News Forum - Father asks police to investigate accident, claims American crashed golf cart, injured his son

[Thaiger]

A father is seeking justice after his son was hit by a golf cart driven by an American man nine months ago, saying legal proceedings have made no progress. Although, the question of who is to blame for the accident has been up for debate. Some people who saw a video of the accident on social media say the motorbike rider was driving too fast in the residential area. The father, on the other hand, says the accident was at the fault of the American, and he has asked police to investigate. The 19 year old son was working as […]

The story Father asks police to investigate accident, claims American crashed golf cart, injured his son as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Fanta]

“The father told Thai media that there has been no development in the case. Instead, he says, his son was charged with reckless driving causing damages to others’ assets.”

Umm… does the father want more charges for his son? 

[Guest1]

I would like to see the video, but I fail to see how a golf cart, driving (by looks at the picture) near the middle line on his side, can hit a motorcycle delivery guy. I can imagine, that the delivery guy did overtake via the "never cross for overtaking" line. Or stopped, because he was already to far, or such. But still, I would like to see the video,  

[palooka]

Put the squeeze on the foreigner, who are wrong even when right.............

Hope the yank retaliates and goes after both the father and son. 

Some of these food delivery guys are maniacs.

[AdvocatusDiaboli]

19 minutes ago, Thaiger said:

A father is seeking justice after his son was hit by a golf cart

Or the son hit the golf cart.

and justice? Have not the police investigated? Or is legal proceedings a euphemism for no brown envelope trading place here?

20 minutes ago, Thaiger said:

saying legal proceedings have made no progress.

9 months, maybe not having a payout is no progress. Why were police not called in first instance is the big question.  

[Chatogaster]

20 minutes ago, Guest1 said:

I would like to see the video, but I fail to see how a golf cart, driving (by looks at the picture) near the middle line on his side, can hit a motorcycle delivery guy. I can imagine, that the delivery guy did overtake via the "never cross for overtaking" line. Or stopped, because he was already to far, or such. But still, I would like to see the video,  

The video can be viewed at https://www.sanook.com/news/8515926/

Based on the relative speeds and positions, it's almost certainly a case of "motorbike hits golf cart" rather than vice versa as reported here. It looks like a typical case of overtaking using the smallest possible margin in terms of time & space.

[Rookiescot]

Yes but if American not here then accident not happen.

[Marble-eye]

I certainly wouldn't want to apportion blame on the strength of that video, but the buggy does appear to be turning right or certainly moving across to the centre of the road, the buggy probably didn't have any indicators.

That said it doesn't mean that the biker was driving safely, we all know how these delivery drivers behave.

50 - 50 ?

[Guest1]

16 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

Based on the relative speeds and positions, it's almost certainly a case of "motorbike hits golf cart" rather than vice versa as reported here. It looks like a typical case of overtaking using the smallest possible margin in terms of time & space.

Thanks for the link. 

This is not that straight forward, any longer, imho:

Yes, the Moto drove quick. What is the limit there? 80? 50? 

Just the cart moved over to the middle, for the last 5 meters, starting at the traffic cone, I'd say. 

Still, without driving quickly , the moto driver should have be able to get away without a crash.  But the cart "swerved" for no reason. Unless the driver used indicators and wanted to turn right, in a bit, there is some fault to see, methinks.

Without the changing of his line, the moto could even have past the cart, without getting into the other side of the road. 

50/50, perhaps?

 

And looks like, the other motocyclist was seeing it (him) coming

 

[Grumpish]

Looking at the video - overtaking on a what appears to be a pedestrian crossing would be an offence in many countries, and while it does look like the golf cart had a little steering wobble, the motorcycle was already much too close to it. A case of the foreigner is always wrong, so the foreigner should pay. That the motorcyclist was charged at all says a lot about who was at most likely at fault.

[Guest1]

6 minutes ago, Grumpish said:

Looking at the video - overtaking on a what appears to be a pedestrian crossing would be an offence in many countries, and while it does look like the golf cart had a little steering wobble, the motorcycle was already much too close to it. A case of the foreigner is always wrong, so the foreigner should pay. That the motorcyclist was charged at all says a lot about who was at most likely at fault.

That with the pedestrian crossings and who is at fault at them, that is NEW. Before the "Ducati-Joe killing a doctor" accident, there would no one even look at it. Because not even a pedestrian in the video! 

[Fanta]

The golf cart didn’t leave the lane. The bike rider cannot overtake legally using the same lane. I doubt any vehicle can legally overtake  at a pedestrian crossing. 

[Chatogaster]

32 minutes ago, Guest1 said:

Thanks for the link. 

This is not that straight forward, any longer, imho:

Yes, the Moto drove quick. What is the limit there? 80? 50? 

Just the cart moved over to the middle, for the last 5 meters, starting at the traffic cone, I'd say. 

Still, without driving quickly , the moto driver should have be able to get away without a crash.  But the cart "swerved" for no reason. Unless the driver used indicators and wanted to turn right, in a bit, there is some fault to see, methinks.

Without the changing of his line, the moto could even have past the cart, without getting into the other side of the road. 

50/50, perhaps?

And looks like, the other motocyclist was seeing it (him) coming

Considering the relative speeds, the issue of overtaking at a cross-walk, the width of the lane (Google Street View makes it clearer) and the minor displacement of the cart breadth-wise just prior to the accident (without crossing the line) it seems pretty clear to me that the motorbike (driver) was reckless. If you stay in your lane and some vehicle hits you from behind, the law will favor you.

