Nicolaides Freed From Thai Prison

[jdinasia]

Harry's book and Da Torpedo's rants fall outside what is called criticism, especially Torpedo's. Anyone could have sued someone like Da Torpedo under regular defamation/libel laws, without the need to resort to LM.

That is the problem, isn't it?

Defamation and slander is a civil case in any reasonable system in the world.

Here it is not only a criminal matter [no-matter who is the victim] - there is also a second special law if the slander happen to be aimed at a specific family - with far harsher penalties for the offender.

TAWP --- arguing the merits of the law is as pointless as arguing the merits of the death penalty for drugs. The result is exactly the same though. Stupid enough to distribute drugs ... deal with the consequences. Stupid enough to commit L.M. then also suffer the consequences.

[ballpoint]

Isn't it interesting that, on the whole, people either supporting or accusing this bloke seem to fall into similar groups as those supporting Thaksin or Abhisit?

I don't know about the others, but being a supporter of Abhisit has made no difference at all to how I view this case. I'd still say the guy deserved what he got had Thaksin, Samak, Somchai or anyone else been in charge. I also believe he'd have been treated in exactly the same way if any one of them were PM right now. (Look at the Swiss guy a few years back). Therefore, I can't see the point of trying to politicise this case in any way. The LM law is just as tricky for the government of the day to handle as it is for the general public. This is not a case of saying the laws are right or wrong, this is a case of a law being in place and you and me and everybody else being expected to follow it.

[TAWP]

TAWP --- arguing the merits of the law is as pointless as arguing the merits of the death penalty for drugs. The result is exactly the same though. Stupid enough to distribute drugs ... deal with the consequences. Stupid enough to commit L.M. then also suffer the consequences.

Arguing the law is not pointless - the law is the main problem at hand.

There is no law against arguing the law, is there?

Is there a law against signing a petition for or against it?

http://facthai.wordpress.com/2009/02/20/si...e-majeste-laws/

[Steve2UK]

That's one way of putting it. Another is that he fully expected to be convicted of lese majeste, to garner publicity for his book, but from the safety of Australia. He was arrested at the airport as he was about to board a flight for Australia.

His courting LM appears to be a publicity stunt

--------------------

More absolute croc!

He submitted the book to all relevent depts, heard nothing back and published 50 copies, sold 7 and forgot about it. In 2005!

So ask yourself why he submitted the text to authorities, when he knew full well that the relevant passage was LM?

Take this sentence at face value and, yessiree, you have a "slam dunk". However, a little further thought demonstrates that this is a "slam dunk" like the one about WMD in Iraq.

What is this "when" ? The items quoted and linked following this sentence provide no evidence (let alone proof) one way or the other. Substitute "........ if he knew full well that the relevant passage was LM?" and there is some point to the post - albeit it's plainly just speculation.

A Thai court has decided that the book (or a passage in it) constitutes LM. As I understand it, we are therefore proscribed from questioning their judgement (grey area - but I like to play safe). That does not take away from the fact that many observers have raised questions (let's say - before the judgement) as to whether it properly was or wasn't LM - let alone obviously. A member with "a background in the law" may care to advise, but that looks to me like at least "reasonable doubt" where asserting knowing intent is concerned.

Regarding Samran's contribution from the rather jolly "crikey.com" (a newspaper-cum-blog site), it's useful to go to Neil Walker's piece itself

http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090122...Nicolaides.html

- the reason being that Samran's quoted version obscures (I'm sure unintentionally) the many live links in the original........ links which themselves go to, among other things, Nicolaides' own pieces for phuket-info.com et al. Walker spends half of the well-researched piece arguing that Nicolaides is a remarkably silly and naive man (plenty of evidence from Nicolaides' own keyboard to support that view) and the other half arguing that he knew all along what he was doing. To my mind, the two propositions seem mutually exclusive as absolutes. He himself describes Nicolaides as "a puzzling contradiction -- managing to write coherent pieces ........ yet also churning out rambling nonsense while in Thailand".

I described Nicolaides earlier as "flawed, unfortunate". Reading the Walker piece (and, more particularly, its links to Nicolaides' own material) - I would now revise that. He seems very flawed - and, at times, unthinking if not downright naive and remarkably stupid in his behaviour where Thai authorities are concerned (the wording of the news release for the book surely shows that). In common parlance, he was "asking for trouble" - but that's as in "accident waiting to happen" and not IMO following a calculated game-plan where LM charges (with or without arrest/trial/sentence) would lead to some subsequent "success". Apart from anything else, the chronology just doesn't support the game-plan theory. I really do think the bewildered "it's all like a bad dream" man we've seen on our TV screens is the reality - what you see is what you get.

