Tourist who hit three year old in Chiang Mai is a Canadian professor

[Flustered]

38 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

 A piece of soap and a week in the monkey house may make him realize what he had done by his failure to help a little kid.

You have a picture of a motorbike as your avatar so i will give you some credit for knowing a little about how to ride one.

 

I am a long time member of IAMs and a Road Smart instructor. I have been riding motorbikes for over 50 years in countries all round the world.

 

Watch the video very carefully before commenting on it.

 

The rider does not change lanes at any time. He has no knowledge that some one will be stupid enough to push a pram out into the road, the traffic is moving slowly but freely. The Tuk Tuk in front of him stops and he moves past it on the left to avoid the tuk tuk behind him from hitting him. At this point the parents are pushing the pram out in front of them and he has no time to react. No one would expect a hazard of this nature to happen. It is one of those sickening incidents that cannot be foreseen.

 

He is going quiet slow and stops under control within 10 mtrs. He walks back to the accident and the video is cut. When the video starts again, he is the last one at the scene, obviously having stayed behind to see what was happening. He then rides off.

 

After this, we have no information as to whether he goes to the hospital, the police station or what. All we know is that there is a report from "Manager" in Thai that states he was in a state of shock. No other reports have been forthcoming.

 

The police would charge him with careless driving as a matter of routine. You will notice that unlike some sick idiots inferred, they did not charge him with driving under the influence.

 

When ALL of the facts are known, then it will be possible to comment from knowledge instead of these ridiculous and sick comments that are appearing, probably from FMs who have nothing better to do.

 

For heavens sake, a child has been seriously injured in an ACCIDENT, have some thought before posting. The only people here with any blame are the parents and they will be suffering with remorse and guilt.

 

 

Addendum

 

Having now read the full manager report (in Thai so it took a while) that is the opinion of a reporter and not the police, the only thing I would add is that it would appear from the grainy pictures and the report that he was not wearing a crash helmet. that is a stupid thing to go without but would not contribute to this accident. But one  thing is obvious and not as reported and that is that he was not speeding. The traffic was moving very slowly and he stopped very quickly under control.

 

Once the police have made a full investigation we will know more but not until then.

 

[lvr181]

2 minutes ago, Flustered said:

You have a picture of a motorbike as your avatar so i will give you some credit for knowing a little about how to ride one.

 

I am a long time member of IAMs and a Road Smart instructor. I have been riding motorbikes for over 50 years in countries all round the world.

 

Watch the video very carefully before commenting on it.

 

The rider does not change lanes at any time. He has no knowledge that some one will be stupid enough to push a pram out into the road, the traffic is moving slowly but freely. The Tuk Tuk in front of him stops and he moves past it on the left to avoid the tuk tuk behind him from hitting him. At this point the parents are pushing the pram out in front of them and he has no time to react. No one would expect a hazard of this nature to happen. It is one of those sickening incidents that cannot be foreseen.

 

He is going quiet slow and stops under control within 10 mtrs. He walks back to the accident and the video is cut. When the video starts again, he is the last one at the scene, obviously having stayed behind to see what was happening. He then rides off.

 

After this, we have no information as to whether he goes to the hospital, the police station or what. All we know is that there is a report from "Manager" in Thai that states he was in a state of shock. No other reports have been forthcoming.

 

The police would charge him with careless driving as a matter of routine. You will notice that unlike some sick idiots inferred, they did not charge him with driving under the influence.

 

When ALL of the facts are known, then it will be possible to comment from knowledge instead of these ridiculous and sick comments that are appearing, probably from FMs who have nothing better to do.

 

For heavens sake, a child has been seriously injured in an ACCIDENT, have some thought before posting. The only people here with any blame are the parents and they will be suffering with remorse and guilt.

 

 

Yes I do know how to ride (and raced them as well) and have been riding about the same length of time as you, always with one guiding thought above everything else - Ride to Live!  And always expect the "unexpected"!

[Flustered]

3 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Yes I do know how to ride (and raced them as well) and have been riding about the same length of time as you, always with one guiding thought above everything else - Ride to Live!  And always expect the "unexpected"!

So you would not have had the same accident in the same circumstances?

 

Definition of Accident.

 

an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

[metisdead]

Some nonsensical speculative posts and replies have been removed. 

