Will They Ever Learn? 2 Arrests for Sex with Under-Age Boys

[Gaybutton]

It's been a few months since the last arrests involving farang accused of having sex with under-age boys, so I guess we were about due. The following appears in the PATTAYA CITY NEWS:

_____

 

Two English Men Arrested by Region 2 Police, Accused of Having Sex with Minors.

 

We joined Police Colonel Tanisorn from the Child and Women Protection Unit from Region 2 Police as he attended two locations in search of two foreign men wanted by Police.

 

We begin in Soi Bongkot where the Colonel served an arrest warrant on Mr. Morris John Praill aged 77 from England. The warrant stated that he was alleged to have engaged in sexual activities with minors aged under 15. Mr. Brown who is already facing similar charges relating to previous cases is alleged to have gone to Soi Sunee Plaza in South Pattaya and offered money in exchange for sex to a boy aged 8 years. Mr. Praill denied the charges but did admit to giving money to the boy as he felt sorry for him. Mr. Praill was taken into custody and will appear in court next week.

 

The second arrest warrant was served on Mr. Ronald David Wiener aged 60 from London, England. He was arrested at his 13th Floor apartment in Jomtien. A search of the room uncovered CD’s featuring underage sex. The warrant stated that Mr. Wiener was accused of having sex with a 13 year old boy in exchange for money. He will now receive additional charges of possession of child pornography and will also appear in court next week.

 

Both cases are being monitored by the British Embassy in Bangkok.

__________

 

You might also want to read the following story from the PATTAYA DAILY NEWS:

 

http://www.pattayadailynews.com/shownews.p...NEWS=0000005410

[Guest naughtybutnice]

It's been a few months since the last arrests involving farang accused of having sex with under-age boys, so I guess we were about due.

 

What is just as worrying is that on another message board posts criticising people looking for, and bars employing, underage kids are being removed without any explanation by the moderators.

[Guest luvthai]

Last week in Sunee a farang was set up by a malayasian boy and his father. The boy went with the farang to a short time room and as they left the room were confronted by the father who threatened to call the police unless a large amount of money was handed over. The farang paid some money and the boy and his father left to return to bangkok. This was witnessed by several people and reported on the ting tong forum. There has been an increase of the darker skinned boys from malayasia lately and there have been several reports of scams involving them.

[Gaybutton]

there have been several reports of scams involving them.

 

If the boys used in the scam are under-age, then the people who fall for the scam don't get any sympathy from me because they were involving themselves with an under-age boy. The fathers, if they are indeed the fathers, are just as reprehensible. Your post says the farang gets confronted as he is leaving the room. My interpretation of that is that the fathers are allowing the sons to engage in sex and then, afterwards, try to blackmail the farang. If that isn't child abuse, then what is?

 

I'm surprised the farangs are not calling the bluff. Those "fathers" aren't going to go anywhere near the police. They would be in major hot water themselves for allowing their under-age sons to engage in sex with a farang, especially if they are also foreigners. If they're not the actual fathers, then they're in for just as much trouble as the farang, perhaps even more. Either way, involving the police is the last thing they would want to do. They might have a rough time explaining to the police that they did not set up the farang, since they obviously knew where their "son" was, who he was with, and what he was doing. It would be hard for them to convince the police they thought the farang was only reading Rumplestiltskin to the boy.

 

Regarding naughtybutnice's post, I have not seen the posts that were removed. My guess is the posts would be removed if the names of specific bars were used. If the bar names are given in an accusatory post on this board, I would remove the post too. A board can't tolerate that due to Thailand's libel laws. Even if Thailand did not have this sort of libel law, I would still remove the post if there is no solid evidence included in the post other than the poster's say-so. We get too many people who have something against a bar or bar owner, and they set out to ruin the bar's business through posts. That is something this board does not allow.

 

If no names were used and if there was nothing to make it obvious as to which bars were being referred to, then I would have to see the post to understand why it was removed.

 

Whether the moderators should provide a public explanation as to why posts are removed is subject to debate. In my opinion, if a post is removed, then the reason for the removal is between the moderator and the person who wrote the post, but not between the moderator and the rest of the world. In my opinion, it is optional for the moderator to provide a public explanation. If the moderator chooses to post an explanation, fine with me. If he chooses not to, that's also fine with me.