As stated this man is no Rushdie (not in any sense) nor should he now be turned into some kind of latter-day Dreyfus. That said, it seems inevitable that he will be claimed as a cause celebre/martyr by those with axes to grind - just as he has been and will be vilified as a cunning, self-serving agitator by others who have their own axes. IMO neither argument stands up to proper scrutiny - whereas "accident waiting to happen" does.

Why it happened when it did is another matter - I'll leave that one to the more politically-minded to argue over. As I've said before, I don't have a horse in that race.

[Insight]

Thanks for the link Steve & Samran - very enlightening. (very much agree with your viewpoint Steve)

It's a simple law. Flawed, but simple. If in doubt, ask a good Thai friend. Going to the authorities is a bit silly - similar to walking into a police station with a bag of drugs saying "can I do these?" ...

Flawed because it is thrown around a bit too liberally, mostly by politicians. The charges against Johnathon Head have very little merit what-so-ever. The worst politician for doing this in recent times I believe was none other than Thaksin. I find it ironic now his supporters are calling for a review of the LM law when it can no longer benefit him (and if you believe the conspirators, will dropping the law could ultimately benefit him greatly).

But for the overwhelming majority of expats here, the law has very little impact on our lives. Why challenge it? Any problems with it are up to the Thais to sort out.

Harry's next book might be interesting, if only for the sewage incident.

[rixalex]

Isn't it interesting that, on the whole, people either supporting or accusing this bloke seem to fall into similar groups as those supporting Thaksin or Abhisit?

I don't know about the others, but being a supporter of Abhisit has made no difference at all to how I view this case.

Ballpoint hits the nail on the head.

My guess is that a good number of the posters who are speaking out in defence of this bozo, have also been known to speak out in defence of another well-known bozo. Coincidence? I think not.

[seri thai]

Does anyone know where the actual passage in question can be found? I was under the impression that imprisonment was done to punish and deter others. But how can anyone be deterred if they don't even know what the actual crime was?

It can be found with a prudent search in many internet locations.

For those interested there was no real political dimension to it and it did not really reference the king but another individual about whom most thais like to gossip in hushed tones after a few drinks. Foolish and naive to repeat common gossip and think of printing it. Astounding to offer it to the royal court for review. Of course if you asked same thai what they think of a fahrang repeating such stuff they would puff out their chests and defend their, and by extension god, king and country against others. In the west its called hypocrisy, in

se Asia its called "face". My country/football team, right or wrong.

Not just SE Asia then??

Incidentally if you read some of Mr Nicolaides other arrogant reviews of Thailand its a wonder he wasn't in a fatal fracas long before. If he hadn't been sentenced he probably would have got himself into the papers in far less pleasant circumstances eventually. Beathtakingly arrogant and condescending. "The Ugly Australian."

[mbkudu]

I discussed this LM law last night with my Thai partner, who is over 40 years old. Common understanding among the Thais, as he understands it, is that a Thai citizen who seriously offends the monarchy is put in prison, along with his entire Thai family.

I never wrote no stinkin' book about Thailand. I wrote about Xanta, and the Xanthese people who live along the Maakong River....

Which side of the river? Would this land be near the Kingdom of Sarkhan?

[samran]

Regarding Samran's contribution from the rather jolly "crikey.com" (a newspaper-cum-blog site), it's useful to go to Neil Walker's piece itself

http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090122...Nicolaides.html

- the reason being that Samran's quoted version obscures (I'm sure unintentionally) the many live links in the original........ links which themselves go to, among other things, Nicolaides' own pieces for phuket-info.com et al. Walker spends half of the well-researched piece arguing that Nicolaides is a remarkably silly and naive man (plenty of evidence from Nicolaides' own keyboard to support that view) and the other half arguing that he knew all along what he was doing. To my mind, the two propositions seem mutually exclusive as absolutes. He himself describes Nicolaides as "a puzzling contradiction -- managing to write coherent pieces ........ yet also churning out rambling nonsense while in Thailand".

