Sonthi Gets Two Years In Jail On Libel Suit

[george]

Sonthi gets two years in jail on libel suit

BANGKOK: -- Sonthi Limthongkul, owner of Manager newspaper, was sentenced to two years in prison after the Criminal Court found him guilty of making libelous statements against a former Thai Rak Thai executive member.

Sonthi, a strong critic of deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, is also ordered to pay compensation of Bt200,000 to Phumtham Vejjayachai, a former TRT deputy secretary. Court also dismissed the same charges on other defendants.

Phumtham told court that Sonthi made the defamation during his television talk show conducted in Wat Pa Ban Tat Temple in Udon Thani province in November 25, 2005.

After hearing the sentence, Sonthi's lawyer submitted a bail request to the court.

-- The Nation 2007-03-29

[andook]

Just hope the cell is sound-proof....

[Plus]

That's the heaviest sentence for "talking too much" I've ever heard of in Thailand.

[Jai Dee]

Sondhi Limthongkul, owner of Manager newspaper, makes a gesture in a detention room in the Criminal Court on Thursday after being sentenced to two years in jail on a libel suit. He is submiting a bail request.

Source: The Nation - 29 March 2007

[cdnvic]

Does anyone actually serve time in these cases?

[Old Man River]

Does anyone actually serve time in these cases?

Normally no, but these are different times. Are the former convicted members of the EC still in jail?

[cdnvic]

Are the courts in Thailand:

- Subject to the political winds of the day.

- Composed of judges with set political stances.

- Quite independent

- As corrupt as a traffic cop before the holidays

I know how much of the rest of the system works here, but haven't paid much attention to the courts.

[topfield]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

[Tony Clifton]

two years in prison after the Criminal Court found him guilty of making libelous statements against a former Thai Rak Thai executive member.

Still, he has a good average considering all he exposed and barked about to the public. He'll be out faster than you can say PTV.

[Prakanong]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

Sorry in English law you do not have to show financial loss - you can also show a reasonable person to think less of a person.

"English law allows actions for libel to be brought in the High Court for any published statements which are alleged to defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them.

American law is slightly different

"Under United States law, libel generally requires five key elements. The plaintiff must prove that the information was published, the defendant was directly or indirectly identified, the remarks were defamatory towards the plaintiff's reputation, the published information is false, and that the defendant is at fault."

Also "Phumtham told court that Sonthi made the defamation during his television talk show conducted in Wat Pa Ban Tat Temple in Udon Thani province in November 25, 2005."

Therefore as it was on broadcast television could it not be argued it is not indeed libel?

"Libel and slander both require publication. The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. If it is published in more durable form, for example in written words, film, compact disc and the like, then it is considered libel."

Any lawyers know better than my paltry internet search?

[kayo]

was this not the dude who helped significantly in making the coup happen?

[jdinasia]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

I believe you will find that it being televised does indeed make it libel in most places

[jomama]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

I believe you will find that it being televised does indeed make it libel in most places

The law in the US defines libel as "a written defamation communicated to a third party." Spoken defamation that fits the same standard is slander.

[jdinasia]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

I believe you will find that it being televised does indeed make it libel in most places

The law in the US defines libel as "a written defamation communicated to a third party." Spoken defamation that fits the same standard is slander.

There is no "the law" in ther US for slander/libel .... it varies by state

[Steely Dan]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

I believe you will find that it being televised does indeed make it libel in most places

The law in the US defines libel as "a written defamation communicated to a third party." Spoken defamation that fits the same standard is slander.

There is no "the law" in ther US for slander/libel .... it varies by state

Two years sounds lenient to me compared to a recent court case we aren't allowed to discuss.

[Grover]

Sondhi Limthongkul, owner of Manager newspaper, makes a gesture in a detention room in the Criminal Court on Thursday after being sentenced to two years in jail on a libel suit. He is submiting a bail request.

Source: The Nation - 29 March 2007

Just looking at the pic, he doesnt appear to be too concerned about it.

[jomama]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

I believe you will find that it being televised does indeed make it libel in most places

The law in the US defines libel as "a written defamation communicated to a third party." Spoken defamation that fits the same standard is slander.

There is no "the law" in ther US for slander/libel .... it varies by state

That's incorrect. There have been landmark Supreme Court rulings on this. As precedent setting, they are the law.

[dave111223]

There is no "the law" in ther US for slander/libel .... it varies by state

That's incorrect. There have been landmark Supreme Court rulings on this. As precedent setting, they are the law.

Wouldn't the statutes be consided "the law", and precedent be considered "case law" used to help interpret "the law". And if the statutes on slander/libel vary from state to state then wouldn't jdinasia be correct?

Then again i have only ever taken 1 semester of business law, so i am not exactly a legal expert

[Siripon]

I can't remember the last time anyone actually served time for defamation, I would guess on appeal he will be given a suspended sentence and told to publish an apology in a certain number of newspapers for 5 days running, for good measure the judge might include 'The Manager'!

[jdinasia]

There is no "the law" in ther US for slander/libel .... it varies by state

That's incorrect. There have been landmark Supreme Court rulings on this. As precedent setting, they are the law.

