Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

NO!  It probably means an election is coming up.   But is still very good news.

Edited by The Deerhunter
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, The Deerhunter said:

NO!  It probably means an election is coming up.   But is still very good news.

I thought it might be because the Great Leader will be visiting 

the EU,I don't think he is that interested in what Thais think

about it,as it a Farang that is involved,but he needs to get on

the right side of the EU.

regards worgeordie

  • Like 2
Posted
15 hours ago, Jonathan Fairfield said:

The Court of Appeals has acquitted rights activist Andy Hall of defamation, overturning the guilty verdict issued by a lower court.

Lower court get's higher pay?

Posted
16 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

maybe but what about the civil proceedings or is that automatically history now ?

Posted
32 minutes ago, The Deerhunter said:

common sense and justice  are

not returning to Thailand anytime soon. This case is merely reflecting the prevalent interest in exploitation of foreign workers.  It will disappear as quickly as the investigation into Prawit's watches.

Posted
16 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

No, it's meant only few persons are honest in Thailand.

  • Like 1
Posted
16 hours ago, johng said:

I think there might be another appeal..

Yes.. they have already said they would appeal.. seeing them get knocked back again would be good..  as would a successful counter claim for costs and damages..

  • Like 2
Posted
16 hours ago, scorecard said:

- Does the reversal of the previous conviction mean that the 10 Million damages is also cancelled.

 

- Why does he have to pay 10,000Baht for the plaintiff's lawyers if he's found not guilty?

 

1. NO!!! 

2. Because the civil court gived this decision!!!

 

Yesterday the criminal court ruled out a new criminal decision. 
Maybe a appeals civil court will change the civil conviction. Maybe not!!!

This is up to the court.

Posted
32 minutes ago, snowgard said:

1. NO!!! 

2. Because the civil court gived this decision!!!

 

Yesterday the criminal court ruled out a new criminal decision. 
Maybe a appeals civil court will change the civil conviction. Maybe not!!!

This is up to the court.

In most developed countries a criminal conviction is the basis for the other party to sue the convicted as it effectively endorses their claim. Now his conviction has been overturned and with the appeals court actually recognising his accusations were valid there is no basis for the damages claim to stand. But....TIT.

Posted
18 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

You would hope so, but.........

Posted
7 minutes ago, nchuckle said:

In most developed countries a criminal conviction is the basis for the other party to sue the convicted as it effectively endorses their claim. Now his conviction has been overturned and with the appeals court actually recognising his accusations were valid there is no basis for the damages claim to stand. But....TIT.

This is definitive wrong!!! Just look the USA.

 

Just remember O.J. Simpson. In the criminal court him been not convicted.

But the civil court ruled him had to pay million dollars as compensation to his wifes family and kids.

???

Sorry, I forget the USA isn't a developed country!!!  

Posted
17 hours ago, manarak said:

nope.

AFAIK, courts of appeals rulings cannot be appealed, unless based on new evidence or constitutional issues with the ruling.

So in other words the courts of appeal rulings can be appealed, ie., to the Supreme (Dika) Court. I

The Office of the Attorney General can and has prosecuted defendants directly in the Supreme Court, bypassing both the lower court and court of appeals. This is done to expedite prosecution and (I suspect) to allow prosecution with minimal or credible evidence. Thai judges are allowed to conduct their own investigations and pursue evidence that they believe is relevant without transparency or accountability.

The Supreme Court is not the same as the Constitutional Court. As such the Supreme Court does not make rulings on constitutional issues.

Posted
11 minutes ago, snowgard said:

This is definitive wrong!!! Just look the USA.

 

Just remember O.J. Simpson. In the criminal court him been not convicted.

But the civil court ruled him had to pay million dollars as compensation to his wifes family and kids.

???

Sorry, I forget the USA isn't a developed country!!!  

An interesting point,although somewhat different. OJ was acquitted in criminal court on the basis of insufficient evidence based on the 'beyond reasonable doubt' criteria. Civil cases rely on a lower threshold based on 'the balance of probabilities ' . In Hall's case the criminal conviction has not just been completely overturned (I.e. not on an evidential technicality)but the appeals court has ruled that his allegations against the Fruit Company were correct.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, nchuckle said:

An interesting point,although somewhat different. OJ was acquitted in criminal court on the basis of insufficient evidence based on the 'beyond reasonable doubt' criteria. Civil cases rely on a lower threshold based on 'the balance of probabilities ' . In Hall's case the criminal conviction has not just been completely overturned (I.e. not on an evidential technicality)but the appeals court has ruled that his allegations against the Fruit Company were correct.

The point is that a criminal court and a civil court are different courts with different judges.
So the judges of both courts can rule completly different. And the fact is that Hall's interview/report damaged the business. The fact that the fruit company has caused this through exploitation of the workers themselves does not matter to some judges.

So let's wait what the appeal civil court say in some month/years.

  • Like 2
Posted
19 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

Very, very slowly maybe but slow is better than stopped

Posted

Now maybe someone higher up needs to investigate what's going in the Bangkok South Criminal Court since the Appeals Court overturned the conviction on more than just a technicality. 

  • Like 2
Posted
20 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

or maybe some money passed hands ?   nahhhhhh   that couldn't be

Posted
23 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

Nah, It just looks more like they lost huge (international "face") and needed to

regain same the quickest way possible :sleep: 

Posted
On 5/31/2018 at 4:28 PM, worgeordie said:

So does this mean common sense and justice  are  returning

to Thailand .

regards worgeordie

Returning????? When were they ever here?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...