Leicester Dad Tells Of Battle To Cut Thai Drugs Sentence

[Maizefarmer]

Theres some dispute regards whether the accused was in pocession of only what he needed for personal consumption versus quantities consistent with dealing - immaterial of whether or not he was dealing, the courts in Thailand are not likely to grant you the benefit of the doubt - and his sentence reflected that (i.e. he had not been given the benefit of the doubt!)

Pocesession for personal use and dealing carry very different sentences in Thailand - everyone knows that. If you are a user then it is nothing but plain stupidity to be any pocessesion of a quantity that can get you prosecuted for dealing.

He's back in the Uk now, and can be very grateful for been given that oppurtunity. If past examples are anything to go by, he's not going to be inside in 2020 let alone have to serve the full 33years.

I'm not sure how the tariff part of the sentence is calculated or affected when prisoner exchanges take place - and I haven't seen anuthing yet in th media regards the tariff component of his sentance, but if his lawyer is up to the job, he should be able to find a way to get him in front of a parole board sometime over the next few years. So long as he has been a "model prisoner" I would have thought he could expect a sympathetic hearing and a good chance of getting released.

But the message is clear - dont do drugs in Thailand, and if you have a drug problem you can go to any of the Thai state drug help centres and you will be treated just as a Thai would be treated (it is free - you will not be charged) - and be accorded the same confidentuality (though of course you'll stick out and attract a lot of interst in the centre).

[bobjenssen]

It's even sadder that people simply "bend over" to these idiot laws. By saying that they aren't going away (the idiot anti drug laws), is in effect "bending over" to the idiot laws. The more people speak about & discuss such stupid things, the more chance that "brains will grow" & realise the futility of it all.

Frankly they are pathetic. A complete and utter shower.

I really wonder where on earth they went to school, if indeed they ever did.

What I have read on TV really stuns me. And most of the posters are western! They ought to know better.

We have such a slave like mentality, such narrow mindedness , and pure igronance beyond all belief.

Listen to some of it

"obey the law because it is the law! "what a completely ridiculous,, banal flawed way of thinking. Are they humans or robot's ? Should we all of obey Hitler in Germany in WW2.

One of my distant relatives hid Jews because she used a thing she was born with called her brain and innate common sense that told her this was a wrong law. I personally do not think anyone should be told what and what not to do with their own body's.

Especially by a body of people ( in this case a government) who does not exactly posses the slightest bit of any sort of credibility in dictating what is and what is not right and wrong.

Yes, lets all listen to this local government which is light years off being able to properly run its own show. Which oversee's the worlds biggest cat house, which is( according to the USA) the 12th most corrupt country, and has a human right's record that would make a bishop kick in a stained glass window! That's exercise's mind control, ban the discussion of certain things and edits any sort of history that may be seen as making it lose face.

It even amends a philosphy to the staus of religion, why, oh well, it suited them to do so. So obviously, that's good enough isn't it.

Great, ladies and gentleman,welcome to the club of the insane!

" throw the book at them" a statement usually made by people who have failed to some degree in their own lives and seek to offset that by enjoying the misery of others.

"do drugs and go to jail" oh really, let me start, do we mean legal or illegal one's. Does God, or whoever is in control preordain that it is now a 100% certainty that if one touches 'drugs' they will go to jail.God help whoever really believes this nonsense.

Drugs lead to death! again, which ones? oh, the illegal ones I guess. Lets put aside the deaths associated with drink and cigarettes shall we. It simple does not suit this argument does it.

Well again this is totally incorrect.

Many people exist who have life long ( illegal )drug habits and are doing rather well. What is the cause of many deaths is the ignorance surrounding drug use and the fact that because they are difficult to tax they have been made illegal and so the whole business is in the hands of the organized criminals.

My favorite one I spotted last year went something like this " it has been proven that smoking a joint is 20 times more dangerous than a cigarette"! The pster did not, could not say who had proven this although asked several times by another member.

Typical of these sorts he avoided all requests for this wisdom and came back with the usual sort of gutter response " oh well, its your choice if you want to destroy your life". I guess he did know a little about that.

The person said nothing of which brand,which tar, how much would be ingested, the amount of drugs, if any in the 'joint"

This was ridiculously off mark,ignorant remark that is typical of those, who for some reason or another

simply like to, as you so nicely put it " bend over" to all the nonsense out there.

Do they, I really wonder want to hear some truths;

1-The use of drugs is natural. People have been taking them since day 1- and will always do so. Can you fight nature?