Wouldn't the statutes be consided "the law", and precedent be considered "case law" used to help interpret "the law". And if the statutes on slander/libel vary from state to state then wouldn't jdinasia be correct?

Then again i have only ever taken 1 semester of business law, so i am not exactly a legal expert

and I only had 3 semesters of editing classes in this decade

[Thai-Spy]

You can get prison time for your speech but just pay a fine for the most gruesome violence...

Amazing(-ly Depressing) Thailand.

[richard10365]

Not sure why some are discussing English and US law. This is Thailand.

[A_Traveller]

One, I believe that Sondhi has posted bail [200,000 bond] and so may already be out.

Two, In Thailand the most likely charge will be defamation since this is a criminal law matter, not civil, [bangkok Criminal Court] therefore the spats about libel and slander are irrelevant.

Regards

[jdinasia]

Not sure why some are discussing English and US law. This is Thailand.

Good point ... I should have let that bit of silliness slide by!

[brahmburgers]

Yes, it's largely moot to be discussing what passes for law in the U.S. or Britain - compared to Thailand. In Thailand, there's not even a law against harboring a fugitive. In Thailand, all is subjective. Rule of law is largely predicated on a person's social standing - and has everything to do with 'face' and very little to do with 'what's right or wrong.'

Sonthi's 'sentencing' is largely for show - probably to 'save face' for the VIP he embarassed. He will serve no 'hard time.'

[topfield]

The report is INCORRECT

Why dont the reporters check their dictionary !

LiBEL involves publishing IN WRITING . Sontee spoke at a rally.

The word that should have be used is as correctly mentioned below in the Bangkok Post what clearly has an English proof checker

In English law you can only claim damages for Slander when you show the financial loss you have incurred.

A disgraceful law if you cannot speak your mind ...a disgraceful decision

Activist Sondhi gets 2 years for slander

(Bangkok Post)

Sorry in English law you do not have to show financial loss - you can also show a reasonable person to think less of a person.

"English law allows actions for libel to be brought in the High Court for any published statements which are alleged to defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them.

American law is slightly different

"Under United States law, libel generally requires five key elements. The plaintiff must prove that the information was published, the defendant was directly or indirectly identified, the remarks were defamatory towards the plaintiff's reputation, the published information is false, and that the defendant is at fault."

Also "Phumtham told court that Sonthi made the defamation during his television talk show conducted in Wat Pa Ban Tat Temple in Udon Thani province in November 25, 2005."

Therefore as it was on broadcast television could it not be argued it is not indeed libel?

"Libel and slander both require publication. The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. If it is published in more durable form, for example in written words, film, compact disc and the like, then it is considered libel."

Any lawyers know better than my paltry internet search?

Sorry...my memory from my law college days was indeed correct and you are WRONG

"A slander claimant will need to prove that the defamatory allegations caused actual damage,"

In practice this does mean FINANCIAL LOSS

[topfield]

In Enland justification is a complete defence. IE if what you said was true.

NOT so in Thailand or Japan . Honour is what counts in both these countries.

And the criticism for posting about relevant English or US state law ?

Unfair as we Westerners will judge matters by our own morals, standards and laws.

Question : Any one know about the law of defamation in Ozzie ? Is it State or Federal law there ?

//Edit: There are some 200 countries in the world. Please don't use this topic to discuss the laws all over the world. Perhaps this topic needs cleaning up.

Edited March 29, 2007 by maestro
Exhortation to stop off-topic posts

[A_Traveller]

Question : Any one know about the law of defamation in Ozzie ? Is it State or Federal law there ?

Changed in 2005 and resulted in a single codified law as of an January 1 2006, though I think there are still some archaic entries in State Laws.

AFAIK the defence of truth is valid in Thailand.

Here there is no tort provision within defamation, unlike the historically referenced 'British' model herein. Therefore all defamation actions fall under the criminal law. Though it is not that relevant to the thread, in other countries some actions also fall into the criminal but such prosecutions are usually reserved for actions which are deemed to have a malicious basis or intent, and, in the specifics, were known by the issuer of the said 'libel' to be false.

Regards

[old wanderer]

My TW is glued to the 60" television every night listning to Sondhi. As he rants on for an hour or more, she sits there cheering him. Boy she does hate Thaskin. I found she had sent money to Sondhi station to help support it when it was on really shakey ground before Thaskin left. I think we own some stock in ASTV now.

Talk about a simple Issan girl whose brain woke up being in the USA for 10 years. Just after the coup, she was talking with her mother on the phone....."You buffallo brain to support Thaskin. He is Mr. corruption." she said Her mother responds, "Thaskin gave everybody in the village 250 baht to vote for him, nobody else offered anything".

I happen to really like strong people like Sondhi, and really hope some motorcycle does not drive by and shoot him. Thailand could use more outspoken thinkers like him. He does not seem to have a personal agenda, but has his own vision of where Thailand should be going.

[chrisspursbkk1]

They are turning out to be a reall crap joke.