Lawyer who leaked Joe Ferrari tape sued for defamation

[BKKBike09]

Defamation in Thailand extends to information that is accurate, if making it public also causes damage to the reputation of the party concerned.

 

Which is why media outlets will usually say things "the fight took place at a well-known hotel" instead of naming it. After the Santika pub fire, many media reported that a senior policeman was listed as a shareholder of the pub: public record info, but almost none of them named him because he could, potentially, sue for defamation on basis that he was 'just' a shareholder and not responsible for management, ergo printing his name caused damage to his reputation.

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, ezzra said:

I think that the car manufacture Ferrari cars and luxury items should sue Joe for using their trademark name... 

No, for defamation - karma.

[rott]

2 hours ago, nausea said:

 bringing a case of defamation is not the wisest move, just publicising the allegation even further, but I suppose it's a face thing.

Has the (alleged) allegation actually been published anywhere, I have not seen it mentioned anywhere but here and not many seem to know of it. 

[konaboy]

can he countersue for libel and slander?

[Andre0720]

A case of a murderer being annoyed by the reaction of other people...

[crazykopite]

You couldn’t make this up could you one lawyer who exposes corruption another trying to defend corruption 

[digger70]

Lawyer who leaked Joe Ferrari tape sued for defamation.

 

How can this be Defamation? The Tape is Real and The crime committed is on the Tape.  

Does that Lawyer   Really Knows what Defamation means? Obviously not. 

Not much of a Lawyer than isn't he . 

[tomacht8]

This legal opinion is a joke.

 

1. Is Decha Kittiwitthayanun the lawyer from Jo Ferrari? If not, why is he trying to protect the "good reputation" of the plastic bag killer?

2. How can you defame someone who murdered someone? Jo Ferrari doesn't even deny the murder.

3. Jo Ferrari alone ruined his reputation as a "good person" by killing a person.

 

Maybe the lawyer should be prosecuted. As it reads here, he has apparently withheld evidence of murder. 

[johnnybangkok]

4 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Lawyer who leaked Joe Ferrari tape sued for defamation.

 

How can this be Defamation? The Tape is Real and The crime committed is on the Tape.  

Does that Lawyer   Really Knows what Defamation means? Obviously not. 

Not much of a Lawyer than isn't he . 

Please read the article. He is suing for defamation because the other lawyer accused him of attempted blackmail. It's nothing to do with the tape.

 

“I have filed a complaint to prosecute Mr Sittha for defamation and violation of the Computer Crime Act after he accused me of trying to blackmail the former chief of police at Muang Nakhon Sawan police station,” he said.

[robblok]

5 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You have more faith than me. When a fella from a prominent family kills a police sergeant in front of 30 plus witnesses, goes on the run, all witnesses withdraw their statement and he gets off with it. Then ends up as a government minister. No it is not a Holywood comedy but what happened here.

I hope you are right but I have serious doubt.

Was that guys father not a famous politician on the Thaksin side. Charlem if i recall. 

[robblok]

Just now, johnnybangkok said:

Please read the article. He is suing for defamation because the other lawyer accused him of attempted blackmail. It's nothing to do with the tape.

 

“I have filed a complaint to prosecute Mr Sittha for defamation and violation of the Computer Crime Act after he accused me of trying to blackmail the former chief of police at Muang Nakhon Sawan police station,” he said.

Most people are too lazy to read the full article. Its a thing that happens a lot on Thaivisa people commenting without reading or even understanding the full article. 

[khunpa]

Hmm… let me try to make some common sense out of this….

 

So a guy releases a video of a killing and he is in the wrong for making the murderer and police force “lose face”. 

 

It does not make sense!
 

Ohh wait it’s happening in Thailand, where you can kill, lie and steal as long as you do not get caught in the act and publicly “lose face”. Now it makes sense!

 

What a <deleted> up way of thinking!

Edited August 28, 2021 by metisdead
Profanity removed.

[KhaoNiaw]

1 hour ago, khunpa said:

Hmm… let me try to make some common sense out of this….

