet.. then something that should not have resulted in death can be death. I find it not fair to put that 100% on the car driver. If someone does not wear a helmet and dies of head injury it should be taken into account and not put 100% on the car driver. That is just my opinion anyway.

As a car and bike driver i see both sides of the story and I always wear a helmet, and when on the big bike not scooter I also wear protective gear.

Stupid post. The onus is on the CAR driver to have checked for oncoming traffic before pulling out, exactly the same as in our civilised Western countries. The fact that the kid wasn't wearing a helmet would most certainly NOT have been taken into consideration, whether the victim of this insensible manouver had died or not. Same as whether lights were on or not, albeit this would have been taken into consideration when sentencing.

In case anyone has forgotten, been out of their home countries too long, the larger the vehicle, the more responsibility is on the driver to take extra caution. Bicyles/pedestrians always have the right of way when crossing across an outgoing flow of traffic for instance. Not so here, where one must run for one's life before even a rare crossing signal turns from red to green. Selfish, inconsiderate bastards.The drivers, that is.

In my home country they would look if the guy wore an helmet as it makes the situation worse then it else would have been.

You are 100% right the first and most responsible is the car driver and driving off after an accident is 100% wrong.

But if the accident is worse as it should be because of no helmet it should be taken into account. Besides you MUST wear a helmet to be legal so its part of the problem.

If a pedestrian should cross a highway where he should not be you cant blame the car driver alone if he gets hit its also the pedestrians fault to cross somewhere at a dangerous spot. Different story if you hit someone at a zebra crossing.

I will stand by my view that the car driver is most guilty and an absolute <deleted> (murderer whatever) to drive off, but IF cause of dead is head injury not wearing a helmet certainly is a reason and has to be taken into account. The accident should not have happend but could end up much worse because of no helmet and he had to wear one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the accident is worse as it should be because of no helmet it should be taken into account. Besides you MUST wear a helmet to be legal so its part of the problem.

The victim is dead, the question of whether he was driving illegally by not wearing a helmet is a non sequitur but would be taken into account when sentencing, exactly the same as if he had no lights. Hardly sue him can they? Even here in Lalaland.

If a pedestrian should cross a highway where he should not be you cant blame the car driver alone if he gets hit its also the pedestrians fault to cross somewhere at a dangerous spot.

In my country (puffs out chest), you would most certainly be at fault for not using due caution/diligence when exiting without checking for someone not encased in the same metal protection you have.

Edited by jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Russian is totally at fault. Nothing to do with the motorcyclist. I can see why the locals are pissed.

They expect farang to be responsible, they know that their own aren't.

Sent from my GT-I9152 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if the accident is worse as it should be because of no helmet it should be taken into account. Besides you MUST wear a helmet to be legal so its part of the problem.

The victim is dead, the question of whether he was driving illegally by not wearing a helmet is a non sequitur but would be taken into account when sentencing, exactly the same as if he had no lights. Hardly sue him can they? Even here in Lalaland.

If a pedestrian should cross a highway where he should not be you cant blame the car driver alone if he gets hit its also the pedestrians fault to cross somewhere at a dangerous spot.

In my country (puffs out chest), you would most certainly be at fault for not using due caution/diligence when exiting without checking for someone not encased in the same metal protection you have.

Jpeg, all I was saying was that the helmet should be taken into consideration with sentencing, so it seems we found common ground. I find the whole hit and run repulsive and the car is at fault for sure. My only point was to take into account that this accident could have been less damaging (if he died of head injury) with sentecing. Not to sue nothing just taking it into account.

My worst fear is to hit one of those idiots without a helmet by accident and killing them. Without a helmet things can end so much worse. Anyway dash cams are the way to go for that.

As for your assumption I am one of those guys proud of my country just look at my posting history. I am not nationalistic at all, I am not a flag waving American or a Brit thinking of the bygone days of the empire. I am just a Dutch guy and readily admit the faults of my own country and the idiots that sometimes come from my country.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This accident came up in a conversation with a good friend last night.

I never ride whilst intoxicated. I always wear my helmet - which is a proper helmet, not a 189 baht piece of plastic. I am licenced in Thailand to drive/ride. I obey the road rules - no speeding, going through red lights etc. My friend is the same.

HOWEVER, we are seriously considering registering each others bike, in the others name. I would still be riding my own bike, but it would be registered in my friends name. We both have fairly new bikes and their value is the same, so, no risk of a financial loss to either of us.

