'da Torpedo' Fined Bt50,000 For Defaming Coup Leaders, Former Pm, Prem

[webfact]

'Da Torpedo' fined Bt50,000 for defaming coup leaders, former PM, Prem

The Criminal Court Wednesday fined Daranee Charnchoengsilp Bt50,000 after convicting her in defaming the 2006 coup leaders, former PM Surayud Chulanont and Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda.

The court found Daranee or Da Torpedo guilty of defaming Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin and Gen Saprang Kalayanamirt, the coup leaders, Surayud and Prem during a rally of the red-shirt people in 2007.

Daranee will appeal against the ruling.

She has earlier been given a jail term for lese majesty.

-- The Nation 2009/09/16

[webfact]

DEFAMATION SUIT

Da Torpedo happy to get off with a fine

By The Nation

Lese majeste convict Daranee Chanchoengsilapakul, aka Da Torpedo, was ordered on Wednesday to pay a Bt50,000 fine in a separate case of defaming the junta and related figures, including chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulanonda.

"I am glad the court just fined me as punishment - and its decision has convinced me to have confidence in the judiciary," Daranee said in reacting to her verdict.

She said she would try to overturn her libel conviction through an appellate review.

The case was Daranee's latest legal setback following her two earlier convictions for offending the monarchy and for defaming media mogul Sondhi Limthongkul.

In handing down the guilty verdict for smearing the junta, the Criminal Court said Daranee had used foul words to sow public misunderstanding of the junta, an action deemed to have gone beyond making an honest criticism of public figures or agencies.

At the anticoup rally in May 2007, Daranee made sweeping remarks against the 2006 coup, Prem, the then interim prime minister Surayud Chulanont and two coup leaders, General Sonthi Boonyaratglin and General Saprang Kalayanamitr.

The defence contended Daranee had voiced her opposition against the coup without any personal grudges.

The judicial decision said Daranee's choice of wording was not constructive criticism but a smear.

The court cited her clean record as grounds for leniency and not sending her to jail.

It also struck down a prosecution request to impose a consecutive jail term for repeated libel. Her sentencing in the case involving Sondhi did not include imprisonment, so there were no grounds for harsher punishment.

-- The Nation 2009/09/16

[KevinBloodyWilson]

This is so far out of proportion as to be a complete joke. The elites sending all sorts of 'be good Thai boys and girls - or else' messages.

While this woman languishes in jail for talking, thousands of police, armed forces and politicians are thieving and scamming the country dry. But then of course, the purpose of the messages being sent in the first place is tell everyone outside of the elites not to rock the boat so everything continues just as it should.

This is the house that Jack built, and in some very fundamental respects, it sucks.

[givenall]

This is so far out of proportion as to be a complete joke. The elites sending all sorts of 'be good Thai boys and girls - or else' messages.

While this woman languishes in jail for talking, thousands of police, armed forces and politicians are thieving and scamming the country dry. But then of course, the purpose of the messages being sent in the first place is tell everyone outside of the elites not to rock the boat so everything continues just as it should.

This is the house that Jack built, and it sucks.

Well this is Thailand and noting is fare and you should know who is like and who is not by now

[Plus]

They are waiting for your wisdom.

Do you know that extremely negative and sweeping statements about Thailand and its people are against forum rules?

[animatic]

A line has been drawn in the sand for some time. She KNEW going in where that line was,

but ACTIVELY went way past it's obvious limits. It is sad, but she was exessively provocative

and she knew she was at the time and didn't care.

Now she herself says she thought justice/courts are not going overboard because

it gave her some leniency in this last case.

Yes she is getting a hefty swatting, but she had every reason to expect this from her actions.

And yes WORDS can be ACTIONS too, depending on context and venue of delivery.

She lost control on a public stage and is now paying the price; as the example to others.

Free speech is great and a right most all the time, but there ARE limits in ALL societies.

She went egregiously past those limits in her society.

A shame, she was an affective public speaker, that did communicate with people.

