Sondhi Convicted For Libel

[reallyok]

Sonti always said he wouldn't run away, if Newin keeps to his word he could be joining him in just over 10 days. It makes Thaksin look more and more cowardly.

Well at least they got a fair trial wereas Thaksin has'nt even been to court yet and has been proclaimed guilty of just about everything the government can think of !

He would have no chance in court so why would he return, i definately would not, but that does not mean i am a coward.

[Plus]

So, Tawp and others, how do you propose to stop repeat offenders like Samak or Sondhi from shouting their mouths off and inflicting damage on other people?

Here, in Thailand, not in some "enlightened" countries where the damage could have been minimal and reputation (face) doesn't mean as much as here?

Someone suggested reimbursing the damaged party. It's in the books already. The court can decide on the amount of damages, but not everything can be expressed in monetary terms, not in Thailand anyway.

Lost promotions, lost opportunities, lost pride or face, lost influence, and the grand daddy of all suffering - lost connections. Money can't restore those, you can't just buy them back.

Even if it worked - the punishment must be seen as deterrent. If it doesn't deter Sondhi, it needs to be increased, and eventually there must be a jail option.

There could be an argument about criminal vs civil offense, but it's mostly theoretical - none of the present parties is responsible for making libel criminal, and none of the present parties can change anything about it anyway as it's not a priority, it's not even a concern.

[TAWP]

If you cannot take harsh words then perhaps you shouldn't be in the spotlight.

[Thai at Heart]

So, Tawp and others, how do you propose to stop repeat offenders like Samak or Sondhi from shouting their mouths off and inflicting damage on other people?

Here, in Thailand, not in some "enlightened" countries where the damage could have been minimal and reputation (face) doesn't mean as much as here?

Someone suggested reimbursing the damaged party. It's in the books already. The court can decide on the amount of damages, but not everything can be expressed in monetary terms, not in Thailand anyway.

Lost promotions, lost opportunities, lost pride or face, lost influence, and the grand daddy of all suffering - lost connections. Money can't restore those, you can't just buy them back.

Even if it worked - the punishment must be seen as deterrent. If it doesn't deter Sondhi, it needs to be increased, and eventually there must be a jail option.

There could be an argument about criminal vs civil offense, but it's mostly theoretical - none of the present parties is responsible for making libel criminal, and none of the present parties can change anything about it anyway as it's not a priority, it's not even a concern.

The law is the law. Can't argue with that. Damages relevant to the level of public disclosure could work.

I think a very important change would be that telling the truth, should you be able to prove it, should be a defence.

Sondhi spread a rumour, but under the law, whether he could prove it or not is irrelevant.

[Plus]

If you cannot take harsh words then perhaps you shouldn't be in the spotlight.

Pridiyathorn was appointed to the "spotlight".

And libel and harsh words are not the same.

[inquisitive]

Sondhi took control of an airport either by directive to others or directly using his power base. That in any world is a terrorist act. The Red shirts likewise terrorised the Thai community and are yet to be held to book.

I guess it is the fashion, but the descriptor "terrorist" is far too loosly applied to any action that makes people uncomfortable. In actuality, if the action is not done to inspire terror, then it is not a terrorist action. Since the airport cloisure was not done to make anyone cower in terror, it is not correct to call it by that name. Call it what you will (illegal, naughty, anarchistic, royal pain in the butt, or whatever) but it was not an act of terrorism.

Taking vehicles loaded with explosive fuel, placing them next to apartment buildings filled with innocent non-combatants, and threatening to blow them up WAS intended to cause terror, and therefore THAT was a terrorist act.

Last week someone cut me off in traffic in order to reach the green light in time. It angered me, but it was not a terrorist act even if the guy was a jihadist.

If we keep describing every action we don't like as terrorism, the term soon looses all meaning and impact. You don't like Sondhi. We get it. But inconveniencing travellers is not in the same class as a bunch of guys with incredibly bad aim spraying Sondhi's car with fire from assault rifles. Maybe we need to keep a closer watch on our comments or risk seeming like our posts are mindless propaganda.

[Brewsta]

Sonti always said he wouldn't run away, if Newin keeps to his word he could be joining him in just over 10 days. It makes Thaksin look more and more cowardly.

Khun T justs shrugs, pleads innocence and continues his new Diamond Dig in Africa.....

money + power = Get out of Jail Free card......let proxies take the falls........

Nothing new here, Folks.....move along now, etc.

rgdz

Brewsta

[Chunkton]

Well if Sondhi does his time "his two years" what do you think the former "head waiter" is gonna go down for ??