 

Moderators often end up catching hell whether they explain or not. In my case, when I have found it necessary to remove a post, it doesn't make any difference whether I provide an explanation or not. As soon as I remove a post, that's when I start getting called a control freak, a Hitler, and a whole litany of other names. I can't speak for other boards, but on this board we don't remove posts lightly, especially since we know the name callers are going to be right there, almost immediately.

 

I am well aware that many disagree with me on that issue, but that is my opinion nevertheless.

[Guest gwm4sian]

A coule of weeks ago I went into a bar in Sunnee that is usually praised and not one of the old suspects for underage boys. (I won't name the bar here)

After bringing me a drink the rather pushy mamasan started on the usual routine, and as I looked around I remarked that some of the boys looked young.

 

"yes, this one 15, and that one 14, very good for you, have room upstairs"

 

I left

[Guest laurence]

If one does not like a bar or club, for whatever reason, then they should leave.

Life is what it is in Sin City. Why else is anyone here?

 

[Guest MonkeySee]

Here is another article from the Pattaya Daily News about under age sex:

 

Updated: [ December 16, 2006 ] :: 10:13:57 [view 11083 ]

CONTRADICTORY STANCES ON UNDER-AGE SEX AND SEXUAL EXPLOITATION

There has been yet another incident reported of under age prostitution reported in Pattaya, resulting in Western Human Rights Agencies such as the International Justice Mission crying exploitation, yet this whole controversy contains certain ambiguities. The Thai government passed a law in 1996 Prevention and Suppression of Prostitution Act, B.E. 2539, essentially due to Western moralistic pressure, making prostitution illegal. Yet, it should be pointed out that the oldest profession doesn’t carry the same stigma as it does in the West, which is one of the reasons so many Western men come to Thailand, solely for this purpose.

Traditionally, sex for money, has been regarded as a legitimate means of supporting extended families for eons in Asia, the service workers sending money home to their often impoverished kin, which is one of the reasons why the Thai government didn’t revoke the the Entertainment Places Act of 1966 that exempts special services at Entertainment Places such as beer bars and massage parlours and what’s more, legitimises many Western men’s sexual proclivities, otherwise there would be considerably more incarcerated! Indeed, so entrenched is prostitution in some Asian countries that the Buddhist Sangha, or monkhood has actually endorsed it because it is a valid means of substituting for the welfare state!

 

If one considers the ethos of agencies such as the IJM, one can detect an element of hypocrisy underlying their professed aims. Their mission statement is as follows:

 

“International Justice Mission (IJM) is a Christian human rights ministry that helps people suffering injustice and oppression who cannot rely on local authorities for relief. IJM documents and monitors conditions of abuse and oppression, educates the church and the public about the abuses, and mobilizes intervention on behalf of the victims. IJM advocates get involved in cases of bonded child slavery, forced prostitution and sex trafficking, illegal detention, land seizure, and government misconduct.”

 

One wonders what their stance on their own government’s conduct in Iraq is!

Initially, the IJM maintained they were combating child prostitution. When it became apparent to everyone that child prostitutes are quite rare, they jumped on the trafficking bandwagon. Once it becomes obvious that sex slaves are even less common than child prostitutes, what will be their next excuse to obtain grant money from the US government, one asks oneself? It appears to be yet another cynical instance of Christian Fundamentalists on the one hand, highlighting controversial issues to justify their own existence and on the other, yet another attempt by advocates of American Imperialism of trying to foist their value judgements upon the whole world.

 

As it says in the Bible: “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thin own eye?”

 

Presumably the IJM are not familiar with the psychological phenomenon of projection! They would also appear to be ignorant of the Christian legacy from the Crusades, Inquisition, etc onwards right up to the Protestant Ethic’s support of capitalism and its exploitation of the proletariat in West and especially in the US during the early years of the last century. Perhaps it would be better if the IJM and kindred organisations attended to the cases of exploitation in their own domains, before trying to convert the world to their overly partial weltanschauung!

[Guest gwm4sian]

.........which is one of the reasons why the Thai government didn’t revoke the the Entertainment Places Act of 1966 that exempts special services at Entertainment Places such as beer bars and massage parlours

 

Does anyone have any details of this act?

[Guest MonkeySee]

Google "Entertainment Places Act of 1966" and you can read all about it, until your heart is content.