2- The war on drugs has done nothing other to make criminal cartels richer and cause more drug related deaths. THEY DO NOT WORK! why support something that does not work?

3- This is hard to estimate, only a very tiny percentage of criminals who deal in drugs go to jail. Some say it is as little as 1 in thousands. The richer the criminal the less chance he has of spending any significant time in jail.

4- Sending a criminal top jail is tantamount to sending him to school. He learns his trade and networks with others in his game.It is about the worst place we can send them. Yet we keep hearing " send them to jail "

5- the money spent on these stupid laws could ( again this has not been proven) pay for the health care problem in the USA.

I am not sure I fully agree, but one thing is for sure is that the cost of this unworkable laws is immense. A recent case in europe revealed that the cost of the whole operation was 1'200'000 euro's( constant around the clock surveillance is hugely expensive).

It lasted 5 days and resulted in a sentence of 2 years! The criminal will be out in less than 6 months ( if good conditions). Days after the trail one of the key witnesses was severely injured in a revenge attack . He has since recanted his testimony saying he was forced to give evidence and now the whole case will have to be reviewed. Meaning that man will be let go. This is a worst case example but it happens all the time.

Are we happy to pay for things that do not work? Have never worked. Will never work.

I hope we are not and that we can stop bending over and start to think for oursleves.

[bobjenssen]

I know people who admit to being paranoid because of there "harmless" smoking habit.

I'm not saying its harmless. Cannabis can be very dangerous for some people. But overall alcohol causes many more problems.And is legal.

That is not the point. The fact is, it is illegal in Thailand. It is a hard line policy in Thailand so if you are stupid enough to get involved with it then you deserve to get the book thrown at you.

Lets talk about facts then;

what is illegal? is prostitution illegal?

so is corruption

shall I continue?

shall we put all men who come out massage parlous in jail and then watch Thailand self implode because virtually nobody will come here?

Want to talk about facts some more? I doubt it because I will desimate all these lame arguments. they really are a joke .."the point is.." no its not, you are completely mistaken

fact= the laws do not work

fact- the men who should go to jail do not

fact- if on the rare incidence that they do go to jail they become far better at dealing drugs than ever before

fact- its cost us a huge amount, all wasted, you are in fact sending a criminal to finnishing school. Have you ever read any books by criminal who have gone to jail?

fact-drugs fulfill a basic human need, number 5, some say 6th of the human table of needs.

fact- the vast majority who are in jail are usually the poor bottom of the chain ones, the ones used and abused by the very same who ought to be in prison.

The "hard line" policy you talk of does not exist. Take that notion, crush it up and throw it out the window.

If you have money, know the right people a criminal has about as much chance as going to jail as most people here do of waking up, smelling the coffee and supporting proper, humane and workable policy's.

In other words very slim.

I hate to be rude, but really you all ought to grow up,know your subject matter a bit, you haven't a single clue of what you are talking about and do a great disservice to both yourself and people trying to improve.

But do please continue if you wish to look more foolish and like supporting criminal enterprises, wasting your finances and so much time.

[cdnvic]

Stick to the topic at hand and leave the pro/anti drug debates that never go anywhere for another place and time. The topic is a dad trying to get his son's sentence reduced, not about the validity or lack thereof of drug laws in general.

Edit: One post wishing death upon members removed. Get a grip and stop taking these discussions so seriously.

Edited October 12, 2009 by cdnvic

[kevkev1888]

What is wrong with that government, at the same time they let the Lockerbie bomber out on compassionate grounds.

Is Wilcox suffering from a terminal illness?

Oh come on! Mandelson has a meeting with Gaddaffi two days prior regarding oil deals and then . . .

I will agree about drugs anywhere, I hate the stuff because this sh1t has caused big family problems on both continents for me.

I wonder how many farang have had stuff planted on them by whoever in LOS to get them out the way?

I don't even care if drugs cause family problems or whatever, I just like hard line policies like this. No grey areas. I know the punishment is high enough to stay completly away from drugs in Asia. So if you get cought in Thailand with drugs then shame on you, you are a coward, you deserve it.

Please explain how getting caught with drugs in Thailand makes you a coward?????

[elkangorito]

Based upon what the man has said;

"The police were given my name by an acquaintance in Bangkok. They raided my house and found drugs that were for my personal use," he said during an interview at Rye Hill prison, Warwickshire.

If this is true, the Law is truly an ass of the highest order.

"The complete isolation of the place was impossible to deal with. My lawyer barely spoke any English and when it came to court I had to plead guilty to distribution charges, which under Thai law I was guilty of.