I think that he should be incarcerated and the key thrown out of one of TG's aging airliners mid Pacific.

What Sondhi has done pales by comparison with what the former head waited committed "3,000 extra judicial deaths in his campaign against drugs, how many was it at the massacre at the Krue Sae Mosque, how many died when they stacked some one hundred prisoners on top of each other on a sip law lorry" and God only knows how many more.

What about the lawyer who was taken in Bangkok and has never been seen again to this day.

Sondhi would qualify for a sainthood when compared with the former head waiter.

Rather than belaboring us with your to culinary jests, you could perhaps put on your thinking cap and do some actual thinking rather than bellowing.

So the military staged a coup and stacked the courts prior going after Taksin. Now why do you think they didn't go after him on the Mosque and the judicial killings? Great headlines for an arrest, "Evil Murderous Tyrant" etc, but no, they got him on allowing his wife to bid at a land auction, hence the new title fugitive.

So who do you imagine they were protecting not going after those? And as such how and where should the guilt be apportioned that never saw the inside of a courtroom?

Sondhi was a former crony of Taksin who had a falling out, as the PAD murdered people I somewhat doubt he would qualify for sainthood. Intersting to see how you naively view the world though, wake up it is all gray, not black and white. Add to that we really don't know what is actually going on anyway.

[cyb]

If you cannot take harsh words then perhaps you shouldn't be in the spotlight.

To coin a phrase i remember from my youth.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, But words cannot hurt me.

That has to be the most unbelievable phrase i have ever heard.

Words can hurt and hurt very bad.

I think the term mud sticks fits very well into this thread.

[DocHolliday]

Sonti always said he wouldn't run away, if Newin keeps to his word he could be joining him in just over 10 days. It makes Thaksin look more and more cowardly.

Well at least they got a fair trial wereas Thaksin has'nt even been to court yet and has been proclaimed guilty of just about everything the government can think of !

He would have no chance in court so why would he return, i definately would not, but that does not mean i am a coward.

Thaksin has'nt even been to court yet

because he decided to take a break first and withdrawal himself from the upcoming trial! This man has no guts! Sondhi has - he didn't run away!

[inquisitive]

So, Tawp and others, how do you propose to stop repeat offenders like Samak or Sondhi from shouting their mouths off and inflicting damage on other people?

Here, in Thailand, not in some "enlightened" countries where the damage could have been minimal and reputation (face) doesn't mean as much as here?

Someone suggested reimbursing the damaged party. It's in the books already. The court can decide on the amount of damages, but not everything can be expressed in monetary terms, not in Thailand anyway.

Lost promotions, lost opportunities, lost pride or face, lost influence, and the grand daddy of all suffering - lost connections. Money can't restore those, you can't just buy them back.

Even if it worked - the punishment must be seen as deterrent. If it doesn't deter Sondhi, it needs to be increased, and eventually there must be a jail option.

There could be an argument about criminal vs civil offense, but it's mostly theoretical - none of the present parties is responsible for making libel criminal, and none of the present parties can change anything about it anyway as it's not a priority, it's not even a concern.

The law is the law. Can't argue with that. Damages relevant to the level of public disclosure could work.

I think a very important change would be that telling the truth, should you be able to prove it, should be a defence.

Sondhi spread a rumour, but under the law, whether he could prove it or not is irrelevant.

In more, shall we say, enlightened countries the law is different. First, truth is an absolute defense. If what was said is true, then it does not matter whether the writer had the proof in hand when the defamatory statement was printed.

Further, if the target of the libelous statements is deemed to be a public figure, then the bar is raised still higher. By accepting that role, the target has knowingly placed himself in the line of fire. Paris Hilton, for example, was better protected by libel/slander laws prior to her placing her nud_e video on the Internet. Once she did that, she essentially "invited" comments about how big or small her butt is. As one American president remarked "If you can't stand the heat, then stay out of the kitchen."

Perhaps even more relevant are three other concepts:1) In order to gain a conviction, the defamed person must show damages. In other words, if I say you are ugly, and it hurts your feelings but does no other damage, then just buck up and get over it.;

2) The exception to this rule is any comment that effects the defamed person's ability to make a living. Thus, if I said you were ugly and your job depended upon people perceiving you as beautiful, then you might have a case without proving that any actual damage took place; and

3) [this is the tricky one] while truth is an absolute defense under any circumstances, even if the statements prove to be false, so long as the author BELIEVED them to be true when they were made, then again there is no offense. So if you come into my house and threaten me with a bar of soap that has been carved to look like a gun, and I write in the newspaper that you were carrying a pistol without a permit, I am off the hook so long as I really BELIEVED it was true.