I described Nicolaides earlier as "flawed, unfortunate". Reading the Walker piece (and, more particularly, its links to Nicolaides' own material) - I would now revise that. He seems very flawed - and, at times, unthinking if not downright naive and remarkably stupid in his behaviour where Thai authorities are concerned (the wording of the news release for the book surely shows that). In common parlance, he was "asking for trouble" - but that's as in "accident waiting to happen" and not IMO following a calculated game-plan where LM charges (with or without arrest/trial/sentence) would lead to some subsequent "success". Apart from anything else, the chronology just doesn't support the game-plan theory. I really do think the bewildered "it's all like a bad dream" man we've seen on our TV screens is the reality - what you see is what you get.

As stated this man is no Rushdie (not in any sense) nor should he now be turned into some kind of latter-day Dreyfus. That said, it seems inevitable that he will be claimed as a cause celebre/martyr by those with axes to grind - just as he has been and will be vilified as a cunning, self-serving agitator by others who have their own axes. IMO neither argument stands up to proper scrutiny - whereas "accident waiting to happen" does.

Why it happened when it did is another matter - I'll leave that one to the more politically-minded to argue over. As I've said before, I don't have a horse in that race.

Great analysis steve...

Yep - apologies for my article not containing the links...I get crikey.com as a subscriber into my inbox each morning (and hence cut and paste from my inbox didn't work with the links), but I didn't realise that their back catalogue was made free after a certain period of time...so thanks hunting down a 'live' link...good for everyone here.

Crikey has its pro's and con's, but it is consistently (in a very aussie manner) trying to hunt out the bullsh!t in every story. The Nicolides thing was fodder news analysts in OZ who prefer their analysis - lets say - at the 'shallow end of the pool'. For me, crikey summed this one up nicely.

[Steve2UK]

Great analysis steve...

Yep - apologies for my article not containing the links...I get crikey.com as a subscriber into my inbox each morning (and hence cut and paste from my inbox didn't work with the links), but I didn't realise that their back catalogue was made free after a certain period of time...so thanks hunting down a 'live' link...good for everyone here.

Crikey has its pro's and con's, but it is consistently (in a very aussie manner) trying to hunt out the bullsh!t in every story. The Nicolides thing was fodder news analysts in OZ who prefer their analysis - lets say - at the 'shallow end of the pool'. For me, crikey summed this one up nicely.

Yep - a very Aussie style there and all the better for it in many ways . Reminded me of a supercharged Private Eye (UK mag) without the satire - and neither one stands for BS. Love "the shallow end of the pool" analogy. For the shallow end swimmers: "About Nicolaides - some see Bernard Madoff........ I see Baldrick".

[For those not familiar with Baldrick - substitute "Walter Mitty". And see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldrick]

[vahack]

Maybe his book will start selling and some good will come of it.

He should also have the material for a new book, preferably written under a nom-de-plume, about life in a Thai prison.

that would be good. there's been a couple movies in nearby prisons. midnight express or something? cant remember.

he can write whatever he wants as long as he stays out in the free (speech) world. the guy insulted Thailand and then wanted to take advantage of the beaches and beauty. if he doesn't like the place he should stay out. i doubt he has a choice now lol

[DP25]

The question is - who ratted him out?

He only sold seven copies, very few people knew the book even existed, let alone read it until the offending paragraph on page 156. The book is so revolting I suspect no one read it at all, just jumped straight to the juicy part to check out what he was done for.

So, who ratted him to the police? How did he manage to piss off somebody so badly?

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that no government official randomly read the book and decided to press charges on him. This man angered someone immensely somehow, and they went out of their way to find some way to punish him. This was the best they could do.

[mc2]

i'll definitely buy his next book after it is released. and I don't think we will have to wait too long for it.

[sriracha john]

^ if the charlatan scammer angle is how things eventually develop... that's exactly what he's banking on.

[klnnurv]

Its a matter of human rights.

--

From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was ratified by Thailand in 1948:

Article 2

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 7

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 10

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

--

All I am able to say is that the above 4 articles from the UDHR answer the ethical questions of this mess quite clearly with legally binding answers. Unfortunately the UN is unable to enforce the UDHR, even in nations that ratified it. There are simply too many violations. Only the most serious and obvious violations, such as genocides and slavery, receive enough practical attention.

[wayfarer108]

Royal pardon shows King's generosity and fairness

Published: 22/02/2009 at 12:00 AM

Newspaper section: News

The good, but not unexpected, news was announced yesterday that His Majesty the King has pardoned and freed an Australian writer jailed for lese majeste. Harry Nicolaides, who was sentenced last month to three years in jail by a Bangkok court after pleading guilty to a charge of insulting the Royal Family, was freed late on Friday night.