''They gave me a life sentence, even though they knew I wasn't a drug dealer."

What can one expect in a country rife with corruption & that also has a total lack of understanding of "human rights".

"I don't deny that I was taking drugs, I had become addicted to amphetamines at a very stressful time in my life.

"But I never sold drugs and I was absolutely not involved in any sort of distribution.

If this is a fact, the Law should mind its own business.

Thailand seems to take great pride & pleasure in pouncing on any "moral" infringement. But this is a total oxymoron...where is the "morality" in treating people, who choose to ingest certain chemicals, in such an inhumane way?

[aay2553]

Based upon what the man has said;

"The police were given my name by an acquaintance in Bangkok. They raided my house and found drugs that were for my personal use," he said during an interview at Rye Hill prison, Warwickshire.

If this is true, the Law is truly an ass of the highest order.

"The complete isolation of the place was impossible to deal with. My lawyer barely spoke any English and when it came to court I had to plead guilty to distribution charges, which under Thai law I was guilty of.

''They gave me a life sentence, even though they knew I wasn't a drug dealer."

What can one expect in a country rife with corruption & that also has a total lack of understanding of "human rights".

"I don't deny that I was taking drugs, I had become addicted to amphetamines at a very stressful time in my life.

"But I never sold drugs and I was absolutely not involved in any sort of distribution.

If this is a fact, the Law should mind its own business.

Thailand seems to take great pride & pleasure in pouncing on any "moral" infringement. But this is a total oxymoron...where is the "morality" in treating people, who choose to ingest certain chemicals, in such an inhumane way?

I agree and no law in the world is gonna change the way I like to treat my own body thank you very much!

And just like BJ says , how dare such a corrupt set of fools try and pass their morals onto anyone else

they have to get their own house in order before they do that.

And lets face it- that ain't gonna happen for quite some time!

[HalfSquat]

Do all UK people get to serve their sentence in the UK?

[MB1]

I don't even care if drugs cause family problems or whatever, I just like hard line policies like this. No grey areas.

No grey areas?????...

So do you think it's fair that a man is sentenced to 33 years for 25 grammes of a class A drug might serve more prison time than a man sentenced to life for heroin importation into Thailand and gets a ten year tarriff set by UK Judges under the rules of the treaty, I'd say it's a very grey area, but thats just my opinion.

Edited October 12, 2009 by MB1

[Arkady]

From various books and articles I have read there are major differences in the way the Brits take the treaty literally and let the prisoners serve out their sentences at the discretion of the Thai government on the grounds that, if they disregarded the Thai government's wishes they would be in breach of the treaty and other prisoners may not get repatriated. Other Western countries tend to release the prisoners when they have served whatever the net sentence after parole would have been in their country for the same offence and the Thai government hasn't so far stopped repatriating their prisoners. In addition the British Home Office maintains that because there is no precise sentencing tariff in the UK, as in the US, Australia etc, they cannot even say what the comparable sentence in the UK would be for a similar offence. This is technically true but legal experts have a very clear idea of likely sentences and a panel of judges could be asked to opine what on the sentence would be or set a benchmark, if the government so desired.

BTW I take no moral position re foreign drug offenders in Thailand, who by and large knew what they were doing. I am just interested here in the legal position of repatriated prisoners in the UK who seem to serve two or three times the time they would if they were of another Western nationality. After repatriation, according to Sandra Gregory’s book on the subject, they also get put in with other inmates with similar length sentences. Thus, some one on a Thai life or 33 year sentence for a drug offence ends up in prison with serial child murderers on life sentences. The average murderers in the UK get out way before the repratriated drug offenders. Gregory was also repeatedly moved around to different maximum security prisons in the UK which prevented her from ever feeling settled and all the prisons were too far for her family to visit her.

Edited October 12, 2009 by Arkady

[MB1]

After repatriation, according to Sandra Gregory’s book on the subject, they also get put in with other inmates with similar length sentences.

Sandra Gregory was arrested Febuary 1993 for possession of 89 grammes of heroin and 600 temazepam and was granted a Royal pardon June 18th 2001 and was released from prison after serving a small part of her sentence imposed by the Thai court, she was originally given a death sentence which was changed to a life sentence and then changed again to 25 years.

Wilcox gets 33 years for 25 grammes of a class A drug which he says was for personal use, I'd be mighty pissed of with the UK government if I was in the same predicament as Wilcox.

