Leicester Dad Tells Of Battle To Cut Thai Drugs Sentence

[jackr]

I'm normally in the tough titties camp, but in this case it does seem a bit of a piss take for simply having the stuff. He'll be out in a few years and is actually quite lucky considering. Unfortuntaley for him he'll never be setting foot over here again, so guess he'll have to bring his family over.

This guy should thank his lucky stars he is a UK citizen and actually has an agreement with Thailand, I'm quite sure he'd rather be in in Rye Hill than Bang Kwang.

That place looks really nice; gym, computers, arts and crafts, and even cooking classes <deleted>.

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

It was not the decision of the British gov, which resides in London, ENGLAND. It was wholeheartedly a SCOTTISH decision by their gov minister; you know, that little country to the north of England. I think I can guess where you're from... are you guys really that geographically-challenged or is it that you just couldn't care less about the make-up of the rest of the world?

[elkangorito]

I fully agree with bobjenssen's comments.

[Mosha]

I thought he had his sentence reduced , it used to be Death, Drugs are drugs small or big , I have no sympathy, As usual if you cannot do the time don't do the crime.I came from a hard back ground, I am 55 i went to school and if i was a naughty boy i got leathered from my teachers , also if you got caught by the police you got belted. he then took you home and your father did the same. I have grown up with morals and values , I do not want to kill people or do bad things just because i was mentally scared when my gold fish died when i was 4.The sad thing is that the Public has to pay to keep idiots in luxury while old people struggle to live.

idiots?

I would include those who "belt" a young lad for being none other than a child and who have no sympathy for someone so obviously betrayed by a ridiculous legal system .

Its a shame your belting of which you seem almost proud did not teach you a little compassion.

Its not hard, it is igronance ,pure and simple and if proper law's were in place you would not need to be spending you hard earnt moneys.

Blame the law makers.

and those who belted you!

By the way, I am guessing you are from the UK where it now illegal to belt anyone. What was legal then is no loner legal now.

So, was it right to belt you then, but wrong now?

Do you see how stupid this whole way of thinking is?

It was once legal to take whatever one wanted until the USA ordered everyone to put law's into place thus ensuring that the worlds criminal syndicates would remain rich and in place.

Great state of affairs.

..and now we have the smart Alec kids who know their rights inside out. Can smash your property etc.. I wonder why the place is such a bloody mess.

[elkangorito]

I thought he had his sentence reduced , it used to be Death, Drugs are drugs small or big , I have no sympathy, As usual if you cannot do the time don't do the crime.I came from a hard back ground, I am 55 i went to school and if i was a naughty boy i got leathered from my teachers , also if you got caught by the police you got belted. he then took you home and your father did the same. I have grown up with morals and values , I do not want to kill people or do bad things just because i was mentally scared when my gold fish died when i was 4.The sad thing is that the Public has to pay to keep idiots in luxury while old people struggle to live.

idiots?

I would include those who "belt" a young lad for being none other than a child and who have no sympathy for someone so obviously betrayed by a ridiculous legal system .

Its a shame your belting of which you seem almost proud did not teach you a little compassion.

Its not hard, it is igronance ,pure and simple and if proper law's were in place you would not need to be spending you hard earnt moneys.

Blame the law makers.

and those who belted you!

By the way, I am guessing you are from the UK where it now illegal to belt anyone. What was legal then is no loner legal now.

So, was it right to belt you then, but wrong now?

Do you see how stupid this whole way of thinking is?

It was once legal to take whatever one wanted until the USA ordered everyone to put law's into place thus ensuring that the worlds criminal syndicates would remain rich and in place.

Great state of affairs.

..and now we have the smart Alec kids who know their rights inside out. Can smash your property etc.. I wonder why the place is such a bloody mess.

The "place" is a bloody mess because of the law.

BTW, the topic is about drugs etc, not why everything is cocked up.

[smokie36]

It seems the british government would rather he had served his sentence in Thailand than return home. Its a very long sentence in a relatively cushy jail system.