His Majesty's generosity and sense of fair play led him to grant these and other pardons for lese majeste convictions, and these qualities have also led him to intervene in past instances in which the charge may have been used politically.

Earlier, in his annual address prior to his birthday in December 2005, His Majesty expressed his personal views on the lese majeste law, saying that it was too strict. He also said a lack of freedom to make fair criticism reflected unfavourably on the people and the country.

continued:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion...ty-and-fairness

[wayfarer108]

from the press release Harry wrote for his own book:

"His new novel – VERISIMILITUDE – is a trenchant commentary on the political and social life of contemporary Thailand. It is an uncompromising assault on the patrician values of the monarchy ....Savage, ruthless and unforgiving, VERISIMILITUDE pulls away the mask of benign congeniality that Thailand has disguised itself with for decades and reveals a people who are obsessed with Western affluence and materialism and who trade their cultural integrity and personal honour for the baubles of Babylonian America."

and a brief BBC interview with a crying Harry upon release:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7903267.stm

Edited February 22, 2009 by wayfarer108

[sriracha john]

^ certainly sounds like he knew exactly what he was getting into beforehand.

[jdinasia]

^ certainly sounds like he knew exactly what he was getting into beforehand.

Maybe this Aussie could now apply his experience to a 'phD in Thai cultural studies' :-)

[Businessman]

Long live the king.

Edited February 22, 2009 by Businessman

[hnka]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02...n=entertainment

Nicolaides freed from Thai prison

An Australian author who has spent five months in a Thai jail is on his way home after being given a royal pardon.

Harry Nicolaides, 41, was arrested last August and was sentenced to three years' jail last month for insulting the Thai monarchy in his 2005 book, Verisimilitude.

His lawyer, Mark Dean, says the pardon was granted on Thursday night and Nicolaides was deported from Thailand at midnight.

"The Australian Government and the Thai Government have been working together very closely on the resolution of Harry's case," he said.

"The various steps that had to be taken in Thailand were expedited in this case, resulting in the King being able to grant the pardon last Thursday."

Nicolaides was sentenced on January 19 by a Thai criminal court over Verisimilitude, which contained references to an unnamed crown prince.

He was arrested in late August as he boarded a flight to Melbourne and was repeatedly denied bail.

TV images of a deeply distraught Nicolaides led to widespread concern in Australia, with his family shocked as he was brought to the court in prison garb and chains.

He described his time in prison as "torture" and "a bad dream" and has expressed remorse over the publication.

Good for him and his family!

[think_too_mut]

Full credit to his family and partner who stood by him.

Sure the guy made a mistake, he has done the time, now he can move on.

I hope he can make some money from his ordeal and build a future with his partner.

Maybe write a book or do some interviews. good luck to him.

Sure, what a hero he is:

Did he do it on purpose? He looks like a skunk, what a shame for other English teachers

[sriracha john]

once again we have more evidence of...

^ certainly sounds like he knew exactly what he was getting into beforehand.

From the linked article (thanks for posting, btw):

Nicolaides believed it best to create a sensation, a publicity stunt to land an author on the literary map. He suggested that an author jump in front of cars and perform other such stunts in order to garner fame.

and so, once again we have more evidence of...

^ if the charlatan scammer angle is how things eventually develop...

and a lot of people being fooled and taken in by his scam... but they shouldn't feel too bad.

Admittedly, it was a good, unprecedented scam....

It's just a shame he didn't go with his other inclination for a book and jump in front of cars.

Edited February 22, 2009 by sriracha john

[dee123]

Maybe he was an attention seeker? if this news article is acurate,never the less it begs the question why Thai authority's persist using this law when they know it is only achieving bad publicity.Wouldn't deportation be more humane and attract less negative press?

Edited February 22, 2009 by dee123

[sriracha john]

From The Linked Article What article? srirachajohn who said he had said this?

in the post above mine

[mc2]

in all the interviews he looked genuine. it was not an act.

it was just a misjudgment, an oversight, an unfortunate mistake, and a case of being in the wrong place in the wrong time.

as we know this current goverment is clamping down and is looking for targets.