[webfact]

General warning

Flames deleted.

If repeated a warning and/or suspension will be given

[cruiser2]

Lese majeste convict Daranee Chanchoengsilapakul, aka Da Torpedo, was ordered on Wednesday to pay a Bt50,000 fine in a separate case of defaming the junta and related figures, including chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulanonda.

Good to see this malicious loud-mouth get her just desserts.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

This is so far out of proportion as to be a complete joke. The elites sending all sorts of 'be good Thai boys and girls - or else' messages.

While this woman languishes in jail for talking, thousands of police, armed forces and politicians are thieving and scamming the country dry. But then of course, the purpose of the messages being sent in the first place is tell everyone outside of the elites not to rock the boat so everything continues just as it should.

This is the house that Jack built, and it sucks.

Well this is Thailand and noting is fare and you should know who is like and who is not by now

Just muttering "TiT" is a cop-out imho. We all have a stake in this place and an interest in seeing it lumber reluctantly and ponderously at least as far as the 20th Century. None of us have any benefit of the place continues to become a failed state.

Qui tacet consentit

Edited September 17, 2009 by KevinBloodyWilson

[hammered]

A fine rather than a jail sentence for defamation seems about right

[Plus]

A fine rather than a jail sentence for defamation seems about right

On the other hand she still feels no remorse for her LM offense. A year in jail seems not enough.

Another goal of punishment is developing a Pavlovian reflex - do not repeat your crimes, it hurts, even if you don't fully comprehend it. On the day of her sentencing she looked like she'd go and repeat her speech straight away. In her recent interviews she sounds a lot more apprehensive. Apparently solitary confinement has this effect on people.

Say what you want, but jail, and all its internal credit-debit system are designed for people who otherwise don't get it. I mean everyone knows that stealing or dealing drugs is wrong, but some don't have strong enough convictions against it.

Pity that Torpedo doesn't get that offending the monarchy is not acceptable here. She still thinks she was absolutely innocent. And pity those who take her views as some sign of Thai societal thinking. It isn't, she is a freak they all want to put away, including her former comrades. Pity those who take lessons in courage from this misguided woman.

[animatic]

The sentence is to put the fear of god in her lil ass. She will get pardoned, after some appropriate time in stir,

by the very person she defamed... How ironic. AT that point she should/may have a slightly modified viewpoint.

Which IS the reason for the whole exercise.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

They are waiting for your wisdom.

Do you know that extremely negative and sweeping statements about Thailand and its people are against forum rules?

So complain.

Statements, sweeping or not are not perjorative if they are true and held to be common knowledge.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

A fine rather than a jail sentence for defamation seems about right

On the other hand she still feels no remorse for her LM offense. A year in jail seems not enough.

Another goal of punishment is developing a Pavlovian reflex - do not repeat your crimes, it hurts, even if you don't fully comprehend it. On the day of her sentencing she looked like she'd go and repeat her speech straight away. In her recent interviews she sounds a lot more apprehensive. Apparently solitary confinement has this effect on people.

Say what you want, but jail, and all its internal credit-debit system are designed for people who otherwise don't get it. I mean everyone knows that stealing or dealing drugs is wrong, but some don't have strong enough convictions against it.

Pity that Torpedo doesn't get that offending the monarchy is not acceptable here. She still thinks she was absolutely innocent. And pity those who take her views as some sign of Thai societal thinking. It isn't, she is a freak they all want to put away, including her former comrades. Pity those who take lessons in courage from this misguided woman.

Having seen the text of her comments when they happened, it is clear that no threat to the monarchy was made and no insult was passed. She made comments that do not conform with the wishes of those that hold power and wish to retain power. That's why she is in jail. It is childish, petulant and very ill-advised for a so-called 'developing nation' to engage in this kind of repression.

And so that you understand it better, the law is not about insulting the monarchy, it is about saying things that someone other than the monarchy 'deems to have offended the monarchy'. In other words, it can be whatever is politically expedient. It is a travesty.