The idea being that we would both have the option of "fleeing the scene" if we feel we were going to be treated unjustly. Eg. extorted for compensation, when the accident was not our fault.

Then, when the police come, you say the bike was loaned to someone and you know very little about them. A "Mr. Dam" - like in another recent thread.

I'm sure many are already doing this.

The concern is, the accident is not our fault, but as farang, we will be extorted out of a lot of money, because a 16 Thai boy, for example, speeding and without a helmet, crashes into us and dies, yet we are made to pay compensation, or go to gaol.

I'm not suggesting it was the Russian's fault, or the Thai kids fault, in this thread.

It's just an idea we discussed last night that gives us both an extra option should we be involved in a serious accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drunk driving is a criminal offense and killing someone whilst driving is manslaughter at least. Put the two together and they are culpable homicide. In the States or Europe you'd be looking at a 7-8 year stretch. Thailand probably 2-3years or a big payout before it got to court. Anyway I'd rather do a couple of years in a Thai prison than live in Russia for the rest of my life. The Russian Embassy will know who these people are and I am confident there will be resolution. Russian investors in Phuket or Thailand don't need the bad press.

Killing someone while driving is in now way automatically a.manslaughter offence. Have you ever driven in Thailand?

Drive 5 miles in heavy traffic and there can be 100 opportunities to hit a bike and be in the legal right. Undertaking, overtaking, weaving in and out, illegal uturns, no signals, no helmets, no lights, there is barely a legal motorcycle driver in Thailand by western standards.

But you are not in the West, so you have to adapt to the ways of the roads in Thailand, otherwise for those who find the types of driving here undiscerning, than I suggest they should use public transport or walk, because it`s not going to change in the foreseeable future.

Motorcycle users are a way of life in some parts of South East Asia and other types of vehicle users have to make allowances, because this is how it is.

There probably are multiple opportunities to smash into motorcyclists, but the art of being a caring and responsible driver in Thailand is having tolerance and avoiding them, or at least doing one`s best to avoid having any accidents, losing those Western attitudes and not assuming that motorcyclists are the lowest form of life on the roads and therefore those in other vehicles should have the absolute right of way.

Well 18 years and no dings, touch wood. It was the statement," killing someone while driving is manslaughter",that was nonsense.

I never assumed motorcycles are the lowest form, just the most likely to get killed so give them a wide berth. Of course, if you realise how bad their driving is, you realise how likely you are to hit them. That takes a foreign driver Ed. .

Thais think its.perfectly normal to drive motorcycles the way they do.

Edited by Thai at Heart
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have been saying all the time here.. doing a U turn is a special manouvre and by doing so you need to let everyone else pass you have no right of way so if someone slams into you your at fault. Seems logic.. only non logic thing is the lights.

Its good that these laws exist else motorcycles would be even more at risk by cars as they already are.. But same goes for a motorcycle doing a U turn and you slamming into it they will be at fault.

Not if someone slams into you from behind or into the driver's side when trying to pass on the inside lane, I've seen imbeciles do that.

from the OP it's not quite clear in which direction the boy was traveling...

knocking the boy who was travelling in the same direction off his bike

in which same direction? in the direction she was traveling prior to executing the U-turn or after that?

Which sums up.perfectly why "undertaking" is such a dangerous maneouver particularly with so many motorcycles on the road

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This accident came up in a conversation with a good friend last night.

I never ride whilst intoxicated. I always wear my helmet - which is a proper helmet, not a 189 baht piece of plastic. I am licenced in Thailand to drive/ride. I obey the road rules - no speeding, going through red lights etc. My friend is the same.

HOWEVER, we are seriously considering registering each others bike, in the others name. I would still be riding my own bike, but it would be registered in my friends name. We both have fairly new bikes and their value is the same, so, no risk of a financial loss to either of us.

The idea being that we would both have the option of "fleeing the scene" if we feel we were going to be treated unjustly. Eg. extorted for compensation, when the accident was not our fault.

Then, when the police come, you say the bike was loaned to someone and you know very little about them. A "Mr. Dam" - like in another recent thread.

I'm sure many are already doing this.

The concern is, the accident is not our fault, but as farang, we will be extorted out of a lot of money, because a 16 Thai boy, for example, speeding and without a helmet, crashes into us and dies, yet we are made to pay compensation, or go to gaol.