Of course he could have stayed in Thailand and hoped for a reduction in sentence or a pardon. Both tough choices.

I only wish the courts was as harsh in sentencing criminals in the UK.

25 grams?? Seems on the high side for personal use imo...

[Maigo6]

What is Illegal today can be legal tomorrow.

If the Governments taxed Cannabis, would there be a death sentence for alcohol ?

[Maigo6]

I only wish the courts was as harsh in sentencing criminals in the UK.

Smokie, the UK would have to build many more prisons, so many that it just is not financially viable to do so, hence light sentences, Tags, community service, probation, suspended sentences etc etc.

[smokie36]

I only wish the courts was as harsh in sentencing criminals in the UK.

Smokie, the UK would have to build many more prisons, so many that it just is not financially viable to do so, hence light sentences, Tags, community service, probation, suspended sentences etc etc.

I realise that. It just rankles me that almost any severity of crime can see the offender released after 3-4 years. Way too soft on sex crimes, manslaughter etc..

And plain silly on drugs.

[smokie36]

What is Illegal today can be legal tomorrow.

If the Governments taxed Cannabis, would there be a death sentence for alcohol ?

Its not viable to tax this. Only reason it remains illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol.

[Mosha]

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

[Maigo6]

Its not viable to tax this. Only reason it remains illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol.

With Alcohol induced crime a major problem in so many countries, an Alien coming from another planet may wonder why Alcohol is legal and Cannabis can get a person the death sentence.

Alcohol must be one of the worse drugs around, the fact that it's legal and put in pretty bottles with different flavours does not alter the fact that Alcohol is an incredibly dangerous addictive drug.

It's only tolerated by governments because it's such a great revenue earner.

If Alcohol wasn't highly taxed, it would be a class 'A' illegal drug.

Edited October 11, 2009 by Maigo6

[RogerSterling1]

Sort of surprised the farang don't get off easy. Some of these sentences are just brutal.

[RogerSterling1]

Its not viable to tax this. Only reason it remains illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol.

Ummm, I dunno about that.

I think its correct when you account drinking and driving. Most drug users don't do the drug and then get in an automobile.

[Maigo6]

Its not viable to tax this. Only reason it remains illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol.

Ummm, I dunno about that.

I think its correct when you account drinking and driving. Most drug users don't do the drug and then get in an automobile.

Yes, I read the post wrong. I'm pissed.

I agree, the only reason alcohol is legal is because governments know how much money can be made, they know that more people get pissed rather than stoned.

[MB1]

25 grams?? Seems on the high side for personal use imo...

Maybe so, I'm a little more interested what the British Goverment are doing with regards the man in questions prison sentence, it seems one rule for one and one rule for another if what Steve Wilcox says is true.?.

Just a little peice from the article, link provided once again if anyone is interested in reading it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?ac...mp;qpid=3069471

"For a prisoner on an indeterminate sentence (i.e. no fixed number of years) you must have served 8 years of your sentence to qualify to transfer. A prisoner serving a determinate sentence of 4 years or more, whether convicted and transferring from Thailand or convicted in England is automatically released from custody in England once they have served two – thirds of their sentence. Again those prisoners serving a sentence of 4 years or more are eligible for consideration for release on parole licence once they have served one half of their original sentence. Obviously a life sentence (indeterminate) is a more serious and longer sentence than any sentence with a fixed number of years. All prisoners serving a life sentence in England and those who transfer from Thailand have a tariff set, (the tariff is the minimum period that must be served before they can be considered for release on licence).

When the Judge sentenced me, he stated that my sentence of 33years and 6 month is one- third less than a life sentence. According to Thailand’s Law, a life sentence prisoner is eligible for parole, release on licence after serving a term of 10 years imprisonment. So my sentence being one-third less than a life sentence, I would be eligible for parole according to Thailand’s Law after serving a term of 6 years 8 months imprisonment. "

Interesting reading.

[smokie36]

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.

[smokie36]

25 grams?? Seems on the high side for personal use imo...

