News Forum - Swiss man arrested for allegedly beating a man to death, claiming self-defence

[Stonker]

8 hours ago, JamesE said:

My question about this narrative is: Why was he packing heat?

Maybe because he had a registered and licensed firearm, so like many who do they "don't leave home without it".

Alternatively, if his mother's story is correct and he'd been invited around by the wife (and the phone call would be very easy to confirm), because he was worried about either what would happen if the husband  walked in when they were in flagrante delicto, or what would happen if the wife told them who was the chosen one and the husband didn't like the choice.

8 hours ago, JamesE said:

This sounds more plausible.

If, again, the mother's story is correct then it's probably the least plausible of a large number of possibilities.

If that was the plan, then it doesn't match any of the known events.

If they'd hatched a plan to kill the husband, etc, then they could have done so anytime - not at his house, in the middle of the village, where everyone knew and would recognise him, would see him climbing over the low wall, and hear a gunshot.

If they'd hatched a plan to shoot the husband, then unless he lost his nerve he wouldn't have had a James Bond-esque long intellectual discussion before shooting him but would have just shot him.

If he'd lost his nerve and couldn't bring himself to do it and a fight ensued, the husband couldn't have ruptured his liver with a blow in a fight unless he was a skilled boxer or martial artist, but only by kicking him in the back when he was on the floor.

If the husband wanted to make sure he was safe by tying him up, whether he was conscious or not, then it's hardly likely that he would have left the gun next to him.

Of all the possible credible options, the stories hatched by the couple and by @Fluke are the least plausible.

Edited October 5, 2021 by Smithydog
(No actual edit - For Moderator Reference only) 2 quotes in post are replies to 2 different members in original post they are from. To combine into one quote potentially would change context.

[Stonker]

7 hours ago, MikeTexas said:

depends..

 

6 hours ago, MikeTexas said:

Thanks Stonker, that was kind of my point when I was commenting on Gummy's post, well more specifically, that tying him up after the injury could have been for safety in case he regained his senses. But your input was helpful. 

Agreed, it would make sense to tie him up even if he was unconscious - and in hindsight it would also make sense to do so even if he was dead to make it look as if that's what had happened.

What doesn't make sense, though, is that if you're in control of things enough to tie him up you don't leave the gun next to him - unless he's dead and you put it there.

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, stuhan said:

Reasonable force is what they call it in the uk, when he had tied him up he should have called the police not beaten him to death.That way he would not have lost his defense case against a Thai.

Agreed 100%, @Stuhan - even in Texas, while you can shoot someone in self defense if they're in the middle of a robbery, you can't beat them to death or shoot them once they're tied up and unable to do anything.

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, Russellprout said:

He was only tied up AFTER the self defense. I would have tied him up as well. What would have happened if he regained consciousness? Its the same as Police handcuffing someone so they are no longer a threat.

Yes, @Russellprout, but would you have left the gun next to him?

That suggests it was not only staged, but badly staged in a bit of a panic.

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, gummy said:

Yeh right, so publicly admitting that your son was shagging the wife of a married man is not tarnishing the families good name then ? 

Ummm ... in up-country rural Thailand ?

No, not really ... particularly if the married man was an elderly farang ... maybe even something for the boasting book 

[Poolie]

12 hours ago, Lawyers_Guns_and_Money said:

I'll be curious to how this will eventually turn into a vilification of deplorable Americans. 

Effortlessly.

[Poolie]

2 hours ago, gummy said:

Do police handcuff dead bodies ? please lets us know with some facts.

No, but they sit on your neck until you breathe your last.

Told you - effortless!!

[Paco]

18 hours ago, Stonker said:

There's a world of difference between defending yourself and tying someone up and beating them to death.

Like I said i think he hit him before to tie him up, and yes when you exited it is possible you hit to hard without knowing it

[Stonker]

21 minutes ago, Paco said:

Like I said i think he hit him before to tie him up, and yes when you exited it is possible you hit to hard without knowing it

Yes and no.

Yes, he may well have been dead or dying before he was tied up, but ...

No, however excited you are unless you're a skilled, fit and strong boxer or trained martial artist it's not possible to rupture someone's liver in a fight other than by kicking them with full force in the back when they're lying on the floor.

A ruptured spleen, quite possibly, but not a ruptured liver - it just needs too much force.

That isn't legitimate force, even in Texas.

[Sgtsabai]

Having been shot at from long range and very, very close range and survived, if that prick had pointed a gun at me I and I got the upper hand, don't know if I still remember all the moves but they are there, I'd beat that SOB until he no longer presented a threat and then handcuff him, oh wait I can't own my handcuffs here, even if I was still a cop. I do have zip ties. And if still in New Mexico or Texas I shoot the SOB until I knew he posed no further threat. It is called gun control. 2 center mass one to the brain pan. And cops do handcuff dead people, like in this instance they may not know the perp is dead, dying or just injured. It is called safety.

While I realize TiT, one should be presumed innocent until proven guilty, which many here do not seem willing to believe. Of course in the case of Thai courts and Burmese........................ ? 

In this case, the man broke into another man's home and pointed a gun at him saying money. Whether or not extramarital affair was involved or not, he threatened the Swiss man's life if the Swiss man is telling the truth. 

If the Swiss man is telling the truth, righteous self defense, Thai "law" or not. 

 

 

[Paco]

58 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Yes and no.

Yes, he may well have been dead or dying before he was tied up, but ...

No, however excited you are unless you're a skilled, fit and strong boxer or trained martial artist it's not possible to rupture someone's liver in a fight other than by kicking them with full force in the back when they're lying on the floor.

A ruptured spleen, quite possibly, but not a ruptured liver - it just needs too much force.