I'm not suggesting it was the Russian's fault, or the Thai kids fault, in this thread.

It's just an idea we discussed last night that gives us both an extra option should we be involved in a serious accident.

A more common practice is to buy a second hand bike, but never transfer the green book into your name. You can still update your tax and compulsory insurance each year so it never get picked up if you get stopped at a police checkpoint. Then if you have an accident you can just flee the scene and the original owner of the bike will be held accountable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This accident came up in a conversation with a good friend last night.

I never ride whilst intoxicated. I always wear my helmet - which is a proper helmet, not a 189 baht piece of plastic. I am licenced in Thailand to drive/ride. I obey the road rules - no speeding, going through red lights etc. My friend is the same.

HOWEVER, we are seriously considering registering each others bike, in the others name. I would still be riding my own bike, but it would be registered in my friends name. We both have fairly new bikes and their value is the same, so, no risk of a financial loss to either of us.

The idea being that we would both have the option of "fleeing the scene" if we feel we were going to be treated unjustly. Eg. extorted for compensation, when the accident was not our fault.

Then, when the police come, you say the bike was loaned to someone and you know very little about them. A "Mr. Dam" - like in another recent thread.

I'm sure many are already doing this.

The concern is, the accident is not our fault, but as farang, we will be extorted out of a lot of money, because a 16 Thai boy, for example, speeding and without a helmet, crashes into us and dies, yet we are made to pay compensation, or go to gaol.

I'm not suggesting it was the Russian's fault, or the Thai kids fault, in this thread.

It's just an idea we discussed last night that gives us both an extra option should we be involved in a serious accident.

A more common practice is to buy a second hand bike, but never transfer the green book into your name. You can still update your tax and compulsory insurance each year so it never get picked up if you get stopped at a police checkpoint. Then if you have an accident you can just flee the scene and the original owner of the bike will be held accountable.

I bought a new bike in my name. Prior to that, I just rented.

It appears I'm somewhat exposed, despite being law abiding.

I'm definately going to organise something to offer myself more protection.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thephuketnews.com/arrest-warrant-issued-for-russian-woman-in-phuket-death-crash-46015.php

Do we know what the outcome of this was? If she is able to be identified but the law says she doesnt have to come back to Thailand to "explain" then why have an extradition treaty with Russia? Its normal to feel like running away AND knowing not all people act with integrity/maturity thats why we have laws.. she needs to be brought back to Thailand..she caused the death of a child and IF the Russians wont facilitate with bringing her back so she can have her day in court then hold them responsible..some way..Just makes me angry that HER negligence caused so much heartache and in the end NO JUSTICE as well.

Edited by BudfahRuksa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't blame them for fleeing.

Even my thai friends told me to flee if I ever hit someone and sort it out later. Everyone, even thais fear the mob mentality in these situations.

Edited by hansgruber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thephuketnews.com/arrest-warrant-issued-for-russian-woman-in-phuket-death-crash-46015.php

Do we know what the outcome of this was? If she is able to be identified but the law says she doesnt have to come back to Thailand to "explain" then why have an extradition treaty with Russia? Its normal to feel like running away AND knowing not all people act with integrity/maturity thats why we have laws.. she needs to be brought back to Thailand..she caused the death of a child and IF the Russians wont facilitate with bringing her back so she can have her day in court then hold them responsible..some way..Just makes me angry that HER negligence caused so much heartache and in the end NO JUSTICE as well.

So you think she as a Farang would receive Justice in a Thai court?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thephuketnews.com/arrest-warrant-issued-for-russian-woman-in-phuket-death-crash-46015.php

Do we know what the outcome of this was? If she is able to be identified but the law says she doesnt have to come back to Thailand to "explain" then why have an extradition treaty with Russia? Its normal to feel like running away AND knowing not all people act with integrity/maturity thats why we have laws.. she needs to be brought back to Thailand..she caused the death of a child and IF the Russians wont facilitate with bringing her back so she can have her day in court then hold them responsible..some way..Just makes me angry that HER negligence caused so much heartache and in the end NO JUSTICE as well.

So you think she as a Farang would receive Justice in a Thai court?.

"So you think she as a Farang would receive Justice in a Thai court?" - Thai's don't even receive Justice in a Thai Court.

Only poor Thai's go to gaol in Thailand.

  • Like 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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...