Edited October 12, 2009 by MB1

[Thongkorn]

The fact is, the law of Thailand says no drugs, He broke the law.what can he or anybody say , There are big enough signs and many rumors and tales about Thailands jails,why risk it , its the old saying when in rome do as the romans do,

[elkangorito]

The fact is, the law of Thailand says no drugs, He broke the law.what can he or anybody say , There are big enough signs and many rumors and tales about Thailands jails,why risk it , its the old saying when in rome do as the romans do,

And if everybody did that, we would still be living in caves.

[MB1]

The fact is, the law of Thailand says no drugs, He broke the law.what can he or anybody say , There are big enough signs and many rumors and tales about Thailands jails,why risk it , its the old saying when in rome do as the romans do,

The fact is prostitution has been illegal in Thailand since 1960, when a law was passed under pressure from the United Nations, so lets just say that Mr Wilcox got 33 years for being a prostitute, would that be fair when the government and police tolerate prostitution.?.

Nobody is arguing about what law he broke, what some people are saying, myself included is that the prison term Wilcox received was a very harsh one and under the rules of the treaty is he being treated fairly.?.

Why not read the full article about the man in prison, the link has been posted in previous posts and then ask yourself if he is being treated fairly instead of joining the hang em high brigade and quoting the same same as many do, "well he broke the law and this is Thailand".

Elkangorito, me thinks some people are living in caves with their neathanderal attitudes and add nothing to this debate IMO when shouting "the law is the law".

Edited October 12, 2009 by MB1

[sokal]

I know people who admit to being paranoid because of there "harmless" smoking habit.

I'm not saying its harmless. Cannabis can be very dangerous for some people. But overall alcohol causes many more problems.And is legal.

That is not the point. The fact is, it is illegal in Thailand. It is a hard line policy in Thailand so if you are stupid enough to get involved with it then you deserve to get the book thrown at you.

Lets talk about facts then;

what is illegal? is prostitution illegal?

so is corruption

shall I continue?

shall we put all men who come out massage parlous in jail and then watch Thailand self implode because virtually nobody will come here?

Want to talk about facts some more? I doubt it because I will desimate all these lame arguments. they really are a joke .."the point is.." no its not, you are completely mistaken

fact= the laws do not work

fact- the men who should go to jail do not

fact- if on the rare incidence that they do go to jail they become far better at dealing drugs than ever before

fact- its cost us a huge amount, all wasted, you are in fact sending a criminal to finnishing school. Have you ever read any books by criminal who have gone to jail?

fact-drugs fulfill a basic human need, number 5, some say 6th of the human table of needs.

fact- the vast majority who are in jail are usually the poor bottom of the chain ones, the ones used and abused by the very same who ought to be in prison.

The "hard line" policy you talk of does not exist. Take that notion, crush it up and throw it out the window.

If you have money, know the right people a criminal has about as much chance as going to jail as most people here do of waking up, smelling the coffee and supporting proper, humane and workable policy's.

In other words very slim.

I hate to be rude, but really you all ought to grow up,know your subject matter a bit, you haven't a single clue of what you are talking about and do a great disservice to both yourself and people trying to improve.

But do please continue if you wish to look more foolish and like supporting criminal enterprises, wasting your finances and so much time.

Yes prostitution is illegal but I would argue that it is not prostitution that happens in Thailand, it is courting. Many men meet wives or girlfriends in Thailand.

If you knew anything about economics then you would know that Thialand has a huge industrial sector and that is what supports the country.

No hard line policy ? It says right in customs DEATH PENALTY for drug trafficing. Its that simple. I don't want to hear about your cries for equal treatment of criminals. If you know that you are a low end criminal then you also know that you are in for maximum punishment.

[sokal]

Please explain how getting caught with drugs in Thailand makes you a coward?????

99% of the people that get arrested for it in Asia complain about the sentance, that is what makes you a coward.

[Arkady]

After repatriation, according to Sandra Gregory’s book on the subject, they also get put in with other inmates with similar length sentences.

Sandra Gregory was arrested Febuary 1993 for possession of 89 grammes of heroin and 600 temazepam and was granted a Royal pardon June 18th 2001 and was released from prison after serving a small part of her sentence imposed by the Thai court, she was originally given a death sentence which was changed to a life sentence and then changed again to 25 years.

Wilcox gets 33 years for 25 grammes of a class A drug which he says was for personal use, I'd be mighty pissed of with the UK government if I was in the same predicament as Wilcox.

