The criminal fraternity of Thailand owe a great debt of gratitude to Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Tourism and Sports under Any Administration, Chumpol Silpa-archa, for his comments on the alleged rape of a 19-year-old Dutch tourist in Krabi earlier this year.
The rape, which was accompanied by a physical assault so brutal that the woman was first thought to be the victim of a traffic accident, resulted in the arrest of a tour guide named by the victim (which took a month, though the police later claimed to know him very well).  And then his prompt release on bail.

The victim’s father then posts a clip on YouTube called ‘Evil man from Krabi’.

At this point the Thai bureaucracy springs into action.  Not to prosecute the case and make the beaches safe for tourists.  But to protect Thailand’s reputation as a tourist destination.

The local police post their own YouTube offerings which are so crassly wrong-headed that it is perhaps fortunate they didn’t have the wit to do them in English.  The Permanent Secretary of the Tourism and Sports Ministry suggests blocking the ‘Evil man from Krabi’ video (which, since blocking works only in Thailand, will do nothing about all the cancelled bookings).

And the Minister decides that since the victim had dinner with the alleged perpetrator, it can’t be rape.  One presumes that in the Minister’s world, consensual sex includes getting the side of your head bashed in. 

However, using this example of the official view of crime from almost the highest levels of government, an interesting plea was entered at Bangkok South Criminal Court by two motorcycle villains. 

Their modus operandi was to cruise the clogged intersections in the Ratchaprasong area looking for tuk-tuks containing foreigners who had placed their bags or other valuables on the edge of their seat.  With the light at red, they would swoop alongside, snatch the bag and be gone before anyone could move.  The stuff was fenced before the victim could even get to the nearest police station to report the crime.

Their antics were of course regularly caught on the traffic CCTV cameras, but they well knew that the resolution on these things is nowhere near good enough to read a motorcycle plate and that by wearing full visor helmets, they were safe from identification.

Their come-uppance arrived when they snatched the bag of a Middle Eastern grandmother without realizing that the substantial strap was firmly secured around her equally substantial girth.  As they made their escape, they yanked not only the bag, but also its owner, out of the tuk-tuk. 

This caused the tuk-tuk to tip over into the side of a Corolla driven by a mother with two squabbling kids on the back seat.  In her rage at being broadsided, she pushed open her dented door with such force that the tuk-tuk was now upended the other way into the doorway of a Number 74 bus discharging passengers in the 3rd lane from the kerb, who promptly attacked the totally disoriented tuk-tuk driver. 

Granny from Abu Dhabi was at this point serving as a sort of anchor trailing behind the motorbike.  When she became wedged behind the back bumper of a yellow-and-green taxi, the pillion passenger on the bike came off.  The sudden removal of both the drag and the extra weight of the passenger now caused the Wave to shoot not just forward but upwards, unseating the second villain.

The police arrived to find Grandma clutching her bag closely to her ample bosom and sitting on both would-be thieves. 

When they appeared in court, however, they argued that there had been no crime, merely attempted ‘consensual’ redistribution of property.  With their extensive experience of similar transactions, they were aware that foreign tourists had so much wealth that they freely ‘offered’ a share by placing valuables within snatching distance.  If they didn’t want their stuff taken, they argued, then they wouldn’t leave it in such inviting places.

While for a Thai, the forcible removal of belongings would be considered theft, foreigners operated by a different culture.  The experience of seizing the goods of well over a hundred foreign tourists in the last year without ever being caught, let alone prosecuted, had convinced the accused that their actions were sanctioned by custom.

In finding for the defence, the judge remarked on the injustice of the prosecution’s case.  ‘Foreigners come to this country, flaunt their wealth, and their sexual charms, and then when something happens that they don’t like, but which results directly from their ignorance, gullibility, or stupidity, they denigrate the good name of the nation.  We cannot allow people to abuse our hospitality by deliberately provoking crimes and claiming to be victims.’