 

So a guy releases a video of a killing and he is in the wrong for making the murderer and police force “lose face”. 

 

It does not make sense!
 

Ohh wait it’s happening in Thailand, where you can kill, lie and steal as long as you do not get caught in the act and publicly “lose face”. Now it makes sense!

 

What a <deleted> up way of thinking!

No, you haven't understood it. He's not being sued for releasing a video of a killing. He's being sued for saying that another lawyer who had the video earlier was using it to blackmail the police officers involved. The defamation is against the other lawyer. 

[shocky2012]

Alot of people seems to have problems reading... READ PLEASE.

He is suing for defamation because the other lawyer accused him of blackmail. It has nothing to do with the video.

 

''Sittha told the media on Tuesday that he got the clip from a low-ranking officer and before he released the clip, the low-ranking officer has sent the video to Decha first but he refused to released it to the public because we wanted to blackmail Joe for money.''

“I have filed a complaint to prosecute Mr Sittha for defamation and violation of the Computer Crime Act after he accused me of trying to blackmail the former chief of police at Muang Nakhon Sawan police station,” he said.

 

[Laughing Gravy]

34 minutes ago, robblok said:

Was that guys father not a famous politician on the Thaksin side. Charlem if i recall. 

I didn't want to mention it in case I get sued for defamation.????????.

[Laughing Gravy]

5 hours ago, ukrules said:

Well that video isn't going away, ever. That's the difference here, it's on video.

Wait for the spin. This is Thailand.

[rudi49jr]

8 hours ago, ukrules said:

I hope this case exposes and tears the whole rotten system to shreds.

I hope so as well, but don’t hold your breath…….

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I didn't want to mention it in case I get sued for defamation.????????.

I was not 100% sure been a while but just what i recall. But yes great example of how the law does not apply to those with power.

 

But in this case there is video evidence. It might even be negligent not to press charges. This will be hard to brush away. But like you said not impossible.

[Thingamabob]

3 hours ago, brucegoniners said:

Lol. For what? Spreading the truth?

No, for selling the video ahead of his rival lawyer.

[Pravda]

2 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

No, for selling the video ahead of his rival lawyer.

I was waiting for how long this would continue without people understanding the full article. It will probably continue for another 10 pages. 

 

He should be given a medal rofl. He's as crooked as Joe Himself.

 

[samtam]

6 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You have more faith than me. When a fella from a prominent family kills a police sergeant in front of 30 plus witnesses, goes on the run, all witnesses withdraw their statement and he gets off with it. Then ends up as a government minister. No it is not a Holywood comedy but what happened here.

I hope you are right but I have serious doubt.

I don't think Boss is (yet) a government minister, but it's only August 2021.

 

 

4 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

I don't think they care.

 

They will use the rotten to the core system, with it's manifestly ludicrously unjust laws such as those pertaining to "defamation", a system which has been entirely manipulated by a deeply corrupted ruling class, to make it go away.

 

Their horizons only extend beyond the country in as much as the rest of the world provides a place to stache their obscene looted wealth. Public opinion here does not equate to money, so they ignore it. Opinion in the outside world does not equate to money, so they ignore it.

 

Thailand has, in theory, all the institutions and agencies of a developed, democratic state which can serve it's people fairly. In practice the poison of corruption and desire for power, not for any form of public service, but to facilitate self promotion and access to ever more corrupt practices, has infected and perverted just about every organ of the state.

 

They know it, they know their population know it, they know the outside world know it, they don't care.

 

 

 

 

 

I think stashing illicit wealth overseas is quite difficult now. Well, you can do it in Laos, or Cambodia, or in gold bars, (or maybe bitcoin), but if you want to use it in a legit business in an OECD country, you'd have a lot of questions to answer, (with proof of honesty).

[Grusa]

5 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

I do not see how defamation can apply in this case but maybe the law here is different.  There was no libel or slander or comments just a video which people can come to their own conclusion.