I tend to agree with you, although it is not clear exactly why Wilcox was convicted of trafficking. The original post doesn't make clear what quantity he had of ecstasy, cannabis and amphetamines. I presume the combined quantity was enough to classify him automatically as a trafficker and they are all class A drugs in Thailand, whereas none of them are in the UK. Comparing his sentence with Gregory's lesser 25 year sentence for being apprehended trying to smuggle heroin with a significantly higher street value out of the country makes Thai justice seem less than even handed, even taking into account the automatic trafficking charge and the classification of virtually all illegal substances as class A. Gregory got a royal pardon as a result of a campaign supported by her parent's MP to put pressure on the UK government to petition with the Thai government on her behalf. She managed to get a lot of sympathy as a relatively young woman who claimed she tried to smuggle drugs out of desparation as a way get back home after running out of money due to sickness (she said she was too proud to ask her parents to wire her money).

The draconian Thai approach to sentencing doesn't seem to make much of a dent in the problem and has created massive over crowding in the prisons which turn young prisoners convicted for possession of as little as one amphetamine pill into hardened criminals. Perhaps that is because drug dealers who are well connected businessmen, politicians. military or police never go to jail and because of Thailand's accomodating position towards the junta in Burma from where most of the supply comes. The business remains highly profitable for all the king pins and supply remains plentiful. They will never make inroads into the problem while corruption at the top ensures these guys are allowed to operate with impunity.

[MB1]

Yes prostitution is illegal but I would argue that it is not prostitution that happens in Thailand, it is courting. Many men meet wives or girlfriends in Thailand

No matter what you say or argue, the fact is a prostitute is someone who solicits and accepts payment for sex, many men do indeed meet wives and GF's but I wonder how many men would admit that their wives or GF's had been a prostitute in the past.

As for your statement below.

99% of the people that get arrested for it in Asia complain about the sentance, that is what makes you a coward.

I just googled that and can find no such poll or proof that 99% complain, maybe you'd like to post a link.

I don't want to hear about your cries for equal treatment of criminals

So does that mean that you don't care about equal treatment for crimminals ?, at the end of the day their still human and should be all treated the same IMO.

Edited October 12, 2009 by MB1

[bifftastic]

Quite why judicial systems incarcerate drug users/addicts/abusers/dependents (attach whatever lable one cares to - a rose would smell the same by any other name i.e. the problem is the same whatever label is attached to it) for long periods of time - let alone time-periods like 33 years, is quite beyond me – it doesn't make sense at all - it serves no benefit to society, and if anything I think theres a strong argument that it does a great deal of psychological harm to the incarcerated individual - which I don't believe any State/Government/Judicial system has the right to do to a person.

I wish the OP all the best.

If I may say so, that was a very well informed and well written post, thank you.

[Maizefarmer]

After repatriation, according to Sandra Gregory’s book on the subject, they also get put in with other inmates with similar length sentences.

Sandra Gregory was arrested Febuary 1993 for possession of 89 grammes of heroin and 600 temazepam and was granted a Royal pardon June 18th 2001 and was released from prison after serving a small part of her sentence imposed by the Thai court, she was originally given a death sentence which was changed to a life sentence and then changed again to 25 years.

Wilcox gets 33 years for 25 grammes of a class A drug which he says was for personal use, I'd be mighty pissed of with the UK government if I was in the same predicament as Wilcox.

.... there is of course another to look at the Sandra Gregory sentence - that she got treated leniently, and that it wasn't fair on others to pardon and release her so early (?).

The court concluded that Wilcoxs' drug pocession (which was for multi drug types - not just one) was not for only for personal use but that he was dealing.

Putting aside wheather or not he was dealing and the courts conclusion - yes, I do concurr his sentence is harsh, very harsh.

Personaly I do not believe drug use should be criminalised. There is plenty plenty medical evidence today that supports drug use as been a medical problem - and all the help they ask for should be made avaliable to drug users. Quite what society hopes to gain by criminalising sick people and locking them up for the extraordinary lengths of time that Asian countries do lock folk up for - in particular first time offenders - I have never understood. I fail to see how society or the individual benefit from such harsh sentencing.

Drug dealers on the hand - I have a hard time sympathising with them or the sentences they get. Their trade profits on the misery and destruction of other human beings, and as such their removal from society can only be a good thing.

The reality of Wilcox's case is that if most cases are anything to go by, he will appear before a parole board before his tariff is up (and I don't know what part of his sentence is tarrif), and will get a favourable hearing if he has been a "model prisoner". Chances are he's going to be out before the tarrif is served in full, and almost certainly long before the full 33 years are served.