Of course this is where the big legal fees come in. There are questions as to whether I really believed what I wrote, whether it was unreasonable for me to believe it, whether I SHOULD have known better, etc. The biggest question has to do with intent. If I made my statements believing they were true and without the intent of doing harm, then I am free. But if I tell a story that I knew or should have known was untrue and I did so with malice toward the defamed person, then my goose is cooked. This is usually the standard to which newspapers are held. If they write something incorrect about you, but it was an "honest error," then there is no crime. If they are on a holy crusade to "get" you and they print something inaccurate, then the error was made with malice and heads will roll.

So you are right in what you say, and whole nations have already grappled with these issues and somehow they have managed to find a way to make it so people don't go to jail because they reasonably believed the things they were writing. This is especially true about political views since, well, who really knows what is true anyway?

[nickynomates]

Dear Boys and Girls

Thats the Yellow firework just been lit.

Stand back and admire the display.

We have more to follow after this.

Wonder which will go off with the loudest bang or just shoot off and go out in a lame puff of smoke

[marsteele]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

Scape goat there has to be someone to save a little face. Feed a lamb to the lions

[featography]

Dear Boys and Girls

Thats the Yellow firework just been lit.

Stand back and admire the display.

We have more to follow after this.

Wonder which will go off with the loudest bang or just shoot off and go out in a lame puff of smoke

as in more to follow;

No real jail time for the yellow shirt. Melodramatics for show, end result; mai pen rai

[brahmburgers]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) At least now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

Insane? Double those sentences, no triple, tenfold even!!

Thai politicians might even start thinking about what to say before opening their mouth. ;-P

It's doubtful Sondhi will do a day behind bars. Anyone who can get loans for billions of baht, and them harangue the lenders who want to get paid back, is essentially untouchable in Thailand. I like the Yellows, and it's a shame that Sondhi is their most prominent figure. I'm sure they can come up with someone better to front their organization.

As for libel, it's waaaay out of line in Thailand. It was a problem years ago, but then Mr. T took it to new depths, slapping big money defamation of character suits left and right. It's gotten so bad, that it puts a damper on campaign debates leading up to elections - as candidates are too gun shy to say anything about their opponents, for fear of lawsuits.

Another reason there are few face-to-face political debates with civility:

>>> politicians (and Thais in general) are often thin-skinned, and therefore easily offended, and quick to anger and retaliation. ...but that's another topic.

[moskito]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

and in which of the both Bangkok Hilton`s he has to stay for the two years`?

OR

Edited September 10, 2009 by moskito

[Rumfoord]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

1) i agree.

2) don't forget who was the plaintiff here, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of a government appointed by the junta after the coup.

remember Samak, he got also two years jail in a libel case. details here in The Nation.

later it made the news that Samak has liver cancer and want to travel to the USA for medical treatment.

in the thaivisaforum is that documented in thread, including a couple of bizarre comments and opinions by "some posters". accusing samak he just fake his cancer to avoid his deserved jail time. and that the then govt just allow him to become the 2nd most wanted fugitive if his travel to the USA is allowed. read here:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/pm-Samak-Liv...er-t218174.html

later in time another forum topic reported the return of Samak from the USA to thailand. guess who wrote the first reply, welcomes Samak and wished him well enough to face his jail time? click here for answer.

[TAWP]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

1) i agree.

2) don't forget who was the plaintiff here, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of a government appointed by the junta after the coup.

remember Samak, he got also two years jail in a libel case. details here in The Nation.

later it made the news that Samak has liver cancer and want to travel to the USA for medical treatment.

in the thaivisaforum is that documented in thread, including a couple of bizarre comments and opinions by "some posters". accusing samak he just fake his cancer to avoid his deserved jail time. and that the then govt just allow him to become the 2nd most wanted fugitive if his travel to the USA is allowed. read here:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/pm-Samak-Liv...er-t218174.html

later in time another forum topic reported the return of Samak from the USA to thailand. guess who wrote the first reply, welcomes Samak and wished him well enough to face his jail time? click here for answer.

Did I steal your toys when you was a lad?

Yes, I welcomed him back to his prison sentence. Point being? Notice in any thread about libel in the past I have always made a point to note that prison for libel is absurd. It however doesn't mean one cannot smile that a person with little morals or scruples sees the inside of an cell. It is just sad it has to be for a libel case instead of any real case they should have brought against him.