[gemguy]

On ‎2017‎-‎02‎-‎25 at 6:22 PM, cyberfarang said:

I`ve been driving cars and motorbikes for over 20 years in Thailand and many years before that in England. If I were to run over a child, whether it be my fault or not, my first and only concern would be for the well being of that child. Any person that can knock a child down in a road and then skip the scene, is a pure scumbag and anyone who can see justifications for the absent minded professor`s reasons for running off not caring if the child were dead or alive is also a scumbag.

 

I am positive 1 mil% that if the child in the OP was your granddaughter or a family member you would also form the same opinion as me.

Geez...watch the video.....

He did not skip the scene while the accident was caused by the couple more or less bolting across the road as they could see they had an opportunity to cross the road ....but, done in a unsafe place under very unsafe traffic condition and the result was ....THEY caused an accident ...as in THEY caused an accident to happen.

Watch the Video over and over and over again until you see that the couple with the baby carriage caused the accident.

With your logic one could argue that it was all the fault of the Tuk Tuk that slowed down while the Tuk Tuk should not have slowed down resulting in the man on the motorcycle and the Tuk Tuk immediately behind to start to go around as there was plenty of room to maneuver around...as is the usual practice here in Thailand.

 

If I was a judge and had to make judgement on what I see on the video and for the record and by the law and by the road traffic regulations I would mainly blame the couple for crossing the road illegally and causing an accident while I would also reprimand the driver of the motorcycle and the driver of the Tuk Tuk immediately behind the motorcycle for failing to stop when the traffic in front of them is slowing down and coming to a stop.

The man is from Canada and in Canada that is the law and you can be arrested for doing what he did in Canada.

That is also the law here in Thailand  ...but it is not practised here in Thailand on a routine basis rather everyone simply finds a way around if there is or was room to maneuver around any other vehicle slowing down in the same lane or coming to a stop in the same lane ....so in effect the motorcycle driver was driving "exactly" in the same care free way all Thai drivers drive their vehicles

 

In theory and according to the adopted international motor vehicle laws, If a motor vehicle in front of you begins to slow down then you are also required to slow down and if the motor vehicle slows down and comes to a stop in front of you in YOUR lane , the same lane, you are also required to stop behind the motor vehicle having stopped in front of you.

However, if there are 2 lanes , as seen in the video, then you are allowed to cautiously and safely move over to the other lane to by pass the car or cars slowing down and or stopping in the lane in question.

If you did so in a sudden manner and without caution then your sudden maneuver would be considered reckless ..but not illegal.

Had the motorcycle driver transferred over into the lane beside him and to the left and stayed in that lane then he did not do anything illegal although the sudden and fast maneuver around the Tuk Tuk would be considered reckless ...but not illegal by any means...( IF ) he had of stayed in the other lane to his left after maneuvering around the Tuk Tuk  in front of him slowing down and  coming to a stop.  

But he did not, as seen in the video, rather he quickly maneuvered around the Tuk Tuk , in the same lane and stayed in the same lane AFTER having squeezed by the Tuk Tuk to be confronted by people that were illegally crossing the road.

 

However, by way of everyday "practiced "Thai standard driving routines he did nothing wrong while any Thai person would argue that until they were blue in the face if you pulled out the Motor Vehicle, road and safety traffic regulations and laws and pointed them out.

 

So...do you go strictly by the book or do you go by way of the every day practised driving conduct of the Thai people and argue that he did nothing wrong as he did the same as all the Thai people do on a regular and routine basis ...every minute of the day all over the nation.

 

But we know he will not win that argument and use that as the reason he did not slow down and also come to a stop  behind the Tuk Tuk and without trying to maneuver around the Tuk Tuk.....while stopping is what he should have done.....but then, the Tuk Tuk behind him would have maneuvered around the  Tuk Tuk coming to a stop and more than likely collided with all 3 of the pedestrians illegally crossing the road.

 

Cheers   

[ajarngreg]

4 hours ago, Recog said:

You can clearly see he stayed to help them. And they then cut to the scene of him leaving and no one is behind him. Therefore we must conclude that he is going to the hospital with them. After the incident on the road was cleared. The parents are at fault here.

 

From his perspective the car was stopping for reason, and he couldn't see anyone in front of the vehicle. 

Thats how traffic normally is in Thailand and many other countries. You pass people who stop or slow down. 

Given that it was at night didn't help.