[sokal]

Yes prostitution is illegal but I would argue that it is not prostitution that happens in Thailand, it is courting. Many men meet wives or girlfriends in Thailand

No matter what you say or argue, the fact is a prostitute is someone who solicits and accepts payment for sex, many men do indeed meet wives and GF's but I wonder how many men would admit that their wives or GF's had been a prostitute in the past.

As for your statement below.

99% of the people that get arrested for it in Asia complain about the sentance, that is what makes you a coward.

I just googled that and can find no such poll or proof that 99% complain, maybe you'd like to post a link.

I don't want to hear about your cries for equal treatment of criminals

So does that mean that you don't care about equal treatment for crimminals ?, at the end of the day their still human and should be all treated the same IMO.

Any soverign nation can decide how to interpret and enforce their own laws. Evidently the Thai kingdom sees the prostitution laws the same way I see them and not the way you see them.

Foreign nationals do not and should not have the same rights as citizens in any country.

Like I said before, if a hard line policy is not enough to deter you from this kind of behavior then you deserve the death penalty or any amount of time you get.

[sokal]

Quite why judicial systems incarcerate drug users/addicts/abusers/dependents (attach whatever lable one cares to - a rose would smell the same by any other name i.e. the problem is the same whatever label is attached to it) for long periods of time - let alone time-periods like 33 years, is quite beyond me – it doesn't make sense at all - it serves no benefit to society, and if anything I think theres a strong argument that it does a great deal of psychological harm to the incarcerated individual - which I don't believe any State/Government/Judicial system has the right to do to a person.

I wish the OP all the best.

If I may say so, that was a very well informed and well written post, thank you.

Hard line policies are designed to deter people from commiting the crime.

You can argue the problems of hard line policies all you want but when there is one in place that everyone knows about and you get caught you simply deserve it.

It is so lame to debate the policy just because somebody was caught.

[taffylee]

The UK prisoner transfer treaty is archaic and dates back to the 1930's

If this bloke was a Dane, French, German or a Yank he'd be out on parole in a couple of months.

If he had a 99 year sentence then the UK would re-assess his sentence and he'd also be out in no time.

If I was banged up in Thailand, I would prefer the 99 year sentence (life sentence) to the 33 year sentence anyday!

It's a horrible legal loophole that this boy is trapped in, but there are so much backround politics going on that he doesn't stand a chance..

I am sympathetic, he has to do 1/2 the time to be eligible for release in the UK whereas his european and North american cousins get released after only 4 years!

[britmaveric]

Tell you what transfer him back to Thailand so he can really whinge.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Tell you what transfer him back to Thailand so he can really whinge.

[bobjenssen]

Quite why judicial systems incarcerate drug users/addicts/abusers/dependents (attach whatever lable one cares to - a rose would smell the same by any other name i.e. the problem is the same whatever label is attached to it) for long periods of time - let alone time-periods like 33 years, is quite beyond me – it doesn't make sense at all - it serves no benefit to society, and if anything I think theres a strong argument that it does a great deal of psychological harm to the incarcerated individual - which I don't believe any State/Government/Judicial system has the right to do to a person.

I wish the OP all the best.

If I may say so, that was a very well informed and well written post, thank you.

Hard line policies are designed to deter people from commiting the crime.

You can argue the problems of hard line policies all you want but when there is one in place that everyone knows about and you get caught you simply deserve it.

It is so lame to debate the policy just because somebody was caught.

Sir

it would take pages to show you the flaws in what you say

do you know what

"coward" means? Please tell me what you think it does and which dictionary you read from. I will help you obtain a proper one so your arguments are not so way off.

Am I coward for refusing to pay a police bribe?

Am I a coward because I disobeyed the law and stood by a tibetan monk to assist the poor fellow as chinese police broke his bones in Lhasa in 1985?

I was threatened with jail. I was breaking the law ( there was curfew in place).

It has nothing, zero, nadar, zilch, inherent either by implication, nor direct to do with what you say.

You have just assigned a whole new meaning to it.

And, yes, those sentence are designed to do just that. And also ,yes, they completely fail.

Can I now assign the word 'coward" to people who refuse to wake up, smell the coffee and support inhumane policy's that do not work?

Why is it we are seeing a change of the meaning of certain English words ( that destroys any credibly to ones argument straight off) and a stubborn clinging to things that do not work.