I have no boat to paddle in respect of Daranee, as a matter of personal opinion I think she was stupid and resppnded entirely to the heat of the moment (a typically Thai response), but repression of this kind is clearly anti-democratic. This government fraudulently tries to peddle its democratic credentials, having come to power undemocratically, and having embarked on a wide program of repression of the freedom of expression and opinion since then.

[Plus]

The logic of her speech was "become like Japanese or British monarchy or...."

What followed was a threat, and the court dismissed the defense argument that she had no ability to carry it out.

And you do not threaten anyone with things like violent death, rallying a crowd, repeatedly, much less the monarchy, in Thailand, of all places.

"Statements, sweeping or not are not perjorative if they are true and held to be common knowledge."

Your flame was deleted, common knowledge or not, apparently it was against board rules, which encourage civilized discussion. You are free to flame anywhere else you like, but here we are all just users and we agree to abide by this board rules.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

The logic of her speech was "become like Japanese or British monarchy or...."

What followed was a threat, and the court dismissed the defense argument that she had no ability to carry it out.

And you do not threaten anyone with things like violent death, rallying a crowd, repeatedly, much less the monarchy, in Thailand, of all places.

"Statements, sweeping or not are not perjorative if they are true and held to be common knowledge."

Your flame was deleted, common knowledge or not, apparently it was against board rules, which encourage civilized discussion. You are free to flame anywhere else you like, but here we are all just users and we agree to abide by this board rules.

I can't even remember what the alleged flame was my friend, and I doubt you can. However, thanks for the friendly pointers; when I next need some advice on minding your own business I will be sure to look you up and ask.

Oh, and yes. I am aware that sentence was malformed.

Cheers. Have a nice day.

[jayboy]

A fine rather than a jail sentence for defamation seems about right

On the other hand she still feels no remorse for her LM offense. A year in jail seems not enough.

Another goal of punishment is developing a Pavlovian reflex - do not repeat your crimes, it hurts, even if you don't fully comprehend it. On the day of her sentencing she looked like she'd go and repeat her speech straight away. In her recent interviews she sounds a lot more apprehensive. Apparently solitary confinement has this effect on people.

Say what you want, but jail, and all its internal credit-debit system are designed for people who otherwise don't get it. I mean everyone knows that stealing or dealing drugs is wrong, but some don't have strong enough convictions against it.

Pity that Torpedo doesn't get that offending the monarchy is not acceptable here. She still thinks she was absolutely innocent. And pity those who take her views as some sign of Thai societal thinking. It isn't, she is a freak they all want to put away, including her former comrades. Pity those who take lessons in courage from this misguided woman.

Sorry but you're projecting your own extreme views on the Thai people as a whole and it doesn't wash.Firstly there's no evidence whatsoever the monarchy is offended by this rather silly woman.Secondly most Thais are only dimly aware of this case.Those that know the background don't feel that strongly because they correctly believe that this woman doesn't represent a threat at all, and indeed on some subjects - quite separate from the LM charge - she has done no more than point out some true and salient facts.Thais know that when individuals start frothing about LM, they invariably have some political agenda.In your case thousands of posts tell us what that is - no problem with that at all: you are an articulate proponent.You might say that her approach, tone and sense of occasion showed shoddy judgement, and with that I would fully agree.I also agree that she doesn't represent any significant section of Thai society on the serious charge.But get some sense of proportion: your slightly creepy comments on solitary confinement show how angry you are, but really there's much less going on here than meets the eye.Any way the way this case is turning out suggests that the crazies aren't in charge yet.Has a compassionate signal been sent out I wonder?

[Plus]

I remember what it was. In case you don't - at the end of your first post in this thread you added an offensive comment referring to all Thais as "they".

I even double checked who was that "they". It wasn't any special group, like reds or yellows, just Thais in general.

Reading people's posts IS kind of my business, that's why I come here, and if there are flames in those posts, I can choose to report it to the mods, address you personally, or ignore and let someone else to clean it up. I chose the second option.