 

Does anyone have any actual useful advice here for this situation?

 

 

   I've just recently stopped in bright daylight to let two old ladies cross the road at the local hospital. The one lady helped the other one who could hardly walk. 

 

The weirdo behind me in an old red pick up got upset that I stopped, freaked out, hit his horn, then drove by and almost killed the two ladies.

 

     When you're driving a vehicle you should be aware that there's sometimes a reason why somebody stops in front of you. 

[Ace of Pop]

I would be Thinking. I pushed the Child into all that Traffic,I'm to blame.All the rest is crafty evasion n blame spreading


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Anthony Loh]

I have seen the video. 100% fault of the parents. Just ran with their trolley right through the traffic on a 4 lane road. They knew that what they are doing was absolutely crazy.

To me they ( the parents ) are not only crazy but they are so stupid that they don't know how to take care they own kid. Of course the Canadian driver also partly in the wrong to race a bike in this way. But under the Thailand traffic law, good lucky to the Canadian man as if I'm not wrong he may need to pay a very expensive price in the courts.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[roo860]

To me they ( the parents ) are not only crazy but they are so stupid that they don't know how to take care they own kid. Of course the Canadian driver also partly in the wrong to race a bike in this way. But under the Thailand traffic law, good lucky to the Canadian man as if I'm not wrong he may need to pay a very expensive price in the courts.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

Racing? Don't talk ridiculous.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[fullcave]

OMG, <deleted> are they doing pushing that poor child into oncoming traffic? 

[redwinecheese]

no excuse whatsoever for the professor to flee the scene

[Flustered]

11 minutes ago, redwinecheese said:

no excuse whatsoever for the professor to flee the scene

You have read the previous posts and watched the video?

 

HE DID NOT FLEE, He was the last one to leave.

 

But then I guess you are just winding us all up so that you can have a sick laugh.

[redwinecheese]

1 minute ago, Flustered said:

HE DID NOT FLEE, He was the last one to leave.

 

If he really didn't flee then he should sue TV news channels who said he did.

[balo]

You have read the previous posts and watched the video?
 
HE DID NOT FLEE, He was the last one to leave.
 
But then I guess you are just winding us all up so that you can have a sick laugh.

We have a news article published where he admitted he fled the scene because he was in a state of shock.

Can you confirm Mark did not flee ? Did you talk to him ?

Yes we have all seen the video and it does not give us the full picture.

[Flustered]

31 minutes ago, redwinecheese said:

If he really didn't flee then he should sue TV news channels who said he did.

You are so good at posting false statements. The only mention of him fleeing the scene is in the Thai report in "Manager" in Thai. There are no others. Thaivisa has just quoted the Manager report, nothing else.

 

Which TV news channels stated he had fled the scene? If you have seen these, then I take it you live in Chiang Mai and can name the TV news channels and you can also tell us about the spot where the accident happened. For instance, were they trying to cross at a crossing or did they just walk out across a busy main road?

 

Your view would be most welcome.

 

 

[Flustered]

4 minutes ago, balo said:

 

 

We have a news article published where he admitted he fled the scene because he was in a state of shock.


 

 

 

Where does he admit to fleeing the scene because he was in a state of shock?

 

In the Manager, the police report that he was confused and in a state of shock. The word flee can also be translated to mean left.

 

I cannot read anywhere where he admits to fleeing.

[redwinecheese]

6 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Thaivisa has just quoted the Manager report

Well then he should sue both

[Flustered]

Just now, redwinecheese said:

Well then he should sue both

And you as well for stating the same?

[Flustered]

I wish that FMs would understand that Thai does not translate easily into English. The Manager report states things like "fatally wounded" when the child is still alive or " motorcycle driven by a foreign man who drove too fast and did not stop"., when he was driving slow and did stop.

 

The report is full of errors and contradictions partially down to translation into English.

[redwinecheese]

29 minutes ago, Flustered said:

And you as well for stating the same?

I'm not Rod McNeil

[farcanell]

2 hours ago, redwinecheese said:

If he really didn't flee then he should sue TV news channels who said he did.

He's probably a little preoccupied.

[farcanell]

2 hours ago, balo said:

 

 

We have a news article published where he admitted he fled the scene because he was in a state of shock.

Can you confirm Mark did not flee ? Did you talk to him ?