Would you back a 3 legged horse to win the British grand national, despite it never have won, despite all the experts saying it will never win, despite all the other horse saying " yes, back him, he looks great,he appeals to the mass,he looks good,he will complete the course and the workers will back him, their ignorance keeps them blind to his real pedigree but we all know he hasn't a hope in hel_l of winning and my god the other jockeys love people like you who back such a lame duck"

That horse is those policy's. Completing the course is the attempt to justify such silly policys by catching the bottom of the criminal food chain- something which does not deter the kingpins one iota. Fact, had and nasty.

The other jockeys are the criminal elite. The ones paying/losing is -you! ( us)

[bobjenssen]

the old backward, silly and archaic 'sovereign nation" nonsense oh dear, here we go;

Ask the brits about this, they were the master of it

So much history went like this

" we're the brits, we bring you the greetings of the Great white queen"

" we do not want it- go away'

" too bad, your getting it anyway, we're here to stay- bang,bang,bang"

And they did. And they, along with their child, the USA who has now grown up and is very much here to stay mean that there will never be a real soverign nation.

Especially here, look around you please, one can buy anything if one has the power. I will not state the obvious but I do think it is so comical how a place can cling to any sort of pride and at the same time be selling of its young female.Wel done, great example of a progressive sovereign nation.

And do tell, what is the point of having laws that can be interpreted in anyway? Oh, may its because somehow it seems that if someone has a great deal of money the laws seem to mean " you can go,off you go, why not buy a football club, and panama is great this time of the year"

oh great!

What progress!

The west does. And to punish when it not appeased.

They will destroy this economy and this city ( as they did after world war 2, in part).

Lets just put aside any silly notions and get real.

This nonsense will never, ever work whilst all 3rd world countrys are effectively owned by the superpowers

And, it really is so banal.

Shall we all respect north Korea then?

lets send them some more uranium so they can send us a nice little gift should we not support their rights as a sovereign nation.

Which is it?

Now I bet you do not support this, do you? See, what I mean?

Unless you really have decided to sell you birthright of being a free thinker you can , and I shall whisper this to you, question the laws in place and ask yourself

" are they right?" yes, its true, you can do this, and guess what, because of this we have women who can vote, black people who can run the worlds most powerful nation and a host of other positive things.Like thaivisa!

So, when we fly across the middle east sitting next to a lady do we stop talking to her when we are over one backward country's national boarders .

Do we put down the pork chop? say no to some wine?

Cover her up over one more,unless she is our wife, daughter, sister, and then have a drink with her when we enter european airspace and enter the mile high club when landing in Holland!

A wholly silly argument as history and practical example ought to show

[sokal]

Quite why judicial systems incarcerate drug users/addicts/abusers/dependents (attach whatever lable one cares to - a rose would smell the same by any other name i.e. the problem is the same whatever label is attached to it) for long periods of time - let alone time-periods like 33 years, is quite beyond me – it doesn't make sense at all - it serves no benefit to society, and if anything I think theres a strong argument that it does a great deal of psychological harm to the incarcerated individual - which I don't believe any State/Government/Judicial system has the right to do to a person.

I wish the OP all the best.

If I may say so, that was a very well informed and well written post, thank you.

Hard line policies are designed to deter people from commiting the crime.

You can argue the problems of hard line policies all you want but when there is one in place that everyone knows about and you get caught you simply deserve it.

It is so lame to debate the policy just because somebody was caught.

Sir

it would take pages to show you the flaws in what you say

do you know what

"coward" means? Please tell me what you think it does and which dictionary you read from. I will help you obtain a proper one so your arguments are not so way off.

Am I coward for refusing to pay a police bribe?

Am I a coward because I disobeyed the law and stood by a tibetan monk to assist the poor fellow as chinese police broke his bones in Lhasa in 1985?

I was threatened with jail. I was breaking the law ( there was curfew in place).

It has nothing, zero, nadar, zilch, inherent either by implication, nor direct to do with what you say.

You have just assigned a whole new meaning to it.

And, yes, those sentence are designed to do just that. And also ,yes, they completely fail.

Can I now assign the word 'coward" to people who refuse to wake up, smell the coffee and support inhumane policy's that do not work?

Why is it we are seeing a change of the meaning of certain English words ( that destroys any credibly to ones argument straight off) and a stubborn clinging to things that do not work.

Would you back a 3 legged horse to win the British grand national, despite it never have won, despite all the experts saying it will never win, despite all the other horse saying " yes, back him, he looks great,he appeals to the mass,he looks good,he will complete the course and the workers will back him, their ignorance keeps them blind to his real pedigree but we all know he hasn't a hope in hel_l of winning and my god the other jockeys love people like you who back such a lame duck"

That horse is those policy's. Completing the course is the attempt to justify such silly policys by catching the bottom of the criminal food chain- something which does not deter the kingpins one iota. Fact, had and nasty.