Maybe so, I'm a little more interested what the British Goverment are doing with regards the man in questions prison sentence, it seems one rule for one and one rule for another if what Steve Wilcox says is true.?.

Just a little peice from the article, link provided once again if anyone is interested in reading it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?ac...mp;qpid=3069471

"For a prisoner on an indeterminate sentence (i.e. no fixed number of years) you must have served 8 years of your sentence to qualify to transfer. A prisoner serving a determinate sentence of 4 years or more, whether convicted and transferring from Thailand or convicted in England is automatically released from custody in England once they have served two – thirds of their sentence. Again those prisoners serving a sentence of 4 years or more are eligible for consideration for release on parole licence once they have served one half of their original sentence. Obviously a life sentence (indeterminate) is a more serious and longer sentence than any sentence with a fixed number of years. All prisoners serving a life sentence in England and those who transfer from Thailand have a tariff set, (the tariff is the minimum period that must be served before they can be considered for release on licence).

When the Judge sentenced me, he stated that my sentence of 33years and 6 month is one- third less than a life sentence. According to Thailand's Law, a life sentence prisoner is eligible for parole, release on licence after serving a term of 10 years imprisonment. So my sentence being one-third less than a life sentence, I would be eligible for parole according to Thailand's Law after serving a term of 6 years 8 months imprisonment. "

Interesting reading.

This made me wonder why he dinn't wait for another 2-3 years and hope for parole in Thailand. Or is this simply not granted?

[MB1]

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.

I'll agree with that, but the thread is about British Justice and the mans prison sentence, whilst I do not condone what he did, I believe in fairness for all, and if what Steve wilcox is saying is true the British government need to sort it out.

25 grams?? Seems on the high side for personal use imo...

Maybe so, I'm a little more interested what the British Goverment are doing with regards the man in questions prison sentence, it seems one rule for one and one rule for another if what Steve Wilcox says is true.?.

Just a little peice from the article, link provided once again if anyone is interested in reading it.

http://www.phaseloop.com/foreignprisoners/...thailand55.html

http://www.phaseloop.com/foreignprisoners/...thailand55.html

"For a prisoner on an indeterminate sentence (i.e. no fixed number of years) you must have served 8 years of your sentence to qualify to transfer. A prisoner serving a determinate sentence of 4 years or more, whether convicted and transferring from Thailand or convicted in England is automatically released from custody in England once they have served two – thirds of their sentence. Again those prisoners serving a sentence of 4 years or more are eligible for consideration for release on parole licence once they have served one half of their original sentence. Obviously a life sentence (indeterminate) is a more serious and longer sentence than any sentence with a fixed number of years. All prisoners serving a life sentence in England and those who transfer from Thailand have a tariff set, (the tariff is the minimum period that must be served before they can be considered for release on licence).

When the Judge sentenced me, he stated that my sentence of 33years and 6 month is one- third less than a life sentence. According to Thailand’s Law, a life sentence prisoner is eligible for parole, release on licence after serving a term of 10 years imprisonment. So my sentence being one-third less than a life sentence, I would be eligible for parole according to Thailand’s Law after serving a term of 6 years 8 months imprisonment. "

Interesting reading.

Edited October 11, 2009 by MB1

[MB1]

This made me wonder why he dinn't wait for another 2-3 years and hope for parole in Thailand. Or is this simply not granted?

Makes me wonder also, maybe he just didnt know the rules, what makes me wonder even more is the guy who received a life sentence for heroin and had a ten year tarrriff set when returned to the UK under the same treaty, if that is true then it does seem unfair to me that a man sentenced for 33 years will serve more than a man on a life sentence, barking mad if you ask me.

Below from same article..