[Guest1]

44 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

If you stay in your lane and some vehicle hits you from behind, the law will favor you.

Hitting from behind? Kind of the cart hit the moto at about between midle and the rear axle, didnt it? Also the movement of the cart wasn't that minor, about a meter is about a meter. And without the hit, the cart would have crossed the line, I think. Befire the hit, the front wheel was still pointing towards the other side.

I agree, the moto driver is mainly at fault, but atill the cart moved from in the middle if the lane to the middle if that road.

However, I think the Dad is not taking in account, that NOW, after Ducati -Joe, even this zebra crossing rules, no one cared about at the time of the accident, would  come in play.

I would like to know, what is the position of the American, here in Thailand   To understand all of it a bit better 

 

 

[SkipsPa]

As a general thought I would consider that a much faster and manoeuvrable vehicle should have been able to avoid this occurring.

[Skip]

12 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Yes but if American not here then accident not happen.

Of course not... Only Americans have accidents on the deadly roads of Thailand... hahaha

[Skip]

10 hours ago, Guest1 said:

Hitting from behind? Kind of the cart hit the moto at about between midle and the rear axle, didnt it? Also the movement of the cart wasn't that minor, about a meter is about a meter. And without the hit, the cart would have crossed the line, I think. Befire the hit, the front wheel was still pointing towards the other side.

I agree, the moto driver is mainly at fault, but atill the cart moved from in the middle if the lane to the middle if that road.

However, I think the Dad is not taking in account, that NOW, after Ducati -Joe, even this zebra crossing rules, no one cared about at the time of the accident, would  come in play.

I would like to know, what is the position of the American, here in Thailand   To understand all of it a bit better 

First of all... you are right... the cart made a move to the right just before impact... BUT why... maybe to avoid a hole or a rough spot in the road... it's a very common phenomenon... and it is his right to do so.

Secondly... what does the position of the American have to do with who is at fault or not at fault?

 

 

[astro]

Position, connections and wealth status of those involved are important considerations in fact-finding missions and assigning accountability.

Edited February 12, 2022 by astro

[Guest1]

1 hour ago, Skip said:

First of all... you are right... the cart made a move to the right just before impact... BUT why... maybe to avoid a hole or a rough spot in the road... it's a very common phenomenon... and it is his right to do so.

Secondly... what does the position of the American have to do with who is at fault or not at fault?

That could explain, why no one questions the legality of a golf cart with no plates  ,insurance, lights, ...., on a road?

And to me, it is not looking like there was anything on the road, that needed to be avoided.

[Fanta]

38 minutes ago, Guest1 said:

That could explain, why no one questions the legality of a golf cart with no plates  ,insurance, lights, ...., on a road?

And to me, it is not looking like there was anything on the road, that needed to be avoided.

So what if the golf cart is or is not a registered motor vehicle? Substitute the word bicycle/elephant for golf cart and you still have the same scenario. The rider was overtaking in the same lane as the vehicle and also across a zebra crossing. That is undeniably proven in the video hence the reckless driving charge. The father is just trying it on.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Fanta
Chung!

[Marble-eye]

20 minutes ago, Fanta said:

So what if the golf cart is or is not a registered motor vehicle? Substitute the word bicycle/elephant for golf cart and you still have the same scenario. The rider was overtaking in the same lane as the vehicle and also across a zebra crossing. That is undeniably proven in the video hence the reckless driving charge. The father is just trying it on.

There is a vast difference between a motor vehicle and an elephant, the main difference is that motor vehicles have their trunk at the rear whilst elephants usually have their trunks at the front.

[Guest1]

But  driving a not road legal vehicle on a road gets the driver in trouble, even if he not did anything wrong. Because he had no right, to be there in  the first place.

Just think about someone driving without a license, or drunk, but not doing anything else to a crash. Still at fault!

 

[AussieBob]

Watched the video in detail - slow mo etc. The cart driver was at fault - so was the bike rider. 

I play golf a lot - golf carts do not have side or rear mirrors and you cannot see behind you at all - therefore before making any turn to the left or right you must look - because you cannot see anything - you do it on the golf course - and you do it on the roads/paths. This is especially true when turning right - turning left means an easy turn of the head left will show anything, but a turn right means having to do a full turn of shoulders to see over the back of the cart. The cart driver or his passenger did not look right at all - he just turned straight into the bike.

Having said that, it is obvious that the bike rider was going too fast and was not being observant and leaving room for just such an idiot move - like so many Thais do on bikes and in cars.  It was also obvious judging from how he flew through the air and his injuries that he did not know how to fall off a bike at speed - never stick your arms or hands out and land on them - they break very easily as evidenced.

I reckon the matter will be settled with the cart driver paying some money to cover the Thai's medical costs and loss of income due to the accident, and the bike rider will have to pay to fix/replace the bike. 

[Skip]

1 hour ago, Guest1 said:

That could explain, why no one questions the legality of a golf cart with no plates  ,insurance, lights, ...., on a road?

And to me, it is not looking like there was anything on the road, that needed to be avoided.

They were in a private community that allows the use of golf carts on the roads... read the article.

Your observation is noted... however it is not any more true than mine... it looks like a brick sticking up in the crosswalk to me.

[Jason]

Considering it's an accident that caused injury, wouldn't it require a full investigation? And wouldn't a foreigner not be able to leave the country while the investigation progressed and until it was concluded. Too little information in this article to draw any real conclusions.