Under what username did you post in that thread?

Edited September 10, 2009 by TAWP

[Trouble]

hel_l, last night some congressman called Obama a liar while giving a speech to a joint session of Congress about his health care proposals. Do you think he will go to jail? These remarks made in the heat of political battles are common place. Only in Thailand would someone go to jail in a libel case. Usually these things are civil matters with civil judgements. They are not criminal matters. This kind of criminal judicial proceeding only serves to stop unwanted dialogue. Making this a criminal offense is not healthy in a "democracy" but then Thailand is far from being democratic.

[animatic]

Jail for libel is insane

How else do you propose to stop it?

Suspended sentences and fines don't seem to have any effect on some offenders, like Samak, for example.

They just don't get it.

What else do you think would teach them a lesson?

In an odd twist of fate I CAN AGREE WITH BOTH PLUS AND JASREEVE IN THE SAME TOPIC.

Quick look is the sky falling.

He was an unrepentant multiple offender,

and this can easily be construed as contempt of court,

and possibly higher in this case.

That said I suspect he is being made an example of because of high profile,

and likely partly because of the airport to mute some loud wailing.

As many whine loudly : Why this an not the airport :

Perfectly logical reason;

this case was started a year earlier and finally wound through the courts.

The Airport case is a year behind in the glacial moving queue.

Didn't Samek get 2 years also for repeat offender?

But apperently went to ground and silence, potentially health related,

and so is being left lie for the moment, or until interment...

Sondhi has no such extenuating circumstance to fall behind.

Nor seems likely to fall into silence... so appeal and be in a tie with Thaksin for years to serve.

Decent odds say he does his and is out before Thaksin ever does an hour.

So can you sue their pants off here till their gonads freeze? That's how the west does it.

Probably the better choice, but here facial loss is considered a much bigger thing.

They have dial back the penalty from something like impalement to jail time for being habitual,

likely an improvement.

But people here kill for less loss of face than Kuhn Pridiyathorn publicly suffered.

I happen to think he is one of the brighter minds here, compared to so many,

and a poor target for this attack, regardless if Sondhi is feeling vengeful.

Edited September 10, 2009 by animatic

[ajarnmark]

As I was suspecting it before. No matter what people at TV think of, but its all power game.

When they wanted power, they became friends with sondhi, now they do not need him and know very precisely that that sondhi can hurt them, so they will put him in jail.

We will soon see Sondhi will start movement against them as he did against thaksin.

Anyway thinks it about justice is living in fool's paradise.

Only time will tell.....

[animatic]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

1) i agree.

2) don't forget who was the plaintiff here, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of a government appointed by the junta after the coup.

remember Samak, he got also two years jail in a libel case. details here in The Nation.

later it made the news that Samak has liver cancer and want to travel to the USA for medical treatment.

in the thaivisaforum is that documented in thread, including a couple of bizarre comments and opinions by "some posters". accusing samak he just fake his cancer to avoid his deserved jail time. and that the then govt just allow him to become the 2nd most wanted fugitive if his travel to the USA is allowed. read here:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/pm-Samak-Liv...er-t218174.html

later in time another forum topic reported the return of Samak from the USA to thailand. guess who wrote the first reply, welcomes Samak and wished him well enough to face his jail time? click here for answer.

I wonder who you were posting as when you first saw these

that NOW you AMAZINGLY remember to search up today?

[RKASA]

Its only a prediction but, Mr. Sondhi will be going completely bananas during the appeal time and will end up facing more charges.

On the one hand I feel for the guy, libel is a civil matter, and should be rare in the area of politics or whistle blowing.   

He's been making speeches and drawing on the temple issue to whip up nationalism and calling for the removal of members and other PAD members have warned of mess rallies.  He wants chaos the sooner the better it suites his needs again.

As much as I am not a big fan of Mr. Sondhi I hope he wins the appeal and then goes fishing ......  for fish.     good time to retire.  Odds of that are about equal to Mr. Thaksin tossing in the towel, they both have so much in common.  

[sedeflonga]

made some accusations,... go to jail !

messed up the country.... mai pen rai.

umm... True!

[chlear909]

Its just to keep him from getting shot again.Although he'll probly get shot in jail just as easily.

[the_webninja]

<CENTER><font="Arial" SIZE="4" COLOR="YELLOW"><b>NOW WHAT AM I GONNA DO?! </b></FONT><P></CENTER>

Edited September 10, 2009 by the_webninja

[MUYTHAI]

Plus>> How about dealing with it like grownups do in other countries?