Yes we have all seen the video and it does not give us the full picture.
 

 

 

I think that's him, in the picture at the top of the thread, with the parents, in the hospital.

[ajarngreg]

3 hours ago, Flustered said:

You have read the previous posts and watched the video?

 

HE DID NOT FLEE, He was the last one to leave.

 

But then I guess you are just winding us all up so that you can have a sick laugh.

 

 

 

He did flee the scene because he was in such a terrible shock. Or maybe a glass of milk too much?

 

       He fled the scene and only he knows why, and that's not really looking good. I'd never drive away no matter what consequences would arise. 

 

      He's the one who hit the child and you should always drive that you're able to stop when something in front of you is happening.

 

What would you say/write if that was your child? Please be honest now. 

 

      

 

            

[balo]

3 hours ago, Flustered said:

Where does he admit to fleeing the scene because he was in a state of shock?

Thaivisa Newsteam reported it from a Thai source so unless the translation is wrong which I doubt this is what happened. 

 

"Petri was overtaking a four wheel public vehicle. He said that the child was wheeled into his path and he could not avoid her.He fled the scene of the accident saying that he was in a state of shock. "

 

 

[Flustered]

I sometimes worry about the intelligence level of some FMs. Follow the Thaivisa newstream to the source which I have quoted many times (Manager) and then translate the Thai report. It is full of contradictions and ambiguous statements.

 

If you are capable, watch the CCTV. It was not a 4 wheel public vehicle, it was a 3 wheel tuk tuk. Just one of many points the reporter got wrong.

 

He did not flee,. He stopped, parked his bike, walked back and at that point the CCTV stops. When it starts again, he is the last one at the scene.If that is the definition of fleeing, god help us all.

 

It would appear that the child and parent have gone off to the hospital (we do not see the ambulance)l, no police appear to have attended the accident so he is left wondering what to do. yes he is in a state of shock as would anyone who has just been involved in an accident but he did not flee the scene. Please get that through you thick heads.

 

Sooner or later the full story will come out but until we hear from the parents and the rider it is all conjecture.

 

Now here is some further facts for you to digest. ....Look at Google earth at the spot where the accident happened. No crossing at all yet just 30 mtrs away, there are traffic lights and a proper crossing point.

 

 

[ajarngreg]

16 minutes ago, Flustered said:

I sometimes worry about the intelligence level of some FMs. Follow the Thaivisa newstream to the source which I have quoted many times (Manager) and then translate the Thai report. It is full of contradictions and ambiguous statements.

 

If you are capable, watch the CCTV. It was not a 4 wheel public vehicle, it was a 3 wheel tuk tuk. Just one of many points the reporter got wrong.

 

He did not flee,. He stopped, parked his bike, walked back and at that point the CCTV stops. When it starts again, he is the last one at the scene.If that is the definition of fleeing, god help us all.

 

It would appear that the child and parent have gone off to the hospital (we do not see the ambulance)l, no police appear to have attended the accident so he is left wondering what to do. yes he is in a state of shock as would anyone who has just been involved in an accident but he did not flee the scene. Please get that through you thick heads.

 

Sooner or later the full story will come out but until we hear from the parents and the rider it is all conjecture.

 

Now here is some further facts for you to digest. ....Look at Google earth at the spot where the accident happened. No crossing at all yet just 30 mtrs away, there are traffic lights and a proper crossing point.

 

 

 

 

 

   You're definitely right about many points. But you can't delete the professor's own words that he fled the scene because he was in the state of a shock.

 

Imagine it was your child and you might see all from a different view.  

[gemguy]

6 minutes ago, Flustered said:

I sometimes worry about the intelligence level of some FMs. Follow the Thaivisa newstream to the source which I have quoted many times (Manager) and then translate the Thai report. It is full of contradictions and ambiguous statements.

 

If you are capable, watch the CCTV. It was not a 4 wheel public vehicle, it was a 3 wheel tuk tuk. Just one of many points the reporter got wrong.

 

He did not flee,. He stopped, parked his bike, walked back and at that point the CCTV stops. When it starts again, he is the last one at the scene.If that is the definition of fleeing, god help us all.

 

It would appear that the child and parent have gone off to the hospital (we do not see the ambulance)l, no police appear to have attended the accident so he is left wondering what to do. yes he is in a state of shock as would anyone who has just been involved in an accident but he did not flee the scene. Please get that through you thick heads.