[Plus]

Firstly there's no evidence whatsoever the monarchy is offended by this rather silly woman.

Secondly most Thais are only dimly aware of this case.Those that know the background don't feel that strongly because they correctly believe that this woman doesn't represent a threat at all,

Firstly, the monarchy is inviolable whether any particular member feels offended or not.

Secondly, some felt strongly enough to throw bags of feces at her while she was talking, though probably not on that particular occasion.

And, on the other hand, if she had built up an audience that was tolerant, if not receptive of her threats to the monarchy - all the more reasons to put an end to it, nip it in the bud, before she develops even more following and gets bold enough to actually try and carry out her threats.

What else did you expect the state would do? Her goal was clear.

and indeed on some subjects - quite separate from the LM charge - she has done no more than point out some true and salient facts.

And she can probably recite English alphabet correctly - irrelevant.

Are you trying to give some sort of an authority to her LM speech just because she was "right" on other topics? All the more reasons to stop it.

Thais know that when individuals start frothing about LM, they invariably have some political agenda.

Certainly not in Darunee's case - politically she was a non-entity, strip her of LM and she is a complete nobody in political sense. Do you know any of her political opponents that could be behind this charge? It's absurd.

And I do not have any opinion on her solitary confinement, I just noticed that it dented her spirit. I don't think that terms of her sentence specify solitary, and if she gets rough treatment from the wardens, what can I say? I don't know for sure, but maybe they feel strongly about her offense.

Lots of Thais would, no matter how pluralistic you try to present them.

[baht&sold]

Since we can't discuss what was said in this incident specifically...

If an known nutter was addressing a known violent group in say the US which has vowed to overthrow the Govt and suggested the President be guillotined (and worse) you can bet your last Benjamin that Homeland Security and/or the Secret Service would scoop that person off the street in a NY second... They would then likely be held for probable sedition charges, or worse. Criticism is one thing, talking sedition and execution of a head of state is another, both have a price and it's not about freedom of speech when the line is crossed.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

I remember what it was. In case you don't - at the end of your first post in this thread you added an offensive comment referring to all Thais as "they".

I even double checked who was that "they". It wasn't any special group, like reds or yellows, just Thais in general.

Reading people's posts IS kind of my business, that's why I come here, and if there are flames in those posts, I can choose to report it to the mods, address you personally, or ignore and let someone else to clean it up. I chose the second option.

Just continuing to follow your off-topic point for a moment (and with the indulgence of anyone else who might be reading and is not yet bored), offensiveness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, which is the whole point of my original comment (you know, the one point you missed). I am sure that if I had meant to be offensive then I would have remembered what I said, otherwise, words are easy to misinterpret. As I am sure you have done.

Generalisations: one of the 3 standard linguistic devices that we all use (oops, there's another one). Let me see. Is it OK to say that it's mainly Thais that live in Thailand? Or is that an another sweeping generalisation? You see, the problem with criticising other posters is that it is often easy to take the criticism and show how ridiculous it is. Isn't it? Which I wouldn't dream of doing because of my overwhelming sense of good will to all, and to you in particular.

Leave it to the mods would be my advice, since they had already dealt with it, rendering your own intervention irrelevant. Otherwise you come across as lecturing instead of simply disagreeing. Unless of course you entertain aspirations to be a mod and are putting in a little advance practice? To draw attention to your credentials?

Here's a tip though. If you don't agree with something I say, why not say "I don't agree"? Easier all around really. Up to you of course...

Have that really nice day though. Over and out - no time left for more foolishness, too much fun to have.

Edited September 17, 2009 by KevinBloodyWilson

[jayboy]

I don't think there was ever a receptive audience, so the nipping in the bud argument doesn't really work.

Mental asylums are full of people who throw faeces around.Anyone who does this for whatever cause is to be pitied and treated but not to be taken seriously.

Yes, she was right on some things but as I said earlier her sense of presentation and occasion was dreadful.