[dee123]

Maybe he was an attention seeker? if this news article is acurate,never the less it begs the question why Thai authority's persist using this law when they know it is only achieving bad publicity.Wouldn't deportation be more humane and attract less negative press?

thanks sriracha john i read it now......I hate to say this,....but do Thai people really need to see human beings suffer before they get satisfaction?

Edited February 22, 2009 by dee123

[plachon]

in all the interviews he looked genuine. it was not an act.

it was just a misjudgment, an oversight, an unfortunate mistake, and a case of being in the wrong place in the wrong time.

as we know this current goverment is clamping down and is looking for targets.

He wasn't arrested under this govt, but during a Thaksin proxy previous govt 5 months ago. So where does that leave your theory? Don't forget either that under Thaksin, Sulak Sivalak was charged with lese majeste, so don't get too carried away with this conspiracy theory of yours. Could it not be possible that the courts are now arriving at decisions with less political interference than in the past?

[dee123]

in all the interviews he looked genuine. it was not an act.

it was just a misjudgment, an oversight, an unfortunate mistake, and a case of being in the wrong place in the wrong time.

as we know this current goverment is clamping down and is looking for targets.

He wasn't arrested under this govt, but during a Thaksin proxy previous govt 5 months ago. So where does that leave your theory? Don't forget either that under Thaksin, Sulak Sivalak was charged with lese majeste, so don't get too carried away with this conspiracy theory of yours. Could it not be possible that the courts are now arriving at decisions with less political interference than in the past?

it leaves "MY" theory that Manan Kongpan and (ISOC) were behind it all!

Edited February 22, 2009 by dee123

[think_too_mut]

From The Linked Article What article? srirachajohn who said he had said this?

in the post above mine

The Sydney Morning Herald

The Australian writer Harry Nicolaides - freed from a Thai jail at the weekend - knew he risked imprisonment by defaming the country's royal family in his little-read novel, says his old colleague Heath Dollar. Here Dollar recalls the author discussing the steps he might take to achieve literary fame.

I KNEW him as Ajarn Harry, a quirky Australian of about 40 who lived in Thailand but did not eat the cuisine or learn the language.

This was in 2005, when Harry Nicolaides and I taught at Mae Fah Luang University in Chiang Rai, and lived on the same village street. This was before he found himself in a Bangkok jail.

Nicolaides and I shared an interest in writing and occasionally dined together in a Western-style restaurant. We spun yarns, talked about literature and discussed ways of getting published.

While I believed that researching the literary tastes of various editors might culminate in a book deal, Nicolaides believed it best to create a sensation, a publicity stunt to land an author on the literary map. He suggested that an author jump in front of cars and perform other such stunts in order to garner fame.

So when a friend emailed me a link to a network news story recounting the tale of Nicolaides, the Australian author jailed in Bangkok on lese-majeste charges, I was not surprised.

I recall reading excerpts of Ajarn Harry's original manuscript of Verisimilitude, the book that got him his three-year sentence, before he published it.

One day, while we were talking at work, Nicolaides showed me a particular passage which, as I recall, insulted the crown prince of Thailand. He asked if I thought the passage violated Thai law. I answered in the affirmative, advising him to delete the incriminating paragraph for safety's sake. I was not the only expatriate teacher who advised him to do so.

As teachers at a university named after the king's beloved mother, and a school that receives regular visits from the royal family, we knew the potential dangers of violating the lese-majeste law. We had even been warned by our Thai colleagues.

Nonetheless, regardless of what Ajarn Harry said in his book, I believe he harboured no ill-will toward theroyal family and that he left the offending paragraph in his novel only as a means of achieving recognition.

Before the book's publication, in fact, Nicolaides rather cavalierly suggested that going to prison for lese majeste could bring him literary fame.

I believe he was ignorant of the implications of carelessly meddling in the political process and the danger of violating the law.

Had he been able to see the future, I believe he would have remained an anonymous striver typing unknown novels in an obscure village rather than an internationally known inmate trying to survive the severe conditions of a Bangkok prison.

Though he is sometimes portrayed as a dissident, Nicolaides would more accurately be described as an opportunist. And if he is a martyr, he is not a champion of free speech but a martyr on the cross of ambition.

He wrote about Thailand as nothing more than a beautiful facade, and has since himself become the embodiment of verisimilitude.

As TV cameras captured his emaciated image through the bars, he appeared to be a man suffering for his political beliefs.

In the end, Nicolaides was simply a literary speculator whose quest for fame and notoriety cost him dearly.

Heath Dollar currently works in the United States.