Like China, Saudia Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Brunei, North Korea, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia, Malaysia, Tajikistan, Singapore, Indonesia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Egypt, Niger, Algeria, Oman, both Yemens, Kazakhstan, Libya, Mali, Chad, Mauritania, Qatar, Bahrain, Azerbaijan, U.A.E., Belarus, etc.

Which country's punishment would you choose TAWP? And would you choose prison, public whipping/flogging, dismemberment of an appendage, stoning to death or death by hanging, firing squad, or beheading?

I assume grownups (adults) are in control of the countrys listed above... and not children.

[MUYTHAI]

Only in Thailand would someone go to jail in a libel case. Usually these things are civil matters with civil judgements. They are not criminal matters. This kind of criminal judicial proceeding only serves to stop unwanted dialogue. Making this a criminal offense is not healthy in a "democracy" but then Thailand is far from being democratic.

You might want to study other countries and their judicial and political systems before making the claims you have against Thailand. Thailand is a "democracy" and constitutional monarchy....about the same as the UK. At least there are not tens of thousands of security cameras on the streets of Thailand "spying...big brother style" on citizens walking down the streets like there are in the in the UK. There really are no true democracies on Earth...except maybe in small "tribal groups". Thailand has some freedoms that are not available in other "democracies" and visa versa. The United States is far from being democratic also. It is an oligarchy run by the big business/special interest groups and their lobbyists and the aristocracy of well-connected and well-financed families, etc. It is just hidden from the public more than it is in Thailand.

Sondhi had been cited for libel before. It was not his first offence. I do agree that he should not go to prison, but be fined heavily. Libel and freedom-of-speech are two separate issues.

In about 10 European countries, it is now a crime to orally state or write that the jewish holocaust did not occurr. People have been sentenced and sent to prison for denying the halocaust in some of these countries. These laws is being pushed by jewish groups in other countries such as the Neatherlands and the USA also. Talk about not having freedom-of speech. Count your blessings in Thailand. Thailand has many freedoms not found in other "democracies". Many countries are far worse... and others are getting worse by the day!

Like I stated to TAWP. Concerning the Sondhi libel case...in the countries listed below one would be worse off than in Thailand.

Like China, Saudia Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Brunei, North Korea, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia, Malaysia, Tajikistan, Singapore, Indonesia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Egypt, Niger, Algeria, Oman, both Yemens, Kazakhstan, Libya, Mali, Chad, Mauritania, Qatar, Bahrain, Azerbaijan, U.A.E., Belarus, etc.

[SHYTALK]

First; one has to say that this court has had no sanction from the people via the ballot box , and therefore has no place in a democratic society.

Having said that, the judicial system is of Sondhi's own creation and he has been more than happy to see it used on his opponents.

Therefore it is appropriate in his case that he his tried by his own justice.

Hoisted by his own petard.

A victim of his own type justice.

A reaper of his own sowing.

As luck would have it a unit is presently available , on a two year term, so can be immediately occupied.

And the fate of its occupant can be in keeping with the fate of its would-be occupant, as diatribed here on tv.

Sondi's circle will no doubt widen , when introduced his new friends.

Now an appeal is mentioned, which hopefully will be in keeping with "Sondi's Law" , and increase the sentance to 10 years,

Bang..

Next please..

[LaoPo]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

1) i agree.

2) don't forget who was the plaintiff here, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of a government appointed by the junta after the coup.

remember Samak, he got also two years jail in a libel case. details here in The Nation.

later it made the news that Samak has liver cancer and want to travel to the USA for medical treatment.

in the thaivisaforum is that documented in thread, including a couple of bizarre comments and opinions by "some posters". accusing samak he just fake his cancer to avoid his deserved jail time. and that the then govt just allow him to become the 2nd most wanted fugitive if his travel to the USA is allowed. read here:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/pm-Samak-Liv...er-t218174.html

later in time another forum topic reported the return of Samak from the USA to thailand. guess who wrote the first reply, welcomes Samak and wished him well enough to face his jail time? click here for answer.

I wonder who you were posting as when you first saw these

that NOW you AMAZINGLY remember to search up today?

Amazing indeed; certainly a poster (since 2,5 weeks; August 26) who knows quite a bit about Thai politics and able to dig up old threads with a snip of the fingers.

Hmmm ...The Return of a Jedi troll or one who was keeping them in check ?

LaoPo