I'm sorry but your comments on solitary confinement and the warders treatment of her continue to strike me as creepy.Never mind: it's not a major point for me.

There's an irony that this instance you defer to the passions of the mob (though I don't really accept your premise of outraged Thais).

[Plus]

Well, the court ruled it was a threat, lots of people here who read the actual words at the time thought it was clearly offensive.

Now some others come and claim it was all innocent speech with no harm intended.

Yeah, right.

[Plus]

Leave it to the mods would be my advice, since they had already dealt with it, rendering your own intervention irrelevant.

Webfact deleted your flame about twenty minutes after my post....

I don't think there was ever a receptive audience, so the nipping in the bud argument doesn't really work.

Mental asylums are full of people who throw faeces around.Anyone who does this for whatever cause is to be pitied and treated but not to be taken seriously.

Yes, she was right on some things but as I said earlier her sense of presentation and occasion was dreadful.

I'm sorry but your comments on solitary confinement and the warders treatment of her continue to strike me as creepy.Never mind: it's not a major point for me.

There's an irony that this instance you defer to the passions of the mob (though I don't really accept your premise of outraged Thais).

You THINK she didn't have a receptive audience? Do you also think that she should be allowed her threat and campaigning until she FINDS receptive audience?

As for feces throwers (browser approved spelling, sorry), it's not their mental state that I pointed out - it's the fact that there was strong reaction. The official reason to deny her bail was to protect her from the mobs.

Webboards are full with comments like "18 years not enough", people throw shit at her, and the courts worries about her safety, even if superficially, and here you are, telling me that Thais don't care.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Since we can't discuss what was said in this incident specifically...

If an known nutter was addressing a known violent group in say the US which has vowed to overthrow the Govt and suggested the President be guillotined (and worse) you can bet your last Benjamin that Homeland Security and/or the Secret Service would scoop that person off the street in a NY second... They would then likely be held for probable sedition charges, or worse. Criticism is one thing, talking sedition and execution of a head of state is another, both have a price and it's not about freedom of speech when the line is crossed.

Can't say I heard any suggestions. Only that it happened. In France.

Which is in agreement with my history books.

I think taking offence at that and interpreting it as a credible threat requires creativity. As befits the proposed creatiivity hub I suppose.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Well, the court ruled it was a threat, <snip>

Oh wait! You men by the Thai courts, famed across the planet for their integrity and consistency, and their steadfast refusal to take decisions based on politics?

I see it all so clearly now. How could I have been so blind all this time?

Edited September 17, 2009 by KevinBloodyWilson

[Plus]

The court interpretation of her speech was not different from people who also saw it.

The courts are the most trusted public institution in Thailand, according to the Asia Foundation survey that is covered in another topic.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

The court interpretation of her speech was not different from people who also saw it.

The courts are the most trusted public institution in Thailand, according to the Asia Foundation survey that is covered in another topic.

Not exactly. 64% trust the courts - hardly a ringing endorsement. Bu high compared with the army and the police.

Also (doubtless) higher than Satan and all his minions but I am not sure that would be a ringing endorsement either.

[animatic]

Also (doubtless) higher than Satan and all his minions but I am not sure that would be a ringing endorsement either.

Well fortunately Satan and his minions aren't in offce right now,

unless the riots work. In this case not minions but mindiots.

[hammered]

The court interpretation of her speech was not different from people who also saw it.

The courts are the most trusted public institution in Thailand, according to the Asia Foundation survey that is covered in another topic.

Not exactly. 64% trust the courts - hardly a ringing endorsement. Bu high compared with the army and the police.

Also (doubtless) higher than Satan and all his minions but I am not sure that would be a ringing endorsement either.

Not just relatively higher than some. The courts came out as the institution having the most integrity and being the most politcally neutral with around 2/3 ie first in both categories. That is telling in a country where it is assumed the country is divided about 50-50. That menas many on the side that doesnt liek the courts still view them well.

The army did averagely while the police came unsurprisingly bottom in both categories with really awful scores.