That isn't legitimate force, even in Texas.

This is not Texas, lol. If someone is in your house, first thing you do is trying to get him out to protect yourself and other family members, no matter what you have to do to make him nit able to do anything.. I will hit his brains in, what the hell someone has to do in my home, before he walks in he knows this can happen... each actions has it's consequences... unfortunately for him it was fatal

Edited October 5, 2021 by Paco

[Bob]

20 hours ago, Stonker said:

So what's next?

If you don't like how someone looks at you, you kill them just in case?

Oh, sorry, that was last week .....

Get real. He entered with a gun. What was he doing ? Just nipping in for a coffee and a chat   with the Swiss guy. 

[Bob20]

1 minute ago, Bob said:

Get real. He entered with a gun. What was he doing ? Just nipping in for a coffee and a chat   with the Swiss guy. 

I think that wasn't a gun in his pocket, and it wasn't for the Swiss guy but for his wife. Allegedly.

[Fluke]

1 minute ago, Bob said:

Get real. He entered with a gun. What was he doing ? Just nipping in for a coffee and a chat   with the Swiss guy. 

There have been suggestions that the gun belonged to the Swiss mans Wife 

[gummy]

Just now, Bob20 said:

I think that wasn't a gun in his pocket, and it wasn't for the Swiss guy but for his wife. Allegedly.

You may well be right there

[Stonker]

21 minutes ago, Paco said:

This is not Texas, lol. If someone is in your house, first thing you do is trying to get him out to protect yourself and other family members, no matter what you have to do to make him nit able to do anything.. I will hit his brains in, what the hell someone has to do in my home, before he walks in he knows this can happen... each actions has it's consequences... unfortunately for him it was fatal

You don't seem to get it.

Your right to protecting yourself and getting someone out doesn't extend to killing someone unless that's what you have to do - not here, not in Texas, not anywhere.

The problem with your view isn't just morality, that you're nobody's judge, jury and executioner, but that while it may put some criminals off it may also make others far more prepared to be violent and to be armed in order to protect themselves from you.

You may think that you're protecting your family and yourself, but all you're actually doing is putting them at much greater risk.

As you say, "each action has its consequences" - including yours.

Instead of going unarmed they'll take a knife, and instead of a knife they'll take a gun. 

Instead of hiding or running away they'll shoot first, to get their shot in before you. 

In this case he was also apparently invited in, making your comments even more inappropriate.

[Stonker]

48 minutes ago, Bob said:

Get real. He entered with a gun. What was he doing ? Just nipping in for a coffee and a chat   with the Swiss guy. 

No, apparently he was invited in for a coffee and a chat with "the Swiss guy"'s wife.

Then it all went wrong - quite how nobody knows, but whatever happened it very obviously wasn't as claimed.

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Sgtsabai said:

Having been shot at from long range and very, very close range and survived, if that prick had pointed a gun at me I and I got the upper hand, don't know if I still remember all the moves but they are there, I'd beat that SOB until he no longer presented a threat and then handcuff him, oh wait I can't own my handcuffs here, even if I was still a cop. I do have zip ties. And if still in New Mexico or Texas I shoot the SOB until I knew he posed no further threat. It is called gun control. 2 center mass one to the brain pan.

And cops do handcuff dead people, like in this instance they may not know the perp is dead, dying or just injured. It is called safety.

While I realize TiT, one should be presumed innocent until proven guilty, which many here do not seem willing to believe. Of course in the case of Thai courts and Burmese........................ ? 

In this case, the man broke into another man's home and pointed a gun at him saying money. Whether or not extramarital affair was involved or not, he threatened the Swiss man's life if the Swiss man is telling the truth. 

If the Swiss man is telling the truth, righteous self defense, Thai "law" or not. 

Of course you would, sweetie.

If as an ex-cop you can't see the glaring contradictions and issues with the Swiss man's statements and actions then you clearly can't "remember all the moves".

3 hours ago, Sgtsabai said:

2 center mass one to the brain pan.

Oh perleeze ... a few movies too many.

Edit:

... and I thought your claim to fame / American entitlement was as a "76 year old Vietnam Veteran" ...

[longwood50]

22 hours ago, AlexPTY said:

miss those days in Texas when you could shoot those who trespassing

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Sgtsabai said:

While I realize TiT, one should be presumed innocent until proven guilty, which many here do not seem willing to believe. Of course in the case of Thai courts and Burmese........................ ? 

Well, yes ... including the guy who was killed!

Bizarre that an ex- policeman doesn't recognize that little issue ...

[Robboaustralia]

Sad 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Robboaustralia
Wrong subject

[Malc-Thai]

19 hours ago, Bob20 said:

I think that wasn't a gun in his pocket, and it wasn't for the Swiss guy but for his wife. Allegedly.

Don't aim that thing at me !

[Viggen840]

19 hours ago, Stonker said:

Of course you would, sweetie.

If as an ex-cop you can't see the glaring contradictions and issues with the Swiss man's statements and actions then you clearly can't "remember all the moves".

Oh perleeze ... a few movies too many.

Edit:

... and I thought your claim to fame / American entitlement was as a "76 year old Vietnam Veteran" ...

Tied up and immobilised before or AFTER the beating? Gained control of the weapon and discarded it? I would have used it!

[Stonker]

2 minutes ago, Viggen840 said:

Tied up and immobilised before or AFTER the beating? Gained control of the weapon and discarded it? I would have used it!

I too, to be honest, if it was as he claimed - but the last thing anyone would have done, which puts a big question mark over everything he claimed, was go to the trouble of tying him up, hand and foot, then leave the gun beside him!

[Viggen840]

20 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Don't know how to tell you this, Dorothy, but you aren't in Texas any more!