 

Sooner or later the full story will come out but until we hear from the parents and the rider it is all conjecture.

 

Now here is some further facts for you to digest. ....Look at Google earth at the spot where the accident happened. No crossing at all yet just 30 mtrs away, there are traffic lights and a proper crossing point.

 

 

Yes, exactly...He did not flee the scene ...but he had to leave the scene, sooner or later while he finally left from the scene of the accident much later and after the Couple and the Child had moved on.

Fleeing the scene means immediately after or within several seconds after while the person quickly leaves the scene and gone ..as in gone.....and in a big hurry to get out of there and not to be seen again and deliberately hiding from the authorities while knowing full well what you did was wrong or your fault and to be held accountable.

That is fleeing the scene.

The guy could have left and never accounted for what he was involved with...but he did not...but now he will be held accountable and probably "milked" ( read: Extorted )  in someway and somehow by those honorable men in brown that can smell money....like Vultures, they can smell money from miles away.

Cheers

[Flustered]

7 minutes ago, ajarngreg said:

 

   You're definitely right about many points. But you can't delete the professor's own words that he fled the scene because he was in the state of a shock.

 

Imagine it was your child and you might see all from a different view.  

Neither you nor I know that these are the Canadians words. They are quoted in Thai in the "Manager" report by a Thai reporter who got just about everything wrong so we do not know if he said this unless you have other links to him doing so. Also we have no reports of the couple complaining or saying anything which is very unusual if the Canadian was at fault as so many are quick to state.

 

As far as I know and can see in both international and Thai reports, this is the only report on the matter and as such is not verified.

 

If anyone has any other links to verifiable reports, it would help to clarify the situation.

[gemguy]

2 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Neither you nor I know that these are the Canadians words. They are quoted in Thai in the "Manager" report by a Thai reporter who got just about everything wrong so we do not know if he said this unless you have other links to him doing so. Also we have no reports of the couple complaining or saying anything which is very unusual if the Canadian was at fault as so many are quick to state.

 

As far as I know and can see in both international and Thai reports, this is the only report on the matter and as such is not verified.

 

If anyone has any other links to verifiable reports, it would help to clarify the situation.

Better known as Thai style muckraking journalism and deliberate media sensationalism attempting to generate more publicity and all the more  revenues for the media entities....including Thai Visa.com .....while they never scrutinise the integrity of the stories they post rather just pass them on and create some further revenues themselves.

So...can the media be held responsible and or accountable under the laws of defamation of character and under the Tort Laws

 

A tort, in common law jurisdictions, is a civil wrong that unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. The person who commits the act is called a tortfeasor.

 

Get it??...Got it??...Good......

[ajarngreg]

42 minutes ago, gemguy said:

Yes, exactly...He did not flee the scene ...but he had to leave the scene, sooner or later while he finally left from the scene of the accident much later and after the Couple and the Child had moved on.

Fleeing the scene means immediately after or within several seconds after while the person quickly leaves the scene and gone ..as in gone.....and in a big hurry to get out of there and not to be seen again and deliberately hiding from the authorities while knowing full well what you did was wrong or your fault and to be held accountable.

That is fleeing the scene.

The guy could have left and never accounted for what he was involved with...but he did not...but now he will be held accountable and probably "milked" ( read: Extorted )  in someway and somehow by those honorable men in brown that can smell money....like Vultures, they can smell money from miles away.

Cheers

 

 

"Petri was overtaking a four wheel public vehicle. He said that the child was wheeled into his path and he could not avoid her.He fled the scene of the accident saying that he was in a state of shock. "

 

     I don't think that this got lost in translation. Are you suggesting that those who're waiting a while and then drive away are not fleeing the scene?

 

I'm sorry, but I'd have waited and it would also have been my biggest concern how badly the kid was injured. 

 

 

       Holiday, bars, alcohol, a fast bike, well there are quite a few answers to some questions that might be of interest. 

 

   Many people under the influence of alcohol flee the scene because they know the consequences.

 

    I feel sorry for the guy because he's the one who's got to live with it.

 

I had my first big bike 40 years ago and if another vehicle in front of me would stop, I'd at least slow down and check why the vehicle in front came to a stop.

 

       Nobody wants to do something bad to the guy, he's already in deep shit.