 

Falsity - Defamation law will only consider statements defamatory if they are, in fact, false. A true statement is not considered defamation. Additionally, because of their nature, statements of opinion are not considered false because they are subjective to the speaker.

My understanding ism the law here IS different. A statement is defamatory if it causes the plaintiff a loss of face. Whether or not the statement is true is totally irrelevant.

 

As in all cases here, who pays, wins.

[Tropposurfer]

7 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

THIS can only happen in Thailand. Farcical and ridiculous!

Umm doesn't this farcical legal stuff go on in the USA every day?

[Sydebolle]

I am surprised, that any court would accept such a claim. Based on what is that lawyer sued?

It confirms though the correct action of the junior police officer to pass on the clip through a legal competent source; the honest officer otherwise would be toast, suicided or simply disappearing at the banks of the Mekong, Ping or any other river flowing through the Kingdom. 

The world is watching just to find out, if Thailand finally comes clean and out of the corrupt doldrums - I fear not though. Another Red Bull episode is in the making! 

[Silencer]

5 hours ago, mrfill said:

I guess the suing lawyer is upset as he was still waiting to hear how much money the news agencies would pay for the story.

That is almost right...but I suspect it was not the news agencies he was waiting but rather others that might be willing to pay to suppress it.  He only cries for the lost millions of baht.

Edited August 28, 2021 by Silencer

[josephbloggs]

2 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

So many posters jumping in without having read the full article.

 

'Sittha told the media on Tuesday that he got the clip from a low-ranking officer and before he released the clip, the low-ranking officer has sent the video to Decha first but he refused to released it to the public because we wanted to blackmail Joe for money.'

 

The defamation is NOT because he released the video but because Sittha has accused him of attemted blackmail - '“I have filed a complaint to prosecute Mr Sittha for defamation and violation of the Computer Crime Act after he accused me of trying to blackmail the former chief of police at Muang Nakhon Sawan police station,” he said.

Happens all the time.  And it's the same bunch of posters every time.  See the headline (which is designed to get them frothing and posting), post about how ridiculous Thailand is, move on to the next one.  Never once do they actually read the article.  It's really quite pathetic.

[RJRS1301]

4 hours ago, IamNoone88 said:

Dangerous territory. Mr Decha cannot let the accusation pass and must defend his reputation against asking for a bribe. On the other hand, if Mr Sittha has evidence, the case could well backfire.

Surely it was a Work Health Safety accident?

He was merely demonstrating interrogation techniques, also what the possible effects of placing bags over a suspects head could be, demonstrating this technique should not be used.

The video will now be part of Professional Standards Training (Advanced Techniques)

[RJRS1301]

2 hours ago, rott said:

Has the (alleged) allegation actually been published anywhere, I have not seen it mentioned anywhere but here and not many seem to know of it. 

Has certainly been on BBC (UK) and ABC News online (Aust)

[johnnybangkok]

52 minutes ago, Sydebolle said:

I am surprised, that any court would accept such a claim. Based on what is that lawyer sued?

It confirms though the correct action of the junior police officer to pass on the clip through a legal competent source; the honest officer otherwise would be toast, suicided or simply disappearing at the banks of the Mekong, Ping or any other river flowing through the Kingdom. 

The world is watching just to find out, if Thailand finally comes clean and out of the corrupt doldrums - I fear not though. Another Red Bull episode is in the making! 

One more time for the hard of reading - “I have filed a complaint to prosecute Mr Sittha for defamation and violation of the Computer Crime Act after he accused me of trying to blackmail the former chief of police at Muang Nakhon Sawan police station,” he said.

It's about one lawyer saying the other was going to use the tape to blackmail. If not true, then he has every right to sue for defamation as this is a fairly serious allegation, especially for a lawyer.

If it was me being accused and I was innocent, I would absolutely be suing for defamation..

[chilly07]

7 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

Sued for defamation? What? Mr. Joe was pretty good at making himself look bad. No chance that telling the truth can be a case of defamation. If they do that they will only dig a deeper hole for the force. And, I believe it´s deep and ugly enough already.

Best to read the full article