"In 1995 a British Citizen was arrested for the importation of Heroin in Thailand and later sentenced to life imprisonment. On August 12th 2004 this British Citizen became the first ever prisoner on a life sentence to transfer on the Thailand – England Prisoner Transfer Treaty. The Lord Chief Justice of England set a provisional tariff and it was then later formally set by the High Court of England to 10 years. 10 years tariff being the same term of imprisonment required by Thailand’s Law for a life sentence prisoner to serve before being eligible for parole(release on licence). "

http://www.phaseloop.com/foreignprisoners/...thailand55.html

Edited October 11, 2009 by MB1

[smokie36]

This made me wonder why he dinn't wait for another 2-3 years and hope for parole in Thailand. Or is this simply not granted?

Makes me wonder also, maybe he just did not know the rules, what makes me wonder even more is the guy who received a life sentence for heroin and had a ten year tarrriff set when returned to the UK under the same treaty if that is true then it does seem unfair that a man sentenced for 33 years will serve more than a man on a life sentence, barking mad if you ask me.

Below from same article..

"In 1995 a British Citizen was arrested for the importation of Heroin in Thailand and later sentenced to life imprisonment. On August 12th 2004 this British Citizen became the first ever prisoner on a life sentence to transfer on the Thailand – England Prisoner Transfer Treaty. The Lord Chief Justice of England set a provisional tariff and it was then later formally set by the High Court of England to 10 years. 10 years tariff being the same term of imprisonment required by Thailand’s Law for a life sentence prisoner to serve before being eligible for parole(release on licence). "

http://www.phaseloop.com/foreignprisoners/...thailand55.html

I read the full article and it seems the UK officials could have set a much lower tariff in this case. He certainly should have the sentence cut. It seems he recieved the tariff when the official was having a bad day.

[sotsira]

Let me get out my violin and box of tissue...you're making me cry

Thanks for confirming I'm making you cry. I thought you were going to play Brahms concerto in D major and have a wank.

That 2nd movement Adagio does always bring tears to my eyes...I save the wanking for the finale of the 2nd...those last few bars have the propulsive energy that's just right

No way! you need 3 hands to do that you liar!

[elkangorito]

This is, yet again, one of the silliest things to argue about.

If a human wishes to ingest chemicals, no problem. If a human, who has ingested such chemicals & as a result, harmed another, there is a problem.

So, what chemicals do "we" ban? Alcohol surely must be No 1, closely followed by coffee & sugar.

These laws do nothing except make people angry. These laws have NEVER worked!!!

Give the guy a break. All he did was possess a weed.

[bobjenssen]

This is, yet again, one of the silliest things to argue about.

If a human wishes to ingest chemicals, no problem. If a human, who has ingested such chemicals & as a result, harmed another, there is a problem.

So, what chemicals do "we" ban? Alcohol surely must be No 1, closely followed by coffee & sugar.

These laws do nothing except make people angry. These laws have NEVER worked!!!

Give the guy a break. All he did was possess a weed.

good to see someone who understand how things really are

[smokie36]

Sadly these laws are not going away. That's how things really are.

[bobjenssen]

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

what a pointless comment.

I know people who do not take anything and are paranoid.

I know people who have been taking drugs, "hard" ones all their lives and are perfectly functional.

Happy,wealthy, successful( no doubt in the broad sense of the word )and, are not paranoid at all.

The sheer ignorance over the whole drug debate coupled with macho sort of banality is incredible.

[elkangorito]

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.

Edited October 11, 2009 by elkangorito

[smokie36]

It's even sadder that people simply "bend over" to these idiot laws. By saying that they aren't going away, 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.

In my case more like dodging around.

I take your point but don't expect any radical changes. It all comes down to money in the end I'm afraid.

[elkangorito]

It's even sadder that people simply "bend over" to these idiot laws. By saying that they aren't going away, 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.

In my case more like dodging around.

I take your point but don't expect any radical changes. It all comes down to money in the end I'm afraid.

It does come down to money if you're busted.

But with everything else, it comes down to pure "people power", which takes time.

Edited October 11, 2009 by elkangorito

[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.

[smokie36]

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.

Thailand's policy on cannabis is not particularly hard line. The judicial system is cumbersome for sure and the policy on class A drugs certainly is harsh.