The other jockeys are the criminal elite. The ones paying/losing is -you! ( us)

Too bad we were not all born into the criminal elite. When you know that this double standard exists yet you still are dumb enough to commit the crime then the only person you have to blame is yourself.

Look at the US of A. Robert Blake and OJ Simpson are permitted to commit murder but the average person will go to jail or get the death penalty. Life is not fair, get with it.

[meom]

After repatriation, according to Sandra Gregory’s book on the subject, they also get put in with other inmates with similar length sentences.

Sandra Gregory was arrested Febuary 1993 for possession of 89 grammes of heroin and 600 temazepam and was granted a Royal pardon June 18th 2001 and was released from prison after serving a small part of her sentence imposed by the Thai court, she was originally given a death sentence which was changed to a life sentence and then changed again to 25 years.

Wilcox gets 33 years for 25 grammes of a class A drug which he says was for personal use, I'd be mighty pissed of with the UK government if I was in the same predicament as Wilcox.

I tend to agree with you, although it is not clear exactly why Wilcox was convicted of trafficking. The original post doesn't make clear what quantity he had of ecstasy, cannabis and amphetamines. I presume the combined quantity was enough to classify him automatically as a trafficker and they are all class A drugs in Thailand, whereas none of them are in the UK. Comparing his sentence with Gregory's lesser 25 year sentence for being apprehended trying to smuggle heroin with a significantly higher street value out of the country makes Thai justice seem less than even handed, even taking into account the automatic trafficking charge and the classification of virtually all illegal substances as class A.

I could be wrong but my understanding is that he got caught with 26 gram amphetamines (probably ice since yaba is normally counted in pills instead of grams). Regarding amphetamines Thai law says anything over 1.5 gram is automatically considered trafficking so that's why he got charged accordingly.

On top of that he had the bad luck to be caught during the height or aftermath of taxin's war on drugs. Amphetamines were classified that time not only as a hard drug (class I) but also as a threat to Thai national security which could clarify why his sentence was much harsher that the one Gregory got.

In the end I feel he was plain stupid by stashing 26 grams. If he had only one gram and the balance in cash he could have bought his way out.

[sokal]

the old backward, silly and archaic 'sovereign nation" nonsense oh dear, here we go;

Ask the brits about this, they were the master of it

So much history went like this

" we're the brits, we bring you the greetings of the Great white queen"

" we do not want it- go away'

" too bad, your getting it anyway, we're here to stay- bang,bang,bang"

And they did. And they, along with their child, the USA who has now grown up and is very much here to stay mean that there will never be a real soverign nation.

Especially here, look around you please, one can buy anything if one has the power. I will not state the obvious but I do think it is so comical how a place can cling to any sort of pride and at the same time be selling of its young female.Wel done, great example of a progressive sovereign nation.

And do tell, what is the point of having laws that can be interpreted in anyway? Oh, may its because somehow it seems that if someone has a great deal of money the laws seem to mean " you can go,off you go, why not buy a football club, and panama is great this time of the year"

oh great!

What progress!

The west does. And to punish when it not appeased.

They will destroy this economy and this city ( as they did after world war 2, in part).

Lets just put aside any silly notions and get real.

This nonsense will never, ever work whilst all 3rd world countrys are effectively owned by the superpowers

And, it really is so banal.

Shall we all respect north Korea then?

lets send them some more uranium so they can send us a nice little gift should we not support their rights as a sovereign nation.

Which is it?

Now I bet you do not support this, do you? See, what I mean?

Unless you really have decided to sell you birthright of being a free thinker you can , and I shall whisper this to you, question the laws in place and ask yourself

" are they right?" yes, its true, you can do this, and guess what, because of this we have women who can vote, black people who can run the worlds most powerful nation and a host of other positive things.Like thaivisa!

So, when we fly across the middle east sitting next to a lady do we stop talking to her when we are over one backward country's national boarders .

Do we put down the pork chop? say no to some wine?

Cover her up over one more,unless she is our wife, daughter, sister, and then have a drink with her when we enter european airspace and enter the mile high club when landing in Holland!

A wholly silly argument as history and practical example ought to show

The US is here to stay ???? Its actually in the process of losing the reserve currency status at the moment. You need to visit the economy and banking section of this forum and read up.