The reason I ask is several people were banned, many (reasonable) questioning posts deleted over the Nick Laycock/Arcadia incident on facebook.

Many were very quick to defend Nick, but not to answer rumour sthat he has faced similar allegations situations elsewhere.

A few accused the police openly, on a public forum, of corruption, depsite the fact that the police responded timeously to the filed compalint, and were only doing there job.

I read soemwhere that the guest hous ein question, Arcadia Backpackers, agreed to provide the police with certain information following Nick's release, but this did not happen. Is this true?

In my mind, the only motives for possibly insisting someone is innocent so vociferously and so early on in a lgeitimate investigation could be rampant mysogyny or looking after vested business interests. Which was it? Or was there a legitimate reason that no one wanted to mention?

And if I am way off beam, will the esrtwhile gentlemen inform us as to their reasons for seemingly blind support?

I did try to ask these questions at the time, but was banned from the facebook page, as were many others. Thus, here we are...

No frothing at the mouth required, just reasoned explanations, please.

I was in Kampot a couple weeks ago? and it seemed much the same like the Kampot I saw 3 years ago. As for the incident, I have no idea about it but Kampot seemed much the same.

AE86, search Nicholas Laycock, thread here as well as 440, and in the papers. Alleged rape, very dodgy circumstances.

^^I'll be honest mate, there's so much shit that goes on around Cambodia that it depressed me to read all about it. I've got enough depressing material to read enough as is...

AE86 wrote:I was in Kampot a couple weeks ago? and it seemed much the same like the Kampot I saw 3 years ago. As for the incident, I have no idea about it but Kampot seemed much the same.

That about sums Kampot up,we are constantly told it is going to be "the next big thing" but it never happens.

Want to borrow my tin foil hat? actually, ive got enough to go around, all this time theyve been telling me im crazy, but i know, its very obvious when you know...

seriously though i do agree, i think there is more to this story...

"Degenerating?" Kampot has always had a weird side, but that's part of the charm.
Just a lot more tourists passing through, so attracting more problems and more crime probably.

Kampot tends to be a discreet kind of place, or used to be, so I guess that none of the expat businesses in Kampot are happy about this. The FB page probably reflects that. The Kampot scene is small, so if you sling some mud it is probably going to splash wider than the target.

The guesthouse in question definitely aims for a certain clientele, so they should be stepping up to address the specific problems that these customers bring. Otherwise, they will be causing problems for one and all.
IMO the worst thing about Kampot is those bloody dogs that roam at night. But I haven't been out to party central, so couldn't say how degenerate it gets these days.

Anchor Moy wrote:"Degenerating?" Kampot has always had a weird side, but that's part of the charm.
Just a lot more tourists passing through, so attracting more problems and more crime probably.

Kampot tends to be a discreet kind of place, or used to be, so I guess that none of the expat businesses in Kampot are happy about this. The FB page probably reflects that. The Kampot scene is small, so if you sling some mud it is probably going to splash wider than the target.

The guesthouse in question definitely aims for a certain clientele, so they should be stepping up to address the specific problems that these customers bring. Otherwise, they will be causing problems for one and all.
IMO the worst thing about Kampot is those bloody dogs that roam at night. But I haven't been out to party central, so couldn't say how degenerate it gets these days.

I don't think giving blind support to an alleged rapist, defaming the police for doing their job, banning several people from a facebook page for reasonable questions, and withholding information from the police afterwards (if that is true) fall within the ambit of 'stepping up to address the specific problems'.

And yet some of these same people called the police corrupt. Ludicrous.

More like 'dodgy cover-up', imho.

Isn't the Black and Tan who wanted to fight Lord Playboy one of Kampot's finest?

You lost me..black and tan? I did hear about somebody trying to belt Playboy, I assumed it was a Welshman who had taken umbrage at being called a dwarf hut-burner.

Do you mean some clown claiming to be SAS?

I worked for the CIA for two years, many people can back up that claim.

Otherwise, mostly Walter Mitty dreamers.